InterQuest 2011 – Part I; Need for Benchmarking at Federal Government In-plants
The sixth annual InterQuest conference targeting government and higher education in-plant printers was held November 30 at the Omni Shoreham in Washington DC with less than 100 in attendance. Digital printing, electronic workflows, and in-plant case studies of successful technology and management transitions often involving newly hired, experienced private sector employees were the reenforced themes of the forum.
Keynote speaker William Boarman, newly appointed Public Printer and CEO of the US Government Printing Office, emphasized the new role of the GPO as the “(federal) government digital application platform.” While printing is a vital part of GPO’s mission, their evolving expertise and skills involves facilitating digital applications and services to enhance access to public information for the benefit of government users and all citizens.
In his brief 11 months in office, which will end January 1, 2012 if the Republicans don’t approve this Obama appointment, Boarman cited a number of GPO accomplishments. One of which involved an emphasis upon receiving payments from overdue chargebacks. In the private sector vernaculor this means chasing accounts receivable to get paid for services rendered. While cash flow is not really an issue for any in-plant, the internal transfer of debits and credits is still essential.
Conversation with one attendee on this delayed chargeback issue was enlightening. He was a new federal government employee of only a couple of years with decades of experience in the private sector printing industry in both production and procurement. As a newbe, one of his first assignments was getting old GPO chargebacks approved for payment by his Agency. Some bills were literally seven years old. Apparently most of his fellow agency colleagues were aware that if the buying agency does not object to a printed piece within 90 days of delivery, there is no recourse against the printer.
Acceptability of the printed piece rarely seemed to be the issue. The often unspoken concern was that delay of payment was among the few recourses available to clients who are unhappy with GPO’s customer service. While Mr. Boarman mentioned numerous examples of satisfied federal clients in his address, it seems the underlying current included the opposite sentiment as well. This is no game. It must be corrected.
Where can the large and unique GPO go to get candid, constructive critique on any of its systems, procedures, or processes such as customer service? Printers of all sizes in the private sector turn to benchmarking their peers and specifically often the recognized leaders performing nearly identical processes.
