Social value is being treated as a tot-up exercise, rather than a lever for measurable growth

Perhaps this structure now brings much-needed consistency among public sector procurement buyers. But does it? 

Each purchasing team can still select which missions and SRMs apply – and can even use bespoke metrics if existing ones don’t fit. Could this then dilute the consistency across the public sector? The only caveat is the metric agreed must be appropriate, proportionate, auditable and referenced in the contract. 

The result? A framework that risks turning social value into a spreadsheet exercise, rather than a purpose-driven transformation tool. 

SRMs are output-based units – counting hours, roles or activities, with little attention to quality or impact. Therefore, although a business may meet the ‘fair work’ principle, which offers fair wages and good working conditions, the authority may prescribe what “good working conditions” are and “fair wages” may include benefits available to parents and facilities for disabled or neurodiverse people.

The new PPN 002 focuses on numbers. When you go beneath the thin veneer of the policy, it is nothing more than a tot-up exercise of what social impact looks like for public sector procurement reporting purposes. Some examples of the metrics include SRMs on how many people can you get into work from apprentices to those who are from under-represented groups rather than how you will improve their work-life balance or what is your targeted retention rate based on your last five years’ attrition rate. Or, how much waste you will send to landfill under this contract, rather than ask how much will you recycle or source better materials to reduce your landfill waste.

But, where precisely is the purpose-driven governance that PPN 002 was intended to promote? PPN 002 was meant to signal a cultural shift — away from box-ticking, toward embedding purpose and accountability throughout the commercial lifecycle. Yet, in practice, many procurement teams will find themselves filling cells in Excel rather than building partnerships that truly deliver impact. Instead, the 33 SRMs dwell in nothing more than more numbers when you download them onto an Excel spreadsheet and buyers just insert numbers and tick them as needed. 

For those who genuinely want to lead, however, there’s opportunity hidden in the detail. 
By using the Model Award Criteria to ask deeper, qualitative questions — for example, “How will you ensure fair wages and good working conditions?” — buyers can move beyond compliance and encourage suppliers to think and act differently. 

"Public sector procurement teams can deliver the true social value purpose and create the desired transformation for businesses"

This is where true transformation lies: combining the empirical rigour of SRMs with thoughtful, purpose-led tender design that invites suppliers to demonstrate meaningful, measurable impact. 

But if you, as the public procurement buyer, really wish to be known for driving social value with your suppliers, you will need to do more than prescribed by PPN 002. You need to actually consider what elements of social value you expect the business to demonstrate to you for a specific contract and how you want that social value impact measured both empirically under PPN 002 and from a quality perspective under the Model Award Criteria for each contract. The questions you raise in the MAC will help nudge suppliers to consider their social impact. 

PPN 002 has become more prescriptive to drive reporting for public sector authorities through its SRMs. It gives us the structure. But public sector procurement teams can deliver the true social value purpose and create the desired transformation for businesses. 

Francesca Lee, founder, SocialValueArchitect