Times are tough for public servants. The difficult economic
situation, increasing public scrutiny and the more diverse and complex
needs of the communities they serve mean that councils need more help
than ever before to do their jobs efficiently and cost-effectively.
One
way to make life easier is to re-think how local authorities find and
manage temporary staff. For example, none of the 11,000 recruitment
agencies in the UK has ever meet all the needs of a single council.
Local
authorities are complex organisations – they can be geographically
diverse, employ thousands of people, are required to deliver services
that represent value for money and support the wider community,
including local businesses. These complex needs are often met by a
complex supply chain.
Rationalising this supply chain to a small
list of suppliers, however, is rarely effective. It often shuts out
small and medium-sized businesses (SMEs) that do not have the scale to
compete with large national recruiters. Some authorities adopt what as
known as the "master vendor" approach, working with one single
recruitment company. Inevitably, that one supplier will not have the
expertise to meet demand across the skills spectrum of the public
sector.
Given the savings that authorities are expected to make on
their workforce costs, this is one area for improvement. If councils
can control spending on temporary staff and reduce the risk involved in
this work, it will help them to meet efficiency targets. One way to do
this is to introduce a "vendor neutral model", which is business speak
for using technology that will help select the right partner for each
individual recruitment need.
They will effectively handle the
supply of temporary labour, but more crucially, manage the entire
process. More than 90 authorities are already doing this, with the
following benefits:
• Visibility: the IT infrastructure that HR
and procurement are offered through these partners mean that they have
total visibility and control over all activities and expenses. Through
having a full oversight of the movement and cost of temporary labour,
other sources of labour such as redeployment pools, internal agencies
and welfare to work agencies can be incorporated.
• Risk is
reduced: councils face considerable risk in the use of temporary labour
in the delivery of direct services such as social care and street
services. The technology provided in "vendor neutral arrangements" means
that the pre-checks on workers are robust. The arrival of Agency Worker
Regulations last year put more pressure on councils, and the control
offered through these platforms substantially reduces the risk of legal
action against organisations.
• Cost is controlled: this model
streamlines processes from requisition to payment, reducing costs and
creating a competitive market place for suppliers.
As local authorities need to support local communities, this approach plays a key role by making good use of local businesses.
Our recent survey of HR professionals working in
local government found that 55% rank using local SMEs as important and 35% consider it very important.
By
using this model, the best-priced and highest-quality agencies are used
and the focus is on procuring from local organisations. Opportunity is
not awarded on size or reputation. Instead good performers are rewarded
with opportunities for repeat business and the potential to grow their
market share – the lifeline of small, local agencies.
The needs of
councils are complex and challenging. However, changing the way you
find and manage temporary staff can make a real difference in the
changing world of public service.
