High-Tech Titanics : Taxpayers are footing huge bills for computer systems that sink, even though these fiscal disasters can be avoided.

Years ago, the mantra for government agencies buried in paperwork, inefficiency and malaise was computerization. Any problem imaginable could be solved by the right kind of computer system. All too often, reality has been far different. One example is Los Angeles’ attempt to upgrade its city payroll system.

The refrain here is familiar: A contractor agrees to deliver the system on time, then misses four deadlines. Projected costs soar from $13 million to $23.9 million, and the city is left with the choice faced by so many other local, state and federal government agencies: Either staunch the fiscal bleeding by ending the project or push on to an uncertain but certainly more expensive result.

Los Angeles City Controller Rick Tuttle, Mayor Richard Riordan and the City Council are still debating which course to take. The path to such an unhappy choice usually begins before the contracts are signed. Project managers can avoid failures by starting with far more careful design and assessment of job needs. Stick to basic requirements and don’t shoot for the moon.

A later problem involves contractors who “lowball” bids or seriously underestimate the complexity of the job. Too often contractors impose an inflexible computer system after a cursory look at the customer’s goals.

Equally bad are government managers who do not allow the employees who will ultimately have to use a new system to help design it by working closely with contractors. This is called contextual or work-centered design, and it can help avoid fiscal disasters. Without it, the contractors don’t learn enough to do their job correctly. Bosses are often unwilling to free employees from their regular work for this purpose. In the long run, it’s far cheaper to get the system right the first time.

Project foul-ups are common. A 1998 article in Governing magazine, for example, noted a study of high-tech government projects worth $10 million or more. Not one of those systems came in on time, on budget and with all of the features that were originally promised; 49% of the projects were failures.

Just this summer, for example, California was agonizing over the need to scrap an $18-million attempt to link computers in its welfare offices. That was on top of the $171 million spent on a failed statewide child support computer system.

At the academic level, the University of Minnesota was forced to dole out interest-free loans when its new computer system stalled some $20 million in financial aid checks.

You can take your pick of problems at the federal level, including those at the Federal Aviation Administration, which spent $2.8 billion on computer projects that were canceled or substantially restructured, and those at the federal Bureau of Land Management, which just pulled the plug on a 15-year, $411-million effort to electronically access millions of land and mineral lease records.

The only way to avoid costly mistakes is through a strong and measured needs assessment upfront coupled with the careful selection of a contractor willing to work to the needs of the job. All of the fiscal horror stories show that these steps aren’t occurring often enough.