Industry news

A number of people have asked whether I have any sympathy for G4S given the current security shenanigans at the London Olympics? Some – yes. And for others too.

There are three parties involved: Government, the organisers: LOCOG, and G4S. Oh – and the IOC (International Olympic Committee) of course. Each time the Olympics and Paralympics are awarded by the IOC to a host city, that city then sets about building an entire operation, in this case LOCOG, from the ground up. From scratch. Learning and evolving in a relatively short period of time and under constant scrutiny.

Whilst growing and evolving, LOCOG also has to plan the events and award contracts. Contracting for live events is really quite different from contracting anything else. You know you need certain services but can’t accurately specify them until close to the event – way beyond needing the contract in place. Requirements evolve constantly. Yes you can learn from history – but this only gets you so far and every event is different. A degree of experienced clairvoyance is required to predict what lies ahead.

Having both contracted and been tasked with doing the unprecedented, I know first hand what it’s like on both sides. If you are attempting something as unprecedented as this security operation in the UK against such a fluid backdrop as I’ve outlined, normal contracting protocols go out of the window. As this G4S situation proves – a contract is little practical use to anyone at the eleventh hour. You need a balance of competency and process, coupled with great relationships.

Being unprecedented, both organiser and supplier are learning. As such, full specifications and responsibilities are nigh on impossible to accurately or usefully detail in any contract. This therefore demands an open, partnership-like approach. With the strict governance LOCOG and G4S operate under and most likely penalty-rich, robust contracts, it’s conceivable that the security problems may have been hidden for too long for fear of reprisals. Contractors failing or struggling is not uncommon. How you deal with it is key.

Another consideration when doing anything unprecedented is to assume the contractor will fail and have a backup plan. A doomsday view perhaps, and I admit not a view held by everyone, but to consider and hope all will go to plan is a flawed theory. I cannot believe LOCOG and the Government did not have a plan B. What’s been most alarming to me over the past couple of days is the level of surprise plan B seems to have been met with. Was the drafting in of police and military personnel really such a surprise? Or is it that if this had been revealed previously, there would have been public outcry? I am not sure we’ll ever know.

The perfect security storm has hit then. What next? And could it have been avoided? Criticisms are easy to dish out, but given none of us know the real facts, I’ll not be dishing any out. A few considerations though:

Should LOCOG have split the contract? Possibly, yes. I think concerns made by some observers that this would have made the coordination more difficult are less of a concern – but would the public sympathise with the fact this would have inevitably cost more? I doubt it.

Should the Government have tasked the military and police with the whole security job from the outset, which I am sure they would have done brilliantly? Possibly, but would the public sympathise with diverting such a huge amount of resource away from their day jobs? I doubt it.

Should G4S be in the situation they’re in? No. But G4S are not working alone. They are, regardless of contracts, working in partnership with LOCOG and the Government. G4S clearly seem to have some serious internal problems but they are also dealing with evolving specifications and constantly moving goal posts from their partners (and client). This is normal. Not ideal – but normal. G4S may have perhaps been naive to treat this contract like they do any other.

Working with a (temporary) organisation like LOCOG on a temporary event isn’t like working on normal jobs. You need to understand not just what you are contracted to do, but everything you are not contracted to do but are going to be held responsible for regardless. It’s that clairvoyance again. A lesson I learnt a long time ago and one G4S is seemingly learning very publicly now.

The government, LOCOG and G4S need to work together for the final push. It is these final moments where everyone will really earn their salaries. The G4S Chief Executive, Nick Buckles sat through a fairly horrific Select Committee hearing yesterday taking the heat. He had no choice admittedly. I think those questioning him need to look at the bigger picture though. Fault lies with all parties but what does the blame game actually achieve at this eleventh hour? It certainly won’t help that final push.

G4S will go on to learn from this, as will the Government, though LOCOG will cease to exist in a few months time. The games will be a success and everyone is working hard. The challenge is unprecedented though, and many would struggle in the same circumstances. The problems have been relatively minor in the grand scheme of things and having been where LOCOG and G4S are – I’ve some sympathy for both.

Recently, Barclays received a record fine of £290 million from the Financial Services Authority and US-based Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). This signals the punitive impact of Trans-Atlantic regulations and the intent of authorities to crack down on irresponsibility. In the last decade, the Western banking industry has had its reputation dented with several scandals, evidenced by catastrophes such as Enron and the last banking recession in 2007.

With more stories on bankers’ bonuses, poor governance is coming to public attention; governments can no longer adopt a ‘laissez-faire’ approach and Governments have a responsibility to look after their citizens because failures have severe consequences. As industry-changing fines are levied to ill-prepared banks, they must look into effective risk management solutions.

According to research from the American Banker, 80% of transactions from US-based bank transactions are processed in the UK, further supporting the need for Trans-Atlantic laws and governing bodies fit enough to enforce them. Banks with have multi-national subsidiaries, such as Barclays, have to be proactive in complying with local regulations, after all, shareholders or taxpayers depend on their money being responsibly managed.

Regulators are becoming more visible and stringent towards corporate malpractice. Governing bodies from both sides of the Atlantic are forming alliances to increase communication and resolve issues relating to compliance of cross-border laws. An example of this would be the partnering of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and Bank of England in 2010.

However, banks must want to instigate internal change and adopt a new mindset aligned to a culture of compliance. New banking regulations will impact the day-to-day work. Containing risks may require increased manpower to implement new processes quickly - especially at banks with a workforce of thousands. To protect the bank, the cost of hiring new staff to monitor and implement controls will increase. These new staff could potential slow down business pace and reaction times as they come to terms with the new environment and require training in the early stages. Using Risk Management technology to quickly disseminate new practices provides a less intrusive method to deal with compliance.

In the past month, the failure of banking technology shared headlines with the failure of compliance. Events at RBS show how a lack of communication can create information black spots leading to the failure of technology, much to the embarrassment of the Chief Executive, who has refused to accept a bonus again this year.

Perhaps the proven failure to manage employees’ compliance - partly linked to technologies they were using - shows buyers are realising some technologies are not up to scratch. Solely using email as a communication can bring issues in risk tracking and monitoring critical information. The malpractice environment when Barclays manipulated LIBOR seems widespread, breaches were communicated through emails and openly spoken about, but they were not flagged.

Instead, hosted solutions such as Cloud-based risk solutions provide risk managers working across the global network of a bank the ability to comply with global regulations. The single platform provides a common view of all compliance activities across entire groups, giving risk managers and the boardroom a complete view of business operations.

Consider the use of embedded enterprise social tools such as Chatter instead of email to encourage peer review of responsible practices. All social data is available to management, and significantly, stored against the data it refers to e.g. a financial transaction. The cloud provides scalability and speed which large banks crave when discussing implementation of new technology.

There will be more penalties given to banks in months to come as authorities clean up corporate behaviour. For banks to find a way to negotiate risk, they must first look at how corporate risk is governed internally in its entirety, from the risk manager up to the boardroom.

It has certainly been a high profile couple of weeks for outsourcing.

Headlines such as ‘outsourcing: can it ever work?’ and 'humiliated' G4S to claim millions’ have really put outsourcing under the spotlight and negative press coverage has simply snowballed.

As the G4S story unravels hourly it seems not only were there critical flaws in the governance plan, change management, and the IT infrastructure but the partnership between the Government and G4S seemed doomed from the start due to an ineffective communications strategy.

What Theresa May is learning is that you cannot simply outsource risk. You can outsource the management but the issue will still be there and governance is a key part of that.

The issue of increasing a workforce from 2000 to 10,000 in a short time period is a huge undertaking and would require some serious change control from any organisation. It certainly raises the question as to what governance G4S and the Government had in place and if an effective plan along with the right people were involved in any way?

On a day to day basis, outsourcing relationships are a great success and provide knowledge, cost benefits, expertise and efficiencies to organisations of all sizes across the world. It is a shame that such a prominent failure has tainted the industry at a time when the public sector needs to make heavy cuts while keeping as many services as possible for us – the taxpayers.

Until the dust settles, G4S need to take their punishment and the Government should reflect on how they communicate with and manage their suppliers. Sharing best practice and our industry’s successes is the way forward. Not only to combat some of the negative press but to share the wealth of knowledge we have amassed and prove the value that outsourcing adds at both enterprise and national level.

The NOA’s Outsourcing Works Campaign aims to do just this and set the record straight through an upcoming research project that will unequivocally prove the benefits that outsourcing brings to the UK economy.

So hopefully some good news on the way – just remember don’t blame outsourcing for this Olympic debacle, one swallow does not make a summer..

BT has secured a tender to provide fibre-optic broadband to North Yorkshire.

The contract is part of the governmental Broadband delivery UK (BDUK) programme which will see an investment of £17.8 million combined with £8.6 million from the European Regional Development Fund to deploy broadband to 90 percent of the UK by 2014.

The contract will see BT provide speeds up to 330Mbps. Carl Les, the deputy leader of North Yorkshire County Council and chairman of the Connecting North Yorkshire project said: “North Yorkshire is a large rural county with many remote premises,- “As a result, deploying broadband is a particular challenge.”

99.54 percent of Logica’s shareholders have backed a takeover bid from CGI of £1.05 per share.

The deal is expected to be worth in the region of £1.7 billion and makes speculation surrounding Logica’s interest in rival-bidders unlikely.

The deal had come under scrutiny from within the analyst community who were sceptical that CGI would be able to successfully integrate Logica’s European operations into the Canadian based company’s range of operations.

Anthony Miller, partner at analyst firm CGI said: “Logica shareholders did not seem to have any second thoughts about accepting CGI’s 105 pence a share offer”.

Alstom have selected CSC to tend a five year contract to provide storage transformation and infrastructure services.

Alstom is a global engineering firm, deployed in over 50 countries and CSC will be involved in providing server and storage capabilities throughout these locations.

CSC will deploy BizCloud, a private cloud service to consolidate and migrate Alstom’s datacentres. The private cloud platform can be hosted on Alstom’s premises in order to enhance security and allow for rapid support and direct access.

The development of new technologies including cloud services combined with economic pressures have increased the use of IT consultancies.

While the public sector and financial services continue to be the main users of IT consultancies, other sectors including transport and construction are now looking to these services according to the Management Consultancies Association (MCA).

Alan Leaman, CEO at the MCA, commented: “the demands of consumers and the ability of new technology to deliver better options for businesses mean that this is an important and growing market for management consultancy firms in the UK”.

Samsung has acquired a handset technology business from Cambridge based CSR for £200 million as well as a further £22 million investment in the firm.

The news of the acquisition have seen CSR’s shares rise by 40 percent. The handset technology business had been described by analysts as being detrimental to the parent business having been affected by various issues.

Samsung persuaded the deal in order to increase its technology portfolio as it looks to improve its Galaxy range of smart devices.

The Independent has reported that errors in IT systems at G4S have been responsible for staff shortages.

An insider revealed that the shortfall had been caused by an internal error within IT systems which led to a miscalculation regarding staff levels.

The exact cause of the IT failure has yet to be reported on, and had not been mentioned before the 14th July when the detail of staff shortages were revealed in full.

The Olympics media center looks set to turn into a cloud computing centre if iCITY one of the remaining two bidders is successful in its application for the site.

The building contains over 31,000 square metres of office space and includes such facilities as 1,300 internet ports with fibre optic cabling. The structure is highly connected and is in close proximity to Canary Wharf.

The announcement of the preferred bidder is expected to be announced within the next 24 hours with rumours of a ruling in iCITY’s favour.