PROCUREMENT AND SUPPLIES
The public sector needs to deliver better services for less money. The Offi ce for National Statistics’ landmark study of public sector productivity showed it fell throughout the last decade, even while productivity in the rest of the economy was rising faster than in any rich country. Innovation holds the key to this. Nesta’s Innovation Index showed that innovation has been responsible for two-thirds of productivity growth in the UK in the last 20 years. Doing more with less inevitably means innovating.
The appeal of using procurement to encourage innovation is that it is involves no direct extra cost to the tax-payer. But there are rules. The most important is to know when to procure for innovation and when other concerns – such as good old-fashioned value for money – should take precedence.
Adding innovation as a criterion to each and every contract, or trying to make offi cials balance innovation against an ever-growing roster of metrics is a recipe for poor value for money. The history of procurement is littered with examples of expensive, unreliable products purchased instead of reliable, cheap ones in a mistaken effort to be innovative.
Lessons from the USA The way to get around this is to identify a relatively
small number of projects where government needs new approaches. These will often involve wicked issues, or new problems that a department is unused to dealing with. Potential suppliers can then be invited to propose solutions to the problem. To see how this can work, look to the United States: its Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) programme channels around $2.5bn a year into innovative small businesses to help meet the American government’s emerging requirements.
SBIR contests look more like prizes than procurements, and involve several rounds. It has been running since the late 1970s, and has backed scores of businesses that went on to become world beaters, including 3G leaders Qualcomm and biotech fi rms Amgen and Genzyme.
The UK has since 2002 had a similar scheme – the Small Business Research Initiative. But it remains small-scale. With a few notable exceptions, departments have been reluctant to use it, preferring to take the safe option of traditional procurement methods. This is a great shame. If we want to bring more innovative ideas into government, and if we want to see procurement used to drive innovation, the UK’s Small Business Research Initiative should be many times bigger. The other second rule of innovation procurement
is openness. Procuring interesting ideas from the outside world requires awareness of new developments which can be hard to obtain from within Whitehall. Once again, we can learn from the US. The US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) helped develop the internet, the graphical user interface, the Global Positioning System (GPS) and self-driving cars.
DARPA is a remarkable organisation not only for its technical expertise but also for its porosity; its project managers typically come from outside the US Government and rarely stay at DARPA for more than fi ve years. Rapid exchange between DARPA, US universities and US businesses helps keep the organisation at the centre of networks of innovation, and makes it better at identifying useful innovations for the US defence establishment.
An ‘Innovation Engine’ All of this points to two clear lessons.
First of all, if we want more innovation in the UK’s economy, government procurement has an important role to play – channelling 1% of government procurement to innovation should be our goal.
Second, to accomplish this we need to use the right techniques and the right institutions. A signifi cant expansion of programmes like the UK’s Small Business Research Initiative, supported by an effective multidisciplinary organisation with experience of the world beyond government, will provide a genuine ‘Innovation Engine’ for British businesses and a vital injection of innovation and productivity into our public services.
Stian Westlake
FOR MORE INFORMATION
www.nesta.org.uk
public sector executive Sep/Oct 12 | 43
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76