Government departments dressing up old outsourcing methods as tower model - and failing, says TfL CIO

TfL is succeeding at using the tower model but several organisations are not, says Steve Townsend

Many government departments have struggled with the SIAM tower model approach because they haven't changed their sourcing model, according to Transport for London (TfL) CIO Steve Townsend.

Last year, Government Digital Service (GDS) deputy directory Alex Holmes shocked many government departments by suggesting that the tower model was "not condoned" and "not in line with government policy".

He said that organisations had adopted the tower model believing they were following government policy and using best practice, but said they were actually doing neither.

"[The tower model] combines outsourcing with multi-sourcing but loses the benefits of either," he said.

Computing criticised Holmes and the GDS for not making clear what alternative approach he thought government departments should take, particularly as many were already well on their way with tower model-based strategies. His words certainly created confusion: the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) said it would be abandoning the tower model approach, while the Ministry of Justice extended its legacy contract with Sopra Steria in January, suggesting that the transition to the tower model may not have been as smooth as the organisation had hoped.

However, many other organisations including the Metropolitan Police, the Tri-Borough Council and TfL decided to stick with the tower model.

Holmes later clarified the situation in an email to Computing: "Organisations need to work out what is right for them based on user needs," he said. "This will be different depending on the situation."

According to Townsend, the services integration and management (SIAM) tower model approach does work for TfL, but hasn't worked for some organisations because of their approach to sourcing.

"Most organisations have struggled if they've chosen to totally insource their towers, while others have gone fully outsourced with an integration services third party in charge of delivering technical services which wasn't really the idea of the SIAM tower model," he told Computing.

"The approach was meant to allow organisations to resource, or contract with their service providers in a way that was suitable for the organisation. So we have gone for a blend: some of the services should be taken internally as we need to keep them close to our chest, while others are better suited to come from the marketplace," he added.

Townsend suggested that organisations have struggled when they outsource all of their towers and have a service integrator sitting on top of it. This, he said, gives organisations problems with both control and costs. TfL hasn't suffered with the same issues, Townsend maintained, because it has taken a step-by-step approach, looking at how services should be delivered back to the organisation to solve problems.

"With the networks tower which is currently out for consideration on the Official Journal of the European Union, we're looking at how we can consume services and which of the elements we can retain - it's not a wholesale outsource," he said.

But other organisations, which Townsend did not name, are merely using the tower model in the same way that they had been outsourcing previously, he implied.

"They've taken the model and either insourced it or outsourced it all, which is just like the old outsourcing method but dressed in a slightly different way," he said.