Canadian Government Executive December 2011

DON DRUMMOND The untapped potential of Aboriginal youth p.12

JENNIFER JOHNSON Wandering Saskatchewan p.20

December 2011 VOLUME 17 NUMBER 10

THE MAGAZINE FOR PUBLIC SEC TOR DECISION MAKERS

MOVING FORWARD

61399 70471 0

Display until January 10

9

10

$5.00

Publication Mail Registration Number: 41132537

www.canadiangovernmentexecutive.ca

contents

December 2011 – VOLUME 17 – NUMBER 10

COVER

FEATURES 18 Performance management

Canada’s under-the-radar monitoring and evaluation system

BY ROBERT LAHEY

20 Wandering Saskatchewan

Pilot promotes province’s wild side

BY JENNIFER JOHNSON

21 Back to basics

Lessons from PS Modernization Act review

BY SUSAN CARTWRIGHT

22 Connecting employees

6

Aboriginal governance

INTERVIEWS WITH SHAWN A-IN-CHUT ATLEO

AND MICHAEL WERNICK

Medicine Hat jostles workers to communicate

BY WILBUR McLEAN

11 Community voice

Ehattesaht youth find their beat

BY SHARON POCOCK

12 Untapped potential

The power of education and Aboriginal youth

BY DON DRUMMOND AND BOB WATTS

20

DEPARTMENTS

15 Building trust

Ontario strengthens Métis partnership

INTERVIEW WITH LORI STERLING AND GARY LIPINSKI

BY JUDY EMBLETON

23 New professionals

Consultations for an inclusive workplace

BY ANNIE JOANNETTE

24 Procurement

Are you FAT enough?

BY MICHAEL ASNER AND SHARON SHEPPARD

26 The Leader’s Bookshelf Online Extras

15

Online Extras

Missed an issue? Misplaced an article?

Visit www.canadiangovernmentexecutive.ca for a full archive of past CGE issues, as well as online extras from our many contributors.

The motivating power of progress

BY HARVEY SCHACHTER

29 Governing digitally

The cloudy state of mobile security

BY JEFFREY ROY

30 Opinion

Fiscal model no longer sustainable

BY DAVID ZUSSMAN

December 2011 // Canadian Government Executive / 3

OUR MISSION IS TO CONTRIBUTE TO EXCELLENCE IN PUBLIC SERVICE MANAGEMENT

EDITOR’S NOTE

EDITORIAL

Toby Fyfe

Editor-in-Chief editor@netgov.ca

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: TOBY FYFE

editor@netgov.ca

ASSOCIATE EDITOR: CHRIS THATCHER

assoceditor@netgov.ca

EDITOR EMERITUS: PAUL CROOKALL

paul@netgov.ca

CONTRIBUTORS: SHARON POCOCK, DON DRUMMOND, BOB WATTS, JUDY EMBLETON, ROBERT LAHEY, JENNIFER JOHNSON, SUSAN CARTWRIGHT, WILBUR MCLEAN, ANIIE JOANNETTE, SHARON SHEPPARD, MICHAEL ASNER, JEFFREY ROY, HARVEY SCHACHTER, DAVID ZUSSMAN EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD

Ole Ingstrup, management consultant; Vic Pakalnis, Queen’s University; Dr. Sandford Borins, University of Toronto; Reuben Bronee, British Columbia Public Service; Shirley Howe, Alberta Public Service; Denise Amyot, Canada Science and Technology Museum Corporation; Hanny Toxopeus, CEO, APEX; Carol Layton, OPS; Ian D. Clark, University of Toronto; SALES NATIONAL ACCOUNT MANAGER: PATRICIA BUSH

905-727-4091 x336 trishb@netgov.ca

VICE PRESIDENT, SALES: TERRI PAVELIC

905-727-4091 x225 terrip@netgov.ca

EVENTS EVENTS MANAGER: SANDRA SERVICE

sandras@netgov.ca

ART & PRODUCTION ART DIRECTOR: ELENA PANKOVA

artwork@netgov.ca

SUBSCRIPTIONS AND ADDRESS CHANGES CIRCULATION COORDINATOR

circulation@netgov.ca

GENERAL INQUIRIES

Aurora Office 24-4 Vata Court, Aurora, ON, L4G 4B6 Phone 905-727 4091 Fax 905-727-4428 EDITORIAL

Ottawa Office 30 Lyttleton Gardens, Ottawa, K1L 5A6 Phone 613-858-6619 http://cge.itincanada.ca/ CORPORATE GROUP PUBLISHER: JOHN JONES

publisher@netgov.ca

PUBLISHER’S MAIL AGREEMENT: 41132537 ISSN 1203-7893 Canadian Government Executive magazine is published 10 times per year

by Navatar Press. All opinions expressed herein are those of the contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher or any person or organization associated with the magazine. Letters, submissions, comments and suggested topics are welcome, and should be sent to editor@netgov.ca REPRINT INFORMATION:

Reproduction or photocopying is prohibited without the publisher’s prior written consent. High quality reprints of articles and additional copies of the magazine are available through subscriptions@circlink.ca PRIVACY POLICY:

We do not sell our mailing list or share any confidential information on our subscribers.

We acknowledge the financial support of the Government of Canada through the Canada Periodical Fund (CPF) for our publishing activities.

Looking to an uncertain future At Canadian Government Executive magazine our goal is to be relevant and useful to public sector leaders and decision-makers. We do this by examining the policy issues and addressing the management challenges faced by federal, provincial and municipal public sector executives.

Over this tumultuous year, one theme that has been reinforced constantly is that the public sector world is changing. There are multiple drivers, but three remain top of mind: the financial challenges faced by governments, changing expectations of politicians and demographic churn.

The economic crisis has given rise to a political debate about the nature of government. There is a rising chorus arguing that big government is passé, too expensive and too inefficient. In nearly all western governments, severe public sector budgets cuts are being demanded.

In the UK, in response to budget concerns but also because of a deep-seated belief that government shouldn’t be the ‘default’ for policy development or service delivery, Prime Minister Cameron launched the Big Society initiative that, among other things, expects to offload much national public sector activity to the private sector.

In Canada, the federal government is completing its Deficit Reduction Action Plan which is hoping for $4 billion in cuts.

A report will soon go before Ontario that will propose ways to reduce costs through efficiencies.

In a more extreme example, Wisconsin

Governor Scott Walker went so far as to cut back public sector bargaining rights by legislating, in part, that public sector unions who represent teachers, state and local workers couldn’t negotiate pensions, health costs or rules of work.

Unions for the police and firefighters were exempted.

Demographic changes have meant that an older generation of public servants is retiring. Interestingly, in spite of these tough public sector times, there appear to be lots of young people willing to take their places. This could be driven by an overall sluggish job market, but surveys suggest that the desire to provide service still resonates.

All this change should not be taken lightly. While the issue may be couched in language like efficiencies and savings, the fact of the matter is that there will be layoffs for the unlucky and an uncertain future for the survivors.

At the end of the day, the challenge for the public sector of the future will be to remain relevant to its political masters and its taxpaying citizens. As governments work toward a changed public service and demand new roles of their public servants (as articulated by Treasury Board President Tony Clement in our September, 2011 issue) solutions that respond to this environment yet maintain public sector integrity need to be sought.

The public sector world is changing and the future remains uncertain. CGE will continue to report on both.

WHAT IF THERE WAS A CEMENT THAT COULD REDUCE CO2 EMISSIONS BY 900,000 TONNES A YEAR? There is. Introducing Contempra, a cement engineered for a better tomorrow. To learn more about this innovative product visit cement.ca/contempra

FEATURE First Nations

Events this fall have highlighted the ongoing struggle of First modernize relationships with governments. At the federal level, self-governance, and will be discussed further at a meeting hosted interviewed Shawn A-in-chut Atleo, national chief of the with Michael Wernick, deputy minister of Aboriginal Affairs

A NEW MODEL FOR

Shawn A-in-chut Atleo

ABORIGINAL GOVERNANCE

Why is there a need for a new governance model for First Nations?

Right now, the bureaucracy and its policies are failing miserably. We need new structures that affirm the relationship and uphold the responsibility. We envision a time in the near future when First Nation governments – at their choice and based on their direction – will operate outside the narrow confines of the Indian Act. This has to be done in a way that recognizes First Nation jurisdiction and our responsibilities as governments and nations.

We’ve seen that real progress is achieved through First Nations building our governance systems, law-making, administrative capacities and re-building and reclaiming our jurisdiction and our responsibilities. Most important, we see this where First Nations are affirming their rights through Treaty. Advancing the First NationCrown relationship means progress through steps like the First Nation-Crown Gathering, First Ministers Meetings with First Nations and a potential First Nation-Crown agreement that advances and affirms our rights.

I do feel that First Nations people have suffered enough and the time has come to re-set the relationship between the government and First Nations.

How should the education system for First Nations people be improved?

The existing framework for First Nations education is severely flawed. The education provisions of the Indian Act are essentially the same provisions that existed in 1951 when residential schools were the primary mechanism for education of First Nations people. With no recognition of First Nation rights or responsibility and no commitment to stability and resourcing, the Indian Act fails as a vehicle to support education. We want to re-create a learning environment in our communities and link with organizations and the public and private sectors to invest in First Nations schools and in our kids.

It is time to fulfill the vision articulated in the 1972 policy paper “Indian Control of Indian Education” and work with First Nations in the development of a framework to enable First Nations education systems to emerge. The current approach of funding First Nations schools through an outdated funding formula, combined with time-limited proposalbased programs, is not acceptable. The two percent cap on annual expenditure increases since 1996 has meant that classroom funding in First Nations education has not kept up with inflation or population growth. We estimate that a minimum increase of 6.3 percent was required over this time period simply to keep up.

Comparability with funding for provincial schools and systems is a basic benchmark. More specifically, First Nations require funding which will cover the real costs of the programs and services that are comparable to what students in provincial systems receive. In remote areas and small schools, this may Continued on page 8

6 / Canadian Government Executive // December 2011

First Nations FEATURE

Nations to exercise greater control over resources and changes have occurred that reflect this move to improved by the prime minister in January. CGE contributor Vic Pakalanis Assembly of First Nations, and editor-in-chief Toby Fyfe spoke and Northern Development Canada, about the changes.

RISING TIDE OF ENGAGEMENT ON

ABORIGINAL ISSUES

The departmental name change makes a point of highlighting the word “Aboriginal” versus “Indian”: does this reflect a changing role for the federal government?

No, I think it’s a case of the nomenclature and the signage catching up with the practice, not leading it. The term Aboriginal is the preferred term in Canada. You’ll see it in Section 35 of the Constitution Act. Most provincial ministries style themselves as Aboriginal affairs and although the international term of practice is indigenous peoples, we don’t tend to use it in Canada as much.

In terms of the machinery of government the department has had extensive Métis and Inuit dimensions for quite some time, so there was an opportunity to catch up to the practice and brand the department for what it is, which is an Aboriginal affairs department. There’s no legislative dimension to this; in fact we have to keep the original terms in all our legal documents and contracts. The government has no intention of pursuing the legislative rebranding as a priority any time soon. It’s really just for the public face of the department and the minister.

What is the balance between your responsibilities in the north and for Aboriginal people in southern urban areas?

We have coordination responsibilities on Aboriginal issues and on northern issues, but those are overlapping categories because a good number of the peo-

Michael Wernick

ple that live in the north happen to be Aboriginal people, especially as you move west to east in the Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut. The issues of land claims negotiations and land claims agreements are very much alive and part of the north and so the minister and I spend about twothirds of our time on Aboriginal issues and about a third on northern issues. But they’re overlapping categories, so we end up playing a very similar role on each of those.

Of the people that self-identify in the census as Aboriginal, the majority now live in what Statscan calls “urban centers.” Of people who have “status” under the Indian Act, about half live on reserves and about half live in the cities. The difference is if you live on a reserve, the place you go to for services looks very much like services provinces deliver: kindergarten to grade 12 education, income assistance, housing, municipal infrastructure and so on all come from the federal government and our funding of band governments.

In the city, you would get those services from the municipality and province just like any other Canadian. We’ve had activity in urban centers going back to the 1990s Urban Aboriginal Strategy, which is really about working with Aboriginal

I think the idea that someday the department’s lights will turn out and cease to exist is really a myth.

Continued on page 9 December 2011 // Canadian Government Executive / 7

FEATURE First Nations

First Nations education systems must be empowered to provide the necessary supports to First Nations schools, and share expertise with provincial systems. Who better than First Nations to develop culturally appropriate curriculum and provide culturally-based teacher education?

Continued from page 6

require additional funding support. First Nations education systems must be empowered to provide the necessary supports to First Nations schools, and share expertise with provincial systems.

Who better than First Nations to develop culturally appropriate curriculum and provide culturally-based teacher education?

The federal government is currently working with us on the National Panel on K-12 Education, which is an important effort to engage First Nations. The Panel will be reporting its findings soon. It will be important that we use this information to take deliberate steps forward. Post-secondary funding is an absolute necessity to ensure that our high school graduates have the promise of higher education.

Our research shows that First Nations need an additional 65,000 university graduates to achieve parity with the rest of Canada.

At the International Summit of Indigenous People on Mining and Energy in July, you spoke of increased First Nations participation and benefit in these two key sectors.

How do you see this being implemented?

8 / Canadian Government Executive // December 2011

The AFN has been leading efforts to ensure industry and governments are aware of and guided by the principles of free, prior and informed consent for any projects in First Nations territory. I recently joined a small group of First Nation leaders in a trade mission to China. Our delegation took part in this trade mission in an effort to build relationships that will lead to economic partnerships for First Nations in Canada. We met with Chinese government officials and many Chinese business leaders. The intention was to remind them that First Nations have title and rights that pertain to any development incurring on our traditional territories. First Nations are open to economic development but it must be respectful of our rights and our land and territories.

We are currently working on the creation of a Virtual Institute of First Nation Energy and Mining. This will enable First Nations to share our knowledge and expertise, and promote better ways of working together towards mutual prosperity. In the meantime, the AFN continues to advocate for the full implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the principle of free, prior and informed consent, which means consulting and accommodating First Nations prior to development.

What advice would you give to Prime Minister Harper and the provincial premiers on dealing with First Nations issues?

While I am not in the business of giving advice, I do feel that First Nations people have suffered enough and the time has come to re-set the relationship between the government and First Nations.

We are looking forward to coming together as nations and continuing our dialogue with government during the First NationsCrown Gathering this coming winter.

The intent of this gathering is to rebuild the nation-to-nation relationship between First Nations and the Crown, as we did in the original relationships, to renew relationships and to set the course for the future based on our Treaties, our rights and our jurisdiction. First Nation representatives, the Prime Minister and key government officials will meet with a focused agenda to set out a real plan for fundamental change and progress.

This is something we have been calling for and something the Prime Minister committed to, most recently in December 2010.

Canada’s endorsement of the UN Declaration makes this a necessary and important priority. Provincial and territorial leaders support this gathering and we are meeting with them to discuss this and other priorities. This joint effort is based on strengthening the relationship between First Nations and the Government of Canada on some key priority issues to produce real results that strengthen First Nations people, communities and governments.

First Nations FEATURE

Continued from page 7

people who live in the cities, to see what we can do as a federal government to promote their economic and social development and participation in the labour market.

National Chief Shawn Atleo is calling for a new relationship between Aboriginal people and the government of Canada. What do you see as the future role for the government and the department?

I think the idea that someday the department’s lights will turn out and cease to exist is really a myth. There will always be a part of the executive branch of the government of Canada that deals with Aboriginal people. Somebody has to be the Crown in honouring existing treaties and agreements, at the negotiating table, and defending the government’s position in terms of litigation.

There will probably be a significant funding role in providing services to First Nations people for the foreseeable future. So I think there will always be a department and administrative structure that handles that.

The most notable thing I have seen is the rising tide of engagement by other people with the First Nations people, particularly on reserve. There was a time, not too long ago, where the attitude in most provincial ministries was – with all due respect – “if they’re Indians they’re a federal issue. Why are you talking to me?” That’s virtually disappeared. Now you see people who work in provincial education ministries, labour market programs, social services, and criminal justice taking the presence and existence of the Aboriginal people in their province seriously and working with us. This is welcome because, frankly, if there’s any expertise out there on policy and programming in areas like K-12 education, income assistance, active labour market measures, housing policy and planning, it’s in provincial ministries and the satellites of provincial governments.

The most interesting and exciting development in the last few years is the emergence of what we call tripartite arrangements and conversations. The federal government’s role carries on from where we come from and is largely a funding role. Provincial expertise, delivery systems and infrastructure around province-like services and the First Nations governments and communities, who bring to the table their own planning and decision making, are leading to three-corner conversations that are very productive.

Before the 1970s there was a lot of direct delivery by this department. There were Indian agents, executives of the federal government who made decisions in communities. Through the ‘70s and ‘80s almost all of that was turned over to band governments and councils. They run the schools, they hire and fire the teachers, they manage their own infrastructure, they do the procurement and contracting for water systems, broadband and electricity. There are more than a hundred First Nations-run child welfare agencies. We now focus on a funding relationship with those entities.

The Auditor General of Canada’s report of May 2011 points out that there are limitations to that model in terms of improving outcomes in the long run. We seem to have run the limit of what we can get out of that model and I think what the National Chief has picked up on (as many people have) is that, if we really want to make a breakthrough in the outcome and conditions of opportunities, we are going to have to have different tools than we’ve had in the past.

What does this say about accountability?

The Auditor-General said there is an over-reliance on contribution agreements that also become tools for getting data and performance information on what’s happening out there, for compliance and for changing outcomes. So if there’s a problem with how a water system is being run by a First Nation, the only tool that we really have is to pull back on funding.

What we’re trying to set the table for (and these are decisions that need to be made by Cabinets of Parliament) is to put more of these province-like services on a solid legislative footing that is clear on rules and responsibilities, accountabilities and governance. The shift in accountability that we then can achieve over the next few years will move from, “Tell AANDC what you did with the money under the contribution agreement,” to “Tell your own members what you did with the money.” That’s a much healthier accountability bargain.

I think it’s a better model. The pressure should be from parents and electors, taxpayers and people in their own communities rather than accounting to us. We will get better if we have a degree of transparency and performance reporting and can satisfy Parliament and the various officers of Parliament as to what the money is being used for.

Is this an inevitable move?

So increasingly the department will be focusing less on service-delivery and more on policy development and managing relationships?

The primary role we have is funding. The department spent over $8 billion dollars in taxpayer money last year in a variety of services and arrangements and I don’t think that’s going to change in the foreseeable future. If the federal government is funding First Nations’ education on reserves or child welfare on reserves then we will probably be the conduit for those funding arrangements.

Nothing is inevitable; there is enormous resistance to change in this area. Many things that have been attempted in the past have been blocked. It’s easier to mobilize coalitions to oppose change than to support change. If the status quo were easy to change, somebody would have changed it a long time ago. There are lots of factors that tend to stifle change initiatives and push you back to the status quo. I’m confident that we have a convergence of forces that will probably give us the best chance in decades for real structural reforms over the next few years.

December 2011 // Canadian Government Executive / 9

Executive Leadership Program Public Sector Governance and Management in a Web 2.0 World The Institute on Governance (IOG) is proud to welcome participants to the 2011/2012 Executive Leadership Program.

The Executive Leadership Program is for committed public service executives who want to broaden their competencies and continue improving their leadership skills. The acquired learning will help participants actively contribute to ongoing transition while continuing to meet the challenges of a fast-paced working environment and the transformative world of deficit reduction.

Founded in 1990, the Institute on Governance is an independent, Canada-based, not-for-profit public interest institution with its head office in Ottawa and an office in Toronto.

The IOG has the honour to be supported and guided by the following members of the Institute’s Learning Committee: John Knubley, Deputy Minister, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (chair) Myles Kirvan, Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada Richard Rochefort, Vice-President, Canada School of the Public Service Nada Semaan, Associate Deputy Minister, Canadian Heritage Gina Wilson, Assistant Deputy Minister, Public Safety Canada Anil Arora, Assistant Deputy Minister, Natural Resources Canada James Meddings, Assistant Deputy Minister, Western Economic Diversification Canada James Gilbert, Assistant Deputy Minister, Veterans Affairs Canada Pierre Nepton, Regional Director General, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada Chris Rainer, Director, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada

The next ELP intake is scheduled for February 2012.

Check out the IOG website for further information:

www.iog.ca 60 George St. Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 1J4 Tel.: (613) 562-0090

Follow us on Twitter IOGca

Sharon Pocock is a public affairs officer with the B.C. Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation.

First Nations FEATURE

Community youth

find their voice and beat

British Columbia’s Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation leads efforts towards reconciliation with Aboriginal peoples. Involving Aboriginal youth, the fastest growing demographic in the province, can be a challenge.

FIRST NATIONS ACROSS the country are faced with the question of how to build a community where youth have opportunities to explore their potential, increase their skills and find their own voice. For the Ehattesaht First Nation, the answer came in the form of creative technologies, a strong partnership with Royal Roads University and a passionate ministry youth engagement specialist, Dawn Lindsay-Burns.

The main Ehattesaht community, located on the central west coast of Vancouver Island, has a high percentage of youth and, until recently, very few recreational learning outlets to channel their curiosity and enthusiasm, a situation that led to increased exposure to the social dangers many Aboriginal youth face. The community’s remote location, almost an hour along an unpaved logging road from the main highway, makes access to local facilities difficult, exacerbating the problem.

As a graduate from the provincial government’s Aboriginal Youth Internship Program, which gives Aboriginal youth experience in the B.C. Public Service, Lindsay-Burns began working with the Ehattesaht youth, helping them uncover and articulate aspirations for their future.

She realized that the most important thing was to listen and not make assumptions.

She found that one of the youth’s main desires was to have an active voice in the community, but they felt that they had no capacity to express themselves.

Over three years, Lindsay-Burns helped guide the youth through a funding application processes that brought them three

annual small grants from B.C.’s New Relationship Trust, a capacity building fund. These $2,500 grants helped the youth to hold workshops and associated activities leading to a successful presentation to Chief and Council demonstrating why their community should invest in its youth. That investment allowed the youth to purchase a computer, digital camera, speakers and microphones. The youth benefited from training and support from university and music specialist partners.

By using these modern mediums they created a short film that allowed them to play out scenarios of isolation, peer pressure and acceptance. They also learned how to use the technology to express their feelings and aspirations by laying down hiphop tracks and making videos.

For the Ehattesaht youth, the project has been transformative, teaching new skills and promoting teamwork and leadership. It has given them a sense of identity and self-confidence in their own abilities and unique perspective on the world, but has also given them the voice they sought within their community. They have used that new found voice to communicate with Chief and Council, demonstrating what they could contribute to the community and asking for the same investment in return.

The Ehattesaht youth recognize that not everyone is in tune with the new mediums and their hip-hop beat, but they are slowly bridging the gap between the new and the traditional.

“Being involved with these creative technologies has helped the youth with their

leadership development work,” says Lindsay-Burns. “We all realize that we are only a few stages along the road and that this kind of capacity building takes time. But as the youth become more confident and the wider community joins them in their exploration of the possibilities of these creative technologies, they will continue through more stages, such as investigating how this new medium can preserve their language and culture in the digital world.”

Lindsay-Burns is passionate about relationship building with youth and believes that her experience at Ehattesaht demonstrates that most Aboriginal youth will create their own opportunities given the chance. This is not a new lesson, but it is one that public servants working with Aboriginal youth will find value in each day.

“Partnering with Aboriginal people to improve the outcomes for the diverse communities across British Columbia involves complex discussions and negotiations involving economic and social development tools,” says Steve Munro, Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation. “But sometimes the most effective work starts at the grassroots level, like the Ehattesaht First Nation youth project.”

December 2011 // Canadian Government Executive / 11

FEATURE First Nations

Don Drummond and Bob Watts are Fellows with the Queen’s University School of Policy Studies.

UNTAPPED POTENTIAL Education and Aboriginal youth Inspired by what has been called “the perfect storm that we are witnessing in politics, policy, and among the national Aboriginal leadership,” a June 2011 Queen’s University Conference on Indigenous Issues in Post-Secondary Education was conceived as an opportunity to respond to the “greatest social policy challenge of our time.” Speakers called for a paradigm shift from the thinking of the past, which has focused on deficits, discrepancies and problems, to a new approach that focuses on Aboriginal needs and successful approaches for change.

What follows is adapted from the conference report.

THE HISTORICAL LEGACY of the residential school era within the broader context of colonization has had profoundly negative consequences for Aboriginal peoples in Canada. With many Aboriginal people living in third world conditions, the Aboriginal population is the fastestgrowing demographic group in the country, growing almost five times faster than the rate of other Canadians. By 2017, the population of Aboriginal people between the ages of 20 and 29 will rise to 242,000, representing a 41.9 percent increase in a relatively short time, compared to a projected growth rate of 8.7 percent for the total Canadian population. The growth rate in Manitoba and Saskatchewan is even more significant: by 2026, Aboriginal school-aged young people will be close to 30 percent of the population in both provinces.

Commenting on the convergence of demographic growth and the socioeconomic realities experienced by Aboriginal peoples, Mary Simon, president of Inuit 12 / Canadian Government Executive // December 2011

Tapiriit Kanatami (ITK), told conference participants that the status quo is not acceptable; she called it “a recipe for social disorder.”

In her June 2011 report, Sheila Fraser, former Auditor General of Canada, indicated that the situation for First Nations people is getting worse and warned that the education gap between them and other Canadians is growing. Census data indicate that the overall high school graduation rate for Aboriginal students is just 41 percent compared to 77 percent for the population as a whole, and the high school dropout rate among Aboriginal people is 22.6 percent compared to 8.5

percent for non-Aboriginals.

Problems related to high school completion and graduation present obvious barriers with regard to post-secondary attainment. Calling it “a story of missed potential and missed opportunity,” Roberta Jamieson, president of the National Aboriginal Achievement Foundation, indicated that 25,000 Aboriginal students reach the age of 18 each year. Yet there is an enrolment loss (in post-secondary education) of 17,000 of those students annually. One in five Canadians will get a postsecondary degree whereas only one in 33 Aboriginals will do so. Although Aboriginals are the fastest-growing demographic

It is ironic, if not perverse, that just as Canadians are becoming ... concerned about future labour shortages, there is a large ... population of young Aboriginal people who could be an invaluable source of workers...

First Nations FEATURE group in Canada, “they are unlikely to get out of high school, let alone post-secondary education.”

Notwithstanding the gaps and challenges, education remains the most powerful tool for improving the future of Aboriginal peoples in Canada. Higher levels of educational attainment correlate directly to important socioeconomic indicators including improved health, employment, and general well-being.

Our society values education for the benefits it holds not only for individuals but also for communities and the country as a whole; it is a necessary tool to survive in the modern age. A recent study by the Centre for the Study of Living Standards reported that closing the education gap between Aboriginals and other Canadians would result in savings of $115 billion over 15 years and that $401 billion would be added to Canada’s cumulative gross domestic product if Aboriginal education and labour market outcomes were to match those of the non-Aboriginal population.

Moreover, it is ironic, if not perverse, that just as Canadians are becoming increasingly concerned about future labour shortages, there is a large and growing population of young Aboriginal people who could be an invaluable source of workers to meet Canada’s future labour market needs. Nevertheless, they are not as engaged in the workforce as they might be because they lack the required education.

Improving Aboriginal education, said Queen’s principal Daniel Woolf, “is, therefore, critical to the fabric of Canadian society today.” It is a moral and economic imperative that would benefit Aboriginal peoples and is in the interest of the nation as a whole. As National Chief Shawn A-inchut Atleo commented, “The failure must not continue. We cannot afford to lose another generation to poverty and despair.”

Important educational summits have taken place in recent months. Corporate Canada has recognized that it too has a role to play, and there has been a renewed commitment and consciousness on the part of Aboriginal leaders, communities and students.

While keynote speakers identified myriad problems, they also spoke of “the slow emergence of a new era in Aboriginal education” or what Mary Simon called “the sound of the rolling thunder.” This

new era began three years ago with Prime Minister Harper’s apology to and compensation for survivors of the abuses in the residential school system. Last year, the Canadian government endorsed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; the Association of Canadian Deans of Education signed an Accord on Indigenous Education containing important voluntary recommendations for

post-secondary institutions; and in June 2011 the Canadian government and the Assembly of First Nations signed the Canada–First Nations Joint Action Plan.

The full report on the IPPSE conference is available on the Queen’s School of Policy Studies website: www.queensu.ca/sps

Make the Most of your journey As a VIA Préférence member, every trip you take brings you closer to free travel. For a more rewarding ride, join VIa rail’s reward program today at viapreference.com.

• Membership is free • Registration is quick and easy • Earn 1 point for every dollar spent at VIA Rail • Earn 1 point for every dollar spent at the VIA Préférence eBoutique • Free travel starts at just 550 points • Get access to exclusive offers • New members get 500 welcome bonus points* * Conditions apply

TM

Trademark owned by VIA Rail Canada Inc.

December 2011 // Canadian Government Executive / 13

showcase special editions

In Four unIque showcase specIals, cGe will highlight the issues and best practices from across the country in key public sector areas.

feature your product or service in these showcase specials March shared servIces

what works, where are we headed, how can the private sector help frame the experience, what can we learn from each other?

How can we save money and improve internal and client services?

June productIvIty and perFormance: is there a public sector productivity gap similar to the private sector’s? How do we transform “I’m being forced to do more with less” to “I’m proud to increase my productivity and improve performance”?

October cloud computInG

trust and technology – how can the cloud contribute to productivity while respecting privacy and security? What about “cloud resourcing”?

Or the structural impact of punching holes in silos?

December retIrement and leIsure

how do we nourish our souls outside of work -- holidays, hobbies, entertainment, work-life balance? What should we be doing, both financially and lifestyle-wise, to get ready for retirement?

cGe is read by 60,000 public sector decision-makers in the federal, provincial and municipal governments. for sales contact: Patricia Bush at trishb@netgov.ca, 905 727 4091 x336 or Sandra Service at sandras@netgov.ca, 905 727 4091 x228 for editorial contact: Paul Crookall at paul@crookall.ca, 613 565 7117

First Nations FEATURE

Building trust

Sterling: The award recognizes our efforts and commitment to build stronger, more positive, more collaborative relationships with Aboriginal people. It is really an award that celebrates the work of many Ontario ministries. And we are honoured that Aboriginal leaders, including Gary, nominated us.

helps Métis make great strides

In recent years, the Ontario government and the Métis people have signed several significant agreements under a new partnership.

Lori Sterling, Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs (MAA), and Gary Lipinski, president of the Métis Nation of Ontario (MNO), spoke with ministry senior writer Judy Embleton.

Lipinski: In my nomination letter, I said

Lipinski: The fund represents years of hard work and effort by many people at the MNO to create an economic development arm. It’s similar to other corporations operated by Métis in western Canada. Métis business people operating, or proposing to operate, in a resource sector such as mining, energy, renewable energy or forestry will be eligible to apply.

Sterling: Another important part of the How did the MNO and the MAA get where you are today?

Lori Sterling: When the MAA was created in 2007, we did a lot of work up front with the MNO to build capacity. We provided annual core funding and seconded ministry staff to help with intergovernmental relations. Our subsequent talks led to a true partnership and a historic 2008 framework agreement that formally recognizes the MNO’s important role in representing Métis citizens in Ontario.

Gary Lipinski: We’re also partnering to build understanding of Métis history and culture. More than 70,000 Métis people live in Ontario. So the government recognized 2010 as the Year of the Métis, which commemorated the 125th anniversary of the Northwest Rebellion and celebrated Métis contributions to Canada.

What else have Ontario and the MNO accomplished together?

Sterling: In June, Ontario and the MNO announced the Métis Voyageur Development Fund. It’s an independent, Métiscontrolled economic development corporation. The Ontario government has committed up to $30 million over 10 years to support Métis business.

framework agreement with the MAA is the New Relationship Fund (NRF). It is helping the MNO and its member communities hire staff, collect traditional Métis knowledge and get technical training.

In 2010-11, the MNO received $2.1 million through the NRF to facilitate consultations between the Métis and Ontario.

Lipinski: Our framework agreement also underlines the importance of Métis education. In 2008, the Ministry of Education signed a memorandum of understanding with the MNO, agreeing to address the unique education needs of Métis students, close achievement gaps and raise awareness of Métis history.

Sterling: The following year, the MNO and the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities signed an agreement to work together to improve postsecondary education, training and employment outcomes for Métis people. And earlier this year, Dr. Brenda Macdougall began her duties at the University of Ottawa as the first Chair of Métis Studies. The role of the chair is to increase research and create more understanding of the Métis people.

The MAA won a United Nations Public Service Award this year, first place in North America and Europe.

our progress together would not have been possible without the commitment of the public servants at the ministry to building trust. Their skill and enthusiasm sets an exceptionally high standard for others to follow.

What advice you can offer to others in public service who want to forge a productive partnership?

Sterling: I believe we’ve accomplished so much because both partners are motivated to work together to improve the lives of the Métis people in Ontario. There was a great deal of collegiality at the tables that negotiated agreements. We set ambitious timelines to reach our goals. There was also the political will to achieve progress.

Lipinski: I can say that the Métis are determined people. My advice is to persevere and trust that your partners share your goals. Trust strengthens your partnership and helps to reach those goals faster.

What’s ahead for the MNO and the MAA? Lipinski: We have many more ideas about what we want to achieve together for the Métis people of Ontario. For example, we are now working on a Métis community research agenda in a tripartite relationship with both Ontario and Canada. It will require joint decision-making. It’s a true test of the commitment to our MAA-MNO relationship.

Sterling: This project is a first in Canada.

The goal is to identify where Métis communities are in Ontario through joint research. The project embodies the principle of reconciliation that we are striving to achieve.

Lipinski: And it is better for all of Ontario to have a strong and proud Métis people.

December 2011 // Canadian Government Executive / 15

GE MOVES

CANADA. At GE’s Bromont, Quebec aviation facility, we produce airfoils used in advanced aircraft engines that move people all over the world. Which takes a lot of work. And all that work means jobs. In fact, an aircraft powered by GE and its partners takes off somewhere every two seconds, lifting people up and taking them home safely.

It’s just one more way GE is working for a stronger Canada.

FEATURE Performance management

Robert Lahey was the founding head

of the TBS Centre of Excellence for Evaluation. He has advised countries and organizations and is a member of Canada’s Evaluation Credentialing Board.

Canada’s under-the-radar

monitoring and evaluation system The two key tools used by the Canadian government to measure program or policy “results” (i.e., the outputs and intended outcomes) are performance monitoring and evaluation.

Internationally, many countries, encouraged by the World Bank and other UN agencies, would refer to this as their Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system. Though this term does not tend to be used in Canada, it is introduced to reflect the systems-approach to results measurement.

MANY SENIOR OFFICIALS WOULD DESCRIBE their organizations as “results”-oriented. The move to “managing for results,” which started in the mid- to late-nineties and really took off over the last decade, has raised the profile of the R-word and the vocabulary of results-based management (RBM) across all sectors. Managing for results, though, implies the need to measure results, and there is generally much less focus on this critical element of the RBM regime.

Evolution of M&E Canada is highly regarded internationally for its M&E system, particularly in the field of evaluation where its introduction into public sector management in Canada dates back to 1969. The first government-wide evaluation policy was established in 1977.

Generally speaking, this was inspired by the notion of “letting the managers manage,” that is, allowing deputy ministers to assume greater responsibility of their departments and programs, but also being accountable for the performance of those programs and the prudent use of public funds.

The 1990s saw an increased move to performance monitoring and high-level reporting across many OECD countries. In Canada, this was inspired by a desire to make performance information more accessible and useful to parliamentarians and parliamentary committees.

The 2000s introduced a more formal “results” orientation into the public sector with the introduction of RBM. In this environment, evaluation and performance monitoring were recognized as key tools to help ensure a results focus, responsible spending and greater transparency and accountability across government.

Canadian characteristics The structure of the Canadian M&E system can be characterized by three important defining elements: Departmental delivery, central leadership: a model based on a strong central management board that oversees and holds deputies accountable.

Emphasis on both monitoring and evaluation as tools of performance measurement: the ongoing performance monitoring and the conduct of planned evaluations are recognized as tools

1 2

18 / Canadian Government Executive // December 2011

to measure program and policy performance, serving to support good governance, accountability and results-based management.

Well-defined foundation setting the rules and expectations for performance measurement and evaluation: formalized government policies establish the standards of practice and guidelines and help clarify the government’s expectations, including the roles and responsibilities of all key players in the M&E system.

3

Along with the TBS and individual departments and agencies, the Auditor General of Canada (AG) is an important element in the M&E system.

Within TBS, the Centre of Excellence for Evaluation (CEE) sets the rules for evaluation across government and supports capacity building needs and oversight responsibilities of the system.

As well, relevant policy areas in TBS guide departmental managers and provide system-wide oversight on performance measurement and reporting. The deputy head of a department or agency has some flexibility in the resourcing of these tools, so as to be ap-

Performance management FEATURE propriate to the size and needs of their organization.

To support evaluation, all major government departments and agencies are required to establish an internal evaluation function, as well as put in place the following infrastructure: a senior-level evaluation committee, chaired by the deputy minister; annual and multi-year planning for evaluation; a departmental evaluation policy reflective of the government’s policy; and, the mechanisms needed for follow-through on delivery of credible evaluation products. To help ensure independence of the evaluation function, the head of evaluation generally reports to the deputy head or at least has unencumbered access to the most senior official in the department. Deputy heads are also required by TBS policy to develop a corporate performance framework (the so-called Management Resources and Results Structure, MRRS) that links all programs of the department to the expected outcomes.

The Auditor General periodically monitors and reports to Parliament on the functioning of various aspects of the M&E system, an important oversight role that reinforces the health and sustainability of the system.

Sustainability of the system M&E should not be considered as an end in itself.

A number of formal centrally-driven administrative policies introduced over the 1990s and 2000s have served as key drivers for both monitoring and evaluation. Some have had a direct impact on building M&E capacity in departments; others, though serving broader needs, have also generated demand for systematic and credible performance information.

An internal evaluation function could potentially be criticized for not having the necessary independence to ‘speak truth to power’. To deal with such a challenge, the Canadian model has put in place certain infrastructure and oversight mechanisms aimed at ensuring that internal evaluations of departmental programs or policies are indeed credible and objective. Some of these elements are instituted at the level of the individual department; others are instituted and enforced centrally.

Oversight in the Canadian model is implemented at both a micro and a macro level. At an operational level, TBS monitors individual departmental M&E initiatives and assesses each department/deputy head against a number of M&E-related criteria through its annual Management Accountability Framework (MAF) process. At a whole-of-government level, the AG conducts periodic “performance audits” that monitor the effectiveness of M&E implementation across the full system.

To be effective, there needs to be an enabling environment for M&E and a willingness to carry out performance monitoring and evaluation of government programs in full public view. Transparency has been a

M&E should not be considered as an end in itself.

critical dimension underlying the government’s M&E system. Access-to-information legislation has played an important role in increasing accessibility of M&E studies to the general public, including the media.

HR capacity development is an ongoing issue given the large number of professional evaluators working in government, currently some 550. The introduction in 2010 by the Canadian Evaluation Society of a Credentialed Evaluator designation based on a recognized set of competencies is the most recent effort to professionalize evaluation.

Current challenges Measuring the performance of programs and policies is not without its challenges. Canada, though one of the leaders in the area of M&E, still works to perfect the use of M&E tools for measuring performance.

While there has been considerable progress in developing program and corporate performance frameworks across government departments, the expectations regarding the establishment of performance monitoring systems has generally not been met, resulting in a lack of performance information.

One of the problems may be that the expectation for performance monitoring (the M) as a tool for measuring results is unreasonably high. Beyond the measurement of outputs and some short-term outcomes, the establishment of ongoing monitoring systems by a manager is not likely the most cost-effective approach for measuring results. Most medium- and longer-term outcomes and impacts likely require a survey, special study or an evaluation. And, the evaluator is best positioned to carry this out.

Evaluation can be a valuable tool to serve the needs of both the central agency and an individual department/deputy. In the best possible world, these are aligned and all needs are met. In reality, though, budget limitations require choices to be made: subject of an evaluation; scope/focus/issues to address; etc.

History has shown (through AG reports) that many departments have had too little coverage of their programs and have often overlooked addressing the “big issues” of program rationale and continued need for the program. Changes to the 2009 Evaluation Policy, though, deal directly with this. However, in the process they may have taken the focus away from doing evaluation to support knowledge generation, program improvement and good management.

One of the strengths of the Canadian M&E system has traditionally been its flexibility. The system has yet to find the right balance between doing evaluation for central agency purposes versus supporting departmental management needs. For government officials and taxpayers alike this is important, as evaluation ought to be considered a key function in the management toolkit that serves to measure and inform on program effectiveness.

December 2011 // Canadian Government Executive / 19

FEATURE Marketing

Jennifer Johnson is director of

communications for the Ministry of Tourism, Parks, Culture and Sport and a former journalist with CBC.

Pilot promotes

Saskatchewan’s wild side The Government of Saskatchewan dove into a social media experiment this past summer with a marketing pilot project designed to garner attention for the province, break negative stereotypes, and generally encourage more tourism within and to Saskatchewan.

The result? The project was so successful it taught Google a new word.

SASKATCHEWAN’S MINISTRY OF Tourism, Parks, Culture and Sport wanted to market the province in a new way, to a younger audience, so together with its ad agency, it developed a project to hire a summer student through a contest with public voting. The winner would then travel around Saskatchewan and blog about everything that makes the province special. The Ministry called the position the “Saskatchewanderer.”

When the project first launched in February, a Google word search for Saskatchewanderer would come back with the result: “Did you mean Saskatchewan Deer?”

Today, saskatchewanderer.ca pops up as the first search result.

“We are extremely pleased with the results of this project,” said Bill Hutchinson, Minister of Tourism, Parks, Culture and Sport. “Thousands of people from all over the world checked out the Saskatchewanderer’s adventures – and hopefully they

are as impressed with Saskatchewan as those of us who live here.”

The contest launched in February. More than 60 young people submitted applications to be the Saskatchewanderer. The ministry shortlisted 10 contestants, and then handed the reigns over to the public. Three rounds of voting later, Andrew Konoff was named the first Saskatchewanderer.

The contest wasn’t just for fun though; it was part of the marketing. The contestants submitted videos, extolling their virtues, but also the virtues of Saskatchewan, describing why it’s the best place to live, work and play in Canada. Then they reached out to their social networks to generate votes, driving thousands of people to saskatchewanderer.ca.

By the time Konoff won the contest, the Saskatchewanderer already had an audience. It also had a media following. Overall, the project resulted in more than 60 positive media stories, including in high profile places such as the Vancouver Sun, Toronto Sun, Winnipeg Free Press, on Sympatico.ca and Yahoo! News Canada.

Over the course of the summer, Konoff gained nearly 2,000 Facebook and Twitter followers, and directed all of them to check out his blog on a regular basis. By the end

20 / Canadian Government Executive // December 2011

of the summer there had been more than 176,000 pages viewed on the website.

And on those pages, people got to see a side of Saskatchewan they might not have known existed. Saskatchewan residents and tourists alike were able to live vicariously through the Saskatchewanderer as he travelled more than 12,000 km and rode a new zip line in Cypress Hills (there are actually six zip lines, about 45 feet above the forest floor), interviewed the Sheepdogs (a Saskatchewan rock band that won a contest to be on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine), tried paddle boarding (a popular fitness activity among celebrities like Jennifer Anniston and Matthew McConaughey), and flew over the Athabasca Sand Dunes (the largest active sand surface in Canada and one of the most northern sets of major dune fields in the world).

“Saskatchewan is not just what you’ll see on the Trans-Canada Highway – go off the road for an hour in any direction and you’re well into adventure territory,” Konoff said. “We have more than five million acres of parks, lots of music festivals, tons of history and a rural and urban landscape unlike anywhere else in the world. Whether you need to escape from civilization for a while or get fully immersed in it, Saskatchewan has something for you.”

People from all over the world checked out saskatchewanderer.ca, from as far away as Finland, Japan and the United Arab Emirates.

Viewers also took advantage of the social media component and got engaged in the project, sending Konoff messages and commenting on photos throughout the summer. Miranda Blaber wrote on the Saskatchewanderer Facebook wall: “We are loving the Saskatchewanderer as a whole; great photos and fun information about the best province in Canada!”

Two sponsors helped support the project – Bennett Dunlop Ford provided a vehicle for the summer and CAA Saskatchewan provided a membership and gas gift certificates.

The Saskatchewanderer has now wandered back to school, but you can still check out his adventures at www.saskatchewanderer.ca.

Susan Cartwright spent 21 years with Foreign Affairs and International Trade, serving abroad five times, before serving with Fisheries and Oceans, Treasury Board Secretariat, Health Canada and the Privy Council Office.

Management FEATURE

LESSONS FROM PSMA REVIEW The Public Service Modernization Act, which came into force in 2005, was the most significant change to people management legislation in the federal public service in over 30 years.

Two of the statutes it introduced – the Public Service Employment Act and the Public Service Labour Relations Act – contained requirements for a five-year review. Susan Cartwright led the preparation of the review report.

WHILE STAFFING THE TEAM and finding office space for our review in 2009, I reflected on our objectives. Producing a high quality, readable and cogent report was obviously critical. But I wanted to focus on making a difference in the workplace by addressing some of the challenges managers and employees face. The review process needed to be useful, an opportunity to bring people together in a neutral space to discuss challenges, to share, to learn, to dispel some myths and to begin to make changes without waiting for the review to be completed.

The review team was deliberately small and comprised of individuals with varied expertise. Small teams force collaboration, in this case with our “partners” the Public Service Commission, the Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer, the Privy Council Office, the Canada School of Public Service, the Public Service Staffing Tribunal, and the Public Service Labour Relations Board.

The independence of the review was an important consideration. Despite the decision that the review would be led by a public servant, we were left to work independently. We never felt constrained in our engagement, analysis or conclusions. We were deliberately transparent about our work and met with our partners periodically, keeping in mind that they were also subjects of our review.

Perhaps the most important step was defining the scope of the review. Determined to avoid scope creep, we were mindful that legislation does not cover all aspects of HR management in the public service, although we could not in some cases ignore the linkages and interrelationships.

We established a governance structure, laid

out our principles, and developed terms of reference. Where possible we used existing resources including data, information, events and committees.

Given the subject matter, we successfully engaged employees at all levels and from a variety of communities across the country. However, our attempt to use Web 2.0 was disappointing.

The task would have been easier if a clear end-state and indicators had been developed in 2005, against which progress would be measured. Despite this shortcoming, once we graduated from legislation “boot camp” and had a sound understanding of the statutes, we set about developing performance indicators and dividing our inquiry into themes.

Over the next 18 months we engaged stakeholders, collected and analysed information, debated with our partners, and developed and road-tested our findings.

An interesting phenomenon emerged: recurrent issues and challenges appeared for each theme. As a result, our recommendations were clustering in a way that we had not anticipated, which we concluded was significant and revealed the underlying reasons why this major change initiative is not yet complete.

This led to a “proposition for change,” which we believe applies equally well to any large change initiative and offers suggestions to increase the likelihood of success.

Finally came the actual writing of the report to be submitted to the president of the Treasury Board. Each team member drafted a section of the report, integrating what we had heard and learnt, enunciating our findings and developing possible recommendations. The disparate drafts then had to be integrated into a cohesive whole that, along with editing, translation and publishing, took longer than we had anticipated.

FROM THIS PROCESS, THERE IS SOME USEFUL LEARNING: • There is no substitute for the basics: sound problem definition, strong fact-based analysis and openness to new ideas.

• Process matters: even those who disagree with our recommendations recognize the review was thorough and thoughtful and appreciate our transparency.

• Notwithstanding our attention to scope, expectations for the review remain high among some stakeholders.

• Despite a discussion guide and background material, it was surprisingly difficult to get beyond the myths and into fact-based discussions.

• Small teams can indeed foster collaboration and learning, but no matter how collegial and likeminded, there can only be one pen, possibly two.

• It was important that we were flexible and ready to adjust, and hear what our analysis was telling us, despite the frustration of revising the work based on our original themes.

• Our most useful and lively engagement sessions were those that mixed participants from different organizations, levels and functions. Learning and sharing good practices happened on the spot.

December 2011 // Canadian Government Executive / 21

Wilbur McLean is a communications officer

for the City of Medicine Hat. He has been involved in the implementation of a visual organization chart for the city’s 1,200 employees.

Medicine Hat jostles employees to communicate

Poet Rudyard Kipling famously described southeastern Alberta as having “…all hell for a basement and the only trap door appears to be Medicine Hat.” INDEED, MEDICINE HAT’S publicly owned natural gas reserves throughout both the city and the region place the municipality in a unique position as a producer and distributor of natural gas and electricity to its residents and surrounding area. With a population of 62,000 people, the city employs approximately 1,200 employees to meet the service needs of the community.

The city’s employees are spread out across Medicine Hat in approximately 10 different work locations. While they all work for the same organization and are driving toward meeting city council’s priorities, a gap in internal communications and employee engagement was identified in 2006 through an internal communications survey.

The survey identified that Medicine Hat, not unlike many other municipalities, needed a way to better connect employees to the organization and to each other. The Corporate Communications Department was tasked with this responsibility and discovered a collaboration tool called Jostle that would help meet many of the recommendations to improve employee communications.

Make it visual Employees were asking for visual organization charts so they could better understand the city structure and find the people who could help them do their jobs. There are several anecdotes of employees taking the elevator with the same people every day or being in meetings, but having no idea about their colleagues or what they do for the city. In fact, even some of the most senior municipal officials are largely unknown to many city employees. Having a tool that enables employees to look at the organization structure and put a face to a name has been invaluable.

Make it useful To gain employee buy-in, the solution had to offer workrelated value. It had to make finding people more efficient and enable employees to be more effective in their work.

The ability to create and work with project teams in the Jostle platform is useful as it allows team members to collaborate and share information in a user-friendly and virtual environment. It is easy to see who is working on which project and what resources may be required to assist with new projects or priorities.

Make it easy

22 / Canadian Government Executive // December 2011

Employee information has typically been stored, updated and shared in several

ICT FEATURE

locations such as through the email system, phone database or via the Internet, so locating the most up-to-date information wasn’t always easy. By pulling all of the information into one platform and having regular updates to employee information, Jostle provides a one-stop shop for all contact information including office locations, email addresses and telephone numbers.

Make it social With workplaces quickly moving towards social media to reach their clients and customers, it made sense to offer city employees the same kind of experience. Medicine Hat wanted to provide employees with a platform that could not only connect them in the workplace, but also provide a space for setting up or joining social clubs or teams. Employee engagement goes far beyond the workplace and having a strong connected culture will benefit any organization.

Jostle satisfied many of the needs identified by Medicine Hat employees and was launched in January 2011. The city used an internal promotion campaign that involved a contest, website information and instructions, as well as email tips and teasers.

Introducing anything new into an organization can be challenging, but there was a decent response. While not all feedback was positive, the city continues to work with Jostle and employees to make the tool more useful. Additional functionality was added and education about using Jostle will continue. Initiatives are expected to include hosting “lunch-and-learns,” setting up project teams and having senior leaders promote its use through a top-down approach to internal communication.

Annie Joannette is communications advisor

NEW PROFESSIONALS

to the National Aboriginal Employee Consultation Team, Correctional Service of Canada.

Correctional Service

consultations for an inclusive workplace the New Year, consultations will take place in the Pacific and Quebec regions, making this a truly national initiative to capture the stories of Aboriginal staff across the country.

As part of the consultation decorum, an Elder is invited to open and close the session with a prayer or a smudge to create a respectful environment for participation.

This incorporation of Aboriginal cultural practices into our work has been an important element for successful consultations as it sets the stage for an open and receptive atmosphere to address the unique challenges that Aboriginal employees – and others – face while working in a correctional services environment.

The consultations that have taken place so far have seen an honest and frank dialogue between the commissioner and participants. This consultation process is an important first step to work together to develop solutions to the barriers faced by Aboriginal employees.

As CSC is committed to operating its facilities in an inclusive fashion, valuing the merits and strengths of all employees, Head held similar consultations with visible minority employees across Canada during the spring and summer of 2010. Next year, the commissioner will launch a round of consultations with persons with disabilities.

This consultation process has been an exciting opportunity for employees to play an active role in their organization, facilitate change within CSC, and ultimately improve public safety results for all Canadians.

This past June, Don Head, commissioner of Correctional Service of Canada (CSC), started a national conversation with staff of Aboriginal ancestry on how to achieve a more inclusive and representative workplace.

The consultation process is part of fulfilling a vision to make CSC one of the top ten employers of choice in the public service. The goal is to address the systemic barriers to recruitment, career advancement and employee retention for Aboriginal employees at CSC. To do so, the commissioner is consulting directly with Aboriginal staff to hear their feedback on how CSC can more successfully create a barrier-free and inclusive recruitment, staffing and training model.

New ways of connecting To help with the consultation process and the follow-up report and its implementation, Head established a National Consultation Team, of which I am proud to be part, to assist with the logistics and organization. One of my roles has been to serve as a social media advisor for the consultations.

As social media becomes more integrated into our daily lives, the use of these tools to build relationships with employees, as well as to inform and engage with Canadians, will increasingly become a requirement for how government departments communicate. As an ambassador of the organization, the commissioner uses Twitter to promote the Aboriginal employee consultation to his staff and to the public at large, as well as to recognize people who are doing great work at CSC in ensuring public safety. We have been encouraging staff we meet to use tools like Twitter to connect with the commissioner as well as other CSC staff across the country.

As social media becomes more integrated into our daily lives, the use of these tools to build relationships with employees will increasingly become a requirement for how government departments communicate.

Cross country dialogue So far, Head has consulted with Aboriginal employees in the National Capital Region, the Ontario Region, and is currently travelling in the Prairie and Atlantic regions. In

For the latest on the consultations, follow Commissioner Don Head on Twitter: @Don_Head_CSC or @ CSC_SCC_en

December 2011 // Canadian Government Executive / 23

PROCUREMENT

Michael Asner is an independent consultant

specializing in public procurement (michael@ rfpmentor.com). Sharon Sheppard is a freelance writer and editor (sharons1963@me.com).

Are you FAT enough?

Anyone who has been told by a doctor to lose weight has undoubtedly been introduced to the body mass index (BMI), a quick and simple measure to help determine if you are in the healthy or not so healthy zone. Just as weight plays a vital role in determining your personal health, so public procurement plays a vital role in determining the overall health of a government’s financial well-being.

Not only does public procurement need to deliver on its financial responsibilities, it also has to deliver on its policy responsibilities to ensure fairness, openness and transparency. And while there are a lot of “prescriptions” and checklists for what that entails, there is currently no procurement BMI that will tell you whether your

organization is in the “healthy zone” when it comes to this key policy deliverable. Until now.

We have created the FAT index, an easyto-use health metric to show whether your agency has delivered on Fairness, Accessibility and Transparency (FAT) policy requirements. It looks at these three critical areas and gives you a quick score that will help determine if your organization is in an acceptable range.

If your score is lower than you would like, the advice is simple: talk to your procurement manager. Listen to what he or she tells you. Often there are simple steps that can be taken to produce quick improvements at little cost. And there are numerous sources of best practices.

We all know that individual health management is more than stepping away from the buffet and counting calories. You have to look at the nutrients you’re taking in, your blood pressure, your cholesterol.

Likewise, in procurement, good organizational health is more than a matter of counting the shekels. Taking shortcuts with process holds hidden hazards that can be costly to your organization down the road.

The key to achieving a healthy FAT score is to ensure you are documenting your work and following best practices. If you need to improve, keep working at it. If you are doing well, give yourself a pat on the back. All of us benefit when public organizations achieve maximum FAT-ness.

Ottawa Public Sector Quality Fair

Register today at www.ottawapsqf.ca

 Keynote Speakers & Panel Discussion  Professional Development Sessions  Fabulous group pricing available st  Register before Dec 31 and win prizes Set up your own Booth – find out about becoming a Supporter or Quality Partner

Act Now Save Hundreds on Group Pricing

24 / Canadian Government Executive // December 2011

Join us for the largest annual event in Canada focusing on improvement in the public sector Canadian Aviation and Space Museum 11 Aviation Parkway, Ottawa, ON February 7, 2012, 8:00am – 5:00pm

Co-hosted by

PROCUREMENT WHAT’S YOUR FAT SCORE? KEY INDICATOR

SCORE

Key Indicator: Fairness Fairness is defined as “treating people equally without favoritism or discrimination.” In public procurement, fair means that a qualified vendor using only the information in the RFP can prepare a proposal that is capable of winning the competition.

Score 1 point for each Yes, 0 for each No

• Specifications do not unduly restrict competition.

• The RFP provides the budget or solid indicators of the scope of the project so that vendors can estimate the budget.

• The evaluation committee’s behaviour is governed by strict rules and signed agreements that provide confidentiality for the process and ensure that evaluators do not have conflicts of interest.

• The evaluation process reflects best RFP practices such as full disclosure of related studies and information; and full disclosure of all information from external sources included in the RFP. • The RFP includes a description of the evaluation process, the evaluation factors, and the weight assigned to each factor.

• Active involvement of a qualified, experienced and ethical procurement officer in each RFP as the chair of the evaluation committee. Use of a fairness officer in high risk, high visibility politicized procurements.

Key Indicator: Accessibility Accessibility means being open to all competitors, not putting restrictions on those allowed to participate. This means the opportunity to compete is public knowledge and the details of the competition are easily obtained at little cost.

Score 1 point for each Yes, 0 for each No

• New procurement opportunities are posted on a widely used e-tendering system available at no cost to the vendor community.

• The deadline for submitting proposals allows all to participate.

• Questions and answers from and to the proponents are posted on the e-tendering site in a timely manner.

• Vendor meetings, if held, are announced in the RFP and webcast with a copy of the file publicly available.

• The RFP recognizes that competition from small businesses is valuable and takes steps to encourage their participation in the process: e.g., vendor development programs, availability of paper documents, webcasts to reduce travel requirements.

Key Indicator: Transparency Transparency is defined as being open to public scrutiny. This means providing documentation to proponents and other stakeholders as the key aspects of the process unfold, especially the evaluation.

Score 1 point for each Yes, 0 for each No

• A policy that identifies which events must be documented and the information to be included in the written determination related to each major decision such as the reasons for disqualifying a vendor or the elimination of a proposal part way through the evaluation process.

• Release of pre-selected information to all vendors once the contract has been signed without an application under the access-to-information law. For example, the summary of the scores and the list of proposals received.

• Use of an evaluation guide: not just general instructions to the evaluators but a workbook on how to perform the evaluation. This guide is available to the public online.

• A standard checklist of documents that must be used/collected during an RFP process and archived/retained in the project file at end of the project. This checklist is available to the public to guide their requests under access-to-information laws.

• Standard release of the recommendation summary, which includes a comparison of proposals, summary of scores and pricing.

UNHEALTHY:

HEALTHY RANGE:

OPTIMUM HEALTH:

Action required

Not unhealthy, but could improve

Where you should be

0 – 6

7 – 10

11-16 December 2011 // Canadian Government Executive / 25

THE LEADER’S BOOKSHELF

Harvey Schachter writes The Globe and Mail’s Managing Books and Monday Morning Manager columns.

He is a freelance writer specializing in management issues.

The motivating power of progress

The Progress Principle Teresa Amabile and Steven Kramer Harvard Business Review Press, 260 pages, $25.00

If you’re of a certain age, you may remember the slogan for General Electric from the 1960s: “Progress is our most important product.” It was one of the most successful advertising slogans of that era. And it should be used, in a somewhat altered fashion, by government executives: progress is our most important engagement tool.

That’s the focal point of a new book by the husband-and-wife research team of Harvard Business School Professor Teresa Amabile and developmental psychologist Steven Kramer. They were interested in unravelling the mystery of workplace creativity, and recruited 238 people in 26 project teams who each day were emailed a diary form with several questions on that day’s activity. Most of those questions asked for a numerical rating about their inner work lives: their perceptions, emotions and motivations during the day.

26 / Canadian Government Executive // December 2011

The most important question allowed their respondents free rein, as they were asked to briefly describe one event for the day that stood out in their mind. The event had to be relevant to work in some way, but could range in the diary narrative from the actions of managers and coworkers to the individual’s own behaviours. In some cases they were positive events, in some negative, and in some neutral. “These daily journals turned out to be a researcher’s gold mine, giving us something that no researcher had enjoyed before – real time access to the workday experiences of many people in many contexts over a long period of time.

Several performance measures indicated that some of these people, and some of their teams, ended up doing very well; some did very poorly,” they write.

In the end, the researchers were privy to scenes from 12,000 individual workdays. The study was of business, but there’s no reason not to believe their key finding doesn’t apply to government as well. It’s a breakthrough idea, which brushes aside much of what we have held dear about work engagement and organizational success.

They call it the progress principle: making headway on meaningful work brightens inner work life and boosts long-term progress. It’s not rewards, or recognition or enchanting words from leaders that gets people going. It’s a sense that they are accomplishing something meaningful – bit by bit, day by day.

“Real progress triggers positive emotions like satisfaction, gladness, even joy.

It leads to a sense of accomplishment and

self worth as well as positive views of the work and sometimes the organization.

Such thoughts and perceptions (along with those positive emotions) feed the motivation, the deep engagement, that is crucial for ongoing blockbuster performance,” they observe.

Progress is our most important engagement tool.

And for the most part, we have failed to realize that. The researchers talked to managers about what motivates employees. Those executives tended to favour the things that most management books tout for motivating employees: recognition, tangible incentives and clear work goals. Rarely did anyone mention progress in work being a factor.

The researchers thought perhaps their progress finding was too obvious and went without saying. So they said it, surveying 669 managers from around the world, asking them to rank five factors that could influence motivation: recognition, incentives, interpersonal support, clear goals, and support for making progress in the work. Progress ranked dead last as a motivator, and third out of five as an influence on emotion.

Work is personal. Professionals who have invested years in their education and careers identify with the work they produce. “Work progress and setbacks matter so much because work matters so much. It’s simply part of being human,” they write.

On a great day, we make progress. On a bad day, we don’t. Companies where people made a lot of progress had motivated employees and pushed ahead.

THE LEADER’S BOOKSHELF

Companies where people routinely faced setbacks in their work had dispirited employees and lower economic returns. As inner work life goes, so goes the organization.

“We discovered that people are more creative and productive when they are deeply engaged in the work, when they feel happy, and when they think highly of their projects, coworkers, managers, and organizations. But there’s more. When people enjoy consistently positive inner work lives, they are also more committed to their work and more likely to work well with colleagues. In other words, work-related psychological benefits for employees translate into performance benefits for the company,” they observe.

So help your employees by facilitating progress, even if in small increments. “A person’s sense of steady forward movement toward an important goal can make all the difference between a great day and a terrible one,” they observe. “Small wins often had a surprisingly strong positive effect, and small losses a surprisingly strong negative one.”

Indeed, you need to strive to prevent setbacks, since the effect of setbacks on emotions is stronger than the effect of progress. Although progress increases happiness and decreases frustration, the effect of setbacks is not only the opposite but also greater on those two emotions. The power of setbacks to diminish happiness is more than twice as strong as

SUBSCRIBE

NOW!

the power of progress to boost happiness. The power of setbacks to increase frustration is more than three times as strong as the power of progress to decrease frustration.

Individuals wrote longer diary narratives about negative events of all kinds, not just setbacks, compared with neutral or positive events. That suggests we may expend more cognitive and emotional energy on bad events than good ones.

In addition to progress, two other factors emerged as significant forces supporting inner work life. The first are catalysts, events that directly help project work. For example, they found if a programmer is told that she will be receiving the new computer she ordered, she will be happy and feel better about her employer and how she is valued – even before she gets the computer. The second are nourishers, interpersonal events that uplift employees doing the work. People are lifted up by four major nourishers: respect, encouragement, emotional support from others, and affiliation – bonds to other people.

On the other hand, inner work life can be undermined not only by setbacks but also by inhibitors, the events that directly hinder progress, and toxins, the interpersonal events that can plague a workplace.

Beyond trying in a general sense to facilitate progress in your workplace, the researchers suggest you emulate their diary technique and start recording how you

are faring. This notion borrows from The Checklist Manifesto by Harvard surgeon and author Atul Gawande, who found that performance of surgery teams were dramatically safer when before the operation they went through a basic checklist of procedures. The surgeons, naturally, thought the checklist was beneath them, but to their surprise it worked, and the researchers urge you not to believe that stopping at the end of each day to evaluate how it went is beneath you.

They offer a daily progress checklist in the book for you to go through each day. Or they suggest you buy a journal, and at the end of the day summarize the main events. Ask yourself: What event stands out in my mind from the workday, and how did it affect my inner work life? What progress did I make today, and how did it affect my inner work life?

What nourishers and catalysts supported me and my work today? How can I sustain them tomorrow? What one thing can I do to make progress on important work tomorrow? What setbacks did I have today, and how did they affect my inner work life? What can I learn from them? What toxins and inhibitors affected me and my work today? How can I weaken or avoid them tomorrow? Did I affect my colleagues’ work lives positively today? How might I do so tomorrow?

Remember: progress is our most important engagement tool.

One Year Subscription (10 Issues) Canada $40 + HST ($42.50) Foreign $60 + Shipping and Handling Fax: 905-727-4428 Mail: 24-4 Vata Court, Aurora, ON, L4G 4B6 Online: http://cge.itincanada.ca/

NAME:

TITLE:

ORGANIZATION: ADDRESS: CITY:

PROVINCE:

PHONE:

POSTAL CODE: PAYMENT:

E-MAIL ADDRESS: CHEQUE ENCLOSED

VISA

MASTERCARD

NAME: CARD #:

EXP. DATE

December 2011 // Canadian Government Executive / 27

Governance Information Software

GOVERNING DIGITALLY

Jeffrey Roy is Associate Professor in the School of Public Administration at Dalhousie University (roy@dal.ca).

The cloudy state of mobile security In the October issue, Greg Lane and I discussed the mobility revolution underway and its consequences for government. We also underscored the considerable importance of privacy and security in realizing positive change both organizationally and for society as a whole. As governments look to cloud systems and mobility devices as platforms for collaboration and innovation, there is no greater priority for 2012.

Consider the emergence this past year of the Apple iCloud. Apple is first and foremost a proprietary-driven company, designing and maintaining its own operating system as a platform for products such as iPods, iPhones, and most recently the iPad. What the iCloud does is synchronize the usage of all such products (including Mac computers of course) via a common platform for storage and processing that is housed online (within the confines of Apple’s “private cloud” if you will).

Since Apple does not provide large-scale systems to government, the impacts of this evolution may be largely indirect in the short-term as the iCloud is directed toward the consumer market of Apple product users. Yet there are nonetheless important implications, three of which we look at here.

First, as John Breeden recently pointed out in Government Computer News, the advent of the iCloud denotes a potentially significant expansion of the usage and credibility of the cloud as a concept for wider segments of the public (just as the iPhone has done much to democratize Internet access to mobile devices). As more people gravitate to Apple’s cloud, this concept will likely gain wider understanding and acceptance (further reinforced by

existing cloud platforms of Google, Facebook and others).

Already it bears noting that Apple’s hugely successful bridging of its proprietary platforms with a partially open community of “apps” developers has resulted in likeminded efforts by many governments to create a similarly open community of contributors.

Second – and much to the chagrin of Research in Motion – a growing cadre of government workers in many jurisdictions are embracing the iPhone and iPad as mobile devices that transcend personal and professional usage. Indeed, the one time infallible security advantages of the Blackberry network are evermore rivalled in this regard

by Apple’s operating system, Google’s open source variant, the Android operating system, and the new collaborative venture between Microsoft and Nokia (all of which underpin a widening assortment of smart phone and tablet devices).

As a recent 2011 report by the Michigan-based Ponemon Institute points out (Seven Tips for Securing Mobile Workers), large organizations must think seriously about an overall enterprise architecture for privacy and security that accounts for not only internal operating systems making use of cloud components, but also an array of external devices. Imposing the choice of digital devices is no longer an option: thus, standards, accountability and training are crucial to balancing openness and flexibility with appropriate information safeguards.

Of course, with respect to Apple product users, an important layer of security and redundancy is now virtualized via their proprietary cloud. This evolution also carries benefits and drawbacks for organizations: on the plus side, Apple is as sophisticated as they come in storing

data and safeguarding infrastructure; on the other hand, users may be lulled into a false sense of “security” that carries over into workplace behaviour.

Indeed, a recent study by the Conference Board of Canada found that Canadians are anything but vigilant online in terms of information security practices, and the situation is worsening across social media sites. Another Ponemon study in 2010, for example, revealed that two-thirds of social media users partake without setting high levels of privacy and security: while 80 percent of respondents apparently expressed concern about online security, more than half admitted to not taking any measures whatsoever.

Governments must therefore shift beyond the language of rights and choice in trumpeting individual freedom online.

Just as more is expected of corporations and governments, legally and morally, in safeguarding information assets, this same notion of responsibility and accountability must be extended to the citizenry at large.

For now, it seems the message is not getting through, with cloud systems and mobile devices inadvertently fostering passiveness even as the stakes are escalating.

Third and finally, government’s clout as a large and strategic consumer of technology systems and devices, coupled with its role as regulator of industry-wide behaviour, create important leverage to promote greater openness and interoperability across otherwise separate proprietary cloud systems and product platforms. As the iCloud takes hold – along with numerous other private, public and hybrid clouds – openness, interoperability and interdependence must be guiding principles for government action both within their jurisdictions and collectively across increasingly porous borders.

December 2011 // Canadian Government Executive / 29

OPINION

David Zussman holds the Jarislowsky Chair in Public Sector Management in the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa (dzussman@uOttawa.ca).

Fiscal model no longer sustainable It is difficult to determine when the debate about the need to strike a better balance between taxes and government expenditures was reignited. Certainly this was a lively topic some 30 years ago when the MacDonald Commission engaged Canadians in a serious conversation about the role of the state and the value of paying taxes in support of public services.

At the time, the MacDonald Commission recommended that Canada develop policies with greater reliance on market mechanisms and pursue a free trade agreement with the United States, the world’s only legitimate superpower. As well, the Commission recommended various reforms to the welfare state model, emphasizing the importance of social equity and economic efficiency. Many of the Commission’s recommendations were pursued by the government and the period following their implementation was generally one of prosperity, with Canada managing to keep its fiscal house in order despite periods of high inflation and large deficits.

The world has changed dramatically since that report, with the global economy putting intense pressure on governments to increase their nations’ competitiveness and technological change redefining the workplace and the value of work. Moreover, many developed countries have adopted a series of economic measures that strongly endorse Adam Smith’s basic assumption that the pursuit of private self-interest by individuals and companies will ultimately be a benefit to society as a whole.

New superpowers have also begun to emerge, putting yet more pressure on recession-prone and deficit-ridden countries to compete, leading to calls for less government spending and more favourable tax treatment for investors and entrepreneurs.

30 / Canadian Government Executive // December 2011

Some, however, are beginning to question whether this approach, with its singular focus on the market and GDP growth, has produced a “good” society. Certainly, there are some unhealthy signs: government bailouts of the banks to avoid the catastrophic collapse of national economies, corporate executives receiving significant compensation for mediocre financial results, high unemployment and record fiscal deficits in several countries.

Canada has remained remarkably unscathed, with a relatively healthy economy and stable labour markets. Yet, here too, there is a growing concern about whether our current system of spending and taxing is sustainable in the medium-term.

Recently, Alex Himelfarb, the former Secretary to the Cabinet for three prime ministers, highlighted the need for an honest conversation about tax, one that recognizes that the impact of cuts goes well beyond the reduction of government waste. He observed, “As we cut taxes and make them less progressive, the costs of the free lunch accumulate. While the most obvious signs may be longer wait times, potholes and crumbling bridges, more insidious and worrisome is the inevitable rise in inequality.”

One way to understand what Himelfarb and others are saying is to ask our federal and provincial governments to answer the following four questions. First, what is the appropriate role and cost of government for the next 20 years? Second, should governments pay for their programs through deficit financing or increased productivity and profitability? Third, in the event that there is not enough economic growth to make up for the increases in program costs, should government increase taxes to pay for the increased levels of services being demanded by citizens. Finally, who

should carry the burden of the additional taxes: high-income and wealthy individuals or middle-income earners?

The current effort by the Harper government to rein in spending, now referred to as the Deficit Reduction Action Plan, is focused on cost savings based on finding efficiencies in the current program architecture or in the use of technology. This exercise is therefore not likely to yield much information to answer these basic questions. We also know from experience that any major change in tax regimes will take a long time to implement and will need a national consensus with the provinces and citizens.

Accordingly, another approach is required for a national dialogue about the services and programs that Canadians will need and how we intend to finance them for the next 20 years. The MacDonald Commission played a very important role in orienting Canadians to the market economy and introduced us to the idea of entering into a free trade agreement with the United States. Over the past five years, the Harper government has created several advisory committees to address serious economic issues but their impact is not readily apparent. Now is the right time for a more serious national conversation about government services and taxes.

The current model is not sustainable in the long-term.

media:scape™

furniture and technology merged to help teams access and share information www.steelcase.com/cometogether

expect more

Contact us to learn more

·media:scape™ creates a collaborative destination ·Everyone can share their digital information instantly ·Information is visible by all participants

POI Business Interiors has more than 50 years of experience in providing knowledge, products and services that help people work more effectively.

We understand the issues facing organizations today.

T 888 296 9967, F 905 479 6941 www.poi.ca info@poi.ca

CDW CANADA & HP GET IT. NMSO & IPMG AUTHORIZED

HP ProBook 6460b

HP Z400 Workstation

E60EJ-07000M/003/EJ

Designed with the environment in mind.

E60EJ-07000M/003/EJ

B/W laser printer, fax, copier, scanner.

EZ107-100002/001/VAN

It’s your very own professional assistant. The HP ProBook 6460b Notebook PC includes a 14 inch diagonal LED screen with an integrated 720p webcam. Complete with an Intel® Core i5-2520M Processor and Intel Turbo Boost Technology to help you get the job done.

With its revolutionary new architecture and bold new industrial design, the HP Z400 Workstation helps you accomplish more with every minute of your time and every dollar of your investment. Run more tasks, processes, and applications simultaneously with a workstation that brings together and optimizes the latest processors, memory, graphics, and storage technologies.

Achieve versatile, powerful MFP performance for a more productive printing environment. Print and copy at high speeds, use image preview to process jobs from the HP Easy Select pivoting colour control panel and get robust paper handling up to 2100 sheets.

• 4GB (1333-MHz) DDR3 SDRAM upgradable to 16GB (1333-MHz) DDR3 SDRAM (1 x 4GB DIMM installed) • 320-GB (7200 rpm) SMART SATA II Hard Drive • 56K V.92 modem • Integrated Intel 82579V Gigabit* Network Connection (10/100/1000 NIC) • Windows® 7 Professional 32

$934.00

¹

• Intel® Xeon® Six-Core W3690 (3.46 GHZ, 12 MB cache, 1333 MHz memory • 24 GB 1333 MHz DDR3 Unbuffered SDRAM • Convertible Minitower • Windows® 7 Professional 32

$2850.00

¹

When you purchase your technology through CDW Canada you can depend on our knowledgeable, dedicated federal government account managers and technology specialists. Our federal team can help you easily navigate through the various purchasing tools and they can get your order processed and delivered fast and flawlessly.

800.493.7632 | CDW.ca/federal | nmso@cdw.ca ¹ NMSO and IPMG special pricing is only available to federal government departments.

HP LaserJet Enterprise M4555f MFP

• 600 x 600 dpi • Monthly duty cycle of 250,000 pages • High-speed host USB port • Advanced security features to protect sensitive data • ENERGY STAR qualified

$2280.00 ¹

+