RWK, while that's certainly true, and I agree with your perspective on some of the constraints facing IT managers with respect to accounting and IT resource availability.
However, maybe I wasn't being clear, my point isn't funding as much as it is the political approval of projects.
As a second or third level manager in a firm like PWC, you don't even dare to think about moving ahead with a project unless it's on the "approved list" from this years slated projects.
My point is that after PWC put resources into "rolling their own" TPM management software, refusing to use it or even championing the cause of "sh*t canning" it and replacing it with a high $$$ COTS solution is risky at best and career suicide at worst.
I've been there done that and was denied the t-shirt.
Years ago I advocated replacing a simple in house developed "trouble ticking" system with the industry leading COTS version. The CIO had spent considerable political capital convincing his management that programmers should be diverted to work on the in-house system. My suggestion was met with scorn and contempt, two years later, after I had left the firm, the company adopted the COTS version.
I can imagine a similar scenario at PWC, eventually though these things have a way of working themselves out. I forget who it was but one of the posts this weekend pointed out that the PWC version couldn't backup the keys. That's extremely significant and makes their version un-"scalable".
I'm not worried about ERAS losing out to a "home grown" solution. Now if PWC had passed over ERAS for Mobile Armor or another vendor, *that* would concern me.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
