Introduction to the SAAQclic Contract
The contract for the digital transformation of the Société de l’assurance automobile du Québec (SAAQ), particularly the SAAQclic platform, has come under scrutiny due to the substantial risks faced by its contractor, LGS. According to Michel Dumas, a former vice-president of LGS, the firm was in a precarious position throughout the project.
Internal Insights from LGS
In a testimony delivered before the Gallant Commission, Dumas provided insights from his tenure beginning in early 2019. He highlighted that the relationship between SAAQ and its vendors, including LGS, IBM, and SAP, was deteriorating. This discord was largely due to SAAQ’s delay in presenting a clear plan for “Delivery 2,” which is crucial for the SAAQclic platform’s development.
The Weight of the Contract
LGS secured a lucrative contract worth 458 million dollars; however, the lack of control over project implementation raised significant concerns. Dumas remarked that all risk associated with the project was ultimately the responsibility of LGS. He stated, “You are not the master of the work; the client decides the resources. Why did you sign this contract?” This statement emphasizes the inherent risks that LGS took on without adequate power over decision-making.
Challenges and Surprises Encountered
Dumas conveyed that the magnitude of the project was surprising, comparing it to another large-scale initiative he oversaw that was ultimately abandoned, the “La moderne” project at CNESST. His observations pointed to “dysfunction” within teams that were involved in the project, indicating potential issues in collaboration and communication among stakeholders.
Consequences of the Deteriorating Relationship
The strains in the relationship between SAAQ and its contractors led to mediation processes, reflecting the complicated nature of public-private partnerships in large government contracts. In September 2020, an agreement was reached that reduced the scope of the original project. This agreement highlights how misalignment and miscommunication can lead to significant project adjustments.
Future Implications of the Testimony
As Dumas continues his testimony, the implications of this situation resonate with other firms involved in similar contracts. The lessons from the SAAQclic project could offer critical insights into risk management, project oversight, and the importance of clear communication in contract execution.
Conclusion
The revelations regarding the SAAQclic contract underscore the complexities of digital transformation projects executed in partnership with government agencies. For LGS and its partners, the risks taken in this contract serve as a cautionary tale, reminding firms that clear outlines of risk responsibility and robust managerial frameworks are essential for the success of such significant initiatives.
