This short report emerged almost by accident, from a discrete exercise to gather evidence for a government consultation on the inclusion of soft services in PFI projects. The challenge was to understand what happens when service providers are directly involved in the design and construction of the public infrastructure. The insights that emerged were so powerful that the report almost wrote itself.
As service providers perceive it, the infrastructure (for example, buildings or equipment) is merely the physical manifestation of part of a service solution. Its role is to facilitate the delivery of the service, and for that reason, it must be designed with the service in mind. In some cases, the ideal service solution may not be constructed around a physical asset at all - home detention in the justice sector and managed care in the health sector are two obvious examples.
Of course, it is unsurprising that the employees of a public service provider should take the view that PPPs should be service-led. For these individuals, services lie at the heart of the solution, and their perspective has been formed by the experience of operational delivery. But that does not weaken the force of their insights.
The concept of soft services is somewhat difficult to define, and the individuals quoted here use the term broadly. In some instances, interviewees refer to soft facilities management (FM) services such as cleaning and catering (services which are not necessary for the maintenance of the physical infrastructure). In other cases they refer to a much wider range of frontline services. All of the participants agreed that the boundaries between soft and hard services are fluid - services defined as 'soft' in one project, might be considered 'hard' in another project. In some projects, the service provider's role extends across all core service functions, far beyond cleaning, catering or maintenance of the asset.
This report does not suggest that soft FM services alone should drive the design process, but a much broader range of service considerations, led by a project team with broad knowledge and capabilities across the range of service needs, from support to frontline functions.
It is worth noting that, whilst those interviewed talk predominantly about assets in the form of public buildings, PPPs are also used in the manufacture of technical and mechanical equipment and the construction of transport infrastructure. The case for PPPs to be service-led applies equally in those contexts. Further research in this area might adopt a broader scope, involving inquiry across a diverse range of projects and feedback from public sector clients and service users
For their contribution to this report, the Serco Institute extends its thanks to the operational experts from Serco's health, home affairs and defence businesses who gave their time to be interviewed for the initial project, and who encouraged colleagues - and in one case a project partner - to become involved in this work