I have just read Andrew Princes' COI letter in design week 26.11.09.
http://www.designweek.co.uk/coi-is-not-to-blame-for-public-sector-problems/3007140.article
We applied for the COI tender and received the full documentation. I find it amazing he thinks a response can be put together in 4 hours. It takes that long to read all the materials and work out how to fill in the PQQ before you start pulling together all the info required including relevant case studies and a written page to support each - make that 2 - 3 days and you have a realistic timeframe. Even at 4 hours with 1000 applying that's 500 working days of time that will only yield a result for up to 10% of respondents - 450 wasted days! The pre qualification is only the start. If you get through there is an ITT for which they want even more detailed information. I read and re read the requirements and came to the conclusion that despite being ably qualified for 3 or 4 of the 11 lots (why 11 lots just for branding!?), the questions were framed in such a way that you start to question your ability to deliver. Having been in business since 1991 and delivered full identity and branding solutions for the public and private sector and retained many of these clients on a long term basis we know we can deliver. But is public sector and procurement worth all the hassle? When I re read the materials I discovered that each lot could have up to 10 agencies on each roster. All agencies are invited to tender for each project and where there is cross over of lots for a branding project the agencies in that lot are also invited to tender. Based on my understanding this could mean having gone through all of this you could have 30 agencies tendering for 1 project. The total budget for the year is listed as £1,000,000. So 11 lots with up to 10 agencies in each means that by my maths that works out as less than £10,000 per project which for a branding exercise is not much for the risk involved. This coupled with the fact that you have to tender for every job means we opted out at the first hurdle to focus on real clients with real needs. When will the public sector realise the value and benefit of long term relationships built on respect, trust, knowledge and experience? How much does procurement and tendering cost the tax payer and the design agencies against any perceived saving this process achieves? How much better are the designers that get through all the hoops? How can piecemeal projects deliver true strategic approaches and brand consistency? I am sure that some of those that get through will see the benefits but from outside I just see the over complex inefficiency of bureaucratic administration that hinders many of our public sector services and delivers no real value.
Who counts the cost?
Monday 30 November 2009
Friday 13 November 2009
Joining or creating a bandwagon!
I'm not sure if posting part of an email is a blog, but i'll put it down to my experimentation with social media before anyone starts reading or following my monologues! I'm trying to get my mind in order after the very inspiring yet worrying launch of a new mini publication that the email refers to and just scratching the surface of a subject area that everyone seems to be talking about in different ways for different outcomes with the same end game - to save the planet and we've got just 10 years to do it.
Worrying stuff, for starters i may still be alive! (Bit selfish.)
So I'll be joining forums, catching up and in the process decide if we are joining a band wagon or that if, with a bit of inspiration, we may be able to create one.
So the email is a response to the DBA following a request for feedback on subject material for future seminars after the very rich and interesting one given on social media by Gemma Went earlier this week. The extract goes:
"I have been going to a few non design talks recently but these have been overshadowed by one run by tommow's company at the House of Lords on Wednesday. It was entitled 'qualitative growth' and launched a paper by the ICAEW and was supported by the WWF. It set the real agenda for businesses and the paradigm shift that is required within the next 10 years. I also went to the tomorrow's company Al Gore lecture last year on climate change with his 10 year deadline. This in itself was eye opening but watered down CSR, sustainability and climate change initiatives have not really tackled the issues - we await the outcome of the summit next month. Unlike many there, I had not heard of Hazel Henderson or Fritjof Capra but they were the key speakers by video link. Their revelations and recommendations were quite shocking but are the issues that we must all be looking at, whether we agree with them or not. I'll be looking into this more and trying to find ways that as designers we can help this 'transformational change' take place. There is a lot of disparate info out there but a bit more focus on this area by the DBA and design publications will really help designers like us to advise and influence clients."
Google here I come...
Worrying stuff, for starters i may still be alive! (Bit selfish.)
So I'll be joining forums, catching up and in the process decide if we are joining a band wagon or that if, with a bit of inspiration, we may be able to create one.
So the email is a response to the DBA following a request for feedback on subject material for future seminars after the very rich and interesting one given on social media by Gemma Went earlier this week. The extract goes:
"I have been going to a few non design talks recently but these have been overshadowed by one run by tommow's company at the House of Lords on Wednesday. It was entitled 'qualitative growth' and launched a paper by the ICAEW and was supported by the WWF. It set the real agenda for businesses and the paradigm shift that is required within the next 10 years. I also went to the tomorrow's company Al Gore lecture last year on climate change with his 10 year deadline. This in itself was eye opening but watered down CSR, sustainability and climate change initiatives have not really tackled the issues - we await the outcome of the summit next month. Unlike many there, I had not heard of Hazel Henderson or Fritjof Capra but they were the key speakers by video link. Their revelations and recommendations were quite shocking but are the issues that we must all be looking at, whether we agree with them or not. I'll be looking into this more and trying to find ways that as designers we can help this 'transformational change' take place. There is a lot of disparate info out there but a bit more focus on this area by the DBA and design publications will really help designers like us to advise and influence clients."
Google here I come...
Saturday 7 November 2009
A November rant - must be the weather
Anyone else noticed that the governments logo for 'solutions for business' is 'red tape'! We came across this initiative, aimed at simplifying support, while working on a funding project with the brief that we had to work within the branding framework set out in the governments solutions for business programme. Having visited the site and clicked various links we soon discovered this is anything but simple :
http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/enterprise/simplifyingbusinesssupport/page44802.html
We have to agree though that 'red tape' as a logo is in fact very appropriate!
Next project, communicating the need for SME's to take a more active role in reducing environmental impact at work in line with Governmental policies. We're an SME but have never really considered the definition of an SME. Our research showed that roughly 99.5% of SME's in London have between 1 and 49 staff and 0.5% have 50 to 250. In Europe, SME companies are defined as: less than 10 staff are 'micro'; less than 50 staff are small and with less than 250 staff are medium. So it's no surprise that given these statistics that nearly all the documentation and 'red tape' we receive as an SME is more appropriate for the 0.5% rather than the 99.5% group. Certainly in our appraisal of the communications requirement for our project, there was a need for a tiered approach with sector specific messages to these different types of business within the SME bracket. I would suggest that some of the guidance and rules given to SMEs from government should also be tailored to 'micro', small and medium, but this could obviously make things more complex and undermine 'simplifying business support'.
When will Government, the public sector and procurement departments really make an effort to simplify things so people can actually get on with jobs and work that benefit people and planet rather than having to plough through endless red tape to tick boxes to satisfy the people that write the gobbledigook!
There is hope. We have recently started working with a couple of public sector procurement departments that actually have some understanding of what we do and don't ask us in contracts for a website to "clear our waste on completion of on site works"!
The joy of public sector work... it would be if only we could get through the PQQs and ITTs. Give me fast paced, relationship building, knowledge sharing, mutual respect and reward, private sector work any day... until public sector cut the red tape, believe in trust and build relationships with their suppliers.
End of rant and will have Christmas cheer hat on for next blog...
http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/enterprise/simplifyingbusinesssupport/page44802.html
We have to agree though that 'red tape' as a logo is in fact very appropriate!
Next project, communicating the need for SME's to take a more active role in reducing environmental impact at work in line with Governmental policies. We're an SME but have never really considered the definition of an SME. Our research showed that roughly 99.5% of SME's in London have between 1 and 49 staff and 0.5% have 50 to 250. In Europe, SME companies are defined as: less than 10 staff are 'micro'; less than 50 staff are small and with less than 250 staff are medium. So it's no surprise that given these statistics that nearly all the documentation and 'red tape' we receive as an SME is more appropriate for the 0.5% rather than the 99.5% group. Certainly in our appraisal of the communications requirement for our project, there was a need for a tiered approach with sector specific messages to these different types of business within the SME bracket. I would suggest that some of the guidance and rules given to SMEs from government should also be tailored to 'micro', small and medium, but this could obviously make things more complex and undermine 'simplifying business support'.
When will Government, the public sector and procurement departments really make an effort to simplify things so people can actually get on with jobs and work that benefit people and planet rather than having to plough through endless red tape to tick boxes to satisfy the people that write the gobbledigook!
There is hope. We have recently started working with a couple of public sector procurement departments that actually have some understanding of what we do and don't ask us in contracts for a website to "clear our waste on completion of on site works"!
The joy of public sector work... it would be if only we could get through the PQQs and ITTs. Give me fast paced, relationship building, knowledge sharing, mutual respect and reward, private sector work any day... until public sector cut the red tape, believe in trust and build relationships with their suppliers.
End of rant and will have Christmas cheer hat on for next blog...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)