The NSA awards contract to att over dxc and will be paying a premium for the decision.....$750 million more than the dxc offering. I think we all know they made the right choice.
12 replies (most recent on top)
Clients are getting smarter. They chose the cheaper solution, and then every time something goes wrong, they complain about it. Supplier, in our case DXC, will end up failing SLA`s, case goes to court, and most of the time client will win, and that is when the supplier will have to pay fines. And this is how the client will end up getting a service, which was cheep to begin with, even cheaper or close to free.
Ok, so a US government department paid more money for a better service. It wasn't their money, it was tax payers money.
Try and find commercial clients with that point of view.
Outsourcing is all about cost reduction. The client will pay for the least amount of service that they can, even if it causes them some outages.
Which is why nobody normally tries to sell a gold plated service.
In fact, I saw a recent DXC bid for a contract where we HAD pitched a comprehensive solution that was double the price of the nearest tender.... and DXC didn't win that one despite it being a far better solution. The client picked the cheaper tender.
The client made the right choice, not because I just want to bash DXC, but because it's a balance of risk and investment, you would!'t want to trust that much money to a firm that does the bare minimum on a tender, it wouldn't make financial sense. We all know this, except DXC.
This sends out a strong warning to others about DXC's capability, that comes complete with independent confirmation that DXC's claim for unfair treatment was not deemed unfair in the eyes of the law; Now go home and cry to mommy!
"...you s--- so bad at your jobs that we are willing to pay $750,000,000.00 dollars more to another company to NOT work with you people"
Let that sink in for a while... just 100% truth !!!
... which client would like to work with disgruntled employees ??
It's poetic justice for Lawrie and the rest of DXC senior management. What else did they expect with years of mass layoffs, no morale, continuous cuts to benefits, no raises, and added job responsibilities without additional compensation?
DXC is dead.
I read both the article and the report. Add that to the last year as DXC, and the time before as CSC / HPE. I am trying to be fair but the thought that keeps rolling through my head is that the federal government is basically saying to DXC is that...
"...you s--- so bad at your jobs that we are willing to pay $750,000,000.00 dollars more to another company to NOT work with you people"
Let that sink in for a while...
I've read the full report, be add reading for the month!
good news !
https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/690757.pdf
Full text of the denial...
Well, at least the company has remained consistent:
"...DXC only met minimum acceptable standards in the eight requirements."
comparable to Gartner's Peer Insights (a kind of trustpilot for IT clients). One said in
Oct 2017:
"CSC/DXC has a large offering and capability. We have found though, that CSC will default to doing just the bare minimum required to meet the terms of the contract, often requiring massive audit and oversight to ensure that the job is getting done as thorough as needed. The people are really good to work with; it's more a condition of what is the goal...their's is do as little as possible and meet the requirement, ours is to get as much as possible..."
Sweet,
Love this quote:
“It is beyond dispute that AT&T’s proposal was considered by the agency to be superior in nearly every aspect,” says the documentation.
Truth.
https://www.hstoday.us/briefings/daily-news-analysis/at-t-winning-bid-for-nsa-contract-was-more-expensive/