G-Cloud and tech procurement; some necessary spring cleaning
Heather Cover-Kus, head of central government programme at techUK takes a look at some of the pros and cons of the G-Cloud 13 framework
As the daylight hours get longer and we look forward to ditching our puffy winter coats for lighter spring jackets, the urge to have a good spring cleaning can take over. In my household, my husband is the one who loves a good clear out. He is ruthless in deciding what to keep and what no longer meets our needs. I on the other hand can easily convince myself that one day I will use the cake decorating tools that sit collecting dust in the cupboard.
Like my kitchen cupboards, many public procurement frameworks could benefit from a bit of spring cleaning. It is a useful exercise to bring them out, shake them off, and consider which parts of them work and which parts are less useful. The team at Crown Commercial Services are undertaking this kind of evaluation with one of its most popular frameworks – G-Cloud.
What is G-Cloud?
G-Cloud is an online catalogue where public sector customers can buy cloud-based computing services such as hosting, software and cloud support. It includes many off-the-shelf, pay-as-you-go cloud solutions.
No stranger to “spring cleaning”, the framework has undergone many iterations and its current formation, G-Cloud 13, is nearing an end. As the G-Cloud team at Crown Commercial Services prepare for G-Cloud 14, let’s explore elements of the framework that are worth keeping and those that could be changed.
The keep pile
In general, G-Cloud is a very popular framework. It has over 40,000 services on offer provided by over 5,000 suppliers. Among the technology-focussed procurement frameworks, in 2021, it had the second highest value call-offs at £515 million, the second highest volume of traffic with 446 call-offs, and the largest number (by far) of successful suppliers at 112.
With this high level of engagement from buyers and suppliers, G-Cloud is clearly doing something right. From a buyer perspective, many G-Cloud enthusiasts contend that the framework is a quick and easy route to market that provides value for money. It gives departments the flexibility to easily change service providers as well as access to the latest technology and innovation with every refresh of the G-Cloud agreement.
For suppliers, there were similar benefits. A recent informal survey of techUK members showed that for suppliers, the most well-liked feature of G-Cloud (by far) is the ability for customers to Direct Award to a supplier. Suppliers ranked the speed of the competitive call-off process as the second-best feature of G-Cloud. In third position was the ease of getting awarded on the framework due to low barriers to entry (in comparison to other public sector frameworks).
G-Cloud’s transparency was a close fourth place. Suppliers value the ability to see others’ offers and prices. This transparency helps keep costs down and bids competitive. It also helps to drive out bad practices in procurement. For SMEs in particular, the transparency function is hugely beneficial to understanding their position in the market and putting themselves in a good place to win bids. Indeed, G-Cloud is essential to the government’s target of 33 per cent spend with SMEs. 71 per cent of members surveyed said that the current lot structure of G-Cloud aligns well with the SME supply market offering.
The repair pile
So far so good with G-Cloud. But there are definitely things that need repair. For starters, the eagle-eyed among you would have noted that while 112 suppliers got business through G-Cloud in 2021, that number represents just over 2 per cent of all 5,000 suppliers on G-Cloud. Most suppliers never have any work channelled through this framework. Perhaps departments are choosing to use other frameworks, or perhaps because the framework is easy to join, many suppliers sign up, whether their services are best suited for G-Cloud or not. I suspect it might be a mix of both.
Furthermore, as with any good thing, there will always be those who take things too far. Crown Commercial Services are extremely cautious about the direct award feature of G-Cloud and want to ensure that it is not abused. Indeed, the proposed Lot 4 seems to be designed to safeguard against this type of behaviour. However, this lot serves to exclude SMEs and makes the framework less SME-friendly than it previously was.
In the midst of a constantly shifting economic climate, the transparency of G-Cloud pricing that is well-liked rubs up against the inability to update prices and locks suppliers into a model that might not be suitable for the current context. Suppliers have suggested introducing dynamic pricing into G-Cloud which would allow them to add and alter services and prices to fit the present situation.
The future is still bright
While G-Cloud might be like marmite, with some people loving it, and others hating it, there is definitely still a place for it in the public procurement cupboard. What gives me hope is Crown Commercial Services’ approach to this framework. They are actively seeking supplier views on G-Cloud, recognising that to get the best out of this procurement vehicle, it needs to work well for both buyers and suppliers.
We are actively looking forward to seeing the improvements that can be made with G-Cloud 14, particularly under a new set of rules allowed by the Procurement Bill.
