1 / 5

Code Governance Review: follow up

Code Governance Review: follow up. Background. CGR implementation PID included the following deliverable “ achieve a demonstrable cultural shift within the organisation to ensure Ofgem ’ s proactive and constructive participation in the industry change management process ” .

darius
Download Presentation

Code Governance Review: follow up

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Code Governance Review:follow up

  2. Background • CGR implementation PID included the following deliverable • “achieve a demonstrable cultural shift within the organisation to ensure Ofgem’s proactive and constructive participation in the industry change management process”. • We considered that a survey would be helpful to capture industry parties current (pre-CGR) views • 25 responses received, covering large and small parties, and code administrators • Comments generally in line with expectation – perceived weaknesses are being addressed through the ‘cultural shift’

  3. Results

  4. Further breakdown, by question

  5. Key messages • The value the Ofgem representative adds to the process varies code to code and dependent upon the individual • Desire for greater consistency and assertiveness • Response times for both decisions and actions often too long, with little transparency on what is happening • More proportionate approach needed • Calls for greater visibility of internal process • Quality of decisions generally good, but let down on specific – often key – decisions • Need to improve technical knowledge

More Related