Executive summary
The Digital Transformation Agency (DTA) engaged SolsticeIT to conduct a strategic review of the Australian Government’s Single Seller Arrangements (SSAs).
The review collected insights from government agencies, SSA sellers, industry bodies, and both domestic and international representatives through interviews, written submissions and surveys. The objective was to determine if SSAs remain fit-for-purpose, continue to deliver value, and support the government’s digital transformation agenda.
Summary of findings
The SSAs are pre-negotiated, whole of Australian Government technology agreements with specified sellers, established to leverage the government’s collective buying power and ensure consistency with legal terms and conditions.
SSAs achieved over $1.6 billion in discounts between 2019 to 2024.
SSAs remain vital to enable the Australian Government to enhance its bargaining power with major technology companies. Stakeholders overwhelmingly support the retention of the SSAs, with other governments nationally and internationally also expressing interest in similar arrangements. There is, therefore, a clear ongoing role for the SSAs within the Australian Government’s digital ecosystem and in supporting the digital transformation agenda.
The SSAs continue to deliver significant value. Between 2019 and 2024, the SSAs achieved $1.6 billion in discounts, enabling the government to instead invest in other core services like education, health care, and agriculture. Further, a range of examples were identified of additional value provided by the SSA sellers to Australia, such as:
- The employment of more than 10,000 Australians by the SSA sellers.
- Investment in local infrastructure, such as data centres throughout the country.
- Contributing to workforce capability through skills development and training initiatives.
The review also found SSAs have typically been established with sellers already holding significant technology presence and spend within the Australian Government ecosystem. In this way, the technology selection precedes the SSA, rather than being driven by it. The review concluded that SSAs are intended to be used as a contracting framework – not a procurement pathway – allowing agencies to retain autonomy and responsibility for procuring value for money technology, whilst also enabling the government to secure better holistic deals.
99% of surveyed buyers want to retain the SSAs and other nations want similar arrangements.
Nonetheless, there are opportunities for the DTA as the steward of Australian Government digital capability to ensure the SSAs:
- Are strengthened and optimised in the way they are negotiated and managed to ensure continued alignment with government priorities.
- Deliver maximum value for agencies and continue to enable digital transformation.
- Support the ongoing delivery of essential services.
- Deliver greater economic value to Australia, in alignment with Australian industry participation policy and the Buy Australian Plan.
- Foster a genuine strategic partnership with the SSA sellers, which does not yet exist across all of the SSA sellers.
The detailed findings were determined through the exploration of four key topic areas.
1 - Do the SSAs support alignment with government policy?
SSAs are broadly aligned with the Australian Government’s digital transformation agenda and technology security objectives. However, while procurement policy obligations, such as Commonwealth Australian Industry Participation Plans (CAIP Plans), are included in the SSAs, their practical implementation is often left to agencies - resulting in either inconsistent application or absence altogether. As the policy environment evolves (e.g. with the introduction of Supplier Environmental Sustainability Plans), SSAs must be actively monitored and updated to remain current and effective.
Key opportunities to refine the policy settings include:
- Extending on the broad security clauses within SSAs, define data and digital sovereignty, with consideration of localisation requirements and existing policy (e.g. the Hosting Certification Framework), and work across government to determine the most suitable means to implement associated protections.
- Distinguishing within the Commonwealth Procurement Rules (CPRs) whole of Australian Government digital contracts from Coordinated Procurements to address the risk of SSAs being utilised as a procurement pathway.
2 - Do the benefits of having SSAs outweigh the costs and risks?
Stakeholders consistently identified three key benefits of SSAs:
- Volume discounts across all buyers - $1.6b in discounts were conservatively estimated over 2019-2024, which for smaller agencies are substantially greater than they would otherwise have access to in particular.
- Greater efficiency in contracting – with 4 out of 5 of the buyer’s surveys identifying this as a benefit.
- Consistent contractual terms and conditions – which is achieved through having a single head agreement for each SSA seller respectively, and stakeholders interviewed consistently echoed this as a benefit.
Other benefits identified were enhancing growth of the Australian technology industry, improving the ability to maintain critical technology and leveraging centralised digital procurement expertise for benefit of all Australian Government agencies.
Some concerns were raised about inconsistent seller behaviour - such as offering better discounts outside the SSAs whilst simultaneously removing other negotiated terms and conditions - which risks undermining their value.
The DTAs average cost to establish an SSA is $1.6 million and ongoing management is $1 million annually.
The review also considered the key risks associated with the SSAs, assessing these to present a low to medium risk. Of note, the risk of buyers being locked into sellers as a result of an SSA was assessed to be low, as it is more likely the nature of technology and the costs to exit are driving challenges experienced with switching sellers. The review noted this is true of most technologies. In essence, by the time a seller has met the thresholds for entering an SSA, technology reliance is likely already present.
Nevertheless, the benefits were widely viewed as outweighing the costs and risks.
3 - What insights can we obtain from other jurisdictions?
Other governments confirmed the value of centralised agreements with major technology providers. Jurisdictions lacking this model (e.g. the U.S.) struggle to achieve the benefits identified by the review, especially for smaller agencies. Strong central coordination, tailored flexibility and accessible information are essential for driving meaningful usage. Fragmented procurement was repeatedly identified as a disadvantage for buyers.
Within Australia, inclusion of States and Territories introduces additional compliance complexities (e.g. privacy) but also increases negotiation leverage if managed well.
4 - Optimising the future value of the SSAs
Although internal guidance exists, to improve transparency a public-facing framework for assessing seller suitability should be implemented for both retaining / retiring existing SSAs and for determining new SSA opportunities. This will also support proactive management of the sellers which have an SSA as the market and technology landscape shifts over time. Following this, to further maximise future value, the DTA should expand, where appropriate, the use of SSAs while ensuring they remain flexible to better support technology choice and capability uplift across the public service (e.g. through the provision of training credits in predominant technologies by the SSA sellers). To improve engagement, maximise the value of the SSAs and ensure ongoing appropriate use, the DTA and SSA sellers must invest in education and guidance for agencies.
Recommendations
The DTA is well-positioned to leverage its relationships with SSA sellers to support the Australian Government’s digital priorities and generate opportunities for Australian businesses. This report supports the continued use of SSAs as a whole of Australian Government contracting framework, with five recommendations made to strengthen their transparency and ongoing value throughout the life of the SSA:
Strengthen the SSA model by refining policy settings, specifying stronger cyber and sovereignty requirements, and simplifying the funding model.
Publish an SSA suitability assessment framework and then expand the use of the SSAs.
Proactively leverage the SSAs to support the growth of the Australian technology sector.
Enhance transparency and information availability by publishing SSA expenditure and correcting public facing content.
Leverage existing DTA capability to establish an end-to-end SSA management approach.
A series of key actions to implement these recommendations, representing the insights from this report, are provided in Chapter 7 Recommendations and actions.
SolsticeIT thanks all the sellers, industry bodies, Commonwealth agencies, State and Territory agencies, international jurisdictions, Australian industry more broadly and the DTA for their contributions to the findings in this report.
Strategic review at a glance
Why undertake the review?
- To assess whether SSAs remain fit-for-purpose, deliver value and support the Australian Government's digital transformation agenda
- To consider the ongoing suitability of the SSAs and opportunities to make improvements
- To consider impacts on the broader ecosystem and competition
What did we find?
- The SSAs continue to deliver significant value, for example, through discounts to the Australian Government and the broader employment of over 10,000 Australians
- Whilst the arrangements are mostly fit-for-purpose, there are opportunities for refinement (e.g. rules underpinning sovereignty)
- As global technology giants, the SSA sellers play a vital role in supporting the Australian Government's digital transformation agenda, yet a genuine strategic partnership does not exist across all of the SSA sellers
What did we do?
- Interviewed over 100 stakeholders from public service agencies, peak bodies, other jurisdictions, the SSA sellers and the DTA
- Undertook two surveys: one of public servant users and another of the general public
- Considered alignment to Australian Government policies or key legislative provisions
- Conducted a wide range of research
Looking ahead, what do we recommend?
- Strengthen the SSA model by refining policy settings, specifying stronger cyber and sovereignty requirements and simplifying the funding model
- Publish an SSA suitability assessment framework and then expand the use of the SSAs
- Proactively leverage the SSAs to support the growth of the Australian technology sector
- Enhance transparency and information availability by publishing SSA expenditure and correcting public facing content
- Leverage existing DTA capability to establish an end-to-end SSA management approach
Key insights
99% of public servants surveyed want to retain the SSAs, and other nations either want or have similar arrangements in place
99% of public servants surveyed want to retain the SSAs, and other nations either want or have similar arrangements in place
People with disability
Put the human first, and disability second
Use empowering language in the design and delivery of your digital service. Avoid defining a person by their disability.
Support independence
Support users to complete their service by providing clear explanations and instructions up front. Advise the user on the documentation they will require at the start of the transaction, so they do not have to get all the way though to understand the requirements.
Avoid story repetition
Where appropriate, seek consent from your users to share data about their accessibility needs with other channels and services, to avoid them having to repeat their story.
OffDigital Access Standard myGov Case Study
National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA)
The launch of an accessible myGov platform was the key driver for NDIA to adopt myGov.
- Accessibility is front and centre at NDIA. The older myGov platform didn’t offer the levels of accessibility NDIA needed for their target users.
- NDIA shared their accessibility concerns with myGov and the feedback was taken onboard. Accessibility improvements were built and released into the myGov platform.
- In late 2022, ‘myGov Blue’ platform was launched. This is when NDIA commenced its journey to integrate its newer customer facing digital channels into myGov.
- By onboarding to myGov, NDIA is conforming with Digital Transformation Agency and federal government intention to reduce government access points and improve the user experience
From 2020-22 NDIA took a position to not integrate with myGov until it lifted accessibility standards. This drove NDIA to build login solutions in house.
It had been a challenge to get a variety of data to test various ways to login. For example, secret question and answer, SMS, code generator and myGovID.
So far, it has not been possible for NDIA to test the myGov app in the test environment. The myGov onboarding team are working with NDIA to rectify this limitation.
This case study is a real digital service currently onboarding to myGov. It shows how NDIA could have applied the Access Standards criteria and decision-making framework to their new digital service.
Criteria 1: Understand how your users access digital services
The NDIA conducted user research and discovered that their target users already use or have access to myGov.
Research highlights that the newly released ‘myGov Blue’ platform provided the accessibility requirements that NDIA needed to support their users, where the older myGov platform did not.
The NDIA explores requirements to integrate its newer customer facing digital channels into myGov.
Criteria 2: Define your service offering
The NDIA understood the capabilities their services required and how they could leverage myGov. NDIA’s existing user base was already using myGov to access their legacy digital services. With the upgrades made to myGov, NDIA are now able to integrate their newer digital channels with myGov.
NDIA were eager to reuse capabilities such as myGov’s:
- accreditation at the Australian Government Trusted Identify Framework (TDIF)
- centralised security investment and
- modern architecture.
Criteria 3: Use the AGA to find reusable platforms and capabilities
- The Australian Government Architecture (AGA) can be used to further provide the NDIA with an understanding of the capabilities available for reuse and any other requirements and/or policies that apply to their digital service.
- The resources provided on AGA allow agencies to understand and consider their service alignment with the Australian Government strategy to reduce the number of government digital access points.
Criteria 4: Follow the decision-making framework
Applying the decision-making framework helped the NDIA understand:
- where their users access government services from and if myGov may be appropriate for their service
- the capabilities needed for their digital service and if myGov does or could offer them
- the limitations they may face and if they can be overcome
- the associated costs and benefits for onboarding to myGov, by completing a cost/benefit analysis.
Criteria 5: Engage with delivery partners
- The NDIA engaged with myGov at multiple touchpoints throughout the application of the Access Standard criteria to understand the requirements to implement their service through myGov.
- Ongoing weekly engagement with myGov helped NDIA meet its objectives to progressively get myGov in front of NDIA’s participant facing digital channels.
- The journey has had its challenges, however through early collaboration, honest conversations and a trusted partnership NDIA and myGov are working through these challenges successfully.
myGov Decision-making Framework
The myGov Decision-making framework helps you decide if you should connect your service to myGov
Know your user
- Do your users currently engage government services via myGov?
- Could your users access myGov?
Service Offering
- Do the capabilities offered by myGov address your services’ needs? (refer to myGov Platform Capability and Functions Overview document)
- Could your service requirements be built into myGov?
Limitations
- Is your service free from limitations that could impeded the use of myGov? (data sharing, ethical or legal)
- Can these limitations be overcome?
Assess the investment
- Would connecting your service to myGov be cost effective?
Digital Access Standard myGov Case Study
Statutory Declarations
Three agencies work together to implement a Digital Commonwealth statutory declaration service through myGov.
- During COVID there were difficulties with in-person witnessing of statutory declarations. This identified a need for an option to have statutory declarations digitally witnessed.
- Services Australia, Attorney-General’s Department and Department of Finance came together to implement a Digital Commonwealth statutory declaration service through myGov.
- The Attorney-General’s Department led the legislative changes for this new service and changed the law so Commonwealth statutory declarations can be made digitally through an approved online platform.
- To create a digital Commonwealth statutory declaration without a physical witness you must have Digital Identity connected to your myGov account.
All 3 agencies engaged early with the myGov teams at Services Australia. This allowed a full investigation into the capabilities that could be reused and new capabilities that needed to be introduced.
A myGov Design Sprint (Incubation) was conducted. This enabled agencies to understand the feasibility of the new capability and gaps.
New capabilities and enhancements like ‘QR code verification’ and ‘digital upload’ were introduced and enhanced for this new service.
This case study is a real digital service in myGov and shows how these agencies could have applied the Access Standard’s criteria and decision-making framework to their new digital service.
Criteria 1: Understand how your users access digital services
The agencies researched their users and determined that users already use or have access to myGov.
Outcomes from research highlighted that this service required legislative changes to allow the removal of an ‘in person’ witness.
Agencies understood that myGov was fit for purpose and started to investigate what the user experience could look like.
Criteria 2: Define your service offering
The agencies conducted a design sprint with myGov to fully understand their service offering and the capabilities myGov can offer or implement to support the new service.
The agencies learned that Digital Identity and digital upload will be leveraged, but there were some initial gaps in capabilities.
New capabilities were able to be introduced which ensured myGov was fit for purpose.
Criteria 3: Use the AGA to find reusable platforms and capabilities
The Australian Government Architecture (AGA) could be used to help agencies understand what capabilities are available for reuse and other requirements and/or policies that apply to their digital service.
The resources provided on AGA support agencies to understand and consider how their services align with the Australian Government strategy, to reduce the number of government digital access points.
Criteria 4: Follow the decision-making framework
The decision-making framework was applied, which helped agencies understand:
- where users access government services and if myGov is appropriate for their service
- the capabilities that are needed for their digital service and if myGov offers, or could offer them
- the limitations they may face and if they can be overcome
- the associated costs and benefits for onboarding to myGov, by completing a cost/benefit analysis.
Criteria 5: Engage with delivery partners
- The Attorney-General’s Department conducted early engagement with myGov understanding this was essential for the successful implementation into myGov.
- The Attorney-General’s Department and Department of Finance worked in partnership with Services Australia and discovered the need for an early Design Sprint with myGov essential to understanding the design, capability and cost effectiveness of myGov in comparison to bespoke solutions.
myGov Decision-making Framework
The myGov Decision-making framework helps you decide if you should connect your service to myGov.
Know your user
- Do your users currently engage government services via myGov?
- Could your users access myGov?
Service Offering
- Do the capabilities offered by myGov address your services’ needs? (refer to myGov Platform Capability and Functions Overview document)
- Could your service requirements be built into myGov?
Limitations
- Is your service free from limitations that could impeded the use of Gov? (data sharing, ethical or legal)
- Can these limitations be overcome?
Assess the investment - Would connecting your service to myGov be cost effective?