Working with government, challenging public perceptions

Whatever mistrust the British electorate feels for politicians, it pales in comparison to the cynicism reserved for private organisations working with government. From schools to hospitals to railways, public services have seen private sector involvement in recent years. In almost every case, outrage has followed. It is clear that the British public still has deep reservations about private sector involvement in traditional public sectors.

These concerns are not without foundation. Private companies have a bottom line and their primary motive is to turn a profit. Certain PFI initiatives, the botched NHS IT upgrade and privatisation of the railways are all examples of private sector involvement in projects that encountered problems. But is public cynicism grounded in reality or the result of more irrational fears? And what communications challenges does this pose for private companies working with government?

This week it was reported that statisticians at the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) had signed off on controversial research developed by private procurement specialists Opera Solutions. The research claimed councils could save £10bn a year through improved procurement. Clearly, this is a significant piece of research with a bold central assertion; the sort of research that will raise eyebrows and receive criticism.

And surely enough, criticism arrived. In particular, questions were raised over the report’s methodology, which involved examining the spending of three local authorities on energy, mobile phones and legal services, determining savings that they could make through working together, and then extrapolating these findings for all local authorities. While Opera would no doubt stand by these findings, it is easy to see why others have been sceptical, particularly given the current government’s desire for councils to make cuts. It is an important and instructive tale for those engaging with government – sometimes your client’s wider political objectives and interpretation of your work may draw you into the firing line.

Opera Solution's recent problems point to other communications difficulties facing private companies working with government. If simply providing statistics can be seen to have a sinister motive behind it, what chance for those providing services that the electorate has an emotive response to, such as health and education? To further confuse matters, public responses to private sector involvement with government are not always predictable. Private companies such as YouGov regularly provide statistics for political parties; statistics that are generally accepted to be impartial by the electorate. Admittedly there are good reasons for this, including YouGov’s transparency of methodology and the trust it has accrued over some time. But public cynicism is somewhat inconsistent, and dependent on media.

So what are the communications principles for private companies working with government, both at a local and central level? Firstly, go in with your eyes open. Political agendas of all persuasions will mean that the likelihood of becoming part of the story is always a distinct possibility. Secondly, be transparent. Private companies found lurking in the shadows behind government will always raise concerns for some and questions for others. While it is not always desirable or appropriate to put yourself front and centre, you should never look to obfuscate your involvement. Thirdly, make sure your communications are consistent with those you are providing services for. Mixed messages are often the cause of increased public anxiety. Finally, and most importantly, be confident in the integrity of the services you provide. Private companies provide government with valuable services in numerous areas at many levels. We should not be afraid to champion the value that we bring to government and the wider public.

John Hood
Consultant
john@linstockcommunications.com