Local government should be proud of its collective knowledge, but it should be doing more to share it. John Tizard suggests a ‘local government knowledge eBay’, or an online data-agency.
Have you ever paused and taken a few minutes to quantify the collective knowledge, experience, expertise and ‘know how’ across local government?
If you have, then I am sure the answer will have been ‘… it’s huge’.
And then, if one were to seek to estimate a value for this, I am certain that the number could run into the hundreds of millions of pounds – if not more.
All hail local government: The sector has a huge pool of talent and knowledge at its disposal.
However, I think one would also come to three further conclusions:
- that this large of pool of knowledge, experience, expertise and ‘know-how’ actually comprises more than 400 distinct and local pools
- that most people sitting in one authority are generally unaware of the scale of knowledge, expertise, experience and know how that their neighbour or other authorities might have
- that most local authorities find it difficult to share or ‘trade’ such knowledge, experience, expertise and know how unless it is of such a significantly-large value that it warrants the establishment of a trading company or other elaborate mechanisms, which can only be justified when the said arrangement is worth a considerable sum of money, and is likely to last for a long time.
By the term know-how, I have in mind examples such as the locally-developed piece of software that links two systems but which the main system supplier has not designed into the systems, or a new way of rostering staff, or a better way to undertake a basic task.
Every local authority will have many examples these.At a time of severe financial restraint and cuts, local authorities need to be as effective and efficient as possible.
They must ensure their people and their assets are being used to maximise productivity, value – based on social, economic, environmental and political values rather than just simply financials, and outcomes for local communities and citizens.
Ideally, this means using the ideas and solutions which other authorities have developed rather than either spending resource on reinvention or consultancy support.
Similarly, local authorities are increasingly wishing to share services, equipment and people – but the experience of attempting to establish ‘shared services’ arrangements has tended to be complicated and expensive, and often these costs have proven disproportionate to the potential benefits.
Formal shared services arrangements usually involve whole services or activities – and all the staff engaged in these.
They are often underpinned with long-term contracts, staff are subject to TUPE, and new governance arrangements have to be established.
All these requirements and constraints typically prove both frustrating and inefficient.
However, there could be another way which would allow local authorities to exchange ideas, patents, solutions, people, equipment or whatever is appropriate – without having all the burdens described above or having to enter in new legal agreements every single time.
The model I have in mind is based on the creation of a ‘local authority exchange’, through which authorities can share and trade with each other. Such an arrangement will have some but not all of the characteristics of an ‘eBay’, ‘Amazon’ or a ‘data agency’.
However, it will be more than a transactional system. It will be a source of ideas and advice as well as services. It will be assured and local authorities using it will want to be confident of what they are subscribing to and using.
Local authorities facing major budget pressures and cuts, as well as increasing demands for core services, will require a reliable, guaranteed service in the same way that individual council officers and members, like the wider public, expect high standards of service from retailers and others.
There can be no room for error or wasteful expenditure. The services available will need to be comprehensive, and participation in the exchange will need to be easy and low cost.
The provision of such a local authority exchange could take many forms. The exchange might be owned by its users but, given where we are starting from, such a model may be over ambitious so it could require a business sector partner.
In a sense the ‘exchange mechanism’ and who owns it are not the issue. What is, is the concept, and what it can offer local authorities.
Participating local authorities will post the services, ideas, solutions and capacity that they have available, while other authorities will be able to search the exchange for what they require.
It sounds easy and simple – because, in essence, it is.
Costs and return on investment will be recovered through a percentage commission on those services which local authorities trade with each other through the exchange. And possibly, to cover the costs of non-traded but shared services and ideas, a modest membership fee might be appropriate.
The good news is that the models and technological platforms on which such an initiative can sit are already available.
As the storm clouds of further austerity and deeper cuts gather, local government has no option but to explore alternative ways of working. A local authority exchange is one very practical solution. It is surely worth pursuing.