Agenda item

To receive and consider a discussion paper relating to the joint management of the Shared ICT Service.

The Joint Committee received a discussion paper, presented by Councillor Cryan (on behalf of London Borough of Southwark), which members were advised had been prepared to encourage further consideration around management options for ongoing delivery of the Shared ICT Service.

Whilst highlighting that Southwark remained committed to the Shared Service, a number of challenges had been highlighted in respect of the following areas:

·                delivery of both ICT project and business as usual requirements, although it was recognised that some of these were related to legacy and investment issues;

·                the perception that the service was being defined and delivered by Brent rather than as a shared endeavour;

·                the current operating model’s capacity (including structure, governance and processes) to operate at the scale now required to serve three local authorities.

Whilst members were agreed that the delivery of a strong and successful shared ICT service remained critical to all three of the boroughs, the Joint Committee was being asked to consider a number of questions regarding how best to manage the service moving forward in order to address the challenges identified.  These included:

·                how best to create and maintain independence in terms of management of the shared service – including the proposal to appoint a Managing Director to lead the service independent of the three member authorities accountable to a Joint Management Committee;

·                how best to address the current management capacity issues within the service;

·                how best to address the wider service capacity issues across the service – including the potential appointment of technical architects by each authority;

·                how best to start the improvement process – including (as outlined under the previous item) delivery of the Service Improvement Plan.

The paper was then opened up for discussion with the following comments raised:

(a)       members recognised the challenges identified as a basis for the paper, given the critical nature of the service in underpinning each Council’s digital transformation strategy and driving service improvements for residents and in delivering performance improvement and associated efficiency savings.  Whilst it was felt that the Service Improvement Plan represented the start of a process, in principle support was expressed towards further consideration and development of the proposals within the discussion paper.

In order to move the process forward members felt that further consideration would need to be given to the detailed arrangements in terms of timescales, resources and operating structure prior to any final proposals being presented for approval.

(b)       In terms of the background to the proposed technical architect solution for each Council members were advised that the proposal was aimed at addressing the current capacity to link and co-ordinate technology decisions between authorities and integrate with the enterprise architecture component of the shared service.  Whilst recognising that some solutions would require a more localised approach, members were supportive of the proposed concept, subject to a more detailed definition of the role being developed, as a means of ensuring that technical requirements being identified to address business needs were subject to the necessary assessment and approval process.

(c)       Further details were sought on the membership of the Recovery Board being proposed to lead on delivery of the Improvement Plan, which it was confirmed would consist of the appropriate senior managers from the three authorities comprising the shared service.  Whilst the final membership of the Board and its relationship with the existing governance arrangements for the shared service would need to be defined it was proposed that the Board would meet on a regular basis in order to oversee delivery of the Improvement Plan.

As no further issues were raised it was RESOLVED that given the general consensus expressed at the meeting regarding the proposals identified, further work be undertaken to develop the future management arrangements for the shared service with a further update on progress to be provided at the next Joint Committee.

Members agreed that should any proposals be identified as requiring more immediate consideration these would be raised with members outside of the meeting.