ANNEXJ QUALITATIVE SURVEY Introduction ,The following paragraphs provide a synopsis of the interviews conducted with ECC and DPA members. All of the 45-minute interviews were typed and key themes falling out of them identified. Each interview was then revisited and quotes were extracted to add substance and authenticity to the findings. Each objective is addressed, the initiating questions tabled and responsorial themes highlighted. ECC Objective 1 addressed the level of belief in SPI The questions below advance the understanding ofECC members' views on this theme. "What is your view of the Smart Procurement Initiative?" Confirmed need with reservations All respondents agreed with a need for the SPI and stated the main cause as being poor performance in the past. This is well illustrated by one interviewee who stated, "I think it was an excellent idea that needed to be done, at the time. As the public perception of the way that military equipment was being procured was quite bad", which resulted in ''very bad press for the Ministry of Defence. This current initiative should hopefully speed up the way items are procured and hopefully make them cheaper, faster and better to coin a phrase". However, he also qualified his remarks by stating, "The bad progress reported in the press can be attributed to the way the NAO go about actually reporting delays to projects". The NAO are adept at recording the delays, over-spends, and failure to meet specifications associated with defence -p~ogrammes. However, they are less effective at recording the cause. Currently, the NAO are assisted in their task by the DPA and perhaps this is no longer appropriate and a more objective and complete . picture could be provided by the Customer in conjunction with the IPTL. 252 Another commentator stated. " 1 feel its very early days and its still shaking itself out but it was a welcome initiative and I think we've got a lQt more to do in taking it forward". He then focused on research which. was expected at some stage from the scientific body as in many respects research was not well addressed in the SPI because no doubt the destiny of the DERA was still in the balance. which to some extent it remains today. He went on to say. ''we've got to make some changes in research in the way we manage research and the way we utilise the outcome of research in order to help people procure in a better way". This theme was supported by another stating. "With the advent of capabilities its more difficult to map the research into the equipment projects because now the research will be mapped onto capabilities and then you need a further mapping of the capabilities onto the projects." Perhaps one of the more difficult future tasks will be the management of research over and above the external problems of dealing with two DERA elements. Matrix management of research is not uncommon but with many capability managers now involved in the process only the CMs would appear to be capable of addressing the wider Bol issues. However. if they cut any capability funding they would also be guilty of transgressing the DEC's autonomy. Linked to the business of research is the desire to place greater emphasis on technology inse!1ion and this was another issue raised. "1 think we really had to bring the process in line with current technology and rapid advancement in technology". This is a commendable aspiration and the only comment offered is that it is extremely difficult with platforms being required to enjoy greater longevity to predict what is required of a system from the outset to accept stretch potential and more difficult still to identify the associated life cycle costs. "Smart Procurement is an excellent concept but it can only work if the organisation such as the DPA are given'sufficient flexibility to be able to make trade-offs between the various components that make up the system". Trading -off historically was a task that caused consternation between the old customer and supplier bases. as he who conducts the task has considerable control over a programme. With the concept of moving responsibility for the SRD formulation to the IPTL. trade -off should be t made by the DPA ensuring in the process that customers are content and it is believed that this is gradually happening. On a wider issue the flexibility referred to is anticipated by all involved in the process and falls within the category of greater empowerment. However. it might have been premature to state that, "now we've got the onus on the man with the money to deliver the project". In practise is this assertion really true? Any effort by superiors to curb empowerment parameters would have an _ adverse effect not only on moral but also on the culture. Yet currently, savings measures are imposed from above even when it is recognised that a programme is jeopardised. One senior IPTL said that his manning difficulties were now acute and yet the level of saving sought had no correlation with the cost or status of what was referred to as a flagship 253 programme. I believe this was the genesis of a remark from a customer, who said, "I think projects could get held up for administrative reasons". But there is more to empowerment than giving them authority and responsibility there is also the quoted matter of, "actually allowing them to define the boundaries in which they work and get a sense of achievement from being able to work with'in those bounds". He went on to postulate and I agree that" the sense of achievement is the key thing for individuals and clearly if it provides improved value for money for the government then its got to be a good thing!" This sense of achievement if shared goes a considerable way to strengthen a culture. One of the respondents believed that SPI was a "beneficial exercise because it attempts to put a better structure onto our procurement process. I think the areas where I have visibility of it are at the front end trying to make sure that the requirements are clear and clearly justified". However, the delineation of the scrutiny boundaries for any gate has never been well articulated. Rather than be determined as an Approving Authority's need the scrutineers have enjoyed almost a free hand unless challenged. This particular freedom especially that enjoyed by the scientific scrutineers continues to cause delay and friction between cultures. Secondly, there is a belief that by cutting the number of requests upon the Approving Authorities to two events: the Initial and Main Gate the burden of proof is reduced. This is a specious argument and it could equally be argued that a similar level of detail is required no matter how many visits occur. This next interviewee adopted a positive view of SPI because had just benefited from" taking a programme through in remarkably quick time to contract let which we did yesterday in the period of9 months. So something about this business is different and works so positive". However, he was concerned that no effective process had been put in place, ''to do the balance of investments at the higher levels". It is believed that the JCB have addressed this issue but really have no effective tool other than military and scientific judgement to decide between the CM areas where the balance of investment is going to lie. "But actually the old ways of doing things and the amount oftime it took just were no longer tenable". This statement was made in the context of rapidly developing technology. However, the individual was not convinced that "we've yet had a system delivered as a result of the Smart Procurement Initiative that's gone through the whole cycle" other than perhaps the odd small programme as described in the previous paragraph .. So using his words "its very difficult to measure whether it has _ been a success or not." This not unreasonable stance at this embryonic stage and neither should it detract from the reality that many are changing their behavioural norms in an effort to make this initiative succeed where others floundered. 254 This theme of an embryonic stage is well encapsulated in the following quotations again from experienced practitioners "If used properly it (SPI) can have the potential to reap great benefits". He then went on to say, "It does require a lot of effort by all of the people involved in every part of the process not just those dealing with industry but those dealing up here as part of the customer organisation and also those supporting the organisation such as the scrutiny community both technical and financial. We are making progress but it takes a bit of time and people are learning an awful lot all the time". It is believed that these words are not only encouraging but are worthy of recognition because this is a corporate initiative, still in its infancy and people should not be quick either to condemn or overly praise but rather should allow time to run a longer course before making judgement. Confirmed need with concerns "I believe it was necessary, timely and that in the long term unfortunately it will create more difficulties than it will solve." He went on to describe how the history of the past twenty years demanded change and the way forward must involve the continued effectiveness ofIPTs in which he placed considerable store. His scepticism was then revealed, " I think there will always be a budgetary restraints and political restraints etc and dare I suggest even the service restraints as regards the practical chain of command and I think that over a long period it will distort the process and will jeopardise and probably restrict the freedoms of SPI." There has always been a political card that is occasionally played once the EAC have made recommendations and sometimes before.