Trade in option marketplace appraisal toolkit
This stage can commence once the function of the library service has been clearly defined. These themes are mapped to specific criteria against which each option is evaluated. This leads to a final recommendation about the preferred delivery model which can then be taken forward to the business case.
An options appraisal provides the opportunity to help councils and library services make an trade in option marketplace appraisal toolkit and evidence based decision on how to deliver library services.
It does this by considering the relative advantages and disadvantages of a number of different delivery model options including the current way in which the service is delivered. The methodology helps you to consider the relative desirability, viability and feasibility of the different options, and to answer the following questions:. While the options appraisal is important in helping to identify a preferred option, you will not necessarily be able to resolve all of the questions by the end of this stage — this is to be expected.
The process of undertaking the options appraisal consists of several important activities. If there are significant time constraints, it is possible for some of these activities to take place in parallel, allowing the process to be completed within a shorter time frame. To undertake the appraisal, it is necessary to conduct some analysis of the market within which the delivery model will operate, and to explore other relevant areas.
Development of a set of criteria, allowing each option to be consistently tested, is most effective when a range of stakeholders are involved. It is not just the criteria themselves that need to be developed, but also an understanding of how important each one is this is often referred to as the relative weighting and the definition of good and bad for each option often known as the scoring mechanism.
These are the most important criteria which can be used to quickly identify any options that are unsuitable. Typically 2 to 4 criteria from the full list might be identified as gateway criteria. Applying the gateway criteria to the long-list of options allows you to identify a shortlist of options which can be taken forward and developed in more detail.
This means you can target your efforts at the most appropriate options. Each of the shortlisted options should be developed in more trade in option marketplace appraisal toolkit. This will enable you to consider each option in greater depth. Each of the shortlisted options will then be scored against each of the criteria. You should identify a team representing different perspectives to undertake the scoring, or involve external advisors, to ensure that the assessment is as objective as possible.
Record comments and points of discussion during the scoring exercise. At the end of the options appraisal you will have an overall score for each option. This should be interpreted carefully to identify the preferred option and a rationale prepared which explains why this is the preferred option. We also involved an individual from another service area, to provide an alternative perspective. The process was facilitated as a discussion by the project manager and each person contributed their comments and scoring against a number of criteria.
The recommendation of the options appraisal panel was approved by the Project Board including stakeholders from across the council and ultimately signed off by the portfolio holder.
Typical delivery model options that might be considered for library services are listed below, trade in option marketplace appraisal toolkit outlined in greater detail in Alternative delivery models. The delivery model options are:. When identifying a long-list of options for delivery of library services, the following aspects should be taken into account:.
The internal rationale for changing the method of service delivery. This could include factors such as the:. The rationale for delivering the services outside of the council, and whether this lends itself to any particular models. Library services are increasingly being delivered in new ways and you should consider examples of innovative models being used elsewhere when developing your long-list of options. The range of options identified are likely to sit along a spectrum of ownership and control which, at one end, will be entirely with the council for example an in-house serviceand at the other end, entirely outside of it such as an outsourced service.
This helps you to keep the options appraisal process robust and objective. You will need to make sure the options appraisal is based on realistic assumptions. Some initial research should be carried out to understand the market context in which the delivery model will operate. The findings from the needs analysis should also be considered at this stage.
Using assessment criteria for the options appraisal provides you with a consistent framework to analyse each delivery model option. Trade in option marketplace appraisal toolkit outlined in section 1, you should use 3 main themes for investigation - desirability, viability and feasibility. These 3 themes mean you can develop an options appraisal scoring framework where each area is equally important, even if the number of criteria identified for each is different.
For example, it may only be possible to identify 3 criteria to test feasibility, but there may be 10 criteria to test desirability. Stakeholders may, however, feel that one theme is more important than the others. The process allows you to allocate a greater weighting to one theme. The development of assessment criteria is often done in a workshop format. This provides an opportunity to engage important stakeholders in the assessment process.
Collective thinking and discussion of the 3 themes is likely to bring to the surface any underlying concerns, motivations, or questions that stakeholders have. Some examples of areas that you may wish to cover via the assessment criteria are trade in option marketplace appraisal toolkit on the assessment criteria template. Specific attention needs to be paid to whether the council is in a position to delegate delivery responsibility for statutory services.
In the case of library services, councils are able to delegate their statutory functions. After you have identified your initial set of assessment criteria, it is important to define these further through 2 further steps:.
A weighting representing the relative importance should be assigned to each criterion. A definition to determine a high and low score for each criterion should be created. This is most easily done by envisaging the scenarios that would warrant either an extremely high trade in option marketplace appraisal toolkit extremely low score. After you have developed the full set of assessment criteria, it is usually relatively easy to identify a small subset of gateway criteria.
These are make or break criteria — should an option not meet most or all of the criteria, the option drops out of the appraisal process. Gateway criteria are applied at an early stage of the options appraisal to refine the list of delivery model options that progress to the main body of the appraisal.
The example provided above would be considered a gateway criterion, as it has been allocated the highest possible weighting of 10 points. Having identified gateway criteria, these can be used to rapidly identify a shortlist of options. This step involves assessing each option against the gateway criteria to determine whether they should progress to the long-list or be discounted at an early stage.
This process requires you to assess whether each long-listed option passes or fails each gateway criterion. Having determined the outcome for trade in option marketplace appraisal toolkit options in the long-list, this will lead to the development of a shortlist of options that are worth further consideration. Having clearly identified a number trade in option marketplace appraisal toolkit shortlisted options that meet the gateway criteria, the next step is to develop propositions for each of these options.
You will need to consider a number of important areas. The main characteristics of each option should be outlined, including:. A high-level financial model should be developed, informed by the proposed function of the library service and market analysis information.
You will have already collected some of this during trade in option marketplace appraisal toolkit case for change stage 2 and case for externalisation stage 3. A high-level consideration of the important technical features for each model should be undertaken. After you have developed a proposition for each option, the next step is to objectively score each option. This can be done in a number of ways. A collaborative process, such as a workshop, which draws on input from a number of stakeholders, is likely to build the greatest level of trade in option marketplace appraisal toolkit and promote further buy-in to any potential recommendations.
Each option must be scored against each criterion. This should be done with the previously agreed scoring definitions available for reference. Sometimes the most logical way to structure the scoring is to assess each model against a particular criterion in one go. This can help to make sure that you are applying a degree of objectivity and consistency when looking through a number of models and criteria in a single exercise. If this process is being undertaken with multiple stakeholders, it may be preferable to ask all stakeholders to individually consider a particular criterion or model, and then to discuss the results as a group before coming to a final consensus on the appropriate score.
Once the scoring is complete, the results should be entered into a spreadsheet which uses trade in option marketplace appraisal toolkit pre-agreed weightings along with the scores to calculate a percentage score for each option. For further information, please refer to the options scoring template this will download.
At this stage, you should have a percentage score for each model. This score can be understood as representing the degree to which each model satisfies the criteria you have chosen. It follows that, at a first glance, the model with the highest score represents the strongest fit with the criteria.
At this stage, it is important not to accept the score that has been generated without asking some trade in option marketplace appraisal toolkit questions. In particular, where a number of options may have scored particularly close to each other, further consideration is warranted. In this instance, differences in scoring between the models should be closely examined to ascertain the precise reason.
It may become obvious, for example, that one option has scored well against desirability but negatively against feasibility, with another option reversing these scores. This should then be explored further before deciding on a preferred option. Should 2 or more options still be scored very closely together, we recommend including both of them within the business case process.
This will allow you to further analyse both options, before one of them is identified as the preferred option. The options appraisal drove the decision-making about our form. The appraisal identified a PSM as our preferred option.
Taking this and our function into account, it was trade in option marketplace appraisal toolkit to all that a community owned cooperative was the best option for us, as we wanted a voice for the community in decision making and freedom from excessive bureaucracy. The [next section] https: