|
1 |
The LEP is a vehicle which should be designed to deliver outcomes; it is not a mechanical
process. The majority of activity is post financial close; some Authorities think
it is all over at financial close when in fact it is just the beginning. |
|
2 |
The process is complex and the governance issues should not be underestimated. Independent
chairs are perceived in a positive way. |
|
3 |
There is evidence that people can see the benefits of the LEP, and there is a general
commitment to make it work. The capacity issue is critical - you need to have the
right people. Traditional contractual stances are outmoded and do not work in the
post-LEP world. |
|
4 |
Co-location of the LEP and Authority teams is viewed positively and thought needs
to be given to creating a good team spirit. Don’t look for the perfect LEP but pick
up tips from others as to what works best. |
|
5 |
The Authority needs to carefully consider what resources will be made available
both on the Board, and supporting the Board. The LEP members need to be imbued with
the spirit of “What is in the best interests of the LEP?”. Look at the size of the
Board - 20 is far too many. About 7 is a better number. The LEP needs to have a
cultural affinity with both organizations however this is not easy to achieve. The
officer team is typically likely to comprise about 7 posts: general manager, commercial
manager, new projects director, construction manager, project co-ordinator, commissioning
manager, admin support posts etc. Need to consider whether the LEP personnel should
be employees or secondees. |
|
6 |
The Authority needs to consider in advance the risk of insolvency if the deal flow
is not there. The timing has to work for the LEP. |
|
7 |
The LEP must develop a role as a mediator, and not be a forum for confrontation! |
|
8 |
Linking LEP objectives to Authority objectives - many saw the LEP’s objectives as
needing to closely align with the Authority’s. The Authority needs to understand
what it wants from the LEP. A number of LEPs have been hampered by too limited restrictions
in the original OJEU process. The Authority’s aspirations have grown over time but
there have been limitations due to procurement rules. |
|
9 |
Setting up shadow roles and responsibilities during the final stage of the procurement
and making sure that the right individual is identified early on who will represent
the Authority on the LEP Board. That individual must not have any conflicts of interest.
Do not underestimate how long it takes to get the shadow Board up and running. |
|
10 |
There is no one model - it has to be right for the Authority and its PSP partner.
It will not be successful just by following a process and adopting the standard
documents. LEPs have found they have had to make it work later and were disappointed
by the limited size of their ambitions at the outset. |