Scott Wonfor, Head of Service Delivery at Certes IT Service Solutions, explores how culture, risk, governance and talent shape IT service delivery across the private and public sectors, and why the two are more alike than many assume.

Public and private sector organisations are often portrayed as operating at opposite ends of the IT service delivery spectrum: one commercially driven and fast-moving, the other cautious, highly governed and accountable to the taxpayer. But from the service provider’s perspective, the divide is far less clear-cut. 

 Scott has worked across banking and insurance and now leads the governance and delivery of contracts (primarily in central government) at Certes IT Service Solutions. His experience on both sides has led him to challenge some persistent assumptions.  

“These industries aren’t as dissimilar as you’d think, and they’re becoming more closely aligned,” he says. “The difference isn’t really to do with service delivery; it’s to do with the attitude of the organisation we are serving.” 

  

Different motivations, the same demand for value 

 Private sector IT service delivery is associated with revenue, profit and shareholder value, while public sector IT service delivery is judged against public value and the responsible use of finite budgets. Yet both environments expect services to be efficient, reliable and outcome-focused. 

 “The Ministry of Defence cares just as much about spend and the outcome of delivery as the private sector. The reasons are different: private organisations are doing it for shareholders; the public sector is doing it for the general public. But the outcome is still the same. They want success, at the best possible value for money.” — Scott Wonfor 

  

Risk appetite: speed versus stewardship 

The clearest difference is risk appetite. Commercial organisations may accept greater uncertainty to gain market advantage or generate new revenue. Public bodies, by contrast, must protect public money, maintain resilience and demonstrate that decisions can withstand scrutiny. That caution can look like bureaucracy from the outside, but Scott argues that controls exist for a reason, and that large, regulated private companies have their own versions of the same safeguards. 

Risk aversion does not mean an absence of innovation. Public bodies can experiment through proofs of concept and minimum viable products, containing exposure while testing whether an idea deserves wider investment.  

“The public sector needs to learn to take a few more risks,” Scott says, “but it needs to do it in its own way. In a controlled, small-scale sense.” 

  

Failing fast and learning properly 

 “Fail fast” is a familiar principle, but speed is only useful when failure produces learning. Scott sees a public sector strength in the discipline that follows: structured reviews, documented lessons and an intention to share knowledge so that another department does not spend public money repeating the same mistake. 

 “A big part of failing fast is the lessons-learned piece: we made a mistake, we dropped the ball—and then what? I think the public sector is actually better at that. It is more introspective and has governance processes in place to review what went well and what didn’t.” — Scott Wonfor 

The intention to share does not always make sharing simple.  

Security classifications, clearances and need-to-know controls can slow the movement of lessons between departments. In the private sector, however, information may be siloed deliberately because insight creates competitive advantage. One side may want to share but face structural barriers; the other may have the means to share but little commercial incentive to do so. 

  

IT Service Delivery levels are converging

At the operational level, expectations are increasingly standardised. Availability, responsiveness, resilience and value matter regardless of who funds the service.  

“Private sector organisations push SLAs to become more cost-effective and valuable, while the public sector pushes them to be safer and more resilient,” Scott explains.  

Providers working across both environments can combine those pressures and bring the best of each into a single service model. 

  

Talent, purpose and the value of specialist partners 

Competition for technical talent remains a genuine challenge. Public sector salaries can struggle to match private sector packages, so purpose, pension, leave and long-term public service motivations become important parts of the proposition. Specialist suppliers also give public bodies access to private sector skills, including scarce capabilities in secure environments, without relying solely on permanent recruitment. 

For Certes, ex-military personnel bring a distinctive advantage to secure service delivery.  

“A by-product of military training is that you get people who can lead and just get stuff done,” Scott says. “They know what the mission is and will do whatever they can on the ground to deliver it.”  

That mindset creates cohesive teams that escalate quickly, respond locally and begin resolving incidents before central support arrives. 

  

Removing barriers without weakening assurance

The public sector’s challenge is not simply to fund innovation, but to make it possible for capable suppliers to participate. Smaller technology businesses may have strong ideas but lack the established governance, certifications or specialist knowledge needed to navigate complex procurement and assurance processes. Those requirements may be valid, particularly in defence and security, but suppliers need a clearer route through them. 

“Removing, where possible and appropriate, barriers to entry in innovation work is critical. Smaller organisations may have exactly the technology government needs, but they need hands-on assistance to understand what they must demonstrate and how to demonstrate it.” — Scott Wonfor 

  

What each sector can learn from the other 

The strongest future model lies between the two traditions. Public organisations can adopt more controlled experimentation, shortening the path from idea to evidence. Private organisations can give greater weight to governance, wider social consequences and the question of whether an innovation should be pursued, not only whether it can be. 

“The public sector needs to learn to take more risks… And the private sector needs to understand that regulation, controls and governance are there to keep everybody safe, not just the organisation, but the wider public.” 

Ultimately, private and public sector IT service delivery share the same practical ambition: to maximise the value generated from available resources. The motivations and tolerances may differ, but the disciplines are converging, and service providers that understand both sides are well placed to turn that convergence into better outcomes.