| ▲ | Freak_NL 2 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||
It's an unfortunate Dutch way of doing things. The firm believe that the market will solve it if you have a contract that says thing will be solved. Write a tender, pick the cheapest party, trust in contracts, hope it won't break before you (the external contractor pushing for it) move on in a few months time. The people who pointed out that none of the moving parts of DigiD should have been outsourced were ignored until the tide shifted this year. I'm honestly surprised the government decided to intervene. The usual method is to keep on believing in the signed piece of paper until the shit hits the fan (like with the Fyra high speed trains) — never mind that the US (where the buyer is from) is not likely to give a toss about those pieces of paper if they need something from our data. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | speleding an hour ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
It's important to add the context that whenever our government tries to do something by themselves it ends up late and severely over budget. So you have to weigh the risks of outsourcing to the risk of the whole thing becoming very late and very expensive. The risks around outsourcing are something further down the line, the risks of everything becoming expensive and late are something that will give the responsible politician a headache now. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||