Cambionn

Let's be clear:

#NS could very well have not chosen for an US company. They could have put something regarding political #independence and digital #sovereignty in their #aanbesteding. They also could have looked more at quality, where this cheap US firm scored lower than competitors.

NS claiming they had "no choice" is bullshit to hide behind now that people are critical.

Also doubt they have no clue about ABRO extending to them.

https://tweakers.net/nieuws/244544/ns-stapt-voor-niet-kritieke-ict-over-van-kpn-naar-amerikaans-bedrijf.html

#digitalAutonomy #digitalsovereignty

NS stapt voor niet-kritieke ict over van KPN naar Amerikaans bedrijf - update

De NS gaat een deel van de ict uitbesteden aan een Amerikaanse partij. Het gaat om niet-kritieke hosting, technisch applicatiebeheer en ketenmonitoring. Experts zeggen tegen NRC dat zij het besluit onverstandig vinden vanwege de afhankelijkheid van de VS.

Tweakers
Feb 10 at 2:23pmWeb
Show threadEdwin KremerFeb 10

@Cambion Exactly that! #NS, way too easy to say "there was no other way" and putting the blame on others ('lack of governmental guidance').

I can't get my head around it that still today, one organisation after the other outsources (critical) IT to US companies. I mean, how, how ignorant could one possibly be - it is just off the scale!

Show threadCambionnFeb 10

@edwinkremer
Even aside of making better requirements (which their great at when they want to avoid "open unless" rules): The whole idea that one has to go with the cheapest due to the law is plainly wrong, yet so often it's the excuse.

The whole things feels like quickly signing "cheap" US contracts before they can't due to ABRO counting for them, especially with the up to 12 years(!) they signed for. Because paying with freedom, independence, privacy, etc. instead is good for the boss' bonus

Show threadEdwin KremerFeb 10
@Cambion Agreed. In a tender you usually define a scoring model where 'price' is just one of the parameters. However, all other parameters equal, price will be decisive. 'All other parameters equal', or let's say "equal scoring on quality criteria", is unlikely - but those who aim to be the cheapest sometimes make fairy tale promises regarding their capabilities and finding out the real truth early enough is often surprisingly hard - within the rules of engagement in European procurements.
Show threadCambionnFeb 11

@edwinkremer Would be true, if not for NS stating they didn't score as well on quality. There is no fairytale promise here.

NS is going with the "aanbesteding-law forced us, it's not our fault" excuse, but that excuse is incorrect (despite it's common use). Signing for up to 12 years, right before a law-change limiting these kinda contracts, is rather suspicious

If they would admit it was about money, I still would disagree but the discussion would be very different. At least they wouldn't lie