The GCOP Interview: Amanda Gomersall on flexibility, trust and avoiding battle grounds

AN: Let’s start with some background. What was your route into your current position? How did you get into PPP?

AG: I think it’s fair to say it was probably by default rather than choice. However, I am more than happy to be where I am.

From my initial degree it’s been NHS from day one – in the first instance in soft services and catering. I then went on to be soft FM manager at one of the Trust sites, when we started planning for the first large PFI. We have two PFIs and I was involved in both with Bexley Wing being the largest at circa 67,000 metres squared – so quite a big building.

My remit was ensuring we could deliver soft  and hard FM services by making sure the design was fit for our purpose from an Estates and Facilities perspective. My role then expanded and now I also look after the two energy centre contracts and the large retail contracts, such as retail catering and linen services for the Trust across all five sites. So that keeps me busy!

AN: What do you enjoy most about your current role?

AG: I think it’s got to be the variety. It doesn’t matter what you’re planning in your diary – one day is never the same as the next. We’ve got constantly changing priorities. It’s a very dynamic role in that we’re doing different things all the time.

One day it could be, why is the toilet roll holder in that place and the next could be, how do we deliver 250 million pounds MES scheme? Such a variety and at different levels.

AN: What do you enjoy less or find frustrating?

AG: Lack of movement. Because I’ve worked with private sector partners for quite a while, we discuss something, agree something and it gets done. But often that’s not the case within the Trust and our own departments. We talk about things forever and don’t always manage to deliver a great deal.

In terms of the contract, what is frustrating at the moment is getting through red tape to get variations done. We have been successful with a grant of circa £5m and part of this will fund decarbonisation of the heating within our PFI. But getting that project off the ground and delivered and the variation signed in the timelines that DHsc has is challenging.

AN: What’s the main blocker in getting this over the line? Are there delays due to the partnership, the contract?

AG With this one, it isn’t the SPV, it’s FMCO being very risk averse and having to dot every single I and cross every single T to be able to move forward. Some of that is down to a lack of resource recently with our FM Co from a central commercial  and legal perspective.

AN: Are you seeing this mainly when there is a change or are there similar frustrations on a day-to-day basis?

AN: No, business as usual and day-to-day management of our schemes is excellent from both FMCOs and from both SPVs. I think it’s where support is required higher up the chain centrally from both a commercial, legal and a governance perspective.

We can agree and have a plan, but then it has to go through numerous approval levels and the tiniest little thing gets challenged. And I understand this is in no small part due to what is happening elsewhere with deduction hunting organisations. Where there are projects that are poorly performing, that impacts how FMCO and SPV behave on the projects that do perform, because we have to dot more I’s and cross more T’s than perhaps we would have done previously.

AN: So certain behaviours (even outside your Trust) are impacting how your contract is delivered. Do you have any suggestions about how we could change the contract in future projects to help strengthen the partnership?

AG: One area that I think we need to look at is whether the performance regime can be relaxed. However, that has got to come with a best value approach.

On a recent refinancing we did a piece of work looking at how can we make the project better value for the Trust. We said, “go away FM Co and come back with some suggestions of where you’d like to tweak the pay mech that will allow us to make some savings.” And after four months the answer was, “we don’t think we can do anything anywhere” which was really disappointing. We have a really spiky pay mech. For example, if  a linear accelerator which is a bunker where we deliver radiotherapy treatment, is out for two sessions (and FMCOhave one hour and 45 minutes to respond) that’s a deduction of circa £20k

Now, that’s quite spiky and we could sign-up to that being relaxed slightly but we would have to see a corresponding reduction in cost. And I still think there’s a risk aversiveness and a lack of willingness from FM COt to look at those types of things.

AN: So I wonder how we could embed that into the next wave. Would you suggest that there could be points in the life of the contract where you go back to the performance regime and assess whether it’s still fit for purpose?

AG: No, I think it needs to be from the start because you’re signing up to a risk profile and a cost at the start.

But our contract was signed 20 years ago and we now have experience of PFI over those 20 years. For any new future contracts, those discussions can be had now to balance getting the best value with the best service solution for the British taxpayer.

AN: Staying with future projects and the potential of Trusts and authorities potentially managing these contracts for the first time, what one piece of advice would you give them?

AG: I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I’d look at compliance in the first instance. You need to know how your contract’s performing and understand whether it is genuinely being delivered as it should be.

If you then realise that you are receiving a good service and that everything is being delivered, then you can relax a little and discuss potential deductions as they arise rather than automatically applying them every single time.

AN: Do you think it’s important to exercise this type of reasonableness when applying deductions?

AG: Yes. Things can go wrong in any hospital, for example a wash hand basin’s been blocked and a patient’s left to tap on. There are an awful lot of arguments as to whose fault that flood is.
Is it the blocked drain? Is it the patient that’s left the tap on? Is it a member of staff that’s not seen it quick enough? Rather than just saying there’s a leak, it’s your fault, this is your deduction. I think we have to take responsibility for some of it as well.

AN: Any advice about managing the relationship for someone quite nervous of the private sector running rings around them? You’ve spoken before about the importance of your partners knowing your boundaries.

AG: I would advise you to get to know the individuals. However good the company is that’s delivering you a service, it’s about the individuals on your site. And I’m not suggesting you need to go out partying with them, but get to know the people themselves, not just as the opposing contract manager. Knowing those individuals helps with a lot of the relationships as you move forward.

AN: Where you have a test in the partnership or relationship, or something that you feel isn’t being handled the best way, what processes or approach do you have of making sure that not only is it not going to damage the relationship but you get the results that you want?

AN: You’ve got to make sure the partnership operates on all levels. We’ve split our structure into three distinct levels. There’s the operational level, the tactical level and the strategic level.

At the strategic level, we’re looking at how are we delivering the service and where do we want that to go in future.
At the tactical level, we’re planning what is happening on a day-to-day basis. And at the operational level, we’re actually delivering the services. So that also gives you that escalation path. If everybody’s involved all the time at every level, you don’t have appropriate levels of escalation to get things sorted.

If you have four levels of authority, or four levels of FM CO, attend every meeting, you’ve only got that one meeting. You can’t differentiate and set aside that specific time. So we have an assistant PFI contract manager that tends to work operationally.
We have a PFI contract manager that does dip into operational, but is mainly tactical. And there’s myself that dips into tactical, but is mainly strategic. And I think by keeping those separate, we’re able to escalate where needed.

But it isn’t easy. People are stressed and people have a lot of pressure on them, be it from a Trust side to make sure those bed spaces and rooms are available for use, or be it from an FM Co side to ensure you’re not going so above and beyond that it affects costs. And sometimes you lose the sight of why you’re there, and we’re all there for the patient in the end.

AN: Who has driven forming that process and how you deal with those performance meetings? Is it a joint effort?

AG: Yes and I would say we have an absolutely excellent SPV in Albany and they have driven the use of a SharePoint. All our business is managed through the SharePoint. Every document, every decision, it’s there and there’s one source of truth.

AN: You have been a very active member of GCOP since we formed. What do you think success from GCOP looks like? Is it in creating a forum for understanding different drivers and perspectives?

AG: I think it’s both that and altering behaviours. Both from an authority and an FMCO perspective, I wouldn’t say it’s one-sided at all.

AN: Is there a hope that behaviours can change or do you think sometimes they are entrenched?

AG: We’ve had experience with one of our energy centre contracts, which is a sort of PPP type of contract, and for three years behaviours on all sides were appalling. It’s only when two or three of us that had worked together previously on different things came together that we were able to take the rocks and guns out of individuals hands and have them sit in a room and talk to each other, that we were able to force better working relationships.

AN: Obviously a large part of GCOP’s work is to try and influence behaviours but does this always need to be addressed project by projects. Could we have more standardisation, almost like a charter of behaviours?

AG: Personally, and it’s only my personal view, I’m not sure signing a piece of paper or a charter makes any difference whatsoever into the behaviours across such disparate projects. I think people get entrenched and don’t want to move. But it’s not about finding a win, it’s about finding a position that all parties are equally accepting of, that you might see a win further down the line. It’s not about winning every single battle (or creating a battle for every issue), it’s about the overall strategy.

Sometimes you do have to give to move forwards and it might be quite galling that you have to give, but in the grand scheme of things, that’s a better position to put yourself in sometimes.

AN: Staying on behaviours, it seems to me, that sometimes being as antagonistic as possible and find as many “savings” as possible is being celebrated from further up.  But it sounds like you are prioritising value for money and getting the best performance and the best level of service.

AG: It is, and it’s all about trust in the end. Making sure that we understand each other and understand each others drivers. A private company is there to make money for the shareholders, and the only way they can do that well is to deliver excellent service.

And it works both ways – it’s about them trusting us. I know I can ring FM CO up if I need to, ask them to place an order for circa £20k with no paperwork in place, but I’ll fill it in tomorrow, day after, as soon as I get round to it.

And that’s accepted because we both trust each other. There are other projects where unless they’ve got something in triplecate with three signatures on, they’re not going to order anything. So I get the benefit out of making sure those relationships work. It might not be always a financial benefit, but it’s still a benefit in delivering the service.

AN: And I guess you’re not going in to work every day to be in a battleground.

AG: Absolutely. You don’t want to come to work dreading it every day. You want to come to work to enjoy it.

AN:  And talking of what you enjoy, and stepping away from PPPs, outside of work, where is your happy place?

AG: My passion has always been horses – although I don’t have them at the moment. I used to compete in equestrian sport, mainly cross country, etc.

And spending time with friends. You’ve got to be able to divorce both worlds.