Analyse why London Ambulance IT project failure accurred, and where Essay

Analyse why London Ambulance IT project failure accurred, and where similar organisations might learn valuable lessens so that future IT projects don not folow - Essay Example The London Ambulance Service IT project was too ambitious and is an apt example of failure where technology was mistaken to be the solution. The London Ambulance Service (LAS) was responsible for accepting emergency medical calls and for dispatching ambulances as appropriate. LAS employed a computer aided dispatch (CAD) system to understand the emergency, resource the ambulance and dispatch. The ambulances were also fitted with an automatic vehicle location system (AVLS) which facilitated the CAD to track its progress in fulfilling a particular requirement. This project to make a CAD first started in 1987 with a budget of 3 million pounds. The objective was to automate human intensive processes of manual dispatch systems. It was abandoned in 1990 when the costs overshot but then a new management team was appointed in January 1991. After many deliberations, the system did go partially live a year later only to shut down in October 1992. LAS was the largest in the world, which covered 600 sq miles, 7 million people and had a fleet of 700 ambulances. Founded in 1930, LAS attended to 1600 emergencies per day. Government changes in NHS from mid-80s onwards led to pressure on LAS due to internal market, which led to management restructuring and disputes over working practices (London Ambulance Service Case Study). The magnanimity of the service did cause bottlenecks. Communication errors, difficulty in identifying the right locations, human judgment in identifying duplicate calls were disrupting services. To bring about overall efficiency computerization was sought. Various factors were responsible for the failure of the project, which include management ethos, bad procurement process, timetable, inexperience of suppliers, inadequate testing, poor quality assurance, poor training, and finally inadequate project management. The biggest mistake that occurred was

Science Lab Research, Predictions, & Observations Report

Science Research, Predictions, & Observations - Lab Report Example The force of gravity is greater on objects that have a heavier total mass. 2. When a rock and a feather are dropped on the moon, they are going to float in the air rather than falling, for a much longer time. There is no friction from the air to influence the feather, on the moon. â€Å"The weight of an object is different on the earth and on the moon since the strength of the gravitational field is different† (Newton, 2009). The hammer still has greater mass, so it will still hit the ground on the moon, faster than the feather. 4. The containers fall at the same rate, apparently. I dropped them from about five feet: a drop of several stories may have been different. When the objects are in the containers, the air resistance is equalized. 1. In terms of the logic of the horse, when the horse pulls, it puts force on the earth. It contacts the earth with its hooves, and pushes against the earth. At the same time, the earth exerts force itself. Meanwhile, the horse is exerting force on the wagon. It is a system of pushing and pulling, in which various forces have an impact on each other. The logic of the horse is that it will cause the wagon to accelerate, because of the force of the horse. 2. This may seem to make sense, but what the horse is stating incorrectly is the relative importance of its force on the wagon. The wagon and the horse are separate, so they have different levels of force acting on them, independently. The forces at work on the horse, are not the same as those at work on the wagon. The relation between the horse and the wagon is incorrect. 3. The force between the cart’s wheels and the road is another force that can be added to the picture. From this perspective, the force exerted by the horse on the ground, has an effect on how the wagon moves. This then questions the fallacy of the