I read with interest that the Central Office of Information is splitting its ‘design and creative for print’ roster into three new frameworks in an attempt to speed up the procurement process (News, DW 24 September), but I fear this may only serve to exacerbate the real issues involved.
A roster should consist of the right number of the right consultancies, which receive the appropriate remuneration that their work deserves.
If the European Union directive requires that ‘all suppliers on a framework capable of performing a contract [are] to be invited to compete for every piece of business’, then I would ask how many of the 63 consultancies that are currently listed feel that they are getting their fair share of briefs, and therefore revenue, even before the number of consultancies proliferates.
Also, are they all to pitch on a continuous basis?
Given that many consultancies within the design and branding spectrum are multidisciplined, should the taxpayers’ money really be spent on managing another roster of, for example, ‘brand engagement and guardianship’ consultancies which, in all probability, are equally capable of providing brand valuation services.
By cutting one roster to create 11 more, will consultancies really see the benefits of increased procurement efficiency?
I’m sure that the design industry will respond diplomatically, but the COI should ensure that it has the optimum number of consultancies so that each can rely on getting regular work, having invested so much time and effort in getting on to the COI’s coveted rosters.
Rosie Doggett, Partner, RD Squared, by e-mail