pathway 1 continuous improvement - tpximpact/f4-fsa-field-ops-discoveries-overview GitHub Wiki

1. A single coherent strategic change programme for Field Ops
2. Improved decision making and governance
3. Better evidence for business cases and the means to assess impact

1. Map inspection processes and outcomes
2. Define metrics for operational outcomes
3. Embed domain alignment into change process
4. Standardise operational planning model
5. Roll out activity logging

This pathway aligns with the following Ops Transformation Seven Elements of the future delivery model.

• Modernised management
• Robust assurance regime
• Transparent compliance
• In-house capability and capacity

This is a foundational step that underpins all other recommendations. The intention is to make visible and build shared understanding around the commonalities that modern regulatory operations are to be built around.

The starting point is to define what outcomes the key operational processes are expected to deliver for stakeholders, and to map how these processes should be carried out. The mapping exercise will surface user needs and functional requirements that will drive technology requirements.

Without commonly grounded inspection processes and well understood user needs, the FSA risks further proliferation of disparate tools, as well as building solutions for single inspection domains, reducing the value and return on technology investment. This diminishes the opportunity to re-use products and there is a greater risk of shoe-horning products that are not fit-for-purpose into operations, exacerbating friction for a user base that is already digitally unconfident.

Related: This recommendation links across the recommendations programme, but has direct relevance to both defining metrics for operational outcomes and activity logging.

• Build a common approach to how inspections are done.
• Build consensus around commonalities and variations across inspections team
• Enable common tools.

• Map processes and outcomes for the common inspection service activities
  • Carry this out as a group exercise to build consensus across inspectorate domains
    • Facilitate the process by service design
  • Start by defining the process outcomes
    • align these to the inspections value proposition
    • keep checking back that the process being developed delivers the outcome
  • Prioritise key activities that deliver service value
  • Move on to integrate remaining lifecycle activities
  • Refer to the existing blueprints and workflows as needed
  • Keep it platform neutral
    • avoid solutionising in favour of mapping the core and variation processes
• Review unavoidable variations for each domain as a group
• Define common data elements and flow
• Define key process charging and measurement points
• Use mapping to inform subsequent
  • continuous improvement priorities and impacts
  • system functionality requirements

• suite of business processes, aligned to service maps and future user journeys

• Measure and demonstrate end-to-end outcomes over silo performance

• Review business model and organisational value proposition
  • Agree the value proposition for the principal customer segment
• Define key indicators that demonstrate value delivery
  • Consider indicators that are materially significant to FBOs (who receive value)
  • Liaise with FBOs about the indicators
• Review operational and governance reporting for outcome focus
  • A lot of energy is spent producing the current operational reports
  • Consider whether the existing reports help Field Ops focus on these outcomes
• Identify gaps in data collection or processing
  • Are you collecting the right data to report on outcome success
  • Align outcome measurement requirements to core processes
• Provision standard governance and operational reporting suite
  • Don’t just add more reports, but remove obsolete reports
  • This will keep clear operational focus on shared, priority outcomes

• streamlined and focused operational reporting suite, aligned to delivery and improvement outcomes

• Ensure development portfolio is focused on consistent and common goals across inspections domains

• Review relevance of Ops Transformation elements for Dairy and Wine
• Incorporate alignment scorecard into Continuous Improvement and ITMB business case and assessment criteria
• Use scorecard to identify priorities for tactical interventions
• Use scorecard to highlight and share good practice across practice
• Embed best practice into tool design and selection

• streamlined application process with clear roadmap and benefits criteria for improvement priorities

• Develop a consistent allocation approach for more flexible and shared workforce management

• Identify and compare key decision factors for resource allocation across domains0
• Model people, frequency and business type factors against risk / segmentation factors
• Consolidate and centralise single shared view of workforce
• Define how utilisation is measured within and across Field Ops
• Use learning from modelling to surface requirements for workforce management tool

• consolidated resource allocation view
• utilisation metrics aligned to service delivery partner

There is no current visibility of how much effort is being spent on different activities. This makes it impossible to make informed decisions about where operational bottlenecks and opportunities really are. The activity logging that is done is incomplete - giving a partial view of utilisation in only some areas of official controls.

This recommendation marks a shift from tracking simply for charging to tracking for improvement.

The context for this is explicitly not micro-management or keeping a watchful eye on staff but to identifying areas to improve business planning and utilisation:

• Focus on high-level activities
• Establish baseline activity profile first
• Drill down into activity detail as needed in the future

With better visibility and insight into how activity and utilisation, Field Ops can focus on streamlining operations to maximise high risk or effortful value-add activities. The proceedings of activity logging can also support segmentation initiatives.

Related: This recommendation builds on inspection process and outcome mapping, and is a mitigation for changes to timesheeting that may fall out of future charging model review.

• Understand where and how effort is spent to improve business planning and delivery of the FSA’s value proposition
• Ensure continuity of data in absence of tracking chargeable time

• Verify key operational activities model
  • Agree that these are the common activities that matter
• Map existing charging codes to high level activities
  • Infer activity by charging code where possible, to avoid double entry
• Extend and deploy timesheeting app to incorporate high-level activities across inspection domains
  • Reuse what is already in place
    • this should be mostly configuration of user permissions and activity codes
  • Avoid over-engineering a bespoke solution in favour of
    • using familiar tools that don’t create unnecessary additional work for users
    • speed of delivery - get baseline insights early and iterate from there
• Build activity reporting across domains
  • Priority is domain comparison at national level
  • Use by-cluster view to spot outliers or where the national / domain view may be skewed
• Use reporting to identify operational and delivery opportunities
  • Context is business planning and utilisation
  • Focus on value-add activities
  • Consider how this supports segmentation

• organisational activity profiling