TechUK slams government for creating confusion over IT procurement
Trade association disappointed that significant change in policy was announced in a Government Digital Service (GDS) blog post
TechUK, the trade association which counts more than 850 companies as its members, has slammed the Government Digital Service (GDS) for creating confusion about the tower model in a recent blog post written by deputy director Alex Holmes.
In the blog post, Holmes claimed that the tower model, in which large outsourcing deals are broken down into component parts, was no longer effective and was "not condoned".
Last week, Computing analysed whether Holmes was right in stating that the Service Integration and Management (SIAM) tower model is no longer considered best practice, particularly after the government had given the clear impression that it is indeed the preferred approach to procurement.
Computing called for better communication between government departments, and clarification from GDS. TechUK's Naureen Khan's blog post lends further support to our cause.
Khan said that Holmes' blog post had caused its members "some alarm".
She said that in many procurement exercises, supplier briefings and TechUK events in the last two years, the applicability of the tower disaggregation model had been advocated by public sector bodies, including the Cabinet Office and GDS representatives. She added that the tech industry responded by investing in methodologies and proposals to help them deliver against the government requirements.
Khan warned that "unclear procurement policies are likely to dissuade future investment in the public sector from companies of all sizes".
TechUK was particularly disappointed that such a significant change in policy was announced through a blog post, without any industry consultation or opportunity to comment.
The trade body now wants the government to engage with the whole of the industry to help shape how organisations should transition away from the tower model, and how companies should procure solutions going forwards.
Khan said that the government must answer three key questions in order to clarify its stance on the matter:
- What is going to happen to current projects and those in the pipeline?
- What was the evidence base used to cause this change in policy?
- Will this new approach endure? Or will industry and departments be looking at another change at some time in the future?