NDL

Ian Laughton, Director of Nomad

In the first of a series of interviews with key people in the mobile and flexible working industry, we talk to Ian Laughton, Director of Nomad, which acts as a centre of excellence for mobile and flexible working in local authorities.

His experiences show that there are some great projects going on, but that there are still several barriers to be overcome before local authorities take full advantage of the opportunities available.

1. How has the uptake of mobile and flexible working in local authorities matched the aspirations of Nomad?
It’s been mixed. I think it’s matched Nomad’s aspirations in terms of ingenuity and vision, with lots of pilots trialling new mobile services and exploring innovative ways of delivering services. But where progress hasn’t been as good as we’d hoped is in moving from these pilots to wide-scale enterprise solutions. I believe the reasons for this are two fold: firstly, because of the newness of the technology and therefore the problems of adoption; and secondly, but perhaps more importantly, because it requires such huge cultural shifts across these large organisations to change the way people work and that takes time and resources – much more than we predicted.

2. Have the predicted benefits of mobile working matched the outcomes experienced by local authorities?
I believe they have – and at Nomad we’ve well-documented case studies and evaluations of projects which clearly show the benefits which have resulted from mobile and flexible working. This is particularly in the areas of:

Service delivery to customers: for example, in areas such as benefits and social care, where customers can see the advantages of transactions taking place on the spot in real time, rather than waiting weeks and weeks for them to be processed back at the office. Internal efficiencies: flexible working suits modern lifestyles, and it reduces sickness and absence. People can work in the way they want and get through a lot more – they get so much more done if they’re not always in the office, with all the interruptions. We’ve got figures to prove this: for example, in one benefits service, staff are achieving 50 per cent more because of flexible mobile working.

3. What have been the most successful service areas for implementing mobile working?
We’ve seen that it’s where there are high volumes of transactions which follow standard processes. One good example is benefits: although there are many possible claims, each one is a well-structured process. Another is building repairs services: this one is a no brainer! The benefits of mobile-enabling the workforce and then sending them directions to their next site and job while they are out and about are obvious.

Some areas are much trickier: for example parts of social care, which involves high volumes of complex processes. Translating these on to a mobile device and preserving good professional practice is difficult and it probably means more re-thinking how that service is delivered. Another is Children’s Services: this involves multi agencies from multi locations, and to achieve mobile working would need structural and service changes.

4. Why do some projects fail? I think it often comes down to leadership and senior people taking ownership of the programme. You’ve got to have a very real commitment from senior management right up to Chief Executive level. Mobile and flexible working means re-engineering the way people work and consequently it needs huge cultural change: owners therefore have to push hard against those in the organisation who’ll inevitably say it won’t work. The leadership of this process needs to be by example - tangible and demonstrable. It is difficult to win a major flexible working project if your Chief Executive and Directors still hide in cellular offices.

5. What have been the most common barriers to implementing mobile working?
Firstly, getting the leadership in place and the programme outlined in detail before you start - including the resource investments needed.. Secondly, putting in place effective communications with staff and involving them from the beginning. Thirdly, creating a technical partnership with the developers or suppliers which really understands your vision. And fourthly, creating a successful interface between the mobile environment and the existing in-house application.

6. How are these being overcome?
Apart from getting the right leadership, what really helps is sharing experiences - and at Nomad we do get lots of interest when we have solid evidence of successes through case studies. People like to talk with those who have already gone through the change. At Nomad, our advice service enables individual councils to learn from successful examples so they can then move more easily to enterprise-wide programmes.

7. How well are suppliers matching their offerings to local authority requirements?
They’re getting there. Suppliers are far more aware now of the need to produce applications which deliver the right data and the right functions, and then enable the end user to manipulate that data. But they still need to show more flexibility, particularly around end-user licensing and opening up their platforms: we still hear reports of the difficulties of making a successful business case for deploying mobile working on multiple numbers of devices because of prohibitively-expensive licences or interface developments.

Nomad’s aim is to analyse, demonstrate, evaluate and share the potential benefits and savings which can be made by introducing mobile and flexible working technology solutions into local authorities and the public sector. For more details, visit www.projectnomad.org.uk