Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Crystallising the vision
• Customer facing transactions and tailoring channels
• Embed customer focused culture
• End to End business process re-engineering
• Support changing customer behaviours
• Bringing more activity to the front end of the process
• Dealing with the whole person
------------------------------------------------------
Would anyone like to guess whence these pearls come?
Alan?
.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by dont want to give name on
-
or are they so brainwashed with all the jargon that they are just blurting out jargon without thinking? i would like to think the authorities think before they communicate,perhaps they don't? because the man in the street deserves better when he is trying to understand, what is really going on...
-
-
are you a libdem actavist clive? i know you said that you are linked to the lib dems in some way
-
-
clive is this thread about the theme of jargon. or is it about labour council bashing from the lib dems?
just asking...
not expecting an answer...
-
-
Is Claire on meths again? Still doesn't want to give her name.
-
-
you are entitled to your opinion oae...
it is sexist to call an annonyous poster by a womans name, incase they are posting annonymously to avoid sexism...as sensible women do...
im not saying that you cant call me claire though if that is your fetish of choice...
but what about the jargon?
please stay ontopic oae, because clive is staying ontopic with his thread about jargon; and isnt just council bashing on a separate theme...
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
Of course some of it is jargon but some of it describes things that would take a long time to write down otherwise. "End to end business process re-engineering" means taking a process like applying for housing benefit, identifying each step in the process as it is done at the moment then identifying steps and tasks involving too many people, that cause delays or simply don't help things and then working out a better process that is faster, more efficient and saves money.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
Michael I think I follow what you say about end-to-end ....
It doesn't sound too complicated; do you think that the council should be trying to do this themselves – rather than spending a shed-load of money on consultants?
Are you able to parse, "Customer facing transactions and tailoring channels" ?!
-
-
A customer facing transaction describes something where the council and the customer (a resident, a business etc) come together to complete a transaction. A good example would be paying for a resident parking permit. Maybe the current way of doing it would be to haul yourself up to Wood Green, stand in a queue for a fair while, produce your documents, pay for your permits and then get the 29 bus back. Tailoring the channels means offering different ways of doing this to suit you. You could log on to your account online and it links in to your counci tax record so providing proof that you live where you say you live, pay the fee from your living room and then either print off the permit or get them through the post.
I agree that it would be much better to find the people to do this inhouse. The problem is if you have been doing it the same way for years, it's hard to break out of that way of thinking. Maybe what Haringey should be advertising for are people to come and train staff how to improve things and then let then get on with it.
PS - I am not a management consultant!
-
-
I appreciate you're not a management consultant Michael, but I think you've made a pretty good fist of defining the jargon (what's needed isn't really rocket science, is it ?!).
Can I suggest that you offer your services to Haringey at £2,500 a day, which may represent a saving. In order to be in the running however, I think you'll need to embrace the waffle.
As I see it, the big problem with your explanation, is that I understood it and the council might find your intelligibility suspicious!
-
-
Can I use you as a referee Clive?
-
-
Delighted Michael.
However, I don't think it'll do any good, as Haringey is often determined to thrust huge amounts of taxes into the hands of consultants who can come up with the right line of patter (see top of thread).
I think it's incompetence combined with a lack of confidence.
For years, this is what happened up the hill at AP.
IMO, they should reduce this reliance on outsourcing and instead, appoint good people in positions of authority. This is what happened at AP. Sorry to keep banging on about AP, but as it is a council-controlled entity, I see it as a microcosm of the Borough.
-
Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on
-
Hi Clive - who is responsible for spending £1,600,000 do you think?
The £1bn annual budget is prepared by the Chief Accountant and endorsed by the ruling party on the Council. Big chunks of it have to be spent and whatever party was in power would have to follow Council officials advice on it or risk personal prosecution. That's why, for instance, Councillors can't just give the big grant they get from Central Government entirely to the poor, defeating the Government's order to cap poor people's benefits.
Overall the Chief Exec is responsible for spending the budget so the buck stops there.
Below the Chief Exec there are assistant Chief Execs and a range of Directors heading up various departments. Here's an org chart from 2010.
For projects like this there are people tasked with drawing up details of the requirements, putting the work out to tender, comparing bids and making recommendations that conform to the regulations on tendering imposed by central government. There are further strict rules about the types of things the Council can spend money on, and people paid to make sure they stick to the law. Normally Councils can't approach particular consultants and ask them to do work.
The tenders have to be made public by law (obviously partly to make the bidders aware of the opportunities to bid) and they can be found, for example, in the relevant EU journal of contracts as often, under the law, councils must offer the work across the EU so as not to discriminate unfairly.
Then there are the consultants themselves. They could be blamed for taking the work and doing it badly. Council Officers oversee the tendering process and are responsible to their bosses for the quality of decisions made. Those with oversight are usually senior officers who have experience of previous tenders and received professional development training, often from national training organisations and often over a period of years.
Generally with operational matters like this, the ruling party of Councillors has almost no say in how exactly the money is spent, or specifically on what. It would obviously be wrong, for instance, if a Councillor was able to tell the Executive to appoint a particular firm - this has happened to other Councils in the past, but it's so illegal that those concerned have been caught and imprisoned.
So, who exactly is to blame Clive? Can you name and shame?
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
