Last week's National Young People's Commissioning Forum, at the Emirates stadium in London, provided an opportunity for the voluntary sector and local Government and other commissioning bodies to share ideas about how to improve the commissioning process.
For those not familiar with the language of the 'third sector' (i.e. neither commercial nor state), 'commissioning' is the term used for the acquisition of services from charities and voluntary organisations by the State. One of the presentations posed the question 'What is Commissioning?', offering a choice of answers including 'The same as procurement!', and indicating that it is far from widely understood, even in this sector.
In essence, when services are 'commissioned', as opposed to 'purchased', the service provider should play a much more active part in the specification of how the service should be delivered, and should be viewed more as a partner in delivery than simply as a 'supplier'.
This is somewhat akin to the 'partnership' models that are often trumpeted by commercial organisations when they are launched, and then quietly forgotten when the good intentions have turned to bickering. There were, however, success stories among the tales of challenges and problems. In particular, one council's Children and Youth Services department talked of the excellent relationship that they had established with a third-sector service provider, developing through honest and fair-minded dialogue that enabled them to work through the inevitable upsets.
The chairperson, Fran Pollard of Catch22, did an excellent job of steering us through the debate about what made good commissioning happen, and how to avoid the pitfalls that had claimed some projects. The breakout groups, a central focus of the forum, provided ample spirited feedback.
It was clear that although none of the third sector participants wanted to alienate potential clients, there were some strong feelings about the way the sector has been treated in the past.
We at Devant have seen many examples of onerous contracts, such as those requiring the provider to give extensive indemnities, where the contract value will barely cover the cost of delivery (assuming all goes perfectly to plan). This sort of indemnity is regularly rejected by commercial entities that stand to make a significant margin on a project, on the basis that it is an unfair allocation of risk. So how does that stack up with the 'commissioning' approach being encouraged by Government?
Not well, it appears.
It seems that although the third sector may suffer occasionally from being too nice to speak out, it is finally finding its voice. Let's hope Government is listening.
Friday, May 22, 2009
Negotiation planning - we know it works, so why don't we do it?
On Tuesday's IACCM Negotiation Community of Interest call, which I had the pleasure of co-chairing with Jason Anderman of whichdraft.com, we discussed the use of tools and templates to assist with negotiation planning.
In a quick straw poll, it transpired that 50% of those on the call had such tools in their organisations (mainly large, multinational corporates). But only 50% of those actually used their tools regularly.
In a study that Jason recently undertook on behalf of a client, he identified that effective use of negotiation planning tools and processes delivered a 64% improvement in efficiency. That is, on average the negotiations that took place using the tools were concluded in less than half the time of those in the control group, and delivered outcomes that more closely matched the objectives initially set for them.
This study provides a useful evidential basis for a belief long-held by those of us who consider ourselves to be negotiating professionals, that structured planning delivers better outcomes in less time. However, it also provides an unexpected illustration of the old chestnut that we humans don't always do what we know to be good for us. Despite the overwhelming evidence supporting the use of process and templates, the organisation in question decided not to roll them out more widely. Why?
Probably for the same reason that few of us meticulously plan and manage our time, and consequently many of us fail to achieve our longed-for work-life balance. The same reason that, despite the irrefutable evidence that it causes ill-health and contributes to early, painful deaths, millions of sane, intelligent adults continue to smoke. The same reason that I finished my healthy chicken, asparagus and baked potato supper with a fairy cake left over by my children.
Perhaps because humans, despite our longing for order, process improvement and efficiency, seem naturally inclined to chaos. Let's hope the benefits of negotiation planning can help us overcome our chaotic tendencies and bring a little civilisation to our business lives.
In a quick straw poll, it transpired that 50% of those on the call had such tools in their organisations (mainly large, multinational corporates). But only 50% of those actually used their tools regularly.
In a study that Jason recently undertook on behalf of a client, he identified that effective use of negotiation planning tools and processes delivered a 64% improvement in efficiency. That is, on average the negotiations that took place using the tools were concluded in less than half the time of those in the control group, and delivered outcomes that more closely matched the objectives initially set for them.
This study provides a useful evidential basis for a belief long-held by those of us who consider ourselves to be negotiating professionals, that structured planning delivers better outcomes in less time. However, it also provides an unexpected illustration of the old chestnut that we humans don't always do what we know to be good for us. Despite the overwhelming evidence supporting the use of process and templates, the organisation in question decided not to roll them out more widely. Why?
Probably for the same reason that few of us meticulously plan and manage our time, and consequently many of us fail to achieve our longed-for work-life balance. The same reason that, despite the irrefutable evidence that it causes ill-health and contributes to early, painful deaths, millions of sane, intelligent adults continue to smoke. The same reason that I finished my healthy chicken, asparagus and baked potato supper with a fairy cake left over by my children.
Perhaps because humans, despite our longing for order, process improvement and efficiency, seem naturally inclined to chaos. Let's hope the benefits of negotiation planning can help us overcome our chaotic tendencies and bring a little civilisation to our business lives.
Friday, May 01, 2009
Tackling the Profit Munchers
This morning we had a great session at Surrey Enterprise Hub (soon to become an Innovation and Growth Team) in Guildford. The entrepreneurs who attended our breakfast workshop were all keen to learn new hints and tips to help them focus on building profitable relationships and avoid contract clauses that would munch away at their margins!
Everyone engaged actively in our workshop activity, achieving an impressive amount in a limited amount of time and leading to a very lively and interactive session.
One key learning point from the session was the importance of clearly defined client responsibilities, and the potential for making your own service more cost-effective by getting the client to deliver parts of it themselves! At a time when cost-reduction is all important, this is a useful tool for reducing your price without reducing the total value of deliverables to the client. In particular, using their administrative resources to perform routine research is a great way to cut your costs without cutting quality.
Everyone engaged actively in our workshop activity, achieving an impressive amount in a limited amount of time and leading to a very lively and interactive session.
One key learning point from the session was the importance of clearly defined client responsibilities, and the potential for making your own service more cost-effective by getting the client to deliver parts of it themselves! At a time when cost-reduction is all important, this is a useful tool for reducing your price without reducing the total value of deliverables to the client. In particular, using their administrative resources to perform routine research is a great way to cut your costs without cutting quality.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)