Jump to content
We’re excited to announce the forum is under new management! Details to follow.

Sheffield City Councill must save £60 million.

Recommended Posts

We had a 'big' company in on a programme I worked on a few years back. Cost a fortune. They were doing jobs like project planning, risk managment - standard PRINCE stuff and we had the people who could do this stuff who had more recent PRINCE quals than those who were 'telling' us how to do it (not the one I quoted earlier that was the job before). So we got that one sorted. Then we had an an army of them on comms - made no difference at all so they got sent packing and we were left with the ones that cost the most who were doing the ' we can help with that' (kerching). Thanks but no thanks we were able to do it ourselves. We don't need outsiders to do benchmarking we have the means to do it. It's not that hard.

 

I don't agree with outsourcing as I know it ends up costing more. Contract management is not cheap nor is running the exercise to get there. (And given we all have access to benchmarking data there should be no need) but I do support the idea of KPIs. However I see examples of it being mis-used in the public sector as a blunt instrument to bash folks with. As you will no doubt understand things are never straight black and white. And this is why you need not just good but excellent business analysts.

 

There is a flaw in your argument - the consultants who failed were sent packing. Have you tried to do that with the employees who had failed, which is presumably why consultants were there in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Contractors as in individuals hired to fill a post, probably cost about the same.

Large consultancy companies, far more than regular staff.

 

Oh I wish! they don't sadly :(

 

---------- Post added 16-01-2015 at 02:09 ----------

 

There is a flaw in your argument - the consultants who failed were sent packing. Have you tried to do that with the employees who had failed, which is presumably why consultants were there in the first place.

 

The consultants weren't there because the employees had failed at all. They were there because we wanted to make quite a big change in how we did something that was a national change. They were there to provide things like benchmarks against other places that had wanted to do something similar. The underlying reason was to cut costs and nothing more sinister. I work in the civil service and finding savings every year isn't anything new. It's been a factor more years than I can remember (certainly as far back as the 80s).

 

What annoyed me was at some points the consultants were filling jobs that we had people who were equally if not more qualified to do. It got sorted and off they went and the programme delivered several hundred millions in savings.

Edited by annbaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They do though. The headline rate is about twice that of a permie, but there are lots of savings that you're probably not considering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They will pay it and then get into 31m worth more of debt because they can't afford to pay the next lot, it won't solve the problem at all. Factor in the money it costs to collect this money and it isn't really a solution to any councils deficit.

 

You reckon councils shouldn't bother collecting debts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You reckon councils shouldn't bother collecting debts?

 

Where did I say that?

 

Every council area has a Council Tax "debt", debts cost money to chase, some people will never pay it and as I said, if people do pay it then they cant afford to pay the next lot and so merely get into debt again, and the problem isnt fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What annoyed me was at some points the consultants were filling jobs that we had people who were equally if not more qualified to do.

 

One of the problems is that consultants, like councillors and MP's, don't have to have any formal qualifications to do the job. One of the reasons they should not be highly paid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the problems is that consultants, like councillors and MP's, don't have to have any formal qualifications to do the job. One of the reasons they should not be highly paid.

 

That is utter rubbish of course consultants have qualifications not MP's but most have a degree. All the consultants I have met have had qualifications also had a proven track record with previous companies as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.