Getting Tough to Tackle Boom and Bust
CYCLICALITY is an ugly word, just as it has now been proven to be an ugly side-effect of water industry regulation. It is now widely accepted that the investment peaks and troughs of the five-year AMP cycle have cost up to 40,000 jobs, seen skills lost to the industry and stifled innovation.
In his exclusive interview for WWT’s sister publication WET News, chair of the Cyclicality Working Group, Richard Coakley, set out the progress made in tackling the problem. Key measures include a promise of capital spending brought forward from AMP6 into a transition period and the potential for a website to share information about forthcoming projects with the supply chain.
Of course, it’s hugely encouraging that this group has been getting to work. We must now make sure that it has sufficient ‘teeth’ to make change happen. That starts by considering everyone from the top to the bottom of the supply chain. It’s not just about water companies and Tier 1 contractors and consultants. Equipment manufacturers may be at the ‘bottom’ of the chain, but often can be the wellspring of new ideas and technologies.
“We like established innovation” was how one wry water company executive described the situation to me recently. If we don’t take tough measures to ensure that equipment manufacturers are part of a truly transparent supply chain, then the water industry may continue to unwittingly bite the hand that feeds it.
Funding or procurement cycle?
In fact, cyclicality itself is not the issue: every business has funding cycles. The problem is that the water industry cycle has been interpreted as a cycle for procurement, which is a different matter. Unfortunately it is still in the contractor’s interest to leverage the cycle to push down on equipment suppliers. Whilst Tier One partnerships with water companies are well established, the reality at the other end of the supply chain is that lowest price may still triumph over best value. Meanwhile, framework agreements are locking in three, five or even seven year commitments to equipment solutions that discourage new entrants and ideas.
We are now in the AMP5 trough and, as yet, there has been little encouragement filtering through to equipment suppliers in the form of brought-forward projects from AMP6.
I hope the Cyclicality group have the courage to explore forward-thinking procurement practices with equipment suppliers that could help to support Totex and through-life costing and thereby save costs for the consumer.
- Business Stream launches water efficiency pledge Edinburgh-based water retailer Business Stream has announced ambitious plans to help its customers reduce their water... Read More >
- Water companies should ‘go beyond the catalogue' with supply chain Water companies should be more willing to work with the supply chain on bespoke solutions rather than opting for... Read More >
- Nationalisation report a reminder of consequences - Water UK Water UK has said a new report on the impact of nationalisation on household savings and pensions is "a useful reminder to... Read More >
- Turning Totex from Theory to Practice 7/15/2015 2:26:03 PM Totex is a neat term, and an even neater theory: Invest pro-actively in the lifecycle of a process, rather than just...
- How Committed Are We to Water Quality? 7/15/2015 1:04:49 PM 2015 is the year when that European environmental juggernaut, the Water Framework Directive, was supposed to achieve 'good'...
- Grit - Are you seeing the Full Story? 4/30/2015 1:11:12 PM When it comes to grit, do you know what you are missing? That's the question currently being posed to operators about the...
- Innovation needs open minds and open doors 4/30/2015 12:55:48 PM "It is new so it can't be part of a framework." This was the baffling response of one UK water company executive, when...
- The Water Challenge That Waits for No Man 11/4/2014 12:19:00 PM What is the biggest challenge facing the UK water industry? Competition? Regulatory reform? Boom and bust in the supply...