RBS 'Computer Glitch'

[Mich the Tester]

I don't mind which because I don't pay the bill. My point was, who in RBS has the Governance and Control. It doesn't matter who runs what and where. What matters is what Controls you have in place to make sure what gets done is right and when (because no matter where your work is done and by whom it will) it all goes a bit wrong it gets fixed, fast.

Governance and Control? In a bank? Nope, never seen that. Seen lots of 'compliance' numpties that prevent proper testing with nonsense rules and of course 'testing competence centres' that produce 57 page templates for test plans, mostly filled with stuff nobody reads, but control? Nah mate, pull the other one.

[kmge]

Governance and Control? In a bank? Nope, never seen that. Seen lots of 'compliance' numpties that prevent proper testing with nonsense rules and of course 'testing competence centres' that produce 57 page templates for test plans, mostly filled with stuff nobody reads, but control? Nah mate, pull the other one.

OK I give up, I know when I'm beat But can I just say it doesn't happen in the Bank I contract at. If anything they're so risk averse it can be frustrating

[Mich the Tester]

OK I give up, I know when I'm beat But can I just say it doesn't happen in the Bank I contract at. If anything they're so risk averse it can be frustrating

You're not cut out for CUK general are you? You're supposed to argue all afternoon, call a few people 'cretin', set up a poll with an Andyw option and then come back tomorrow and do it all again!

[doodab]

I'm a bit concerned that my non natwest / RBS account is now reporting a "limited statement service" and balance that's about £350 out of whack.

Have they started rerunning transactions from last week and ruining the whole banking system? Imagine if all the debt in the world had to be written off because it was the only way to recover from a computer glitch

[Mich the Tester]

I'm a bit concerned that my non natwest / RBS account is now reporting a "limited statement service" and balance that's about £350 out of whack.

Have they started rerunning transactions from last week and ruining the whole banking system? Imagine if all the debt in the world had to be written off because it was the only way to recover from a computer glitch

Other way round; a major computer glitch is probably the only way to recover from all the debt in the world.

[kmge]

You're not cut out for CUK general are you? You're supposed to argue all afternoon, call a few people 'cretin', set up a poll with an Andyw option and then come back tomorrow and do it all again!

The Mark Twain quote springs to mind.....

I can only speak from my experiance of how things are done, others may have more than me.

[moorfield]

It is interesting that this first occurred on Tuesday night. Normally we have applied batch patches/changes to banking systems on the weekend after the Friday night batch so the first problem will be encountered on Monday night.

This is what happened:

Bob was asked to put a fix into their GL end of day for last weeks Swedish bank holiday.
No one really knows how this bank holiday is meant to work or whether it is actually a bank holiday, especially when it comes to FX, their BAs don't, and Bob certainly doesn't. Needless to say Bob's testing was hapless and pretty much consisted of "Does it compile ok?", "Yeah", "Ok let's release it then".

Result:

Their GL end of day went bonkers and their number bods have spent the last 4 days reversing out all the cr4p before they can put the correct transactions through.

[bobspud]

So it seems that the dev bobs are getting cained for this, but, who at RBS signed off the change? Who was the person who put pen to paper at HQ to say "yep, happy to do a major change to our payment system".....? Have a go at the bobs all you like it's the person/change board members who said "yes" that should be up against a wall. Governance and Control. Process and Procedure. The basics seem to have been overlooked.

CAB won't work if those attending dont take the role seriously...

The CAB process is supposed to make those that come before it think about their problem properly, and have answers ready to prove they know what they are up to. There is two ways you can think of it:

1) It lets the elders and experienced members of the team ask questions of the person wishing to make the change so that they can better explore the problem and ensure they have all the solutions to hand...
2) It is a pain in the arse that means I have to write loads of extra tulip that will take more time than the change....

As a holder of the TDA post I have seen both come before my CAB. I have seen project managers lie and provide incorrect/incomplete information to try and reduce the severity of the change and speed up its adoption. I have seen inexperienced guys come in and get spat back out because they have not thought about how to back up the servers or services prior to the change. On several occasions I have also seen cans of worms pop open mid way through the discussion when all parties involved sit back and say "Oh CRAP! I never thought about that....Lets not go there. I will come up with a better plan..."

More often I see certain companies playing the system more than others...

If I ask you if you have a roll out plan and its fit for purpose and tested I have to rely on your integrity to tell me the truth...

[kmge]

CAB won't work if those attending dont take the role seriously...

The CAB process is supposed to make those that come before it think about their problem properly, and have answers ready to prove they know what they are up to. There is two ways you can think of it:

1) It lets the elders and experienced members of the team ask questions of the person wishing to make the change so that they can better explore the problem and ensure they have all the solutions to hand...
2) It is a pain in the arse that means I have to write loads of extra tulip that will take more time than the change....

As a holder of the TDA post I have seen both come before my CAB. I have seen project managers lie and provide incorrect/incomplete information to try and reduce the severity of the change and speed up its adoption. I have seen inexperienced guys come in and get spat back out because they have not thought about how to back up the servers or services prior to the change. On several occasions I have also seen cans of worms pop open mid way through the discussion when all parties involved sit back and say "Oh CRAP! I never thought about that....Lets not go there. I will come up with a better plan..."

More often I see certain companies playing the system more than others...

If I ask you if you have a roll out plan and its fit for purpose and tested I have to rely on your integrity to tell me the truth...

You're not wrong. So I come back to Governance and Control. You can't change the past but you can make sure the future goes better. If a person tells me all is good and it then goes very bad either have a really really really good excuse or a resignation letter in your hand.
Everyone makes mistakes, just never lie.

[bobspud]

You're not wrong. So I come back to Governance and Control. You can't change the past but you can make sure the future goes better. If a person tells me all is good and it then goes very bad either have a really really really good excuse or a resignation letter in your hand.
Everyone makes mistakes, just never lie.

Ha ha ha a TDA after my own heart...

The word from someone quite well in the know was that the third tranche of guys and girls to leave RBS under their clear out, included a fair few that should never had been allowed out the door because they had knowledge in their heads that was far better than anything written down... They had also got rid of a few of the London based TDA's... I am pretty sure that this mess is going to have serious repercussions when the actual failure is done and dusted...