- The Wales Co-operative Centre is the largest co-operative development agency in the UK, established in 1982 to support and train co-operatives throughout Wales. - They advocate for co-operative consortia as a way for small organizations to pool resources, share costs and risks, and bid for larger contracts than any one organization could handle alone. - Two models for co-operative consortia are presented: a special purpose vehicle model and a lead body model. Both have pros and cons to consider regarding structure, control, and meeting the needs of commissioners.

2. Who We AreWho We Are
• Set-up in 1982.
• Now the largest co-operative development agency in UK.
• Support and train co-operatives and social enterprises
throughout Wales.
• Funded by:
Welsh Government, European Union, Local Authorities &
Consultancy fees.

5. Collaborative DriversCollaborative Drivers
• ‘All Wales’ contracts and frameworks
• Scale – capacity to deliver
• Skills set to deliver on large contracts
• Collaboration on the buy-side – efficiency
• New local supply chains – fill supplier voids
• Local benefits e.g. employment opportunities

6. Co-operative Consortia -Co-operative Consortia - TheThe
OpportunitiesOpportunities
• Ability to tender for large contracts
• Shared costs / pooling funding to buy services
• Shared resources – staff / premises
• Bulk purchasing
• Continuity and volume of supply
• Shared skills and knowledge
• Opportunities to share good practice and ideas
• Greater presence in the market place & access to
new markets
• Shared responsibilities and risks
• Inter-trading

7. The Consortia SpectrumThe Consortia Spectrum

8. The Consortia Development StagesThe Consortia Development Stages
Stage 1
Strategic Rationale
Stage 2
Identify Partners
Stage 3
Early Stage Planning – Joint Vision
Stage 4
Developing the Business Model
Stage 8
Review and Evaluation
Stage 5
Agree on the Structure of the Consortium
Stage 6
Legal Framework and Governance
Stage 7
Start Delivering

10. Self-Analysis - Your OrganisationSelf-Analysis - Your Organisation
• Strategy
- Is this clearly understood internally and externally?
- Is joint working part of your strategy already?
• Competency
- Do you know your strengths and weaknesses?
- Are you prepared to review these with potential partners?
- Where can partners add value?
• Culture
- Are you open, trusting and respectful of others?
- Do you know how to share – people, knowledge, costs etc..

11. Collaborative Working–Collaborative Working– When it goesWhen it goes
WrongWrong
• Collaboration is often better described as “putting
mutual loathing aside in order to get your hands on
the money”
Alex Scott-Samuel
• Partnership working involves “the undefinable in
pursuit of the unachievable”!
Powell and Dowling, 2006
• “Collaboration is like cottage cheese. It occasionally
smells bad and separates easily.”
Thompson and Perry, 1998

12. Early Success
• Caerphilly WHQS External Works
framework.
• Work has been offered in two
lots, one lot for works packages
below £750,000 and one lot for
works packages above £750,000.
• All works packages will be
tendered from the framework via
mini competition tender
processes from the relevant lots.
• Allied Construction Consortium – 4 members.
• The consortium will be legally constituted as part of the conditions of
tender/contract.

13. Special Purpose VehicleSpecial Purpose Vehicle
The Special Purpose Vehicle
The Membership
Usually the core consortia partners
Hold assets
The Board of Directors
Drawn from the
members
Employ Staff
Draw down
grant fundingBid for contracts

14. Special Purpose VehicleSpecial Purpose Vehicle
Pros Cons
Promotes more of an equal partnership
amongst the members.
Can be difficult to attract funding as no track
record of delivery at start-up phase.
Once established can be used over and over
again to deliver new initiatives, bid for
contracts.
Lack of understanding of the model by
commissioners.
The model can be flexible, so if agreed, not all
members need be involved in delivery, for
example.
Could create additional costs for the founding
members – need to balance this against the
proposed return.
Membership can be expanded if additional
skills / coverage is required.
As no one partner has direct control, this
could put off those who like operate in this
manner.
Can be established using a non-for profit legal
structure or can be more commercial.
Can be time consuming to establish, hence
can be obstructive if working to a tight
timescale.

15. Lead Body ModelLead Body Model
Lead Body
This organisation would draw down the required
start-up funding, lease any premises, employ staff.
Lead Body Board of Directors / Membership
The lead body is accountable to its own Board of Directors
and membership.
Steering Group
Made up of all delivery
partners
Delivery
Partners
Delivery
Partners

16. Lead Body ModelLead Body Model
Pros Cons
It is a model that public sector bodies are
used to working with and their procurement
processes and management systems are
geared up to work around this model.
The financial responsibilities fall with the lead
body, hence you need to identify an
organisation willing to take that risk.
Gives the commissioner a single point of
access for services to be delivered.
The sub-contracted members of the consortia
could feel disenfranchised as it is not an
equal partnership.
Can be pulled together relatively easily if
working within a tight timescale.
Small organisations still at a disadvantage, as
due to their size, they would never be in a
position to tender as lead body so would
always have to act as a sub-contractor body.
Smaller organisations can benefit from scale
of working with larger partners who can act
as lead body.

17. Boundaries for EngagementBoundaries for Engagement
• Purpose of the consortium
• Principles
• Decision making processes
• Administration
• Finance
• Dispute resolution
• Membership termination / changes
• IP
• Duration of agreement
• Confidentiality / data protection
• Trust

18. Sensitivities that Need to be ConsideredSensitivities that Need to be Considered
• Organisations simply don’t think about collaborating.
• Limited evidence of successful consortia.
• Perceived increased workload in creating a coherent and
comprehensive consortia bid.
• Concern about the resource implications for working in partnership.
• Imbalanced collaborative partnerships – potential inequality in bid
effort.
• Difference in the interpretation of collaboration between members.
• Loss of control – perception of giving part of the business to others.
• Lose or dilute identity.
• Lose client contact.

19. Contact DetailsContact Details
Rhian Edwards – Project Manager
Rhian.edwards@walescooperative.org
02920 556958 / 07867 788510
Prof. Paul Cantrill – Adviser
Paul.cantrill@walescooperative.org
02920 556159 / 07917 844856
Sarah Owens – Adviser
Sarah.owens@walescooperative.org
07760 885634