THE LAUNCH DOCK

Part I — The Business of Influence: How Public Infrastructure Firms Turn Planning into Power

The most powerful businesses in public infrastructure don’t start with construction.

They start with planning.

Long before a contract is signed or a shovel hits the ground, the winning firm is often the one that defines the problem, frames the solution, and establishes which outcomes feel “inevitable.” That is not accidental. It is a business model.

Performance Services, Inc. (PSI) provides a clear example of how this model works — and why it deserves closer scrutiny from both entrepreneurs and the public.

The Market Opportunity: Complexity and Risk Aversion

Public entities are uniquely risk-averse. Failed infrastructure projects don’t just cost money — they cost political capital, public trust, and careers. Research from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD, 2015) shows that governments consistently favor vendors who reduce visible risk, even when long-term costs may be higher.

This creates a powerful incentive for firms that can offer:

• Bundled services

• Simplified accountability

• A single point of responsibility

In other words: certainty.

The Turnkey Model — and Where It Expands

PSI markets a suite of integrated services that typically includes:

• Facilities and educational planning

• Energy performance contracting

• Design-build construction

• Long-term infrastructure strategy

• Public-Private Partnership (PPP) delivery models

Public-Private Partnerships are designed to combine public assets with private financing, expertise, and long-term operational involvement. According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO, 2018), PPPs are increasingly used to accelerate development and shift upfront costs off public balance sheets.

From a business standpoint, this is elegant.

From an ethics standpoint, it introduces risk — because PPP frameworks blur the line between advisor, planner, financier, and beneficiary.

Why Former Insiders Are the Ultimate Competitive Advantage

A review of PSI’s publicly available consultant bios reveals a consistent pattern: many consultants are former superintendents, assistant superintendents, city managers, or public-sector leaders.

This staffing strategy is not incidental. It is strategic.

Former insiders:

• Speak institutional language fluently

• Anticipate board concerns before they surface

• Understand procurement psychology

• Carry pre-existing credibility

Political economists describe this as information asymmetry — one party holds disproportionate knowledge and influence over decision-making processes (Pierson, 2000).

This is not bribery.
It is structural advantage.

Where the Market Is Actually Won

By the time a project reaches formal procurement:

• The scope has already been defined

• Cost assumptions have been normalized

• Alternatives have quietly fallen away

Research on public procurement shows that early planning and feasibility stages strongly shape final vendor selection, often determining outcomes before competitive bidding begins (OECD, 2015; Stone, 2012).

This is where competition doesn’t just weaken — it disappears.

Planning is not a neutral service.
It is market control.

The Ethical Risk Most Founders Miss

From a purely strategic lens, this model works extremely well. It scales across:

• School districts

• Municipal governments

• Energy systems

• Large-scale infrastructure projects, including data centers

But the long-term risk is not regulatory.
It is reputational.

When firms embed themselves too deeply in public decision-making systems — especially through revolving-door staffing and PPP frameworks — scrutiny eventually follows. Trust erodes faster than revenue grows, and no contract can insulate a brand from that collapse.

Bottom Line

The most successful public-sector firms don’t just sell services.
They sell certainty, access, and influence.

Entrepreneurs should study this model carefully — not to replicate its ethical blind spots, but to understand how power actually moves through complex systems.

In Part II, we’ll examine the revolving-door pipeline that fuels this business model — and why ignoring its ethical implications puts both public trust and long-term enterprise value at risk.

In solidarity,
Lyndsay LaBrier
The Launch Dock

References

Government Accountability Office. (2018). Public–private partnerships: Key issues and considerations (GAO-18-xxx). https://www.gao.gov

Government Accountability Office. (2019). Ethics programs and revolving door risks in public service (GAO-19-xxx). https://www.gao.gov

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2015). Public governance of infrastructure investment. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org

Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251–267. https://doi.org/10.2307/2586011

Stone, D. (2012). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making (3rd ed.). W. W. Norton & Company.