Tag Archives: Cabinet Office

Alpha.gov.uk shows how agile can work in government

Posted on 02/06/2011 | 2 comments

By Tony Collins

Harry Metcalfe, managing director of Dextrous Web, has written an excellent article on Alpha.gov.uk.

Alpha.gov.uk is a prototype, built in response to some of the challenges laid down in a report by Martha Lane Fox last year. The two main objectives of Alphagov are to:

– test, in public, a prototype of a new, single UK Government website

– design and build a UK Government website using open, agile, multi-disciplinary product development techniques and technologies, shaped by a preoccupation with user needs.

It’s clear from Metcalfe’s post that he  understands the unbending ways of government. He sees the opportunities too. He says:

“As a technical solution, this [Alphagov] is brilliant. If you’re going to have a single [web] platform, this is the right kind of platform to have, because it embraces change.

“If you want some new functionality, add an app for it. If you need a new department, add a new instance of the department app, add your content, and you’ll have 90% of what you need.

“If you want to run a consultation using someone’s third-party tool, just have them brand it appropriately and write an app that gives you as much integration as you want, or as the tool can support. But this kind of flexibility is powerful. In many respects it’s anathema to the way government works.

“For a start, it requires something government unwisely gave up on long ago: an in-house development team…”

Campaign4Change comment:

Alphagov is not yet handling transactions. Indeed there are no agile-developed systems that handle passport applications or tax self-assessment.

As Metcalfe says: “…transactions are complicated, messy beasts, unavoidably bound up with business processes and legislation; empires, politics and entrenched positions; long contracts and vast sums of money.. it’s not primarily a technological problem. It’s a process problem, and those are much harder to fix.”

It may be a matter of time, though, before agile becomes far more prevalent in public sector IT. Universal Credit is based on agile, in a programme run in part by the redoubtable Joe Harley, the UK Government’s CIO.

Harley told the Public Accounts Committee last month:

“In the waterfall it takes quite a while to do a design – maybe a year or two … By the time we come to execute, things have moved on.

“In the agile world, it is a way of providing rapid solutions very quickly. Normally, and in Universal Credit it is monthly, one designs, develops, implements and produces a product very early on in the cycle. It is particularly useful and appropriate when the users themselves – in the universal credit, citizens themselves – can participate in the creation of it. It is about user-centric, rapid deployment solutions. That is what we hope to achieve.”

Ian Watmore, Chief Operating Officer at the Cabinet Office, told the same committee that the government objective is for the first claims under Universal Credit to be paid by October 2013. He said: “I would have thought that if we achieve that, it will become the precedent and benchmark for Government projects.”

We hope Universal Credit is a timely success and that it becomes a benchmark for government projects. It’s easy to talk down the chances of agile in government on the basis that it ill suits the way government works. But Francis Maude, officials in the Cabinet Office, and Alphagov’s developers want to change the way government works.

To say that agile won’t work in government is like telling someone who’s obese that they need not eat less because history shows they won’t be able to.

Government must spend less. And agile is one way to cut spending. Alphagov is showing the way.

How Alpha.gov.uk came about:

Last year Martha Lane Fox published suggestions on reforming UK Government’s online. At the launch of her report (subtitled “revolution, not evolution”) she recommended:

“…Putting the needs of citizens ahead of those of departments”

She made a strong case for the UK Government to adopt a single web domain, analogous to the BBC’s use of BBC.co.uk, and recommended a radical change in how gov.uk sites are produced:

“Government should take advantage of the more open, agile and cheaper digital technologies to deliver simpler and more effective digital services to users.”

Links:

How Alphagov might change UK government for the better.

Institute for Government: what’s wrong with government IT?

Agile in government IT – don’t knock it.

10 things Alphagov gets right.

10 things Alphagov gets wrong.

Alpha.gov.uk

2 Comments

Posted in Agile, Campaign4Change, innovation, Uncategorized

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Cabinet Office Minister Francis Maude tells private sector: ‘Come and knock on our door’

Posted on 27/05/2011 | Leave a comment

By David Bicknell

Cabinet Office Minister Francis Maude has insisted that large private sector service providers are still a part of the Coalition’s pluralist vision for the delivery of public services.  Although the volume of conventional outsourcing will decline,Maude challenged the private sector to engage with the Government and to pioneer new ways of working.
 
Talking to members of the Business Services Association, Maude laid out his vision of a new chapter in public/private sector collaboration. Giving the Association’s Annual Lecture,  Maude urged private sector contractors to work with him to realise the opportunities to reform the delivery of public services.
 
As the public sector represents some 40% of the revenue of business services companies, there was ‘standing room only’ to hear Maude’s vision of the future. He referred to this interdependence to justify his call for a shared effort in looking for efficiencies. Whilst the inherited budget deficit lends an edge to the Government’s reforming drive, Maude was keen to look beyond mere cost savings to facilitate new approaches to accountability and stakeholder involvement. Referring to staff consultation over reform, he sees there is potential to energise and challenge Government from within and set out his mission to “set this passion for the public service ethos free” from the shackles of outmoded workplace practices. But he also realises that this objective cannot be realised solely from within and he is looking to establish relationships with the big service providers to help the Government on its way. And in particular, he sees the need for the large players to work with mutuals, SMEs and charities to find new models for the delivery of services.
 
Commenting on the address,  Michael Ryley, Head of Support Services at Pinsent Mason, the Annual Lecture’s sponsor said: “The Government is clearly conscious of the difficulty of driving change from within a public sector workforce which is steeped in a tradition of delivering services in a certain way.  Given that modern procurement creates the potential for workforces to move seamlessly between private and public sector employers, the Government is clearly attracted by encouraging flexibility and using private sector expertise to energise the public service ethos.” 

Leave a comment

Posted in Campaign4Change, mutualisation

Tagged , , , ,

Leaked memo confirms Fujitsu “keen” to settle NHS IT dispute

Posted on 25/05/2011 | Leave a comment

By Tony Collins

On 5 May I wrote on Campaign4Change that there are signs that a long-running £700m dispute between Fujitsu and the Department of Health over the NHS IT programme will reach a settlement without a court hearing.

Now a leaked Cabinet Office memo confirms that the Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude has met a representative of Fujitsu who is “keen to find a way through this issue [a dispute over its NHS IT contract] outside the legal/arbitration route currently being pursued”.

The memo says the when the Cabinet Office agreed a pan-Government memorandum of understanding with major suppliers including Fujitsu “it became apparent that the [NHS IT] dispute is material to:

– the quality of the relationship between central government, now acting as a single customer, and the company; and

– the financial and operational health of Fujitsu UK, which affects its ability to fulfil a number of business-critical contracts across central government.

The memo says that a Fujitsu representative had indicated to the Cabinet Office that the company wanted to improve its overall relationship with government.

To see whether a resolution to the NHS dispute could be reached, Fujitsu executives were willing to meet a group of officials.

The memo makes the point that relationships between suppliers and the government have changed. Coalition reforms of central government mean that the Cabinet Office is managing the Crown relationships with 19 strategic suppliers including CSC and Fujitsu. So a dispute with one department may affect a supplier’s relationship with the government in general.

HM Treasury has issued “delegated authority” letters that  give the Cabinet Office the ability to be involved and, if appropriate, lead the resolution of legal disputes within departments. The aim of this, says the memo, is to “provide objectivity and seek an optimum outcome for Government”.

The memo is also revelatory in suggesting that the Department of Health is not cooperating with the Cabinet Office over dispute resolution.

When a contract for Fujitsu to supply desktops at the Department for Work and Pensions ran into trouble, the DWP “actively” sought support from the Cabinet Office, given the Crown initiative to see contracts in the round.  In contrast, says the memo, the Department of Health has not involved the Cabinet Office.

The memo also refers to the dispute between the DH and CSC.

Leave a comment

Posted in npfit, outsourcing, supplier relationships, Uncategorized

Tagged , , , , , , ,

NPfIT – our view on what should happen now.

Posted on 25/05/2011 | Leave a comment

By Tony Collins

Far from being dead, the National Programme for IT is on the point of being re-invigorated.

That, at any rate, was the impression given on Monday by senior executives at the two main NPfIT suppliers, BT and CSC,  and by two senior officials at the Department of Health, Sir David Nicholson and Christine Connelly.

MPs on the Public Accounts Committee were questioning Nicholson, who is the NHS Chief Executive also the NPfIT’s Senior Responsible Owner, and Connelly, the Department of Health’s CIO, on a report published last week by the National Audit Office on the NPfIT detailed care records systems.

Nicholson and Connelly are among the most highly paid in Whitehall, earning between them nearly £500,000 a year; and the security and seniority of their positions might help to explain their confident replies.

Their allies at the PAC hearing were Patrick O’Connell, President, BT Health, and Sheri Thureen, President UK Healthcare, CSC. All four – Nicholson, Connelly, O’Connell and Thureen – argued for the continuance of the NPfIT. They gave the impression to MPs that the remaining years of the NPfIT, with a total of £4.3bn left to spend, are safe in their hands.

On the other side of the irreconcilable divide were the MPs on the Public Accounts Committee who comprise eight Tory MPs, five Labour and one Liberal Democrat. Labour’s Margaret Hodge chairs the committee. They were allied to the National Audit Office whose auditors say the £2.7bn spent so far on the national programme’s care records systems “so far does not represent value for money and we do not find ground for confidence that the remaining planned spend of £4.3bn will be different”.

At times the animosity between the two sides at the Public Accounts Committee was not concealed; and at one point even the NAO found itself under attack. There were few smiles or obvious signs that each side respected the other despite their disagreements.

To the board of a large private company that was confronting a contract on which a supplier had not delivered, the exchanges at the Public Accounts Committee might have looked odd.

This is because the suppliers and customer – CSC, BT and the Department of Health – were as one. On the whole they were defending the NPfIT against auditors and MPs who were representing taxpayers.

But the board of a private company, facing a contractual disagreement, could ask:  shouldn’t this NPfIT dispute be a matter of customer versus supplier?

This could never be because the customer, in this case, has messed up at least as much as the suppliers. Which may explain why suppliers and customer are on the same side, against the people who want to hold them accountable: the MPs and auditors.

Something similar happened after the fatal crash of a Chinook helicopter on the Mull of Kintyre in June 1994, which killed all 29 on board including 25 VIPs. Poor software was a suspected factor in the accident but the Department – the MoD – sided with the helicopter’s supplier in arguing that the equipment and software were sound.

So the MoD and the Chinook’s suppliers were on one side of the divide. On the other side were MPs, families of the dead pilots who were blamed for the crash, and other campaigners who discovered evidence that the Chinook was not airworthy at the time of the accident.

All this shows is that it can be difficult and even impossible to get to the truth after something has gone seriously wrong.

At the end of Monday’s Public Accounts Committee – which lasted about two and a half hours – neither side would have been satisfied. And it’s against this background that £4.3bn has yet to be spent on the NPfIT.

Margaret Hodge made the point that £4.3bn would enable the NHS to employ 200,000 more nurses.

The NPfIT represents change  – but some would say it’s for the worse. At Campaign4Change we welcome the independent review of the NPfIT CSC contracts by the Major Projects Authority of the Cabinet Office. The review has already begun.

We recognise there is much pressure on the Authority to approve the contracts and allow the Department of Health to sign a memorandum of understanding with CSC. Indeed the NPfIT minister Simon Burns has indicated that he’d like the NPfIT to continue.

This is the sort of pressure that can make a nonsense of an “independent” Cabinet Office review.

It’s clear to us that the national programme, as structured, pits the Department of Health and its suppliers against anyone who criticises them. In the ring, in one corner, are the Department of Health, Sir David Nicholson, Christine Connelly, CSC and BT, together with consultancies and other organisations and institutions that have a financial interest in the continuance of the NPfIT.

In the other corner are the organisations that represent the taxpayers: the National Audit Office, MPs and potentially the Cabinet Office. Many of these representatives regard the arguments used to keep the NPfIT alive as learned gibberish.

That’s not a recipe for successful change.  In the view of Campaign4Change, BT, CSC, NHS Connecting for Health, David Nicholson and Christine Connelly should discuss in a non-legalistic way how to wind down the national programme in a way that minimises the costs to taxpayers and the suppliers. Those at the centre should be setting standards, rather than specifying systems and negotiating contracts that NHS trusts don’t want.

Once a wind-down discussion reaches a conclusion, that can be put within a legal framework. That’s change the NHS can live with. Otherwise the NHS will be locked more securely into suppliers and contracts they hadn’t endorsed in the first place – and the £4.3bn that has yet to be spent may be more good money going into a congenitally bad programme.

Leaked memo reveals CSC’s plans for new NHS IT deal.

Leave a comment

Posted in Campaign4Change, NHS, npfit, outsourcing, supplier relationships, Uncategorized

Tagged , , , , ,

Agile in Government IT – don’t knock it

Posted on 20/05/2011 | 1 comment

By Tony Collins

Alistair Maughan, a lawyer who specialises in large ICT projects, argues that agile won’t work in government ICT.

“The Government ICT strategy had some good ideas. Agile project management isn’t one of them,” says Maughan in a cogent and informed blog post for Computer Weekly.

I asked the Institute for Government to respond to Maughan’s comments. The Institute advocates agile in its report System Error: Fixing the flaws in government IT.

My thanks to Jerrett Myers, a senior researcher at the Institute, who has written the piece below, in response to Maughan’s comments.

Agile government ICT – a question of innovation

Like any management innovation, there are plenty of challenges in adopting an agile approach, but fortunately none are insurmountable.  The innovation guru Everett Rogers outlines a series of factors that influence the rate of adoption of an innovation – in effect setting out a test for how likely it is for an innovation to be implemented.

The first is test is the relative advantage of the innovation – the degree to which a new way of working is perceived as superior. Government departments and agencies have reported extremely positive results from agile projects. Indeed, the Department for Work and Pensions, the Ordnance Survey and the Ministry of Defence have all used agile methods for delivering ICT projects.

Regularly changing priorities, advances in technology and the desire for more cost-effective and user-led solutions require a far more responsive approach to running ICT projects.  Of the thousands of people who have downloaded our recent report, we have had an overwhelmingly positive response to the idea for government.

So how can government make it work? The second innovation success factor is ‘trialability’ – can departments test out this approach on a limited basis.  Again, the good news is that at relatively low cost, departments can use an agile approach for running ICT projects – and indeed they are committed to doing so.

The third characteristic is ‘observability’ – are the results of the innovation visible to others.  Whitehall has committed to creating a centre of excellence across government and the private sector which can enable fast start-up and mobilisation for agile projects.  It will also establish a cross government approach and capabilities for agile.  This should serve to raise the profile and ‘observability’ of agile projects.

The fourth factor is complexity – how difficult is an innovation to use and understand.  Here, the government faces a greater challenge.  New skills will be required which are ‘in-house’ rather than bought in through contractors.  This includes making difficult trade-offs and prioritising effectively. Regular testing, planning and demonstration will need to take place to handle risks. And by taking part in agile projects, it can serve to internalise agile values, build skills and help to foster support, understanding and momentum for change.

The final factor is perhaps the greatest barrier to overcome – compatibility – the degree to which an innovation is consistent with existing values, norms and operating procedures.  Maughan underscores how different the agile approach is for running ICT projects. The project approval processes and legal arrangements governing contracts need to be adapted to be far more responsive and receptive to agile delivery.

Equally important is the culture of empowerment that needs to surround projects.  Fortunately, the experience in other large organisations in the public and private sector suggest this transition is possible.

At a large government agency, budgeting and governance processes have changed to accommodate and encourage more agile projects.  Its new investment approval process involves obtaining early permission to fund development immediately without a fully specified business case being approved (although a robust justification must still be provided). The projects are given permission to spend at a particular rate over a period of time and return to the investment board at specified intervals for further approvals and to update on progress.

On each of these points, it appears that agile can succeed with the right leadership and determination for change. Ultimately, however, this isn’t just about adopting a new approach to government ICT, reforming the procurement process or taking a more sophisticated approach to managing risk.  Instead, it is a test of Whitehall’s capacity for innovation.

**

Jerrett Myers is a Senior Researcher at the Institute for Government. The Institute for Government’s report, System Error: Fixing the flaws in government IT can be downloaded here.

Alistair Maughan’s blog post for Computer Weekly is here.

1 Comment

Posted in Agile, innovation, Uncategorized

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

NHS IT minister talks of “fantastic” NPfIT system at Royal Free

Posted on 18/05/2011 | 2 comments

By Tony Collins

Interviewed by a BBC Radio 4’s “Today” presenter James Naughtie this morning, Simon Burns, the minister responsible for the NHS’s £11.4bn National Programme for IT [NPfIT], explained why he has no plans to stop the NPfIT.

Burns was responding to a report of the National Audit Office, which was published today, which questioned the value-for-money of the billions spent on the detailed care records systems at the heart of the NPfIT.

Just before Burns’s interview, Naughtie spoke to Richard Bacon MP, a member of the Public Accounts Committee, who  called for the NPfIT to be scapped.

Naughtie asked Burns: “Do you accept that critique from your colleague Richard Bacon?”

Burns replied: “Yes.  We inherited a system we would never have devised ourselves. To have a centralised top-down approach where everyone had to change their systems to conform to the new system was the wrong way forward and was, as it has been shown, a gross waste of public money.

“But I think everyone will agree it is crucial to have an effective IT system in a modernised NHS because when patients go to see their doctor, or go to hospitals to see nurses or consultants, they do not want to have to be explaining to each different person their medical background.”

Naughtie said that Richard Bacon had made the point that a national system is not necessary, and that it’s rare for patients in one part of the country to need treatment in another part. So why do patient records have to be available at every NHS site? Why do it that way, asked Naughtie.

Burns:  “That was the model the last government decided to go ahead with and we think they made serious mistakes…  If you take the north, the midlands and east of England, after 10 years and £6.4bn of money spent, only four out of 97 trusts have had their hospital records installed. That is a farce and an utter waste of money.

Naughtie:  “If it is a farce why not stop it now?”

Burns: “Because everyone is agreed that to improve patient care in a modernised NHS one has to embrace IT in a responsible and realistic way for the reasons I have already given.

“What we have been looking at in the interim is allowing local trusts to adapt their existing systems rather than having to get rid of them and bring in new systems.”

Naughtie: “How much of the £4.3bn that hasn’t been spent will need to be spent to make that happen?”

Burns: “We have already saved £1.3bn with the changes. But what we are doing to move forward is we have set up a major projects initiative which is going to look at this.

“The Department of Health and the Cabinet Office are going to look at this to see how we can move forward in a way that is not going to waste taxpayers’ money but will achieve having an IT system for modernised NHS that actually does serve patients, and doctors and nurses who treat them, so that it is effective and delivers.

“For those who doubt that can happen, if you look at the Royal Free Hospital [Hampstead]  about three years ago they had installed by BT the system the government wanted and it was chaotic.

“They have now worked on that, adapted it, and it is now working to a way the Royal Free thinks is fantastic because it is improving patient care and it is part of a modernised process that they welcome and have embraced with vigour.”

The interview ended with Burns giving the impression that a review of the NPfIT by the Cabinet Office’s Major Projects Authority will not have the option of halting or cancelling the national programme.

2 Comments

Posted in NHS, npfit, outsourcing, supplier relationships, Uncategorized

Tagged , , , , , ,

A sign that Cabinet Office reforms will alter behaviour of major IT suppliers

Posted on 05/05/2011 | Leave a comment

 

By Tony Collins

There are signs that a long-running £700m dispute between Fujitsu and the Department of Health over the NHS IT programme will reach a settlement without a court hearing.

 A settlement, it should be said, will be due largely to reforms of central government initiated by the coalition and Francis Maude, Cabinet Office minister.

Maude’s reforms mean that major suppliers to the government are now managed centrally, at “Crown” level, not contract by contract. So a dispute with one department can affect a supplier’s relationship with government as a whole.

That didn’t happen before, when each department managed separately its relationships with major suppliers.

It’s likely now that Fujitsu will want to improve its relationships with government, particularly since the:

– Tsunami in Japan which has weakened the company’s operations.

– premature ending of Fujitsu’s £330m desktop contract with the Department for Work and Pensions.

The wish for improved relations with government makes it more likely it will reach a settlement over its withdrawal from the National Programme for IT in the NHS – NPfIT – in 2008. Fujitsu was said to have been seeking £700m after its departure. It’s now thought to be seeking a settlement without any formal proceedings.

Comment

It has long been obvious that government should be a “single customer” to its major IT suppliers. Only now is that happening, thanks to the coalition’s reforms. It means that, for the first time in living memory, it’s the government – the customer – that is in control of its major IT suppliers, and not the other way round. 

Few of the top 20 IT and services suppliers to government will now be willing to carry on a dispute with a department when it could cost lost contracts with other departments.

Leave a comment

Posted in Campaign4Change, supplier relationships, Uncategorized

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Six entrepreneurs to coach SMEs for Government “Dragons’ Den” panel

Posted on 14/04/2011 | Leave a comment

 

By Tony Collins

Six entrepreneurs will coach SME representatives before they present their ideas to a Government “Dragon’s Den” panel of officials.

The coaching will help chosen SME representatives improve their  proposals for reforming parts of central government.

Francis Maude, Minister for the Cabinet Office, said the entrepreneurs will coach representatives from SMEs that have submitted successful ideas for innovative and cost-saving Government goods and services to the online Innovation Launch Pad.

The Innovation Launch Pad  opened on the Cabinet Office website in March and closes on 22 April.  SMEs are invited to submit proposals – up to 500 words – on how their goods and services could help save the Government money or deliver better outcomes.

Civil servants will vote for ideas with the greatest potential. The chosen SME representatives will then present their ideas to the Dragon’s Den-style panel of senior government business officials, following coaching by the entrepreneurs.

The entrepreneurs are:

– Jon Moulton, founder and managing director of private equity firm Better Capital and member of the British Venture Capital Hall of Fame

– Mike Lynch OBE, co-founder of a software start-up that is said by the Cabinet Office to be the UK’s largest software company Autonomy. He is also a trustee at NESTA

– Hermann Hauser, CBE, founder of over 20 technology companies including Acorn Computers, who has an honorary CBE for ‘innovative service to the UK enterprise sector’

– Sherry Coutu, founder of two successful businesses in the financial services industry and investor in 35 businesses, and rated as the ‘top CEO mentor in Europe’

– David Cleevely, co-founder of Abcam and founder of Analysys and Chairman of Cambridge Angels

– Stephen Kelly, former CEO of Micro Focus and the Government Crown Representative for mutuals.

The chosen businesses will be invited to a reception at 10 Downing Street.

Stephen Allott, one of nine Crown Representatives appointed by the Cabinet Office to drive procurement savings across Whitehall, told The Telegraph that the initiative would raise the profile of the businesses within Whitehall, although there were no guarantees of contracts at the end of the process,

He said departments were taking the Government’s pledge to acquire more goods and services from small firms seriously.

Francis Maude said: “This Government does not believe there is a one size fits all approach to delivering services.  That is why we want to make it easy for small businesses to tell us their ideas, as they will have a vital role to play in helping us to find new, innovative and more cost effective ways to improve services to the public.  

“We also believe that supporting small business will help to kick-start growth in the economy.  As part of this, we are doing everything we can to open up business to SMEs.

“We have committed to publishing all contracts online for business to see, got rid of the bureaucracy to allow new companies to supply government and appointed Stephen Allott to represent SME interests in Government.

“Our Innovation Launch Pad means that all SMEs now have the opportunity to present their business solutions to us. I am delighted that such senior business figures have volunteered to help us to get the very best out of small business for Government.”

Stephen Allott said: “I am certain that there is substantial opportunity for Government to save money and deliver a better service through much greater use of SMEs.  If you’re an SME with a product or service that could save money, use the Innovation Launch Pad to tell us about it.”

Entrepeneur  Sherry Coutu said:

“The Government buying more goods and services from SMEs is key. One pound of a customer’s money is worth ten times the amount of investment money to a small business.

“Given that 54 percent of jobs are created by six percent of small, fast-growth companies, this is excellent for everyone as small fast growing businesses will continue to drive the economy.”

Jon Moulton said:

“Small businesses in the UK have a fantastic reputation for innovation. The Innovation Launch Pad is a real opportunity for SMEs to showcase their proposals to Government.”

The Innovation Launchpad is here.

Leave a comment

Posted in Campaign4Change, innovation

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Can you outsource to cut costs and boost service levels?

Posted on 14/04/2011 | Leave a comment

By Tony Collins

At an outsourcing conference on 7 July at the Barbican, London, two of the main discussion points will be around these questions:

– What is the role for outsourcing in cutting the public sector deficit?

– Can outsourcing cut costs and improve service levels?

Organisers of the “Delivering cost-effective public services” conference are hoping to have as a speaker  Katharine Davidson, Director, Efficiency and Reform Group, Cabinet Office, who is a linchpin in the Government’s plans for a radical reform of the machinery of central government.  

Davidson has been invited to give a keynote talk on private sector involvement in the way public services are delivered.

Confirmed speakers include:

– Veronica Mansilla, Project Director, Office of Fair Trading

–  Derrick Anderson, Chief Executive, Lambeth Council 

– Sue Gregory, National Director, Inspection Delivery, Ofsted 

Further details are here.

 

Leave a comment

Posted in Campaign4Change, mutualisation, outsourcing, Uncategorized

Tagged , , , , , , ,

First major Government mutualisation announced

Posted on 12/04/2011 | Leave a comment

Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude, has today announced plans for the mutualisation of the 400-strong My Civil Service Pension , which administers the delivery of Civil Service Pension schemes.

This will be the first major mutualisation of a central government service. Mutuals, as they are known, give employees a financial stake in a business whose ownership is shared between the public and private sectors.

The Cabinet Office is also considering the potential for offering a stake to 1.5 million pension scheme members. 

Maude said:  “Too often there’s been a binary choice between the Government providing a service itself, or outsourcing it to the private sector. These choices have historically been driven by a belief that services have to be controlled centrally – with a one size fits all approach that has left little room for innovation.

“We are looking for more innovative ways to structure services. We know that employees who have a stake in their business, or take ownership of it completely, have more power and motivation to improve the service they run. They can also benefit from partnerships with private or voluntary sector organisations which can bring in capital and expertise.

“For the private sector, which can no longer expect the generous margins of the past, tapping the talent of frontline staff to improve efficiency will be a priority. The state too can keep a stake so that taxpayers benefit from the rising value of an improved service.

“I’m impressed with entrepreneurial zeal of Phil Bartlett and his team at My Civil Service Pension. They are pioneering the mutual joint venture model and the Government is committed to ensuring they have they right support to succeed.”

Phil Bartlett, CEO My Civil Service Pension, said: ” By taking the opportunity to mutualise we can better acknowledge our people and their expertise – and access valuable additional resources and expertise in the private sector.

“This new and innovative structure will give us the agility to exploit opportunities in the changing pension landscape and grow our business, and the taxpayer will benefit from the increased value of an improved and more efficient service.”

Mutualisation is being supported by dedicated resource within the Cabinet Office. Earlier this month Maude announced that the entrepreneur and business leader, Stephen Kelly, has been appointed as the Crown Representative to support the creation of mutuals from existing service teams within central government departments.

He also announced the establishment of an Enterprise Incubator to help civil servants create successful enterprises from within central government, including employee and management teams who wish to form mutual companies under the Right to Provide previously announced by the Cabinet Office.

The Government is developing mutual models through the Mutual Pathfinder programme which is supporting 21 existing and potential mutuals with mentoring and advice from experts in employee ownership.

Every department will put in place ‘rights to provide’ giving staff new rights and support to form mutuals.

The Cabinet Office has appointed Professor Julian Le Grand to head the Mutuals Taskforce which will support staff interested in mutualising their service.

Links:

Government signs over civil service pensions to private sector mutual.

 FSA Mutuals public register.

Leave a comment

Posted in Campaign4Change, mutualisation

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,