Speaking at the THINK Cloud Vendors event in London earlier this week, CCS technology commercial director Sarah Hurrell said a rating system for suppliers on the framework was being investigated, but there were many potential barriers.
One concern is that one buyer may angrily give a provider a “0” rating and the company may then start litigation that the public sector cannot afford.
Hurrell said that the issue may be worked around by only allowing buyers to leave positive reviews, but other options are being reviewed because such a system is definitely “on the wish list.”
“I don’t think we will be doing it across the piece, I think it would be a procurement specific piece – maybe on the G-Cloud,” claimed Hurrell.
“I’m not expecting anything on G-Cloud 6, I don’t even know if it will be on G-Cloud 7. It is definitely on the wish list, but I don’t want to spend my life in court,” she added.
Despite this hurdle, Hurrell was still full of praise for the all things G-Cloud has already achieved.
“G-Cloud is brilliant, it is one of a number of ways to sell to government, it is the best way to sell cloud,” she claimed.
“If you are not selling cloud and just selling consultancy services, there are other ways as well, so just to be clear: this is the best way to sell cloud stuff to government and it’s making sure you get the right horse for the right course,” she added.
At the THINK Cloud Vendors event, Hurrell discussed the steps CSS is taking to improve public sector procurement in the future.
She claims that the government body is looking to reduce the number of frameworks down to around 7-10.
Examples of this include the Public Sector Telecommunication Services and Public Services Network frameworks which are being condensed into one singular Network Services Framework.
“We are now doing things very differently than we were doing things 12 months ago,” Hurrell claimed.
“I work very closely with the Government Digital Service (GDS) to make sure that all our technology procurements are much more agile, much shorter.
“We used to have these things called frameworks that went on for five years or so – we’re doing much less of that now,” she added, noting that contracts now last for two years and are much more flexible.