Still can't understand why a bank that had people who made bad deals and lost money causing the bank to partialy fail are kept inplace and paid bonus's and the IT people who did there job well are replaced by cheap labour external to the country and this is at a time when there going on about TAX evasion, this too me makes no sence and is why I don't run banks :|.
Quite an understatement that, the €71bn RBS acquisition of part of ABN Amro often makes it into the lists of "worst business deals ever":
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-feat...
Sad part is that when it goes wrong it does effect the balance sheet. Even sadder is how they internaly cost IT and do it wrong. Remove the IT and see how many people/time is needed to do the same job and that is the true cost/potentual impact of IT. Sadly though that is never done and only comes to light when things fail and then they blame IT and not the effects of seagul managment, budget cuts etc.
Some similarities to the now defunct Railtrack whose remit was to maintain the UK railways decided that it was a good idea to outsource all of its engineering capability. It turned out that Railtrack did not have the ability to manage, monitor or access the state of work carried out by contractors. Some details and links in... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railtrack#Founding
A good lesson. Accessing which are the core functions of your company. And the ability to execute them without failure.
1) Why did it take until the early hours of Wednesday to find out? Why not run a manual check after the change went in?
2) If they found out on Wednesday morning, why did it take until Friday - after three failed batch runs - to fix it?
Maybe in their next business case for off-shoring, they'll plug in realistic numbers for the risk of downtime and its cost.