The Stanton Marris Blog

• You can spend less and benefit local place

  George Osborne announced this week that he intends to immediately tackle the £163bn economic deficit with a proposed £6bn worth of cost cutting in public services. Although ministers promise not to damage front line services, this news is bound to strike a note of fear.

  Now, I don’t know whether this level of cost cutting is possible – but somehow it has to be because this is just the tip of the iceberg – what I do know is, it is possible to spend less whilst benefitting local places. If all those accountable for public outcomes at a local level could establish the needs of local people, and look at the money that is currently being spent, it is entirely possible for them to organise themselves in such a way as to deliver the best value for money.

  So what do you need to make this work?

  • Be outcomes driven by looking at local needs and targeting the approach that gives real results
  • Empower people at the local level, engage them around issues in their area
  • Have a co-ordinated, customer centric approach where all parties involved work together, removing traditionally segmented silo-working
  • Ensure excellent communication channels exist between parties at both the local and national level, to remove duplication, for example
  • Engage in mature dialogue that enables the identification and discussion about the trade-offs between organisations, to stop doing things and realise benefits across the system.

  This is not a quick fix scenario. It will be hard work and the prizes won’t be felt immediately. It will be a challenge getting all parties to work together and, at times, it might be uncomfortable – it will require a level of trust, a clear framework and a commitment to make it work.

  But put these measures in place and it is entirely possible to make savings in a way that’s purposeful and meaningful. It not only mitigates a lot of the pain and risk of cost cutting, but it genuinely enhances the outcome, making local places better. Total Place has shown us that it can be done. From our work on Total Place with the London Borough of Lewisham we have seen that the possibilities are considerable and there for the taking.

  Let’s just hope that when George Osborne outlines his plans for the cuts next Monday he doesn’t pull the plug on manifesto pledges and bin localism. Getting spending decisions to be taken in the round at a local level looks like one of the best options the Government has, indeed, I’m not really sure they have another viable option.

  Read the full article "You can spend less and benefit local place"

  Published May 19, 2010
  Written by Lynn Fabes. This article is filed under: cost cutting, localism, partnership
  1 Comment

• Partnership working and a coalition government

  We’re suddenly faced with the prospect of a coalition government.    That seems a rather scary and unbritish thing.  It doesn’t exactly smack of strong government (remember back to Margaret Thatcher ticking off one of her wet colleagues, Francis Pym, for venturing to suggest that a rather smaller conservative majority might make for better government and stronger Parliament).

  But need we be so scared?

  Look at the corporate world.  It is full of examples of alliances and partnerships.  Few companies exist completely as their own island.  They depend on suppliers, retailers and the myriad of others who make up their value chain.  They may be in consortia, for example in large civil engineering or building projects, or they may be in formal alliances as in the airline industry.  All these arrangements require strong agreement about that the deal is and what the expectations are of different partners.  And they require what we consultants call ‘partnership behaviour’.

  Look also at the political world – close to home in Scotland, and further away in New Zealand.  In both countries coalition government has forced clearer agreement about policies and given their parliaments a stronger hand.

  Just now our politicians could do worse than a quick refresher read of the Institute for Government/Constitution Unit publication on Making Minority Government Work.   There Professor Robert Hazell and colleagues set out a really clear headed analysis of the difference between coalition government and minority government and a very practical set of steps for all the interested parties (not excluding the monarchy) to play.

  Read the full article "Partnership working and a coalition government"

  Published May 7, 2010
  Written by Andrew Jackson. This article is filed under: leadership, partnership
  4 Comments

• If a disaster has your name on it, your brand pays

  Big process industry companies pay dearly if safety goes badly wrong, even if the front line operators involved in a disastrous accident are subcontractors or suppliers.

  On 22 April 2010 the Deepwater Horizon oil rig, operated by BP and owned by US contractor Transocean sank two days after a massive explosion killed 11 workers. Since the explosion, at least 210,000 gallons of crude oil a day have been spewed into the Gulf of Mexico.

  In the words of Group Chief Executive Tony Hayward, “We are fully committed to taking all possible steps to contain the spread of the oil spill. We are taking full responsibility for the spill and we will clean it up.”

  That’s going to be expensive: BP’s share of the oil clean up costs alone will be £6bn or more according to some commentators. However, that figure does not include the reputational damage that BP is suffering already over the oil spillage, made all the worse by its previous record of problems in the US. In 2005 15 people were killed and 170 injured in an explosion at an oil refinery in Texas City. Some people think the company will have to ditch its brand within a few years.

  BP shares have shed around 17 percent since the oil spill crisis began, wiping about £20 billion from the company’s stock market capitalisation.

  Mr Hayward also told the BBC “This was not our drilling rig, it was not our equipment, it was not our people, our systems or our processes. This was Transocean’s rig, their systems, their people, their equipment.”

  All of this may be true, but as we have seen BP will still pay dearly for this oil spill disaster. In future the industry must find ways of ensuring that all subcontractors and suppliers meet the same high safety standards as the big name companies who hire them.

  Read the full article "If a disaster has your name on it, your brand pays"

  Published May 5, 2010
  Written by Rupert Symons. This article is filed under: corporate responsibility
  1 Comment