Size matters...

Or does it? Well it does in the opinion of the LSC. So what are you? Little, or Large. Or perhaps a boring Medium?

In a little reported 'initiative', the LSC has carved up suppliers into Small, Medium and Large categories. In fact the initiative is so unreported that we cannot find any national public reference to this. The initiative doesn't even have a catchy name, which is very un-LSC.

The LSC's categorisation is based on your fund take. So those of you with perhaps (we're guessing here) £1M+, you will be designated Large. We're not sure what the cut off is between Small and Medium. The categorisation is important as it dictates the level of service you will get from the LSC.

Most suppliers will have received standard letters from your 'new' Relationship Manager. The content of that letter infers your category. If your letter promises a meeting with your RM then you are Large or Medium. If the letter mysteriously omits any mention of the luxury of a visit then you are Small. Given that you probably haven't seen your RM for four years perhaps the latter might not be a huge blow.

In a similar way, the LSC has carved up its RMs into Small, Medium and Large. This has nothing to do with Body Mass Index presumably and simply means that some RMs will purely work with large firms etc.

Large firms are promised a monthly visit by the RM. The focus will be on "strategic and general contract discussions". And here lieth the flaw in the plan. The letter goes on to say that RMs will not be responsible for "reconciling accounts, setting Standard Monthly Payments, conducting audits or making procurement decisions". What does that leave? Will it be enough to sustain a monthly meeting without it becoming a mere talking shop?

Given the hardline, aggressive tone of recent missives from LSC Executives we question how genuine the LSC is in promoting an adult, positive dialogue with suppliers. This initiative appears to belong to a former age and is lacking in coherence.

Finally, our further understanding is that the architect of this initiative left the LSC last year. I wonder if he took the blueprint with him.....

Will it fly?

Historians will recall that the Relationship Manager role was part and parcel of the Preferred Supplier initiative which, like BVT, failed to fly.

So one could question the coherence of the scheme immediately. However, it is a de facto preferred supplier scheme in effect as larger firms will get a different service to small firms. It is the nature and utility of this service that is crucial. The omens are not good.

Firstly, as stated in the letter to firms, the RMs have had significant areas of responsibility taken away. That will mean that problems caused by other wings of the LSC such as a problematic audit or a flawed decision about your SMP do not fall within your RMs ambit. That could lead to frustration.

The only major area that we can see remaining is the KPI. We've said it before but the KPI are badly designed and fundamentally flawed in concept. Just because something can be measured does not mean it should be measured. So extensive conversations around KPI are going to lead to even more frustration.

As for the focus on "Strategic discussions" we remain sceptical. We're not sure if even Carolyn Regan knows what is going to happen with legal aid in 2010 let alone your RM. With MacGee reviews going on, the Treasury in slash-and-burn mode and the Ministry of Justice angling for annexation of the LSC, there is no way on earth that an RM will be able to provide you with the strategic steer you require.

back to news listings