- Defence policy
- Equipment and support
- Modernising defence
- Aviation
- Marine
- Land vehicles
- Security
- HR and training
- Defence estates (DIO)
News updates
Twitter updates
Facebook
Email
Print
DE&S 'badly needs private sector skills'
31 July 2012
Bernard Gray, writing in The Times, said that a recent report by the Royal United Services Insitute (RUSI) criticising the government's GOCO plans, had not consulted government for answers to the questions it posed.
He also criticised the report's references to Olympic security contractor G4S, and said that Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) had provided plenty of evidence of failure in the past to suggest it needed an overhaul, citing the procurements of Mk3 Chinooks, Nimrod MRA4 aircraft and Astute class submarines.
Gray said the MoD "badly needs a significant shift" in the way it procures equipment and that "serious work is being done" to consider the options, including simply improving the current procurement system.
"The issue is not whether this is risk in action, but what is the right balance of risk and benefit from all the options, including doing nothing. RUSI showed no sign of recognising this," he wrote.
The use of the private sector in the past has "papered over the cracks", Gray said, "but we need a better answer".
Current procurement rules and processes made prompt and commonsense decisions "almost impossible", he added.
"If I am surprised by anything it is that so many good people are prepared to put up with the immense frustration that is their daily lot. The system, frankly, doesn't work."
Gray's recommendation remains that a GOCO system be adopted, as the main problem, he wrote, is that Defence Equipment and Support lacks private sector skills.
"My experience since re-entering the MoD 18 months ago is that the challenges are, if anything, greater than I thought when I reported on the issue in 2009," he wrote. "Our equipment acquisition organisation has almost no freedom to recruit, retain or motivate staff to get the skills it needs.
"We need talented people in engineering, supply-chain management, finance and programme management. Our staff is drawn from the civil service, whose main focus is on making policy, and the armed forces, whose priority is, naturally enough, combat leadership. This makes it harder for me to get the specialists I need and for them to progress in their respective organisations.
"The problem is exacerbated by these commercial skills being in high demand, which leads to the leaching of key staff to companies that can pay the market rate for talent."
By the time a preliminary decision is made, Gray wrote, there will have been almost two years of consideration, over a hundred man-years of effort and thousands of pages of analysis produced. There is "still significant work to do" before the final decision is taken, he added.
HAVE YOUR SAY
31 July 2012
His basic tenet is correct; the system doesn't work. It starts with archaic treasury driven behaviour.
However, some of the people within the 'DE&S system' are excellent and their skill, experience and dedication would shame commercial contemporaries.
He is also right that the good folk are leaving and Commerce would do well to capitalise on the talent coming to the market. Frankly, Defence industry is also moribund and also needs an overhaul, and with the commercial freedom to act, the talent from within could help that happen.
AMG - UK
31 July 2012
Gray seems to have learned nothing at all about the civil servants he purports to lead at Abbey Wood, the majority of whom will have spent their career in service delivery of one sort or another within the procurement arena and not in "making policy". Quite a number will also be ex-Service. Presumably his wilful ignorance is because he came with the preconceived opinion that "private is best" and never had any intention of challenging it.
Stan - York
01 August 2012
What isn't answered is why "commercial freedom" is any freer than what Treasury delegation could provide - there is no need for massively hidebound rules in-house any more than in a commercial entity.
The fact is that losing Treasury delegation will inhibit what freedoms there already are compared to any other government body (the MOD is unique in having such delegations).
All we're seeing here is a pursuit of personal remuneration as we saw with the board that specified their own jobs when they privatised DERA / DSTL /Qinetiq, or the Royal Ordnance "sweeteners".
And the key problems - overspecification and constant tinkering with requirements, failing to lock down before tender, as well as RP constantly cutting resource lines (removing options to manage de-risking, or spend to save) during annual planning - remain embedded in Main Building. That won't change.
AlMiles - Bristol, UK
01 August 2012
"need talented people in engineering, supply-chain management, finance and programme management".
Mr Gray, in my opinion you have them in bucket-loads already, some/many of them having come from the private sector. You just seem unable to (find and) use them effectively and that may stem from your own mind-set, to judge by statements in the article.
The rules and processes are indeed what prevents agile procurement; in the last 2 years they have been made much worse, not better, with ever more oversight and multiple inconsistent approval processes. That has been on your watch, Mr Gray.
Muddler - UK
02 August 2012
There are plenty of talented, professional, private-sector-experienced and agile finance staff - the MOD says it has a glut of them and has been shedding them along with many other functions.
To find out what is really going on with GOCO, just "follow the money".
Strangely CDM doesn't mention his one area with a shortfall in staff - commercial. Mainly because they'd have to remain MOD staff in order to place contracts on behalf of S of S.
AlMiles - Bristol, UK