A balanced approach to probation outsourcing

I've discussed the outsourcing of the probation service on a number of occasions but today revealed a strange 'spin' which requires re-balance and critique if the best option and approach is to be selected.

We have learnt that "Officials have warned the Justice Secretary", but then that the warning is actually in the form of a risk register. Of course there should be a risk register which identifies risks in as objective a manner as possible, but risks 'might happen', it doesn't mean they 'will happen'. Is it fair refer to inclusion is a risk register as a 'warning'?

Then we learn that a "a criminal justice expert said the Probation's sell-off is being carried out too hastily; there is too much risk. It is highly likely that service delivery will collapse and public protection will be undermined. The Government must think again". Well if you heard that from a 'criminal justice 'expert' you'd assume an objective opinion, but if you were then told that 'expert' had been a trade union representative of the probation service perhaps you'd consider the opinion highly subjective and more than a little biased?

The Times. which report that they have seen the risk register, appear to have been a victim of spin and not managed the risk of being a pawn well.

From a procurement perspective, whether or not we agree with outsourcing, we should applaud comprehensive risk registers, but we should also avoid being too influenced by subjective opinions. Professional procurement requires robust options appraisal and risk management as opposed to scare mongering.

A risk in outsourcing: (Not) Embracing Digital Procurement Strategy

I have been discussing Digital Procurement Strategy over the last few weeks. I thought I had said as much as I was going to until I read Thursday's report in The Guardian on the gagging orders allegedly placed on probation staff during the current outsourcing process of 70% of the work. This provides lessons for all those involved in outsourcing and change management.

As I see it, some stakeholders affected by the outsourcing decision aren't happy - should that be a surprise when your job is at risk, particularly in the current economic climate. They have not been won over during the change management process. They assumed they had freedom of speech and social media provided the channel. The main champion of the proposed outsourcing (the Justice Secretary) doesn't like what is being said using social media, so has chosen to effectively issue a gagging order on any dissenting voices. The gagging order isn't restricted to the disgruntled workers criticism but also applies to their 'retweeting' of others views (potentially this blog too). Seems like a strange view of justice but then perception counts for a lot. There also seems to be more than a little contradiction between the MoJ's view of the world and the proposed NHS Duty of Candour!

Of course we also need to remember that there are more stakeholders than the staff - there are the other potential providers (as I discussed in Probation's Dilemma a few weeks ago).

We are currently in the outsourcing process, what will happen when the contracts are subsequently awarded - will social media turn the process into another West Coast Rail debacle, will contract management become a target of social media, etc...?

My suggestion is that:

1. Recognise social media is two way - you may see it as part of external communications but it is also market communication about and to you;
2. Digital Procurement Strategy needs to reflect the risks of stakeholder engagement, misalignment and criticism;
3. Any potential discussion, yes, even a discussion, on outsourcing needs to be viewed within the context of a change management programme, even if it may not lead to outsourcing;
4. Trying to stifle social media is unlikely to be productive.

The Probation's Dilemma

I'm sure many of you are familiar with the Prisoner's Dilemma - perhaps through the scene in one of my favourite films, The Beautiful Mind, when Nash outlines how his college friends can all 'get the girl' through collaborating together. I think today we saw a new iteration, The Probation's Dilemma.

Previously we have discussed problems with the potential outsourcing of prison services, now we've learnt of plans to outsource the probation service. Personally I think this creates a real dilemma.

1. The first problem is that already there is speculation one of those potentially in the frame for delivery are G4S.  Rather than revisit old ground and boring you, all I will say is: Olympics security delivery, black-listing, and Home Affairs Select Committee.
2. Second, there is the potential power some of the providers may gain in service delivery, namely, providers of tagging, prisoner transport, prison management and, now possibly, probation services. That's a lot of eggs in one basket and a lot of risk with a very small supply base who could start to have so much power they could hold the MoJ to ransom. 
3. Third, there's the problem with making Payment by Results work - specifying outcomes and contract management. Yes, Chris Grayling was one of the architects of the DWP Welfare to Work Programme, but to me that should still be treated as prototyping and an opportunity to learn. 
4. Fourth, there's the not insignificant problem of very unhelpful impact the austerity strategy has had on the third sector who have a good track record in supporting ex-offenders. The third sector are frustrated with their perception of the Work Programme and many have suffered considerable pain as a result of the austerity measures; many are struggling to survive and have been forced to make redundancies. It's all very well offering the carrot of £500k to help them prepare to bid but could this just be a little bit too late?  Have we already lost some of their innovation and creativity in service delivery by being 'penny wise and pound foolish' in short-term procurement strategy? If you were a third sector organisation would you have enough confidence that the probability of success will justify the costs of bidding?
5. Fifth, we have the lethal mix of third sector cashflow and payments by results - will potential third sector providers be able to cross subsidise an unproven government 'good idea'?
6. Sixth, is the readiness to change - it certainly doesn't look as if those who already work in delivering probation services have welcomed this initiative with a fanfare of endorsement!    

So, as I see it, that's The Probation's Dilemma: the need to blend that difficult mix into a success for all the stakeholders so that they each perceive a 'win' - given questions about the MoJ procurement capability and the risks involved: Beautiful Mind or Beautiful Dream?