The APS invests significantly in goods and services from private and not-for-profit providers and this is unlikely to change in the future. It is therefore critical the APS has the knowledge and skills to expertly design, oversee and manage its contractual arrangements with integrity.
What we think is needed
- Policies that, when taken together, empower agencies to achieve long-term positive outcomes and value for money through procurement activities, and holds them accountable for this, as well as maintaining fiscal discipline and strong compliance mechanisms.
- Centres of excellence to: aggregate and provide transparency on the costs and benefits of procurement activities; apply data analytics to this information and identify potential whole-of-service efficiencies; and develop and drive new approaches to procurement.
- Specialist capability to: project demand for procured goods and services; make strategic decisions about when to procure goods and services externally and when to develop them in-house; shape supplier markets to drive innovation; and evaluate procurement activities against intended outcomes.
- Use of the professions model to develop this capability.
What is shaping our thinking
- The analysis and findings of the ANZSOG papers ‘2030 and Beyond: Getting the Business of Government Done’ by Janine O’Flynn and Gary L. Sturgess and ‘The APS Integrity Framework’ by Nikolas Kirby and Simone Webbe.
- The Commonwealth Procurement Rules and the new Centre of Procurement Excellence.
- Key characteristics of success in use of third parties to efficiently and effectively deliver goods and services on behalf of the APS. For example, knowledge transfer requirements and implications for long-term in-house capability.
- Feedback on implications from the use of consultants, contract labour, and outsourcing arrangements for the APS’s long-term capability.
- The experience of other jurisdictions, such as the UK, Canada, New Zealand and NSW, in developing ‘strategic commissioning’ frameworks.
- Experience to date with commissioning approaches in parts of the APS, including the Department of Defence’s ‘independent contestability’ function, and the Digital Transformation Agency’s ‘ask the marketplace’ initiative.
What we are still exploring
- How best to ensure the APS’s high standards of ethics and integrity are reflected in arrangements with external providers; including protocols for former public servants.
- How best to integrate current thinking around the application and benefits of a strategic commissioning framework.
Comments
Thu, 02 May 2019
Consider ways to encourage smaller groups and organisations to enter government procurement so that new and different ideas can be trialled and opportunities expanded while support is given to develop capacity. Some examples include Try, Test and Learn grants, social impact bonds, social enterprise support, Communities for Children, collaborative impact initiatives. Provide greater support to smaller organistations to learn and build capacity in measuring, demonstrating and evaluating outcomes.
Wed, 24 Apr 2019
The current deplorable landscape reflects neglect by Finance over two decades. Previously professionalisation had been a major reform issue. Start again with a new dedicated reform effort as has occurred in the UK several times. Do not try to create a government procurement profession but make the most of what CIPS and IACCM have to offer, and recognise their credentials, especially the latter, as it is better tuned to current issues. Commissioning is a promising avenue but recognise the synergies with procurement rather than identifying "differences". Current procurement thinking is not as represented in the paper put to the Review.
Thu, 18 Apr 2019
The APS review should consider validating the current strategic approach to Whole of Government procurement exercises such as; Property Services Provider, Hire cars and Travel and including the costs associated with managing these contract at a departmental level.
It is unclear if mid to large agencies are actually achieving value for money from the current approach. This is due likely to the significant and ongoing (both agency and Dept Finance staff) effort required to manage these property providers and, a possible reluctance by some service providers, to adequately resource each portfolio.
Thu, 18 Apr 2019
Before undertaking a train let the staff use the new screens developed through TLC for an extended period of time so they can identify where best to enhance instead of wasting money.
Wed, 17 Apr 2019
Just deliver it
Mon, 15 Apr 2019
Document Statement:
On page 15 the APS "..... undertakes frequent and high value procurement decisions"
Response: Terminology is very important. "Procurement" used here can include many activities. These activities are embodied in "project development" … which is the shaping framing defining and building an integrated investment decision business case set of documentation and then executing and operating in accordance with the parameters of the approved business case.
"Procurement" is a subset of project development.
Document statement:
On page 15 the APS to be "...united …"
Response:
A united institution will have an approach to project development which is largely common across the APS but addresses the needs of each agency.
Mon, 15 Apr 2019
Document Statement: on page 47 " …. the new Centre for Procurement Excellence …."
Response:
We suggest that the new centre is called a Centre of Project Development Excellence with all APS agencies adopting project development as core ongoing business (reflected in agency organisation charts, representation at senior management, personnel numbers/ capability/ skills/ experience) nurtured by this Centre of Excellence. Developing effective approaches to engaging third party providers across the APS (including consultants) will be a main stream for the Centre. Each agency will adopt project development procedures consistent with the Centre but specifically targeted to their needs. The new Centre will become a major educational resource for project development for the country. The new Centre will fill a gap in the formal teaching of crucial project development disciplines such as . procurement . contract strategy and formulation (in terms of scope and strategy and type) and management . capital and operating cost estimation
Currently across business and government, these crucial project disciplines are largely gained (for better or worse) through on-the-job experience.
Mon, 15 Apr 2019
Document Statement:
On page 47 "It is therefore critical the APS has the knowledge and skills to expertly design, oversee and manage its contractual arrangements with integrity"
Response:
Our paper titled Wasted Capital in Major Project Development" submitted in May and July 2018 to the APS Review Panel goes to the heart of the items on this page 47.
Procurement involves a wide range of activities from the purchase of office stationery to defence equipment items. The priorities for Change Document should recognise this fact. At the larger scale, procurement is in fact a subset of major project development. Procurement should be a defined term. We suggest using the term “Project Development (including Procurement)” and this subject is so important that it should not be buried in this section. Give it its own section and give that section a simple title.
“Project Development” involves a stage-gated procedure (for example similar to the Association of American Cost Engineers approach) for the shaping and framing and definition of a major project to assemble a business case and all the supporting documentation for the overall project investment decision documentation. The investment decision project gate is followed by project execution (typically including detailed engineering design, project controls, schedule, quality regime, procurement, contract management, construction, installation, testing, commissioning and handover} and operation. There is a major effort to identify lessons learned to apply corrective action or apply in future projects.
Fri, 12 Apr 2019
Travelling around doing work for farmers across the country a consistent problem is evident and perhaps there is a solution:
Country businesses, especially small country businesses such as farms, are losing control of the bureaucratic management imposed upon them. A partial solution is to change the government recruitment process for decision making bureaucrats such that it requires evidence that prospective employees have worked for businesses in the industries they will influence in a primary income generating capacity. For instance, a GIS officer may need to work clearing weeds on farms before employment determining what areas farmers can clear. The idea is to clear the government departments of compassion-less ill-advised city-folk with no idea the pain and destruction they are imposing in country areas with their inappropriate laws. Barnaby has tried to start this change by moving offices to country locations and this is an awkward technique that is part of a solution in some instances. Another is localization of much management. A big one however seems to me to be to ensure decision makers have been in businesses where income comes from primary industry productivity and understand the challenges.
In NSW DPI GATE innovation program Ashlea Miles has developed an idea to help empower farm workers and help farmers employ useful workers. I see a BIGGER NEED to apply this sort of influence, where the farmers, foresters and miners can control which candidates are eligible for government positions. Her solution is presented in http://www.thegate.org.au/project/incubation/workforce-skills-project video - (I could only view it on Microsoft Edge, not Chrome). Please see if you can work with her to apply it to persons in charge of regulation of primary industry.
Thu, 28 Mar 2019
It might be worthwhile also explicitly aligning this priority into the "strategic allocation of funds" priority. One thing that is a little missing in government is the concept of a business case when making an investment.
good business cases would include thinking about how to deliver something - icnluding should it be in-sourced or outsourced..etc. This is complemented by a centralised assurance function which can identify like procurements and highlight for the decision-maker where opportunities exist for efficiencies/strategic procurement.
it would be nice to see more staged cabinet decision-making including consideration of these kinds delivery issues.
Thu, 21 Mar 2019
There is a real problem with agencies commissioning policy research from trendy consultancies who do not use scientific methods. The latter is particularly onerous given the taxpayer's right to policy based on rigorous evidence. I have seen reports that openly state they have used 'empathetic' methods rather than objective or scientific research. I wonder if there is a procurement ombudsman type of function within the APS that could work to address this problem.
Thu, 21 Mar 2019
There is a heavy reliance on probity/procurement consultants who are usually ex-APS but now do the same job at contractor rates. Make agency procurement staff do procurement again.
Wed, 20 Mar 2019
Hello, I have worked in the APS for 20 years, including 10 years in international education & 15 years in the private sector before joining the APS. I have been an EL2 for 12 years & posted overseas.
During this time I have observed numerous contract decisions made by DFAT officers who do not have the relevant technical or policy expertise.
For example, why is that a DFAT officer can make a multi-million dollar ODA decision without seeking expert input from the Government agency with the relevant domain knowledge?
DFAT officers don't know what they don't know and I often see them making mistakes but I can't do anything about it because it's outside my control. For example, DFAT officers will recruit Australian Universities to deliver vocational education and training programs - they do this because they don't know there's a difference between the type of qualifications/education or training offered by the different institutes.
They are frequently too gullible and believe Australian consultants that claim to be 'so called Australalian technical experts' because they don't work in that technical field.
ODA programs above a certain about e.g. $1million should require co-sign off or input from the relevant government agency e.g. if it's an Education ODA project then seek to get co-input from the Dept of Education and Training in design and project oversight. I've seen tens of millions of dollars of ODA funding wasted in education because too often DFAT (formerly AusAid) only seek our token input via IDCs (which feel like tick and flick) or after the ODA program has been designed.
I have tried to bring this matter to the attention of HOMs & DHOMs but I'm treated as an external trouble maker because DFAT own the ODA budget and are defensive about their decisions.