Re: Agile Procurement

Ed Dowding — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 04:33:21 -0000

You forgot 'risk'. That was the main thing I noticed at CitySafe was that, rationally enough, eliminating risk in a project was a major issue for people. Consequently the system is designed to favour large contractors, or at the very least to ensure that large contractors, from approved supply lists only, assume the risks involved in dealing with any smaller contractors who aren't huge companies.

As you've identified, this is clearly going to make it harder to ensure the most suitable product or service wins.

So I would suggest three things:

1) You and I know that being agile actually reduces risk, so that needs to be made evident. Diagrams and crayons might help here.

2) Have the procurement system acknowledge that the risks created from being a small company (such as suffering from cashflow problems) are different from the quality of their service or product, and create ways to compensate for this. Partnership with a large supplier doesn't do much other than triple the cost of the project.

3) Have a look at the Rapid Procurement Processes employed by the military. This is their response to realising that slow procurement meant dead people. Not only will it probably include a lot of good checks and test points, but will also demonstrate agile procurement being employed at the highest levels.

Disqus - Latest Comments for eddowding

Re: Agile Procurement