Outsourcing « Dr Alf's Blog

Upside/Downside Leverage (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

English: Protestors in Brighton on June 30 over pension changes. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

English: Protestors gather in Sheffield to demonstrate against government plans to change public sector pensions. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

English: Teachers at New College Nottingham protesting against government pension plans. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

English: NUT ATL UCU PCS strike rally outside the Forum in Norwich against draconian government cuts in their pension conditions (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This is one of my all time best blogs. Although first published in 2011, austerity has failed and radical reform in the public sector will again need addressing. My colleague & fellow blogger, John Gelmini and I were right in 2011 and we’re still right. Since 2011 there’s more downside risk; (1) austerity has failed; (2) there’s a risk of a neo-Marxist government in the UK; (3) Brexit costs will be high to enormous; (4) Conservative government is ‘weak and wobbly’; (5) in North America, the Chair of the Federal Reserve is warning that labor productivity is increasingly being impacted by the epidemic of drug abuse, especially opioids, now the biggest cause of death for the under fifties.

The original article was based on the UK’s unreformed public sector but in Trump’s America, there’s an enormous ‘Catch 22 challenge’ too, as Macron’s France.

Whilst the ‘Catch 22 Challenge’ was originally pitched at the public sector, it also applies to the private sector where productivity is declining apart from the impact of new technology.

So how should the UK and other advanced countries, like France, the US, Canada & Australia face the latest ‘Catch 22 challenge’ in light of new downside risks?

Open this link for original 2011 blog

Related articles

Boris Johnson piles pressure on May to scrap the public sector pay cap

Philip Hammond should raise fuel duty to fund increased public spending, Lord Lawson says

Pound moves towards $1.30 as Trump probe weighs on dollar

Moment audience LAUGHS as Diane Abbott claims Labour government is ‘sooner than you think’

Is your ski holiday safe? Warning to holidaymakers after Brexit causes three operators to go bust

Cutting the pay of fat-cat executives would ease deficit, says ROSS CLARK

LiveStories nabs $10M to organise, analyse and visualise fragmented civic data

Philip Hammond keeps getting in trouble for gaffes – this time he reportedly said public sector employees are ‘overpaid’

Watchdog’s new price curb could stem the flow of water profits

Vice-chancellor ‘greed’ must be reigned in, says former education minister

Dr Alf's Blog

English: Example of a balanced scorecard strategy map for a public-sector organization (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This article was first published on this blog March 11, 2011.

It’s interesting to see what’s changed in nearly five years – not too much I fear.

————————————————————————————————————

Last week’s blog entitled “Local Authorities & Shared Services: Cost-Cutting, Myth or Reality?” generated some lively debate. Reflecting on recent political and media attention the UK Public sector, it occurred to me that perhaps there has been just a bit too much simplification, glossing over complexity and context, just to score political points.

With over twenty years experience in major multi-nationals, and over five years in the Public Sector, including Central and Local Government, plus International Agencies, I thought that it would be helpful to dispel a few myths. This week, I am going to embellish the content with my own experience. As I introduce new…

View original post 1,567 more words



Embed from Getty Images

Here’s a good op-ed from Gus O’Donnell in the Guardian. He argues that leaving the EU would have been enough of a challenge for a strong majority government but without clear political leadership, the UK is looking at an enormous downside risk.

Source: Gus O’Donnell | Brexit is a massive venture. There’s no way these changes will happen smoothly | Opinion | The Guardian

I’ve spent a large party of my life in delivering radical change, both in private & public sector. Even with the A-team handling delivery, the pivotal role is with the sponsor. Political meddling and change in sponsor leads to massive delays, huge cost overruns and failure to achieve objectives. In my experience, sponsors of radical change programmes usually impale their careers. In addition, it’s seriously questionable whether the government has harnessed the A-team. The first part is in negotiation of the changes and the UK has neither the strategy nor the expertise to face the EU.

Conservative MPs go on holiday comforting each other in their ideological solidarity but sadly that just one dimension of a radical transformation. Without independent risk assessment and costing, plus expert challenge of the strategy, we surely looking at a national train crash?

Thoughts?