Amazon-style ratings on G-Cloud being delayed due to fear of legal threats
- Summary:
-
Rating tools for buyers are in the pipeline
We still aren't sure when they will be introduced, things are still being figured out
The Crown Commercial Service doesn't want to be taken to court over it
There are a number of legal challenges with a framework like the G-Cloud
Despite being on its sixth iteration and having had over £340 million worth of spend go through it in under three years, time and time again the same question pops up amongst both buyers and suppliers in the public sector – is the G-Cloud legal? And the answer is yes, of course it is.
However, that doesn't mean that the G-Cloud doesn't come without its legal challenges. Speaking at a THINK Cloud Vendors event yesterday in London, the British government's commercial director of technology for the Crown Commercial Service, Sarah Hurrell, explained how developments of the framework are being held up through fear of US-style litigation.
Just by way of background, for those of you that are unfamiliar, the G-Cloud was launched back in 2012 as a procurement vehicle for buyers in the public sector to purchase commodity 'cloud' products via an online catalogue that transparently laid out what vendors are available and at what price. The idea being that SMEs can stand side-by-side with the big Sis, driving down cost, as well as making it easy for buyers to see what products are available off the shelf.
The framework is innovative and has had a big impact on how central government buys technology – with Hurrell admitting that it does walk the line on what's possible under EU procurement laws. However, one of the things that Chris Chant and the other members of the original G-Cloud founding team wanted to see introduced was Amazon or TripAdvisor-style ratings, for buyers to give feedback on suppliers.
One of the biggest complaints about the G-Cloud is that with over 1,500 suppliers now on the framework, it is becoming increasingly difficult to identify which are the 'good' ones and which are the 'bad' ones. The use of real-time feedback and a ratings system could really benefit future buyers in their purchasing decisions.
However, Hurrell, who is responsible for how the framework is put together and ensuring buyers and suppliers interact with it according to procurement guidelines, said yesterday that although she wants to introduce the ratings system – she is worried that this would result in time in court for the British government. She said:
This is one of the things I hear from my Government Digital Service colleagues a lot and Tony Singleton [head of the G-Cloud] has badgered me many, many times about a TripAdvisor-type scoring system. I would love to do it, but there is a risk of one customer giving a supplier a zero type score and then that supplier sues us and we end up spending a lot of money on litigation. We would probably lose [in court and I'm responsible for looking after taxpayer money.
However, Hurrell did reiterate that the ratings system is something that the Crown Commercial Service wants to introduce, but it requires finding a way to do it that avoids the possibility of suppliers taking legal action against the government. And let's face it, this is probably a good thing given that the government doesn't exactly have a good track record when it comes to taking on suppliers in court. Hurrell said:
Do we want to do it? Absolutely. We are looking at all different options. One option at the moment is that we just do positive promoter scores, that way we avoid the risk. What is the best way to do that? We don't know the answer, the answer is difficult.
I don't think we will be doing it across the piece, I think it would be a procurement specific piece – maybe on the G-Cloud. I'm not expecting anything on G-Cloud 6, I don't even know if it will be on G-Cloud 7. It is definitely on the wish list, but I don't want to spend my life in court.
Completely understandable. However, introducing a ratings system and getting it right could very well solve some of the problems with the G-Cloud that people currently complain about e.g. forcing suppliers to behave in an appropriate way, whilst giving the good ones more visibility.
Hurrell also had some words of warning for suppliers, however, on how they should be approaching the G-Cloud and where they are going wrong. She even mentioned that suppliers may be pushing buyers to behave in a way that is appropriate in the private sector, but would in fact be illegal in the public sector. She said:
If you put something non-compliant in a lot, we will spot it and bounce it out. There is an element of making sure you are doing something within the intent of G-Cloud – that's because I have the delight of having to meet EU procurement rules and it's not fair to other suppliers if some people play by the rules and others bend them too far. A little bit of bending that I don't notice, I don't notice, but a big bit of bending and you're pushing you're luck.
Some of the points Hurrell highlighted included:
- The controversial two year call off period – contracts on the G-Cloud last for a maximum of two years, which aims to give buyers a better quality of service, given that suppliers are less likely to become complacent. The Crown Commercial Service apparently often gets the question about whether this two year period can be extended...and the answer is no, not legally.
- Pricing – The price of a supplier's product on the G-Cloud can always be reduced. But once it has been reduced, there is no way for that supplier to then raise the price at a later date. As Hurrell put it, you either have economies of scale or you don't. So think very carefully about how you price your goods.
- Submit monthly management information – suppliers have to inform the Crown Commercial Service on a monthly basis about how much they have sold through the G-Cloud, whether that be £800,000 or £0. Hurrell said:
We are looking to do what we can do to make that simpler. I think for larger companies it is difficult to collate all the stuff that is going on and for the smaller companies it is difficult to remember to do it – but it's really important and we have bounced people off the G-Cloud for not doing it.
- Think about local government – Hurrell said that she believes one of the main reasons that buyers in local government are yet to really buy into the idea of the G-Cloud is a lot to do with how the suppliers on the framework offer what they offer. She said that suppliers don't make it easy for them.
Sometimes we can get wrapped up in our own world about what we do and not actually understand how the public sector works. For example, local government has to go through an open and transparent process, they have to show they have considered offers and prices, so if you don't understand the way that they work, there is a point where you might be trying to get them to do something that is completely reasonable in the private sector, but not in the public sector. It can cause challenges and problems.
- One of the early criticisms of the framework was that it was being used as a shop window, but people were actually purchasing independently of the G-Cloud once they have found what products they wanted. But Hurrell warned that if she sees buyers and suppliers making contact via the G-Cloud and then sees deals being done outside of the framework, she will “come down on them like a tonne of bricks”.
- One final word of advice went to the SMEs on the framework, which are in the majority on the G-Cloud. Hurrell said that she has seen SMEs that have put prices in to win business and then only at a later date realised that this sets them up for a long term precedent that may be unsustainable. She said:
Make sure that what you are doing is sustainable, it doesn't help me if you go bust. I don't want you to make an unreasonable profit, but I
want you to make a reasonable profit so that you are around and employing your staff.
My take
For a while now I've been waiting for a new, good spokesperson for the G-Cloud to appear, one that is able to both promote the framework's innovative nature and its use across government, whilst also being honest about where it needs improving.
We have had some great spokespeople in the past – Chris Chant and Denise McDonagh being prime examples – but there has been a noticeable gap of late. I think Hurrell could go some way to filling that gap. She was honest and upfront about the G-Cloud goings on and she didn't avoid any questions.
The advice for suppliers is useful. And I really hope a ratings system of sorts gets introduced, as I think this will be another great tool for buyers and pushes the G-Cloud further down the road towards becoming a modern, internet tool for government.
DIGINOMICA SUPPORTS