As you might already know, I am from Rayalaseema and article may be biased 🙂
This article , trying focus on issues and “program management” learning/mistakes. You can think this as a case study on Telagana.
Unlike US/UK governments, current India government lacks experience and intention solve the issues in methodical approach.
When two brothers are moving way, they would have already agreed on the sharing of power/land/assets and a clear road-map of who is getting what. When two brother lived in same house and earned together, built an asserts and credibility, with out “gentle man’s agreement”, how can they move away.
Getting back to the article, on program management perspective,
Like project management has triple constraints ( time, cost, scope), program management has triple constraints ( governance, stakeholders , benefits).
The constraints/ conflict were never addressed while announcing the formation of the state.
The problem starts from the portfolio management side. This is alignment of your program based on mission and vision of the federal government.
Program should have work- package , like whole plan of addressing a complete road-map.
The initial requirement gathering is done by means of “Sri Krishna commission”, but the pain points were not addressed.
There is no risk mitigation / avoidance plan was considered.
Stakeholders are people, to whom those will be benefited. The elected representing people are not right members in implementation and they are not suitable .
Staged plan approach or incremental delivery approach was not there.
Moving from stage to stage, sign-off were not taken. All sign-off were fabricated.
People sentiments to regions are not considered, and while shutting down we need to have complete path.