EURIM Working Group Minutes

Working Party:	Theme 01/ Working Group
Ref:	02-T02-Min08
Minuter:	Emma Fryer
Date:	11/11/02
Circulation:	Attendees and Apologies
Queries to:	Emma Fryer, Tel: 0191 384 0282 Mob: 07714 803 650 Emma.fryer@eurim.org

Minutes of the EURIM / Intellect Planning Meeting on scope for joint activities on Modernising Government 11^th November 2002, kindly hosted by Intellect
Meeting Notes
			Action
1		Chairman’s introduction
	1.1	JT outlined the aim of the meeting – to clarify the objectives and form of the proposed joint seminar.
	1.2	It was agreed that the proposed event would act as a follow-up to the briefing papers that TA’s group had produced and to the work of the Senior IT Forum that had been launched on 30^th October. It might also build on the output of the Government’s e-Summit on 19^th November.
	1.3	It was agreed that the objective of this joint seminar was to help government understand how to improve programme delivery. Therefore the target audience should include civil servants at grade 3 and above.
2		Format
	2.1	The format would be a brief overview of the problems, followed by a more concentrated look at the solutions, probably in the form of good practice case studies and finish with a summary of the lessons learned.
	2.2	The programme would comprise three short sessions.
	2.3	There would be no sales pitches from suppliers but the speakers must come from a mixture of government and private sector
3		Content
		Session 1
	3.1	Introduction/ keynote This should set the scene from the government’s perspective, explain why government were putting so much emphasis on better programme delivery and show how the event fitted within the context of the government’s modernising programme.
	3.2	Challenges This must outline the challenges to the public sector, and stress that change management was not easy, whether in the private or the public sector, although it was often subject to less scrutiny in the former. Radical cultural change was needed. IT projects now had to be run as business change projects and managers were now responsible for delivery rather than strategy. There was scope to outline the various initiatives and help offered by the OGC
		Session 2
	3.3	Private Sector Case Study This must demonstrate how large-scale IT-enabled change had been implemented in practice in the private sector and how it had achieved real business benefits. If possible the case study should open avenues for debate as to which elements were applicable to public sector business function.
		Session 3
	3.4	Public Sector Case Study This session had to illustrate how to be a good SRO, probably in the form of an SRO / SRIE case study where two senior, experience people demonstrated what they had gained from partnership, how they were co-operating to improve delivery, how they had used the available guidance, how they had overcome challenges and what they had learned. These could be taken from early stages of projects since very little was actually at delivery stage.
	3.5	Conclusions This should identify the successful project management practices in the private sector that could be applied to the public sector to deliver the key thing:- real business benefit.
4		Suggested speakers
	4.1	Scene setting / outlining the challenges
	4.1.2	Andrew Turnbull or Tony Wright MP. NK to investigate AT. EF noted that TW was approachable via his research assistant.	NK
	4.1.3	Peter Gershon or someone equally senior from Cabinet Office. NK agreed to contact Paul Everist of OGC to find out how best to approach him	NK
	4.1.4	William Perrin from policy directorate
	4.2	Private Sector successful case study
	4.2.1	ASDA had successfully conducted an IT-enabled modernisation of stock and delivery systems which enormously reduced stockholdings and turnover. This was an excellent example of change management delivering business benefits. EF agreed to contact Karl Schneider to find out how to approach John Lister and to check that he was indeed the right contact.	EF
	4.2.2	Nationwide Building Society – NK to ask his contact for a suitable name.	NK
	4.2.3	Parts division of Leyland (as was).
	4.3	Public Sector SRO/ successful case study
	4.3.1	The SRO from the Engineering and Science /Physical Research Council.
	4.3.2	John Taylor from MoD
	4.3.3	Land registry
	4.4	Summing up / concluding
	4.4.1	Richard Sykes at Morgan Chambers. EF agreed to ask him.	EF
5		Comments on the programme
	5.1	TA noted that evidence was emerging that the vast majority of these e-government projects were heading for failure and people were now working on that assumption of failure. It might be appropriate to take a harder line approach based on avoiding failure - reflecting the fact that only 25% of government projects were currently likely to deliver expected performance within the timescales and budget.
	5.2	NK noted that some blunt talking would be a good thing – people did not want to hear what they already knew. However, they should also try and make the message positive.
	5.3	TA noted that the event must offer real learning opportunities for its target audience by illustrating how to be a good SRO. Many civil servants had been trained for policy making not for implementation and delivery and needed guidance in balancing their time between managing change for the future and keeping business as usual. A perspective from someone in the private sector who had managed a change programme from a senior position and could give this kind of insight would be very instructive. This was agreed.
	5.4	TA noted that currently the programme was all within the OGC remit. They had to offer something more. The event should aim to bring industry best practice to the attention of government. Major change had been achieved in companies like ICL, Tesco and ASDA but had not been extensively publicised. They must identify which of these practices were transferable to the public sector and which were not. Again, the perspective of a private sector manager of major IT-enabled change would be valuable.
	5.5	It was agreed that the agenda be arranged loosely on the following lines: Challenges – Minister or official What are we doing about it? - OGC How the private sector does it – Case study How the public sector does it – SRO / SRIE partnership Facilitated Debate or discussion Conclusion / lessons learned
	5.6	JT summarised the situation – they had a number of suggested speakers, proposals for an agenda and had identified their target audience. He agreed to review the various proposals for the agenda and come up with a suggested programme.	JT
6		Logistics
	6.1	It was agreed that it would be a morning event, probably followed by a networking lunch.
	6.2	It was agreed that it would be a joint Intellect / EURIM event, ideally endorsed by OGC
	6.3	It was agreed that sponsors would be sought to try and reduce registration costs
	6.4	It was agreed that CMG would be given first refusal for sponsorship and JT agreed to look into this.
	6.5	CH agreed to set out some costings with Tina Comption	CH
	6.6	CH agreed to ask Sam Baglioni to poll interest for the event on the e-Gov feedback form.	CH
	6.7	CH to propose some dates in conjunction with NK	CH / NK
	6.8	CH to identify some suitable venues and check the arrangements for the DTI venue.	CH / EF
7		Timings for a Feb / March event
	7.1	By late November: Approach Peter Gershon with some suggested dates. It was agreed that he was essential to the event. Firstly he had to be approached to find out if he would agree to do it and secondly it had to fit with his diary.
	7.2	By end November: The speakers and event programme / agenda must be ready (some key speakers confirmed and the rest named and invited) to go into the Intellect bulletin as advance warning / diary date. Speakers would have to be approached during the next two weeks – as soon as a date had been agreed with Peter Gershon.
	7.3	By mid December: Formal notices should be going to prospective invitees with hard copy brochure that incorporated logos.
	7.4	From Jan onwards:- bookings and registrations to be processed.
8		Other Business
	8.1	JT noted that TA would say a few words on EURIM at the next e-Gov group meeting on 20^th November. EF confirmed that EURIM material had been left with the Events team for use on the day.
9		Date of next meeting
	9.1	The next planning stage would be handled by email and a meeting scheduled when necessary.

Attendance – 11^th November 2002

F name	Surname	Organisation
Tom	ABRAM	Mantix
Emma	FRYER	EURIM
Carrie	HARTNELL	Intellect
Nick	KALISPER AS	Intellect
Jonathan	TAMBLYN	CMG