Page 32 - FCW, Jan/Feb 2018

FCWPerspectives
The obstacles to shared services
The push for shared services is revealing a host of challenges related to agencies’ core missions and government’s relationship with industry
Shared services have long
been touted for their potential cost savings and operational ef ciencies, though the approach has been slow to gain traction in the federal government. However, the Trump administration’s executive order on cybersecurity and the recently passed Modernizing Government Technology Act both emphasize the use of shared services, and those mandates, coupled with advancements in technology,
are starting to intensify the discussion.
Last December, FCW gathered
a group of federal leaders to
talk about how agencies can move to the next phase of shared services. The discussion was on the record but not for individual attribution (see Page 33 for a list of participants), and the quotes have been edited for length and clarity. Here’s what the group had to say.
Can agencies be successful service providers?
One executive noted that the govern- ment started using shared services back in the 1950s, and the concept has been gaining ground lately despite the challenges. “Right now, we have a perfect storm happening, which is the right catalyst for talking about what those challenges are if we’re going to move forward in an effective way. We now have everybody in the conversa- tion, which we haven’t had before.”
However, others were quick to point out just how daunting some of those challenges are. “We in govern- ment spend a lot of time selling the concept to make sure that agencies jump on board,” one participant said. “We’re already on board. We want to do it. But I don’t believe that we, as a government, are mechanically pre- pared to do it.”
Others cited the government’s acquisition system as a serious imped- iment. “The acquisition framework today does not allow the exibility of a service-based model,” a participant said. “For example, one of the key values of shared services or software as a service are the ebbs and ows of economy. If I’m paying $25 today for a license but tomorrow it drops to $7, why can’t I renegotiate with-
out recompeting and embrace those economies of scale? Granted, there are risks to ebbs and ows, but at the end, technically everything prospers.”
Another participant agreed, saying: “In my opinion, agencies don’t have the freedom and exibility to behave like the private sector would. A fed- eral shared-services provider has to go through the same personnel process that I have to. There are rules and regulations about acquiring products. They have to manage their budget the same way I do. They don’t have mul- tiyear budget systems.”
The participant added that “if the government, through statute, would give the shared-services pro- viders even two-year funding and the ability to hire outside Title 5, they could staff up and down and invest through a procurement process in their infrastructure.”
Indeed, many participants com- mented on the need to have more flexibility built into their budgets — or perhaps a whole new way of approaching the budget-formulating process.
“If we can buy HR systems and we can buy nance systems, I don’t need money to build them,” one participant said. “Why can’t we leverage industry dollars to make the investments and
30
January/February 2018
FCW.COM