Oyez, oyez, all ye who have something to say on public procurement

I'm sure you have something to say about public procurement. Have you ever thought of expressing your opinion in the form of a debate piece or like to share a new development (some of GO Awards entries would be ideal), or completed some relevant research which you'd like to share? 

Public Money and Management is an international, academic and professional journal covering public sector finance, policy and management. A special themed issue on Public Procurement is planned for January 2015 - yes, I know that's a long way away, but that's how long these things take. But the good news is that you also have plenty of advance notice to consider either completing some research or putting down some thoughts.

If you would be interested in potentially having a paper published in the Public Procurement themed issue, we'd be interested in hearing from you.  

Below is a copy of the formal call for papers, so give it some thought:

Call for papers: PMM theme on public procurement

Guest editors: Gordon Murray and Andrew Erridge

Public procurement is centre stage in public service delivery yet dogged by controversy: corruption allegations from Indian helicopters to Hawaiian university construction contracts; aircraft carriers which are not fit for purpose; wrongly awarded rail franchises; and trailblazing initiatives, such as the private finance initiative, which have questionable benefits. Public sector procurement is not easy because it is complex and high profile.

A public procurement themed issue of PMM is scheduled for January 2015 (Public Money & Management, Vol. 35, No. 1). The issue will provide an opportunity for debate pieces (1000 words), main papers (no more than 5500 words) and new development articles (up to 3000 words) to contribute to making a positive impact on policy and practice. Submissions must be of benefit to academics and reflective practitioners.

Submissions that relate their findings to practice are particularly welcomed, as PMM is widely consulted by practitioners. Equally, as PMM has international influence, international comparative analysis is encouraged. Articles may cover some of the following suggested topics, but we welcome contributions beyond this list:

• Lessons from decades of public procurement policy initiatives. 
• The effectiveness of public procurement as a political strategy. 
• The appropriate role of politicians in public procurement. 
• The impact of public procurement policy, for example innovation, SMEs, third sector. 
• Combating corruption in procurement.
• Evaluation of organizational structures. 
• Public perceptions of public procurement. 
• The measurement of procurement savings. 
• The effectiveness of public procurement performance management. 
• The impact of digital strategy on public procurement.
• The future of public procurement.

Outline proposals of around 300–400 words for main papers should be submitted by 1 January 2014 to both editors at drgordonmurray@gmail.com and AF.Erridge@ulster.ac.uk, and manuscripts for debate and new development articles should be emailed as Word documents by 1 April 2014. See http:// www.tandfonline.com/rpmm fir information about preparing an article for PMM.

Government Purchasing and The Iron Lady

Peter Smith and David Smith highlighted that Margaret Thatcher was an early champion of change in UK public sector procurement. The report she requested in 1984, Government Purchasing, was a real landmark. 

You may recognise that we have spent quite a bit of time recently discussing the Public Administration Select Committee's current Inquiry into Public Procurement. There is a strange irony, which I suspect some may have missed, that the father of Bernard Jenkin (the PASC Committee's Chair), Patrick Jenkin was a Minister in Thatcher's Cabinet when Government Purchasing was published. 

Another Minister in Thatcher's 1984 Cabinet was Michael Heseltine,  Michael Heseltine has continued to demonstrate an interest in procurement as a political tool, and his voice on procurement is still listened to in the corridors of power as was evidenced by the recommendations set out in his October 2012 report being generally accepted in the March 2013 budget.   

So it appears timely and appropriate to reflect on what Government Purchasing said in 1984. Perhaps those messages were part of Bernard Jenkin's early induction into the world of public procurement. Equally so, we can ask ourselves about the progress made in the 29 years since the report's publication given 'the Iron Lady's' focus and determination. 

Purchasing objectives

Grasping the national opportunity for Procurement

Last week saw the publication of the Policy Exchange's 'Eight Great Technologies', authored by David Willets (Minister for Universities and Science). He sets out eight areas where the UK could become a world leader - eight areas for growth - eight areas which form the nucleus of a UK Industrial Strategy, namely:

• the big data revolution and energy-efficient computing;
• satellites and commercial applications of space;
• robotics and autonomous systems;
• life sciences, genomics and synthetic biology;
• regenerative medicine;
• agri-science;
• advanced materials and nano-technology; and
• energy and its storage.

Will this gain sufficient cross-party political ownership to provide resilience through the next electoral cycle?

Regardless, this provides an opportunity for procurement to make a significant contribution to the UKs economic recovery and Industrial Strategy. The section we're interested in is the Conclusion - for us, not the conclusion but a manifesto/prospectus.

CBI argues for BIG bonuses for procurement academics

I normally stick to the world of procurement and programme management, but today I have decided to make some comments on John Cridland's (head of the CBI), recent comments, reported in today's Times. In summary the CBI are making suggestions for the next budget.  They are worried about a potential cost to the UK of the backlash against bonuses and restricted immigration.  Cridland argues that leading executives will find the UK unattractive and, in the same breath, overseas academics will not believe they are welcomed.  To quote directly, "If you don't reward success, business can't walk the walk".

Yes, a strange brew of big bonuses and academic motivation!

It would have been interesting if Cridland had also read the Sunday Times feature on Elsevier - a remarkably high performing business baswed on academic publishing.  Elsevier, sells expensive academic journals (including one of my favourites, the Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management) and makes significant profits. Elsevier's supply chain are the host of academics who write papers and peer review others' work.  What most of my readers probably don't appreciate is that Elsevier do not make any payment to either authors or reviewers. There are parallels with the government's Work Programme - if you want to success, consider it an honour to be unpaid. 

What I can't understand is Cridland's disconnect. The UK need high performing academics and business reaps the benefits from their labour. Even those gaining high-performance bonuses are more often than not