As they plan to buy new IT systems, agencies need to listen to their technology users

When they acquire new technology, cities and counties need to consider how their workers will be affected, says Ed Bouryng, president of Reston, Va.-based Meta, a business transformation and cloud delivery technology organization that serves the public sector, education and other parts of the economy.

Bouryng has worked in the technology and software solutions space for more than 20 years. Prior to founding his own technology consulting company, he managed financial products and technology implementation for the federal government.

“When purchasing technology, a local government should consider the degree to which employees will be affected or impacted by the new system or setup. Is this a straightforward technology-only project or is this an implementation that will affect staff directly? The procurement approach should account for this by being more flexible to meet the discovered needs of the people within the organization as the project progresses,” Bouryng tells Co-op Solutions.

Bouryng says technology purchases often go unnoticed by staff and personnel. He adds that this is typical for an ideal, low-risk purchase. “In this scenario, management, HR and IT teams can focus on the cost and benefits of the technology itself.”

He explains that “technology-enabled change projects” require preparations on a higher level. These kinds of projects can include IT retrofits and installs that can profoundly affect agency staffers and the operations they perform. “The tech-buying team for these kinds of projects should include managers who have had first-hand experience with a technology-enabled change project in the past and that have directly interacted with the people who were undergoing the change to their business process. Participants with real experience will be a difference-maker for this team. The more the technology will change the organization’s processes and impact its people, the more the tech-buying team should prioritize this perspective.”

Bouryng says that when agencies purchase technology that will affect the local government personnel, his company advises agencies that they make the staff the priority. “Personnel management roles, such as an HR or accounting manager, should be included in the organization’s tech-buying team to ensure inclusion of the employee-focused perspective. It is critical to ensure the tech onboarding actually fits the needs and duties of those who will be using it the most.”

Bouryng urges procurement teams and agency personnel to assess a technology buy from a slightly different perspective: “Rather than viewing the procurement as a technology project, the local government should treat it as a personnel-focused change project, enabled by technology.” He adds that the agency needs to prioritize staff needs and opinions first as it makes process and budget decisions regarding the purchase. Then and only then, says Bouryng, should the agency focus on the technology and the benefits that the technology can bring to them.

He believes the agency’s chief buyer should make sure that all the project decision makers buy-in to the above concept. “Local governments may be reluctant to take on a people-first approach—it is more expensive due to the added effort to involve more employees throughout the project and to adequately resource the project while meeting ongoing operational demands. This may strain tight taxpayer-funded budgets. However, city and county governments would offset risk and yield a higher return by investing in a people-first approach.”

Bouryng believes cooperative contracts can save time and streamline the process for governments when they buy technology products and services. “Cooperative contracts offer significant efficiencies in the contract process timeline—the vendor short list, contract terms, and unit price are already established. They are generally broadly scoped, potentially impacting the relevance of opportunities for vendors and contract terms to specific purchases.”

The Meta executive says efficiencies gained through cooperative contracts are higher for products, than for services. “Technology implementation service contracts will tend to be more complicated, with a need for flexibility and additional negotiations to arrive at an agreement that factors in the terms by which the vendor can provide the service. An example is the resource commitment being provided by the government—what the government must provide for the project to be successful.”

Bouryng outlines the best technology buy for government agencies in a perfect world: “The ideal procurement solution puts the decision-maker into a position that they have the flexibility to make the decisions and to allocate their budget to support their people, aligned with a people-first approach, throughout the technology project.”

OMNIA Partners offers a robust portfolio of cooperative contracts in the public procurement space. The firm lists numerous cooperative contracts under the keyword “technology“

Michael Keating is senior editor for American City & County. Contact him at [email protected].