19 November 2009
by Vivienne Russell
Adrian Ringrose’s meteoric rise has culminated in his appointment as chair of the CBI public services board. He tells Vivienne Russell that the private sector is compatible with public ideals
One of the most striking things about 42-year-old Adrian Ringrose, the new chair of the CBI’s public services strategy board, is his relative youth. In 2003, he became chief executive of construction and facilities management group Interserve at the age of just 36.
At the time, it was said he was the youngest chief executive of any FTSE 100 company (although he never verified the fact). ‘It was quite daunting going into a job aged 36 when most people last about five years,’ he jokes.
‘Looking back on it I don’t think age has a great deal to do with it. If you have the right people around you and you get the balance right between listening to people who’ve got a bit more experience and knowing when to make your own mind up and do something – that’s more a state of mind than anything to do with how much rust you’ve got on you.’
As if his lightning-quick climb up the corporate ladder wasn’t enough, Ringrose assumed an extra dimension of responsibility in July this year when he took the role at the CBI, following in the footsteps of Serco’s Kevin Beeston and Capita’s Rod Aldridge. The board has a formidable array of public service industry leaders, but its mission, says Ringrose, is about more than simply furthering private sector interests.
The CBI itself has high hopes for Ringrose. Susan Anderson, the director of public services & skills, says: ‘Adrian’s commitment to delivering high quality value-for-money public services is second to none. He is a firm believer in the power of choice and competition to drive better outcomes. His insight and experience are going to be essential if we are going re-engineer public services to reduce costs, while maintaining the quality of services.’
What the CBI wants is an acceleration in the use of the market in public services. Ringrose, sitting in his surprisingly low-key office at Interserve’s London headquarters in Waterloo, explains: ‘We’re not just promoting the cause of the outsourcers, we’re not just promoting the cause of the private sector, we’re saying that the most effective way of improving quality and managing cost is to introduce choice. It’s about markets, not about which providers within a market should win out.’
He acknowledges that there is some good practice in the public sector, but sees its expertise more in the realm of policy development and commissioning, not delivery. ‘It’s in implementation where the introduction of choice and competition would have the greatest effect,’ he explains.
‘Monopolies tend to be slow to innovate and fairly unresponsive because they don’t have to be. There isn’t an alternative for the customer, therefore that natural imperative to improve and to question what is adding value and is what is being offered any good. Is it what the customer wants to buy and is it any good?’
The CBI’s message isn’t ‘private sector good, public sector bad’, Ringrose insists – it’s that choice is good and lack of choice is bad. Public, private and third sector providers should all be in the competition mix.
He does, however, admit that the hearts and minds of some of those in the public sphere do need to be won, but even here he’s optimistic. A major step forward, in Ringrose’s view, has been the acknowledgement by all major political parties that public service provision needs to be reformed. ‘I wouldn’t claim a philosophical victory here. That [recognition of the need to change] has come out of necessity and a realisation that we are in a very different and difficult situation in terms of public finances.
‘I reject the idea that introducing a set of business drivers into a situation is going to take away the very virtuous and good qualities of public service. It’s very insulting to the 20,000 people that my company employs who work in public service to say that because they work for a business that wants to make a profit it means they don’t care any more about the service they’re delivering.’
Ringrose has an impressive track record. A graduate of Liverpool University (he read political theory and institutions), he began his career in the power industry with London Electricity where he worked for nine years. He left in 1997 to join a privately owned facilities management company – the Building & Property Group – running their business development and bidding for new contracts. When the Building & Property Group was acquired by Interserve in 2000 he was appointed business dev-elopment director for facilities management, and then managing director before being appointed to the top job.
Interserve has had a threefold expansion in earnings and a greater international profile since he became chief executive in 2003. The group he took over had 90% of its business concentrated in the UK; today, just 45% of its earnings come from the UK. The firm has activities in 18 countries, employing about 50,000 people.
Interserve is involved in almost 30 Private Finance Initiative deals in schools, hospitals, prisons and defence accommodation. It’s ‘worked very well’, he says, and proved to be ‘pretty efficient’ in producing infrastructure improvement and, at times, better service costs.
He cites one of Interserve’s earliest PFI deals, Cumberland Royal Infirmary in Carlisle. The hospital is ten years old but ‘looks like it’s brand new now because it’s properly maintained and run, from a non-clinical point of view. If you look at the traditionally managed public sector estate you can’t always say that’s the case. Budgets get raided, things are allowed to decline a little bit more than they should and a problem brews.’
But is it value for money? Ringrose says so. ‘Nobody is getting rich out of these things unduly. People are making a commercial return for delivering a quality service that’s measurable and, I think, demonstrably better than that which preceded it.’
What’s more, despite its problems, it’s here to stay. ‘It may change its name, it may evolve its features over time, but fundamentally it’s an efficient way of getting capital projects delivered… In the context of a potentially constrained suite of capital budgets, I can imagine the PFI increasing its market share.’
Ringrose admits to being a ‘bit skittish’ about what interests him outside the office. ‘I like lots of different things, but don’t invest a huge amount of time in any one of them. I’ve got a wife and three young children to get the leftovers, if you like, of the working week.
‘But I think some sort of home-life balance is critical. It’s not just this,’ he gestures round his office, ‘that defines who you are.’
by Vivienne Russell
Adrian Ringrose’s meteoric rise has culminated in his appointment as chair of the CBI public services board. He tells Vivienne Russell that the private sector is compatible with public ideals
One of the most striking things about 42-year-old Adrian Ringrose, the new chair of the CBI’s public services strategy board, is his relative youth. In 2003, he became chief executive of construction and facilities management group Interserve at the age of just 36.
At the time, it was said he was the youngest chief executive of any FTSE 100 company (although he never verified the fact). ‘It was quite daunting going into a job aged 36 when most people last about five years,’ he jokes.
‘Looking back on it I don’t think age has a great deal to do with it. If you have the right people around you and you get the balance right between listening to people who’ve got a bit more experience and knowing when to make your own mind up and do something – that’s more a state of mind than anything to do with how much rust you’ve got on you.’
As if his lightning-quick climb up the corporate ladder wasn’t enough, Ringrose assumed an extra dimension of responsibility in July this year when he took the role at the CBI, following in the footsteps of Serco’s Kevin Beeston and Capita’s Rod Aldridge. The board has a formidable array of public service industry leaders, but its mission, says Ringrose, is about more than simply furthering private sector interests.
The CBI itself has high hopes for Ringrose. Susan Anderson, the director of public services & skills, says: ‘Adrian’s commitment to delivering high quality value-for-money public services is second to none. He is a firm believer in the power of choice and competition to drive better outcomes. His insight and experience are going to be essential if we are going re-engineer public services to reduce costs, while maintaining the quality of services.’
What the CBI wants is an acceleration in the use of the market in public services. Ringrose, sitting in his surprisingly low-key office at Interserve’s London headquarters in Waterloo, explains: ‘We’re not just promoting the cause of the outsourcers, we’re not just promoting the cause of the private sector, we’re saying that the most effective way of improving quality and managing cost is to introduce choice. It’s about markets, not about which providers within a market should win out.’
He acknowledges that there is some good practice in the public sector, but sees its expertise more in the realm of policy development and commissioning, not delivery. ‘It’s in implementation where the introduction of choice and competition would have the greatest effect,’ he explains.
‘Monopolies tend to be slow to innovate and fairly unresponsive because they don’t have to be. There isn’t an alternative for the customer, therefore that natural imperative to improve and to question what is adding value and is what is being offered any good. Is it what the customer wants to buy and is it any good?’
The CBI’s message isn’t ‘private sector good, public sector bad’, Ringrose insists – it’s that choice is good and lack of choice is bad. Public, private and third sector providers should all be in the competition mix.
He does, however, admit that the hearts and minds of some of those in the public sphere do need to be won, but even here he’s optimistic. A major step forward, in Ringrose’s view, has been the acknowledgement by all major political parties that public service provision needs to be reformed. ‘I wouldn’t claim a philosophical victory here. That [recognition of the need to change] has come out of necessity and a realisation that we are in a very different and difficult situation in terms of public finances.
‘I reject the idea that introducing a set of business drivers into a situation is going to take away the very virtuous and good qualities of public service. It’s very insulting to the 20,000 people that my company employs who work in public service to say that because they work for a business that wants to make a profit it means they don’t care any more about the service they’re delivering.’
Ringrose has an impressive track record. A graduate of Liverpool University (he read political theory and institutions), he began his career in the power industry with London Electricity where he worked for nine years. He left in 1997 to join a privately owned facilities management company – the Building & Property Group – running their business development and bidding for new contracts. When the Building & Property Group was acquired by Interserve in 2000 he was appointed business dev-elopment director for facilities management, and then managing director before being appointed to the top job.
Interserve has had a threefold expansion in earnings and a greater international profile since he became chief executive in 2003. The group he took over had 90% of its business concentrated in the UK; today, just 45% of its earnings come from the UK. The firm has activities in 18 countries, employing about 50,000 people.
Interserve is involved in almost 30 Private Finance Initiative deals in schools, hospitals, prisons and defence accommodation. It’s ‘worked very well’, he says, and proved to be ‘pretty efficient’ in producing infrastructure improvement and, at times, better service costs.
He cites one of Interserve’s earliest PFI deals, Cumberland Royal Infirmary in Carlisle. The hospital is ten years old but ‘looks like it’s brand new now because it’s properly maintained and run, from a non-clinical point of view. If you look at the traditionally managed public sector estate you can’t always say that’s the case. Budgets get raided, things are allowed to decline a little bit more than they should and a problem brews.’
But is it value for money? Ringrose says so. ‘Nobody is getting rich out of these things unduly. People are making a commercial return for delivering a quality service that’s measurable and, I think, demonstrably better than that which preceded it.’
What’s more, despite its problems, it’s here to stay. ‘It may change its name, it may evolve its features over time, but fundamentally it’s an efficient way of getting capital projects delivered… In the context of a potentially constrained suite of capital budgets, I can imagine the PFI increasing its market share.’
Ringrose admits to being a ‘bit skittish’ about what interests him outside the office. ‘I like lots of different things, but don’t invest a huge amount of time in any one of them. I’ve got a wife and three young children to get the leftovers, if you like, of the working week.
‘But I think some sort of home-life balance is critical. It’s not just this,’ he gestures round his office, ‘that defines who you are.’
