Library / Thought Leadership

GCOP Interview: CEO Amanda Nicholls speaks to Galliford Try’s Phil Harris about variations, managing expectations and running in the woods

18 June 2026

Copied to clipboard

AN: Let’s start with some background about you and your path into PPP.

PH: I started as a QS [Quantity Surveyor] so I had 10-years working on site before I got into PPPs and I first dipped my toes into the industry with NHS LIFT.

Before NHS Lift even came to market, we were assembling a team at what was then Miller Construction to bid on the projects that we knew were going to be coming along and I was there representing the design and construction side because I’d been doing a number of third party development projects in the primary care arena.

The guy who was heading up the PPP team in Miller at the time liked what I was doing and said, “do you want to come and work for me, move across from the building side into the PPP side and work as a bid lead?” And that was 24-years ago…

AN: Have you found that your background as a QS has been quite helpful during your later career?

PH: Yes, it’s been invaluable in terms of understanding contracts and risk and management of buildings – having the knowledge about what happens on site. You have an understanding of how buildings work,  how they fit together.

AN: What do you enjoy and find rewarding about working in the PPP industry?

PH: What I really loved about it (right from the first projects I was involved in) was being the creator. Particularly when it’s a new initiative like LIFT or BSF [Building Schools for the Future] and you have a completely blank sheet of paper. You have the full gambit of what are these buildings going to look like, how are they going to work, how are they going to be operated, how is the interface going to work between construction and FM, how is the IT going to work?

You’re the pivot to making all those things happen. You are the creator. And that absolutely is what I love about it.

It starts with the blank sheet of paper and the result is that you can hopefully see people’s lives improved because you’ve created something that has genuinely made a difference.

AN: It’s sad how little we talk about that, isn’t it? The actual impact on people who are in these buildings and what a difference it makes to them.

PH: Fundamentally, this is what PPPs are for. They’re not about creating buildings. They’re about improving the space in which people perform the services or things that they do in their daily lives. For schools, that’s improving education for kids. In healthcare facilities, it’s improving healthcare outcomes for people. The buildings  just facilitate that. And if they’re designed and built and managed well, then the outputs will be even better.

AN: On the flip sideis there anything you find particularly frustrating about the industry?

PH: I think most frustrations are at the start of the process. The bidding process is really complex resulting in wasted costs and energy. Typically the bidder that comes second will also have had an excellent solution and they’ve just wasted a whole load of time and money to get to that point.

When you do win and you get those buildings into operation, the frustration comes more in when you see relationships breaking down and people not doing what they should be doing on either side, whether that’s public sector or private sector.

I think this mainly arises from people not necessarily really understanding how the contracts operate and that can get worse as time rolls on when you get changes of staff. Usually the first couple of years it’s all fine because the people who are operating it have been involved in the bid. And then changes come up over time and
new people come in without having the proper education on how these things should work and how to work together. And that can become really frustrating because you can find problems that are occurring in contracts that don’t need to happen just because of relationship issues more than anything else.

AN: Would you say that managing expectations of what people should be doing is the biggest hurdle and where you mostly see relationships breaking down?

PH: I think so. Of course you can get a genuinely poor performance issue or a poor reaction to a request but in my experience issues with the partnership are more likely to be around a gap in understanding.

FM companies don’t try to underperform, but the public sector side might think that the way they’re performing is not the way they expect them to. Neither side may be wrong but equally neither may be aligned. It’s that alignment and the gap in understanding that’s the bigger issue.

AN: Is there a point where it’s really difficult to bring that relationship back? Do you think that relationships can improve? Are there processes that support that?

PH: The ideal solution is that when somebody new is introduced to a project that they are properly educated in how that project should be run rather than just get thrown in at the deep end. But the reality is that often it doesn’t work that way. Somebody goes, somebody else comes in and just picks up the pieces and will be learning on their feet. This can be both public and private, not necessarily putting the time and effort in to make sure that the people that are operating these complex projects understand them properly from the day they are first involved.

AN: Do you think there’s also an issue in what the perception of a good contract manager is? Do you think that in some quarters that’s seen as being slightly aggressive and focused on trying to find savings?

PH: It varies massively. Some of the issues arise from the public sector putting a person in post who’s not actually properly qualified to do the job that they’ve been asked to do.  Most likely this is as a result of a misunderstanding from the senior people in that public sector body about what’s involved in running these projects  well.

These are complex deals, with multiple stakeholders and there will inevitably be things that aren’t done by the letter of the contract. Equally, there’ll be times where FM providers and operators will do things above and beyond what the contract says, but that often doesn’t get recognised then as a quid pro quo.

AN: What do you think is one of the biggest weaknesses of the model?

PH: Without a doubt, the thing that causes most angst are changes. Variations and the complexity that some of the models have created around getting those variations priced, approved and then delivered.

PF2 made some improvements on that for example in allowing the authority effectively to take elements outside of the contract to deliver changes. This meant we didn’t have funder due diligence, funders approvals and so on, making it much simpler, much quicker, much lower cost as a consequence.

AN: It’s a challenge to try and work out how to get funders more comfortable with change…

PH: I think if we got to the position that the variations didn’t impose an additional risk on the fund, then why do they need to approve them? If we could find a way whereby the changes don’t need their approval because it has no impact on their risk profile. But would that still need a lawyer review or a technical review? It’s not going to be straightforward, but I think there should be a route there.

AN: Moving away from projects, what is your biggest frustration with the industry?

PH: My biggest frustration is the perception of the industry. I think that’s largely because the only thing that ever really gets highlighted in the press are bad examples. Public’s wasted loads of money on this project, it cost a fortune, private sector made a fortune etc. What you never see in the press is anything about projects that have gone well.

The other side of it I touched on earlier is that the focus of the media is always on costs rather than the value that these projects add. And maybe we should do more to prove actually what benefits the users are getting out of the projects.

AN: Looking at the end of the contract life and the hand back, do you worry that all the benefits that have been seen over that 25-years are being lost.

PH: It will be interesting to see how many trusts, local authorities, public centre bodies do carry on with some kind of managed service beyond the point of hand back, because I think a lot do actually see the benefit of it. It will be a real shame to have seen a building which has been well looked after for 25 years plus deteriorate over the course of the next five years to something that then becomes a maintenance burden for the rest of its life.

AN: Highlighting the strengths of the model, where there are successes and trying to get people to look at value is part of what GCOP is going to be delivering. You’re a new organisational member, so what do you see success looking like for GCOP from your perspective?

PH: For us, it’s the opportunity to build new and/or stronger relationships, both with private sector colleagues and with the public sector. In terms of national government, if we can get some of these messages across to them and can actually prove the benefit of the model then I think we can make a real difference.

And that will help influence the future direction of potential further PPPs. We know there’s the potential for a healthcare model in England and Scotland so anything we can do to make the decision process easier for government is a good thing. I think that’s a really important thing that GCOP can help deliver.

It would be a real success if GCOP becomes recognised as a channel for PPP operators into government and public sector and back the other way. If we can look back in three-years time and see that GCOP had become that voice, that would be brilliant.

AN: That sounds very aligned with what we were going to do and what we want to do. And with organisations like yourselves joining it’s another strong voice to add to that. Our power comes from our members and our members’ opinions and voices so I’m delighted to have you on board.

Right, so we move away from work and I would be interested to hear where is your happy place?

PH: Where’s my happy place? I love being outside. I’m a very active person with an active family, whether that’s cycling, running in the UK in the summer, skiing in the winter, or just out walking my dog.

I do find I can get the greatest inspirations and just having a clear head when I’m outside doing those things. I never have music on when I’m running or doing anything like that. It’s just a chance for me to have a bit of me time and a bit of clear inspirational moments for myself.

AN: I agree that you can find more solutions, problem solving or inspiration walking that dog than you can have on a Teams call. Do you find that having that time in nature helps with work/life balance too?

PH: I think actually one of the benefits has come from COVID for me and for my team is that it’s really encouraged that more flexible working. We’ve always had a flexible working attitude within Galliford Try and have always been a really progressive business but COVID really flipped it around and made you operate in a different way.

For example, we have a regular ‘wellbeing hour’ where I encourage people in my team to go out and spend an hour doing something which takes you away from your workplace (separate to at lunchtime) to just go and clear your head. Go for a run, go for a walk, go read a book, go sit outside in the garden, listening to the birds, whatever it is that helps you just clear your head and then come back and carry on.

AN: I absolutely love that. I think that’s really inspirational. It’s these types of initiatives we like to see put forward for the Operational PPP Awards so I hope you consider entering.

Thank you for agreeing to be interviewed and welcome again as new members.