MPA to NISTA: How Can We Stop Repeating the Same Mistakes?
A colleague recently asked me to share some insights on the UK Government’s Major Projects and Programmes (GMPP)—their origins, purpose, and underpinnings. We always have the best conversations at Oxford Global Projects—it's just pure project bantz!?
For those unfamiliar, the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA), formerly known as (Prince or) the Major Projects Authority (MPA), and the GMPP process (including the publication of project data) were established under former Prime Minister David Cameron’s mandate.
Here is a link to the mandate (2011)
?The Government identified several key issues at the time for Major Projects and these were:
?
It’s a good job we fixed them..... (Cobbs Paradox ?– see earlier blog link).
To fix these identified Major ?Project “Ills” , the Major Projects Authority (MPA) will have the authority to:
Looking Ahead: What Should NISTA’s Next Mandate Include?
With the recent formation of NISTA (National Infrastructure and Systems Transformation Authority), do we need a new PM mandate and new powers for NISTA? Do we need a new policy and powers for NISTA so it can unlock UK Government Projects Data - Data for the public good (NIC report)
Is now an opportunity to take government project oversight to the next level? Here are a few ideas (feel free to add), and obviously, they are centred around data and benchmarking (because that is all I know) ?
? All government departments must provide NISTA with project data on completed projects (as per an agreed process/format) as part of their funding approvals.
? All government departments should have access to a centralised project data repository to support their project appraisal/analysis
? NISTA to establish a UK Government Performance Forum—a platform integrating benchmarking analytics into the business case process, helping to challenge key metrics such as:
Supporting a top-down data science approach to cost and risk forecasting and analysis
We have been doing some very cool stuff on Pump Storage Hydro projects. (Reach out if you'd like to know more about top-down analysis or Pump Storage Hydro—there's the plug)
Any other ideas? What should be included in NISTA’s powers or PM mandate?
What would you like to add? Could be a chance to influence or to have your ideas stolen.
Drop your thoughts in the comments! Like, share, and follow/connect if you want more insights on the UK infrastructure sector and brilliantly written posts with the help of ChatGPT and my mum (Kidding kidding, I never use ChatGPT)
Everyone knows AI is bad….?? ?(kidding, my mum told me to write that)
Director VMZ Parametrics Ltd Semi-Retired
2 周Aleister- I applaud your efforts! Looking back over the historic initiatives from the late 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, the Jordan/ Lee Casey of the 90s and into the 2000s all the words of the day presented changes that were intended to improve procurement but, in my view, were not targeting the real problems so they failed. With our current wealth of data and analysis capabilities the human part of the process needs a change in qualification and broadening of the subject matter in a way that technical, economic and professional approaches fail to provide their must be an opportunity to enhance knowledge of bias, use of data analysis and acknowledgment of historic project pitfalls to balance the latest quick fix buzz words. Simple message from me is “expand education “
RIBA Client Adviser and architect
2 周Dear Aleister, Just to share, before the MPA/IPA was the OGC. From this helm came so much useful insight and knowledge sharing that has not been updated by subsequent authorities; indeed, the OGC set (available online) is in front of me now to assure this measured conclusion with reference to the IPA set to its side. Just like large businesses demand risk management, along with the signaling and marketing functions to project the least uncertain ownership for the transformation of other people's capital to new use, so too does HMG. The mandate will be very simple in the sense of purpose and knowledge from OGC to bear fruit, however, because this organisation was disbanded along with the people, (just like CABE), this work has not changed, neither has anyone else. My recommendation is a conference at University of Oxford with Cambridge and UCL for the purpose of a 4 side A4 document to provide the mandate, inc. why and how. I have the headlines sitting on my studio desk, and I am sure with aligned data from Crossrail (on the shoulders of 6 previous mega-projects in the SE England, and in the main, by the same people) will enable great correlation to substantiate the mandate in the UK state. Happy to chat...
I could not agree more about sharing project data (in flight would be ideal but on completion the next best thing). On completing Crossrail we had a huge amount of detailed cost and schedule data which could have been published. I thought to get it cleared for adding to the Learning Legacy but it was obvious no-one would let me do that. If it can’t be made public it certainly should be shared with NISTA and ideally other GMPP project teams.
Major Projects Association - improving the initiation and delivery of major project outcomes
2 周Aleister Hellier given the Government has set out some missions, which by intent are cross-cutting, it feels that portfolio management should be part of the mandate. Interested in your views on how we square off the approach of having a single point of accountability via SRO appointments, which is part of transactional decision making on business case approval, with a need to consider major projects as part of a wider connected portfolio.