Canadian Government Executive May 2012 by Promotive Communications

MORAH FENNING Ontario’s better business strategy p.18

JOHN M. KAMENSKY Cross-agency collaboration p.20

MAY 2012 VOLUME 18 NUMBER 5

THE MAGAZINE FOR PUBLIC SECTOR DECISION MAKERS

www.canadiangovernmentexecutive.ca

THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS AT 30

Publication Mail Registration Number: 41132537

Sh SP ar E Su ed S CIA St cc er L: or es vic ies s es

61399 70471 0

Display until June 10

$5.00

Smart Trust

Seminar & Workshop Create Prosperity and Energy in your Workplace In Smart Trust, Covey illuminates the hidden power of trust to change lives and impact organizations. Learning Smart Trust will increase your probability of thriving in this increasingly unpredictable marketplace. Your organization’s ability to trust in this low-trust world will give you a tremendous competitive advantage and the capacity to navigate uncertainty. KEYNOTE SPEAKER:

Stephen M.R. Covey

June 11th, 2012 Westin Ottawa 11 Colonel By Drive Ottawa, ON

Author of the million-seller The Speed of Trust

The first 100 to register receive an advance copy of “Smart Trust”. Other registrants receive a copy on site.

REGISTRATION FEE: Early Bird $199 plus HST by April 30th Regular $399 plus HST REGISTER NOW!

For more information or to register please contact Sandra Service at sandras@netgov.ca or (905) 727-4091 Ext. 228 Visit us at https://networkedgovernment.ca/smarttrust

Brought to you by

In Partnership with

contents

May 2012 – VOLUME 18 – NUMBER 5

SPECIAL SECTION: Shared Services 22

No retread A more elegant public service BY PAUL CROOKALL

Simple principles Ontario’s shared services approach AN INTERVIEW WITH LOIS BAIN

Internal services agency New Brunswick’s service success story BY PAUL CROOKALL

COVER 6

Shared Services Canada Preparing high performance managers BY LISEANNE FORAND

A 30-year journey The Charter of Rights and Freedoms BY JAMIE BENIDICKSON, GRAHAM FRASER, BOB WATTS AND VANESSA WATTS-POWLESS

FEATURES

DEPARTMENTS 30

New professionals The mysteries of digital engagement BY BLAISE HÉBERT

Open source Re-imagining the policymaking process

BY HOWARD YEUNG AND BRONWYN BURKE

Tone at the top Creating a culture of doing right

BY NICK SIMMONS AND MURRAY KRONICK

Don’t be afraid Innovation and more risk-taking

BY JOHN READ

Identity management B.C. turns to secure-chip technology

BY HARVEY SCHACHTER

Open for business Ontario’s strategy for new relationships BY MORAH FENNING

Governing digitally The (lost?) art of reading ﬁction

BY DAVE NIKOLEJSIN

The Leader’s Bookshelf Coaching for high performance

BY WENDY FELDMAN

Procurement Money and politics: defence procurement

BY WAYNE WATSON

Performance management Designing ‘balanced’ performance indicators

BY JEFFREY ROY

38 Online Extras

Opinion Government-community partnerships BY DAVID ZUSSMAN

Aligning stars Five reasons to re-think print services BY PATRICK KEALEY

Cross-agency collaboration The U.S. experience: Achieving measurable goals BY JOHN M. KAMENSKY

Online Extras

Missed an issue? Misplaced an article? Visit www.netgov.ca for a full archive of past CGE issues, as well as online extras from our many contributors. May 2012 // Canadian Government executive / 3

Editor’s note Our mission is to contribute to excellence in public service management

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: Jamie Benidickson, Graham Fraser, Bob Watts, Vanessa Watts-Powless, Howard Yeung, Brownwyn Burke, Wayne Watson, Wendy Feldman, Dave Nikolejsin, Morah Fenning, Patrick Kealey, John Kamensky, Liseanne Forand, Blaise Hebert, Nick Simmons, Murray Kronick, John Read, Jeffrey Roy, Harvey Schachter, David Zussman Editorial Advisory Board

Vic Pakalnis, Queen’s University; Denise Amyot, Canada Science and Technology Museum Corporation; Carol Layton, OPS; Ian D. Clark, University of Toronto; Andrew Graham, Queen’s University; Jodi Leblanc 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 Director: Denys Cruz

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 circulation@netgov.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.

Where’s the vision? One year into to majority government and it’s fair to ask: What is the vision for the public service? The federal government has announced it’s cutting 19,200 jobs from the federal public service. The number could be higher. Departmental job and budget cuts that are being rolled out include those from previous reviews in 2010 and 2011, and the President of the Treasury Board has admitted that the complete picture on job losses may not be known till May 2013. The question of how many jobs will be lost is part of a larger one: what will the federal public service of the future look like? In the U.K., the vision for the future of the civil service is outlined as part of the Big Society agenda. Some say it will be smaller; others, like Phillip Blond, the founder and director of the U.K. think tank ResPublica and author of Red Tory: How Left and Right Have Broken Britain and How We Can Fix It, don’t agree. What there is agreement on is that the civil service will have a changed role in which, for example, it is focused on working with other sectors to deliver services to citizens. In Ottawa, the government has not openly articulated its vision for the future public service and has chosen to position the job cuts as a move to strengthen the economy and reduce the deficit. But there have been hints about a more complex end game. In September, the President of the Treasury Board, Tony Clement, described a role for government as an “enabler” that – like the Big Society vision – works with other sectors to deliver services to citizens. Some program cuts and policy statements speak to a future in which the federal government butts out of areas of provincial jurisdiction and reduces its regulatory role. There have also

been hints that the end game involves less policy from departments and more from elected officials. Elected governments have the right to make these changes, of course, however much career public servants may pine for the past. But in the end, the real challenge for the Tories as they transform the public service is to articulate a vision that makes sure that government remains relevant to Canadians and gives public servants a reason to go to work. Relevance here is about the role of government and its elected and non-elected officials in civil society. And make no mistake: there is a role for government related to ensuring stability, prosperity, fairness and security for its citizens. Relevance matters because it justifies to taxpaying citizens the policy and service delivery functions that remain. Relevance matters because it gives the democratic political and decision-making processes the credibility they need to maintain the respect of Canadians. Relevance matters because it gives public servants a reason to go to work in the service of Canadians. The time is right for the government to communicate unambiguously its vision for the public service of the future. It should do so for the sake of the electorate and for the benefit of both those who have dedicated their careers to the organization and the new generation that has joined it. Speaking of vision, thirty years ago last month parliamentarians from all parties voted to pass the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Parliament’s vision for the Charter was built around the supremacy of individual human rights that are justified in a “free and democratic society.” In this edition, we look at the Charter – and assess its success – from three perspectives.

Atl b

On Ex Le En Fo Joi Tak Me

And

September 5-7, 2012 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Cunard Centre - Halifax Waterfront Atlantic Canada is a natural gateway to and bridge between Europe, the United States and the remainder of Canada. Come see why this event continues to grow in size and popularity! One of Canada’s major networking opportunities for business and government: Explore partnership potential with regional and international firms Learn about Canadian Government procurement plans Engage with Government assistance programs Focus on the 2012 theme of Modeling and Simulation (M&S) Join the discussion on the intersection between M&S and the talents of the digital gaming industry Take advantage of the huge potential for business within the Canadian Shipbuilding Program Meet major industry Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) who are focused on supply chain enhancement And do it all in one of Canada’s great business & tourism destinations - Halifax, Nova Scotia...

Canada’s largest Aerospace & Defence companies are already committed to exhibit, including: CAE DRS Technologies General Dynamics Canada IMP Aerospace Irving Shipbuilding L-3 Communications Lockheed Martin Canada Raytheon Canada Limited SNC-Lavalin Plus dozens more companies...

Visit Visit our our web web site site for for more more information: information:

defsecatlantic.ca

FOR MORE INFORMATION OR TO MAKE A BOOKING, PLEASE CONTACT: Colin Stephenson, Executive Director Mail & Courier: 166 Ingram Drive Fall River, Nova Scotia CANADA B2T 1A4 Office: +1 (902) 465-2725 Fax: +1 (902) 484-3222 Cell: +1 (902) 223-2099 E-Mail: colin@defsecatlantic.ca

“Canadian Partnership Potential. Focused Here, Expanding Worldwide...”

Cover The Charter

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms at 30 Thirty years ago, Parliament passed the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, enshrining it in the newly patriated Constitution. The Charter has had a huge impact on the country. In the following three commentaries, we look at its affect on our society, and specifically on language and Aboriginal rights.

Rights and freedoms guaranteed by Jamie Benidickson

Jamie Benidickson teaches Canadian and international environmental law, water law, sustainable development law and legal history at the University of Ottawa. He is also director of the IUCN Academy of Environmental Law.

Any Canadian who has enjoyed the experience of finding him or herself all decked out in underwear and holding a hand-gun – or, more to the point – of being found by police in such circumstances, will appreciate the virtues of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This almost inconceivable situation, repeatedly described in newspapers across the country not long ago, might suggest that Charter beneficiaries represent a highly idiosyncratic constituency. But the ranks of the momentarily foolish are not closed. So, rather than simply (and misguidedly) chuckling about a constitutional entitlement to bear arms in one’s Stanfields, Boxers, Jockey Shorts or equivalent, we may want to reflect more sympathetically on the Charter’s 30th anniversary. The Charter, in force as of 17 April 1982, guaranteed certain rights and freedoms. These include fundamental freedoms such as freedom of association, of peaceful assembly, of religion and 6 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

of expression. Democratic and mobility rights were also secured, together with a cluster of legal rights. The latter category encompasses, among other safeguards, the right to life, liberty and security of the person, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair trial, and freedom from cruel and unusual punishment. The latter was in issue in the case of our unfortunate gun-holding, underwear-clad fellow citizen. Equality rights provisions came into effect in 1985. The overall constitutional package also contained distinctive provisions respecting the justification of limits on certain rights (Section 1) and a carefully circumscribed override or “notwithstanding” clause (Section 33). Brian Dickson, who presided as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada over the early years of Canadian Charter jurisprudence, welcomed the Charter. However, as reported by his judicial biographers, “he worried that the Canadian judiciary was ill-prepared for the challenge it presented.” Of course they were ill-prepared, quite understandably so. Who indeed would be prepared for the challenge elegantly summed up by the Hon. Patrick Healy of the Quebec Court: “The transformation of parliamentary democracy to a constitutional democracy imposed upon the courts the burden of judicial legislation.” And it was in the fulfilment of that burden – an obligation to assess the operation of legislation against Charter principles – that a judge concluded that a fixed minimum sentence of three years although stipulated by Parliament was inconsistent

The Charter Cover

with freedom from cruel and unusual punishment as entrenched in the constitution. How Charter principles have been elaborated and applied over 30 years involves some consideration of the pathways of doctrine and interpretation and some awareness of evolving social conditions. Evaluations oriented around Supreme Court judges have also proliferated. In speeches and in early judgments, Chief Justice Dickson demonstrated a profound personal commitment to the potential of the Charter for securing such foundational values as democracy, social justice, freedom and human dignity. Echoing the 1982 constitutional changes that brought the Charter into effect, he offered regular reminders that any law inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. Easier said than done. Among Chief Justice Lamer’s contributions, his work in the realm of criminal procedure is often noted. Commentators have underlined Lamer’s resolute determination to search for a suitable balance between the powers of the Crown, on one hand, and the rights of an accused person such as the right to silence or the right against self-incrimination. He is credited with an effort to engage this balancing at the systemic level as well as in relation to a particular legal rule. And, of course, the Charter plays no small part in that elevation, certainly when it is remembered that Charter violations that bring the administration of justice into disrepute might result in the exclusion of relevant evidence. Lamer fully appreciated the challenges embedded in this powerful remedial possibility. Those who favour the exclusion of evidence insist upon fair police conduct as an essential pre-condition of respect for the administration of justice. Yet excessive exclusion may equally undermine the repute of the administration of justice when courts appear to be setting the guilty free on the basis of mere technicalities or procedural violations. Lamer affirmed that it is “sound theory to stipulate that we will admit or exclude unconstitutionally obtained

evidence on the basis of how it affects respect for criminal justice.” He acknowledged, however, that “it is one thing to adopt a standard and quite another to apply it,” for this requires post-Charter courts “to determine how to actually measure the repute of the administration of justice in the context of real cases.” Chief Justice McLachlin said of Justice Claire l’Heureux Dube that “compassion and concern for the vulnerable, disenfranchised is ... a theme woven throughout her remarkable jurisprudence,” adding that her former Supreme Court colleague was also a champion of contextual decision making, an approach that “requires judges to examine issues in their full social context and with awareness to how they impact people’s lives.” The context and impacts that courts now examine with great care and consideration are, as we know, infinitely varied, and have already included claims about entitlements to legal services; the deductibility of child care as a business expense; the disclosure of media sources; procedural safeguards for refugees; and assisted suicide; not to mention the overlay of national security concerns and international relations in criminal matters. Some observers consider the country to have been transformed by the Charter into a society that would not recognize itself: we had freedoms, fairness, a constitution, language and aboriginal rights before. What have we gained? If there was awareness of rights and freedoms – and there was – it is enhanced in the Charter era. If there was understanding of rights and freedoms – and there was – it is refined. If there was debate about rights and freedoms – and there was – it is has been sharpened. If our rights and freedoms were visible – and they could be found on placemats in coffee shops – they are more visible. They have become standard items in the daily news. The ongoing Charter conversation, thoughtfully guided by a conscientious judiciary, contributes importantly to our continuing national journey.

Some observers consider the country to have been transformed by the Charter into a society that would not recognize itself. . .

May 2012 // Canadian Government Executive / 7

Cover The Charter

Language rights: Ensuring justice by Graham Fraser

Graham Fraser has been Commissioner of Official Languages since 2006. A journalist and author with close to 40 years of journalistic experience, he has reported on issues affecting Canada and Canadians.

In 1965, as the late Quebec premier Jean Lesage travelled across Canada, he repeatedly told the story of two engineers: an English Canadian in Vancouver, and a French Canadian in Montréal. Each is offered a promotion to move to the other city. “For the English Canadian promoted to Montréal, it’s just an ordinary move. He can accept without hesitation. His children will go to school as usual, their lives will not be changed,” Lesage said. “But for the French Canadian promoted to Vancouver, it’s a terrible choice. If he accepts, his children must give up their language.” For most of the 20th century, that was the situation. Frenchlanguage education had been eradicated in Manitoba, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario – and had never really existed in British Columbia. At the time that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was debated in the 1970s and early 1980s, there were arguments over provincial autonomy, Quebec’s distinctiveness and the risk that a Charter would Americanize Canadian institutions. Some nationalists in Quebec have made the argument that section 23, which defines the right to access to minority-language education, was “the last attempt to anglicize Quebec.” Now, 30 years on, it is possible to see the impact that the Charter has had on language rights. To begin with, the children of

Lesage’s mythical engineer could not only attend French school in any province; that school would be managed by a French-language school board. But the effect of the Charter has been more sweeping than simply restoring language rights to education that had been wiped out by the Manitoba Schools Act in 1890, the creation of the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan in 1905 and the adoption of Regulation 17 in Ontario in 1912. Exactly 70 years after Regulation 17 abolished French as a language of instruction in Ontario, the Charter enshrined the equality and status of English and French, and began a process giving rights that had been formulated as individual rights a collective dimension. Section 16.1 refers to the equality of the English and French linguistic communities in New Brunswick; section 20 refers to “significant demand” and section 23 not only includes the right to a minority language education, but establishes the right of the community to manage the school where numbers warrant. Parliament significantly revised and strengthened the Official Languages Act in 1988 to make it consistent with the Charter, establishing that English and French are both languages of work for public servants in designated bilingual regions, and introducing the notion of positive measures for the growth and development of minority language communities. Perhaps even more dramatically, in 1999, the Supreme Court established a clear principle concerning the protection of official language minorities. “Language rights must in all cases be interpreted purposively, in a manner consistent with the preservation and development of official language communities in Canada,” wrote Justice Michel Bastarache in R. v. Beaulac. “The objective of protecting official language minorities, as set out in s. 2 of the Official Languages Act is realized by the possibility for all members of the minority to exercise independent, individual rights, which are justified by the existence of the community. Language rights are not negative

Parliament significantly revised and strengthened the Official Languages Act in 1988 to make it consistent with the Charter, establishing that English and French are both languages of work for public servants in designated bilingual regions, and introducing the notion of positive measures for the growth and development of minority language communities.

8 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

The Charter Cover

rights or passive rights; they can only be enjoyed if the means are provided.â&#x20AC;? The Beaulac judgment set the stage for a series of decisions both by the Supreme Court and by Parliament that broadened the nature of language rights, and deepened the obligations of government institutions to protect them. First, Parliament amended the Official Languages Act in 2005, making the requirement that federal institutions take positive measures for the growth and development of minority language communities a binding obligation. Then, in the DesRochers case, the Supreme Court concluded that simply making services available to the minority based on the needs of the majority is not sufficient to meet the obligations laid out in section 20 of the Charter, and in Part IV of the Official Languages Act. Finally, in Solski (2005) and Nguyen (2009), the Supreme Court required the provinces to be more flexible in establishing who has the right to attend minority language schools. In each case, parliamentarians and the Supreme Court have acted to ensure that language rights are not simply individual rights, but also collective rights; these rights are not in place simply to protect a single person, but to ensure the vitality of minority language communities across the country. The result is something that Jean Lesage could not have imagined when he travelled across Canada in 1965.

Aboriginal rights: An unfulfilled promise by Bob Watts and Vanessa Watts-Powless

Bob Watts is an adjunct professor and Fellow in the School of Policy Studies at Queenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s University. Vanessa Watts-Powless is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Sociology at Queenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s University.

The past 30 years has not lived up to the promise that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and indeed the patriation of the Constitution held for the Aboriginal peoples in Canada. The recognition and respect for our rights and freedoms is far less evident today than what seemed possible then. The somewhat good news is that Section 25 of the Charter has May 2012 // Canadian Government Executive / 9

cover The Charter

The key challenges as we begin to work through the next 30 years are for the courts to try and restrain themselves from shaping Aboriginal governments through their interpretation of the Charter and for governments to begin the long awaited process to address the right to self government.

served as an effective shield against the intrusion of Euro-Canadian laws and values while we rebuild our communities and nations harmed by the years of colonialism. Since the Charter has been in place we have seen the equality rights of Aboriginal women recognized through Bill C31, which is best known for restoring “Indian Status” to women who lost status through marriage; sadly it seems to mean that they are now eligible to be legally treated as poorly as all status Indians by the federal government. The Corbiere court case pitted Section 15.1 of the Charter against residency provisions of Canada’s Indian Act. The court decision gave the franchise for off-reserve First Nations peoples to vote in First Nation elections and will, we believe, help break down the myth that our people lose their rights when they leave the reserve. By attempting to define Aboriginal rights within the limits of cultural customs and practices, the state acts to prevent an equitable process for addressing the devastating losses of land. Interestingly, Section 25 of the Charter states that its rights and freedoms “shall not be construed as to abrogate or derogate from any aboriginal, treaty or other rights or freedoms that pertain to the aboriginal peoples of Canada.” This is both an all-encompassing yet necessarily vague claim in that Aboriginal rights are not defined but that indeed these rights, however they may be defined, shall not be subject to its impositions. This section provides somewhat of a shield from the unknowns of what might have been without this protection, yet it also is so vague that is forces Aboriginal peoples and communities into the Canadian court system (given the fear of a political process to do so) to have these rights defined so that they may be protected. This forces Aboriginal communities to pay millions of dollars to in essence ask Canada to define what our own rights actually are. We have witnessed decades of the government developing guidelines and legislation to support a multicultural mosaic within Canada. The attempt to absorb Aboriginal populations under the blanket of multiculturalism has been yet another attempt to assimilate Aboriginal peoples into the values of Canadian society. Both 10 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

the myth of the two founding nations represented by bilingualism in the Charter and multiculturalism represent flawed attempts to rewrite the history of Canada absent Aboriginal nations and frame a future absent Aboriginal nations. So is the question why or why not the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Integral to this inquiry is what defines the antagonistic relationship between the state and Aboriginal peoples and their rights. Values underscoring the rights of individuals and the collective are where this departure begins. As a “liberal democratic” nation, Canada must place the right of the individual as paramount to that of the collective. This type of positioning defines the collective as threatening to the freedoms and rights of the individual. In Aboriginal communities, it is the maintaining of the collective that is viewed as central to the success and development of the individual. The two are interdependent and mutually respected. Forcing this fundamental principle of the collective into a value system that ultimately must distort this relationship in order to maintain its own principles of individual freedoms, means that once again Aboriginal communities are being asked to operate under the guise of a foreign system. The key challenges as we begin to work through the next 30 years are for the courts to try and restrain themselves from shaping Aboriginal governments through their interpretation of the Charter and for governments to begin the long awaited process to address the right to self government. The federal government knows that the key ingredient for the success of Aboriginal peoples is the recognition and implementation of their rights, in particular the right of self-determination. Sadly they seem content to ignore this simple premise while watching the gap in the standard of living between Aboriginal peoples and the rest of Canada continue to widen. Canada’s constitutional framework as evidenced by the intentions of the Charter is big enough to accommodate our rights. The question is: does Parliament have the will?

We don’t go home happy until you do.

Maurice

Downtown Ottawa 377 O’Connor St. 800.465.7275 victoriapark.com

and the snow storm

Maurice, our Front Desk Agent, isn’t exactly a huge fan of the snow. And driving in the stuff? He dislikes that even more. But one cold, grey December evening, our intrepid Maurice ventured out into one of the biggest storms of the season. What could have driven him to drive into this tempest? His sense of duty. You see, one of our guests had left an important item behind.

Knowing that a cab wouldn’t make it to the airport in time to reunite our guest with his property, Maurice took matters, as well as a frigid steering wheel, into his own hands. Arriving at the airport with mere minutes to spare, Maurice personally handed the item to our surprised, and extremely relieved, traveller. Proof once again that, even after you’ve left our hotel, you’re still a VIP.

Really,

ReallyBig Hotel Suites.

The moment.You know it. It happens any time you stay at a new hotel, right after you swipe your room key. The moment before you open the door. Will the room be big, or small? Light, or dark? Nice, or not?

and feature real bedrooms, real kitchens and real living rooms. And they don’t cost any more than those of our competitors. Really, why would you stay any place else?

Here’s what you’ll find the moment you open your door at Albert at Bay—space, and lots of it. Our suites are the biggest in Ottawa

DOWNTOWN OTTAWA

435 ALBERT STREET

613.238.8858

RESERVATIONS 800.267.6644 ALBERTATBAY.COM

FEaturE Policy

howard yeung is a manager and bronwyn burke is a senior consultant with

Deloitte’s public sector consulting practice in Ottawa (hoyeung@deloitte.ca and bburke@deloitte.ca).

re-imagining the policymaking process In a technologically enabled, globalized world where the bad lending practices of banks in California can wreak havoc on the entire world economy, the way that governments undertake policy analysis to address the greatest challenges of our times should be of great concern. Modernizing and transforming policy development should include: encouraging a culture that embraces knowledge translation, collaborative policymaking and creative destruction. the rIse of the Internet over the past decade and a half has increased access to information exponentially. Moreover, this access has not been limited to government or business; the public is now afforded the same access. It is critical then that policy development make use of the information available. In many fields, we expect the experts to make decisions based on the story the evidence tells. We expect physicians, for example, to remain current on the relevant medical literature and make clinical decisions about our health based on strong evidence. We should expect nothing less of government. The evolution of evidencebased policy development is an important one that should be embraced.

open source policymaking Many public servants first join government to answer the call to make positive change in the world. Countless discover that instead of looking outward toward society, they fix their gaze upwards, taking care of

the needs of cabinet ministers and other elected officials. While serving the government of the day is a fundamental part of our parliamentary democracy, the vertical hierarchy of government encourages approaching policy problems through an introspective lens, rather than through the perspective of affected stakeholders and society at large. As the role of government evolves from one of service provision to service regulator and network manager, key relationships with external stakeholders will become more important. The role of external parties should not be minimized. In fact, better policy results from heightened engagement with external parties. Outside input enhances the entire policy process, and improves the efficacy of implementation.

creative destruction The famed Austrian-American economist Joseph Schumpeter popularized the term “creative destruction,” the capitalist process of new innovations destroying obso-

EXaMPLE: rEnEWinG PoLiCY CaPaCitY in tHE aLBErta PuBLiC sErviCE The Alberta Public Service undertook a review of its policy capacity in 2005-06 as the province entered an environment of increasing policy complexity. Consulting with elected officials, senior officials, young policy analysts, academics and key external stakeholders, the APS developed an action plan to enhance its policy capacity. Key outcomes included: developing guidelines for deputy ministers in the policy process, creating a community of practice for policy practitioners to share best practices, establishing a policy internship program, and defining the attributes of “good” policy.

lete technologies in an ongoing cycle to create better and more efficient products and services, leading to long-term economic growth. While Western governments have embraced creative destruction in economic policy, it is largely absent in other policy spheres. Public policy is often developed from a reactive standpoint with little attention paid to whether existing policies remain relevant. Institutionalizing a step within the policy process that regularly reviews and evaluates existing policies will enable governments to focus increasingly limited dollars where they are needed most.

next steps Aging demographics will force governments to make strategic decisions about where to spend increasingly limited tax revenues to respond to growing program demands. As a result, public servants will be called upon to bring about new innovations in the policymaking process, as indicated in the recent Deloitte-Public Policy Forum report, Innovation in government? Conversations with Canada’s public service leaders (www.deloitte.com/ca/innovationgovernment). Public services wishing to re-imagine the policymaking process should conduct a policy capacity assessment, examining the people, business process and technology dimensions that support complex policy analysis and decision making. Through renewed emphasis on knowledge translation, collaborative policymaking, and Schumpeterian discipline, the policymaking process can be re-imagined for the benefit of better public policy.

12 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

gtec12ca

November 5â&#x20AC;&#x201C;8, 2012 | Ottawa Convention Centre

Innovating & Collaborating Making a Difference for Canadians As GTEC marks its 20th anniversary, governments are facing an environment of unprecedented change. The pressure to do more with less continues and the need to collaborate and innovate has never been more important. In response to this increased pressure, GTEC 2012 will be centered on the theme, Innovating & Collaborating â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Making a Difference for Canadians.

Gold Event Partner

TWENTIETH EDITION

gtec12ca_ad-CGE.indd 1

Silver Event Partners

Bronze Event Partners

To learn more visit www.gtec.ca

5/4/12 3:19 PM

Feature Leadership

The tone at the top Are you inciting “wrongdoing” in your organization? Though you are probably bristling at that suggestion, there is a very real possibility that comments or suggestions you have made may have prompted an employee to commit wrongdoing.

14 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

Wayne Watson, a retired Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer and federal public servant, is president of W2 Investigation Consulting (W2inv.consulting@rogers.com or www.w2investigationconsulting.ca).

It is a fact that the “tone at the top” plays an enormous role in creating a culture of “right-doing” in an organization as well as one of wrongdoing. The manner in which a senior manager gives direction, takes decisions, behaves or treats people can render an organization vulnerable to unethical practices. Consider the scenario of a manager telling an employee that she wants to see results “at all costs” or a comment such as “I had better not see numbers like those ever again.” Statements such as these can cause some employees to rationalize unethical behaviours. Whether it be to meet a superior’s expectations, to keep one’s position or to avoid being berated, certain employees may take actions that, normally, they would not even consider taking. Though there may be no personal gain for an employee to falsify numbers on a report to ensure that his boss does not see numbers “like those,” the rationalization to do so can surface in an insecure, fearful or dishonest employee. In fraud risk assessments there is what is called the “leadership risk profile,” which examines the way an organization’s leaders behave and whether their conduct may be conducive to encouraging employees to commit fraud within their organizations. This profile looks at leadership styles, behaviours and the manner in which the leader makes decisions and its correlation to increasing an organization’s vulnerability to fraud. There is no doubt that this profile could be expanded to other types of wrongdoing other than fraud. Dwight Eisonhower wrote, “you do not lead by hitting people over the head – that’s assault, not leadership.” Creating a culture of fear where “failure is not an option” within an organization is fertile ground for wrongdoing at all levels. There is a story of a CFO of a large multinational company who made a mistake that cost his organization millions of dollars. He walked into the office of the CEO, advised his boss of his mistake and handed him his letter of resignation. The CEO read the letter slowly, looked at his employee and dropped the letter in the

Leadership FEaturE

• Talk about ethical practices regularly in your meetings and conversations with staff. • Deal with integrity issues in a timely manner. • Be aware of your verbal and behavioural communications. • Ensure your messaging leaves no room for the rationalization of unethical behaviours.

trashcan. He then turned to his CFO and told him that he had just learned a lesson that cost the company millions of dollars and that he didn’t intend to let him use this newfound knowledge in another company. Wouldn’t you like to work for this guy! A common mistake that most manag-

say, “the boss is going to go through the roof when he hears about this.” Regularly mentioning the importance of ethical practices in your meetings and conversations with your staff, dealing with integrity issues in a fair and timely manner, and being aware of how your actions may be perceived when dealing with difficult issues will reduce your chances of sending any unwanted messages to your employees. Wilful blindness on your part when becoming aware of unethical practices or any delays in dealing with unethical employees can assist some employees in rationalizing unethical behaviours. As the leader of your organization you are accountable for your employee’s actions. Ensuring that your messaging fosters ethical behaviour in your organization is a much better investment than having to spend time and energy dealing with wrongdoing issues. Mark Twain said it best when he stated, “always do what is right. It will surprise some people and astonish the rest.”

ers make is taking for granted that their message is well understood by employees. A message is not only communicated by words but also through one’s actions, including body language. People are very sensitive to the subtle messages that are unconsciously sent to them. If the body language and the behaviours do not mirror the words that are stated, the message becomes murky and open to interpretation. The Canadian leadership guru, Robin Sharma, has written that, “one of the most important of all leadership skills is selfawareness.” Being aware of how your messages and how your behaviours are being perceived will go a long way in preventing any misinterpretation of your expectations. There must not be any doubt in your messaging that your directions are to be followed using ethical practices. It is also important to be aware of how your inner circle chooses to communicate your directions and your behaviours within your organization. Have you ever heard someone

SHARED SERVICES ADOPTION THROUGH

COLLABORATIVE TRANSFORMATION® Successful shared services implementations require collaborative change management strategies that engage the whole organization. At Intersol, we help clients build effective collaborative change management strategies. Our Collaborative Transformation® approach enables organizations to realize the full benefits of shared services, from improved services and standardized systems, to greater productivity and reduced costs.

ALIGNMENT Deﬁne business value and align leadership

Experience delivers meaningful change Since 1989, Intersol has helped clients effectively engage people in the successful design and implementation of complex and challenging initiatives. To learn more about the Collaborative Transformation® approach, contact Anne-Marie Parent at amparent@intersol.ca or visit our website at www.intersol.ca/en/collaborativetransformation.

COMMITMENT Co-create solutions to drive service excellence

ADOPTION Optimize adoption by clients and staﬀ

May 2012 // Canadian Government Executive / 15

Feature Leadership

Wendy Feldman is IPAC’s director of

research. She has worked in the Ontario Ministry of Economic Development and Trade, and in the federal government.

More innovation and

risk-taking Governments have long known that although across-the-board percentage cuts may meet fiscal targets, such cuts can harm ministries and departments for many years. Veterans of the 1990s in Ottawa attest that when they did “more with less” with fewer staff and resources, they were much less effective in achieving goals, and the repercussions were felt for years.

Today there remains a huge appetite for leadership – authentic, courageous, informed, skilled and inspirational leadership that provides new approaches, skills and technologies to address tough problems like climate change, rising healthcare costs, as well as providing excellent citizen services, all with tighter resources. In February, the Institute of Public Administration of Canada held its 7th Annual Leadership Conference. The program was developed amid constant news of government deficits. Speakers and participants alike were seized with the new economic environment in formal presentations and informal discussions. Keynote speaker David Dodge, addressing a packed house, shared his vision of leadership. The former Governor of the Bank of Canada highlighted three new realities: the re-structuring of the Canadian economic union, as jobs and economic power shift from the eastern provinces, but principally Ontario, to the western 16 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

provinces and their resource-based industries; Canadian public- and private-sector costs and lagging productivity compared to U.S. competitors; and rising healthcare costs driven by increasingly sophisticated technologies, expensive pharmaceuticals and Canada’s aging population. Dr. Dodge called for more innovation and risk-taking. “Don’t be afraid of making mistakes ... parliamentarians accept mistakes made in good faith and admitted to.” But he stressed that advice must be based on “the best evidence that can be mustered.” He called on public sector leaders to help Canadians accept “the radical changes in the next decade” through well-designed transitions, arrangements that help people adapt, and actions that build on trust, fairness and integrity. What are other “game changers” for leaders? Michael Raynor, author of The Innovator’s Manifesto, recommended using “disruptive innovation” to generate new ideas, sort them and choose more

winning options. These disruptors, he said, need to focus on the varying needs of under-served citizens. Problems might be solved with new solutions that will initially provide a “lesser product,” with the trade-off being that they would be less expensive. Raynor suggested, for example, that the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care look to programs such as Telehealth playing a more active role in providing medical advice, and introducing machines to dispense basic medications in communities. Armchair discussions with public service executives and politicians were lively debates about leadership at the highest levels. Former Vancouver CAO Judy Rogers and former Toronto City Manager Shirley Hoy spoke about leading two large cities and the challenges unique to municipalities. The Honourable John Wilkinson and Deputy Minister Carol Layton shared perspectives on the arduous, swift and successful implementation of the HST in Ontario, as well as the dynamics of the politician/ senior bureaucrat relationship. Terry Fallis, author of The Best Laid Plans and winner of the 2011 Canada Reads award, recounted his journey as a writer and the tales of his fictional political hero, MP Angus McLintock, known for his forthright leadership style. As the conference wrapped up, many delegates and the media focused on the intense examination of all Ontario government programs undertaken by former TD economist Don Drummond. While the report highlighted 362 specific areas for cuts or changes, it also stressed the leadership needed to “take daring fiscal action early,” to allow for transitions “giving people a chance to adjust” and to prepare citizens for years of fiscal restraint. True to Dr. Dodges’ comments on leadership, the Drummond Report’s “solid technocratic advice” laid out how programs and actions should be supported by the best evidence, risk assessment, costing and policy advice. The 200 delegates also celebrated achievements at the IPAC/Deloitte Public Sector Leadership Awards. See the IPAC Leadership 2012 site for presentations: www.ipac.ca/Leadership2012.

Dave Nikolejsin is the chief information officer for British Columbia, Ministry of Labour, Citizens’ Services and Open Government.

ICT Feature

Chipping away at the identity challenge Governments are looking to online as the future of service delivery for citizens. But one fundamental problem has stood in the way of that goal: how can they be sure that an individual is indeed the person they claim to be over the Internet? British Columbia is choosing to tackle this question of “identity management” head-on. Using contactless securechip technology in conjunction with advanced infrastructure, B.C. believes it has found the right blend of technology and policy to enable privacy protected and trustworthy access to valuable information and online self-services that set the future path for service delivery and engagement with citizens. Citizens make daily use of the Internet for banking, shopping and all manner of things that used to require in-person, telephone or paper mail to complete. They rightly expect to be able to do the same with public services in areas such as healthcare, education, justice administration and the vital government functions that surround business and commerce. Yet concerns about security and privacy risk – already seen through online banking, credit card fraud and hacked access into things like Facebook accounts – have made citizens cautious with how, when and where they share their information online. For public services seeking to serve citizens online, the inability to be confident about “who is at the keyboard” puts many good ideas and projects for service modernization on hold, even when all parties see the benefits in change. In B.C. it has become clear that for online self-services to take root, the problem of digital identity and authentication must be addressed. Fortunately there is a growing convergence of international and pan-Canadian opinion about the right way to move ahead with digital identity and authentication. Leading experts in the field, privacy experts, the government of Canada

“federated identity strategy” and the U.S. government National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace (NSTIC) all see the solution in a distributed “eco-system” of parties, each of whom solves only a part of the identity puzzle. The approach allows the user to have choices over the particular credentials they might wish to use. Importantly, it keeps identity information distributed across a broad range of different parties that serve as trusted authorities for only a particular claim about a piece of a person’s identity information. The problem of the master identity data store is eliminated. To address security threats and risks, it is important that the credentials used to obtain identity information claims are not easily compromised. This means simple user IDs and passwords must be switched out and secure contactless “near field communications” (NFC) secure-chip based authentication credentials switched in. Equally important, a person’s identity information is not stored in the securechip itself. Identity information is stored

with the distributed set of trusted parties operating within the eco-system. British Columbia is putting this model into action with the development of a new B.C. Services card that combines this “identity eco-system” approach with secure authentication credentials utilizing NFC contactless secure-chips. Combined with recent amendments to provincial privacy laws allowing for creation of a provincial identity information services provider, this new card will allow provincial service providers to know “who is at the keyboard” in an interaction. As a first step, B.C. plans to replace the now obsolete health CareCard with the new services card starting in late 2012. Upon expiry and renewal of their driver’s license, citizens will have the choice of combining the B.C. Services card with their drivers licence or obtain a separate services card. The new card will be then be used for access to health services and information. The secure-chip card can also be safely used for access to any other online services that may become available. This will remove what has long been a major barrier for public service providers when it comes to delivering quality, self-serve government services to citizens online. B.C. has been participating in the panCanadian developments for digital identity and authentication where, through efforts such as the Canadian Payment Systems Review task force, the opportunity for a pan-Canadian eco-system involving government, banks and telecommunications industry is a growing possibility. This is a problem that government and industry alike must tackle, and we are proud to be part of driving the solution. May 2012 // Canadian Government Executive / 17

Feature Policy

Morah Fenning is assistant deputy minister of Open For Business, Ontario Ministry of Economic Development and Innovation.

A strategy for new relationships with business Ontario’s Business Sector Strategy is a groundbreaking initiative that has challenged the government to re-think current approaches, re-evaluate regulations and build a new collaborative relationship with business sectors. The Ontario government and the province’s businesses share important goals: to protect the public, create jobs and foster a more innovative and prosperous province. However, from the perspective of business stakeholders, government policy and services are often seen as complex, confusing, and difficult to navigate – even getting in the way of growth, new investments and jobs. Ontario realized that a key to being competitive on the worldwide stage was to change the way we approach our relationship with business. Open for Business (OFB) was created in 2009 to deliver faster, smarter and easier government-to-business services and to establish a modern system of government. Part of OFB’s mandate was to create an open and responsive working relationship between business and government – to drive business priorities and be a catalyst for a new way of thinking and working. Ontario’s Business Sector Strategy, a paradigm changing OFB initiative, was launched in early 2010 as a vehicle for government to address business concerns in a timely and focused manner. Since its inception, the strategy has led to some significant policy shifts, ranging from the establishment of mandatory regulatory impact assessments for new regulations 18 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

across all ministries, to the creation of a new risk-based and compliance-focused Code of Practice for all provincial regulators and inspectors. Services have been streamlined: rather than needing multiple building and land use permits for each new residential subdivision, developers now apply for one. Under the strategy, a sector represented by a lead association consults with business leaders from across the sector to identify five top priorities that, if resolved, would strengthen their sector’s success. Over a two-month period, ministries and business leaders engage in an intensive, focused effort to establish a joint understanding of priorities and solutions. At the end of the consultative period, ministries must address these priorities or deliver alternate solutions that are acceptable to the sector. The process starts with a roundtable where a lead industry association, on behalf of its sector, presents its top five priorities to government. Chaired by the minister of Economic Development and Innovation, the roundtable brings together business leaders with senior political staff, deputy ministers and staff from key ministries to hear the priorities first-hand. The presence of senior officials, and often the premier, sends a clear signal that this initiative matters. The two-month clock starts ticking. Tight time constraints were imposed to create an environment that would quickly demonstrate the government’s responsiveness. Ministries are required to deliver solutions without incurring new costs for government – instead, by doing things differently. Lead ministries are appointed and held accountable for ensuring that political staff and other relevant ministries are engaged to contribute to the solutions. Throughout the process, the sector con-

sults broadly and collaborates with government. Together, they form working groups to decide on objectives, set timelines for action and co-create solutions. After two months, the deputy minister of each lead ministry presents the agreedupon solution at the closing roundtable. A final report is produced as a public record of the results. As of March 2012, the building and land development, manufacturing, information and communications technology, medical technology, agriculture and agri-food and hospitality sectors have participated in the Business Sector Strategy. These sectors account for $385 billion in annual sales, over 60 percent of Ontario’s GDP, and employ over 1.9 million Ontarians. Seventeen ministries delivered key results which, further to those mentioned above, have included: • Implementing a pre-market assessment of medical technologies, a world first that will dramatically improve the likelihood of early stage adoption of new technologies by the health system; • The creation of a “how-to” handbook to help small and medium enterprises access government procurement opportunities; and • The modernization of liquor licensing to allow for all-inclusive travel packages and complimentary drinks. Ontario’s Business Sector Strategy can easily be modified for any organizational structure, to address a variety of issues. This model breaks down silos in government to create enterprise solutions, while protecting the public interest. Business feels its voice has been heard. Through mutual understanding, clear focus, shared objectives and joint problem-solving, government delivers responsive solutions that strengthen its relationship with business.

Patrick Kealey is a business development

Management Feature

executive with Xerox Global Services at Xerox Canada (Patrick.Kealey@xerox.com).

Five factors

for managed print services Governments throughout Canada are facing a number of challenges, from reducing operational costs to meeting sustainability goals and procurement reform. The stars are currently aligned for the MPS business model. The reality is most people don’t think much about their printing infrastructure; they just expect it to work. But many organizations are unaware of the real costs of printing a piece of paper, and how transforming that function into a managed service can not only save money, but help increase productivity and meet important sustainability goals. So what exactly is managed print services (MPS)? In its recent Magic Quadrant for Managed Print Services Worldwide report, published October 2011, research firm Gartner describes MPS as a “service offered by an external provider to optimize and manage a company’s document output to certain objectives, such as driving down costs, improving efficiencies and productivity, and reducing the IT support workload.” MPS, at its most basic level, is a complete print services offering that manages all elements of a department’s printing ecosystem. So why are the stars aligned for a greater adoption of the MPS business model in the public sector? Here are five key factors:

Operational savings: All levels of government are looking for operational savings. Government departments are more aware of the challenges around print infrastructure; at the same time there are financial and human resources strains on IT organizations, along with fast-approaching sustainability targets.

Increased strain on IT resources: Initiatives such as Shared Services have resulted

in departments needing to revise resourcing plans and priorities. With fewer dedicated personnel within departments, the day-today strain is real. Public sector executives are being asked to decide which activities are “core” and which are “non-core” and whether it makes sense for IT resources to be involved in the maintenance and support of the print infrastructure.

Sustainability targets: The government of Canada has committed to reducing its environmental footprint, from the energy used to heat and cool its buildings across the country to the disposal of electronic equipment at the end of its useful life. As an example, under the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy the government has developed new targets in the areas of green buildings, greenhouse gas emissions, electronic waste, printing units, paper consumption and green procurement. As of March 31, 2013, each government department is expected to achieve an 8:1 average ratio of office employees to printing units. This involves using strategies such as managed print services to facilitate improvements to organizations’ imaging environments with regards to greening and increased efficiencies. Each department is also expected to reduce paper consumption by 20 percent per office employee.

Procurement reform: The federal government has also recognized the limitations and challenges of the current procurement approach to the office equipment category. As part of a proposed national procurement strategy for office equipment, re-

leased in August 2011, the government is exploring the role and potential ROI of the MPS business model. As part of this strategy, Public Works and Government Services Canada has stated that it is working to “lay the framework to assist departments in applying a fleet management approach to procurement, operation, management and disposal of office equipment.” This strategy aims to provide a uniform and consistent national approach that, when implemented, will improve the ease and effectiveness of the procurement process for all stakeholders. Government’s national procurement strategy around office equipment represents a move away from a commoditized, transactional approach toward a validated and transformational business arrangement that makes sense — many public and private organizations have already experienced important direct and in-direct savings from MPS.

Savings: A properly executed MPS strategy can reduce a government organization’s print infrastructure costs by up to 30 percent. Initial savings are a direct result of consolidation and optimization of printing infrastructure, but the saving potential increases dramatically as an organization’s MPS begins to include an integrated approach to workflow and document processes. Aside from the more obvious savings, there are also indirect savings that are harder to measure, such as space, energy consumption, hardware management, billing and office administration, as well as impact to other projects. Conclusion: The stars are aligning. May 2012 // Canadian Government Executive / 19

Feature Management

John M. Kamensky is a senior fellow with the IBM Center for the Business of Government. He was the deputy director of the Clinton-Gore Reinventing Government initiative and a member of the National Academy of Public Administration (john.kamensky@us.ibm.com).

The new LAPD COMPSTAT Center

Acting on cross-agency priorities:

The U.S. experience

Mandated by Congress in late 2010, the U.S. federal government is undertaking a grand, new effort to create and act upon its first set of cross-agency goals. The approach was inspired by a blend of management innovation pioneered by Prime Minister Tony Blair in the U.K. and another management approach developed by the New York City police department. As prime minister, Blair identified a handful of domestic policy priorities and targets, such as reduced waiting time for hospital visits and the punctuality of railway trains. He then created a relentless focus on getting them done. Similarly, in the 1990s New York City’s police department created a regular, rigorously run set of stock-taking meetings which they dubbed “COMPSTAT” meet20 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

ings. Their award-winning approach has been successfully replicated in many cities around the U.S. and by several states. Until last year, there was no mechanism to create and pursue cross-agency goals in the U.S. federal government. Cross-agency forums, such as the food safety working group, tended to focus efforts more on coordination of efforts, not collaborating around achieving measurable, concrete results against a common set of metrics.

New law In late 2010, Congress passed a law requiring for the first time that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) –

roughly equivalent to the Canadian Treasury Board – develop a small handful of long-term cross-agency priority goals, in consultation with a dozen different congressional committees, at least every two years. This will require creating new institutional procedures in both OMB and Congress. Agencies are also required to develop a small number of priority goals as well. In testimony before a congressional taskforce on government performance, after the law was passed, the president of the Center for American Progress, John Podesta, said: “The new law also asks for cross-government goals, which I believe is its most important feature. President Obama should use this opportunity to communicate what his entire administration is trying to accomplish, setting no more than five goals that are presented as a contract between himself and the American people … Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair did something similar to great effect.” The law directs OMB to designate a senior government official to serve as the lead for each of the goals. It also requires OMB to conduct quarterly reviews of these cross-agency priority goals, much like the New York City COMPSTAT reviews, to assess the progress toward the goals, and redirect strategy and resources if necessary. In addition, the law created a new central capacity for OMB to better manage government-wide performance. It required each agency to designate a senior level “performance improvement officer” and it created a cross-agency Performance Improvement Council, comprised of the agency performance improvement officers and with cross-agency staff supporting it. The law also required creation of a government-wide website to track progress on all cross-agency and agency-level performance initiatives. That site is now in beta and will be fully operational by the end of the year.

Management Feature Cross-agency priorities Obama’s budget proposal, which was sent to Congress in February, included the first set of cross-agency priority goals. There are 14 in total. Seven are mission-focused, such as doubling U.S. exports by 2014. Seven center on mission-support functions, such as reducing critical skill gaps in the U.S. federal government’s workforce. By design, the goals are supposed to span a two- to four-year timeframe and are not supposed to represent new policy initiatives or require new monies. Rather, they focus on implementing existing policies within existing monies. OMB staff say that they chose these 14 based on a combination of existing presidential priorities and a list of high-risk programs identified by Congress’s Governmental Accountability Office. Mission-focused goal areas include: exports, entrepreneurship, broadband, energy efficiency, job training, veteran employment and science and technical education. Mission-support goal areas include: cyber security, environmental sustainability, real property management, improper payments, data center consolidation, skill gaps and strategic sourcing. The goal statements on the governmentwide website are accompanied by a description that provides some context for

the goal, the name of the goal leader, a summary of the action plan, and a list of the agencies and programs that will contribute to the action plan. Each goal has a designated senior government official responsible for coordinating action. For example, Michael Froman, an assistant to the president for international economics, leads the “doubling exports” goal. He will build off an existing presidential directive – the National Export Initiative – with an existing network of agencies via the Trade Promotion Coordinating Council. There are eight agencies and over 40 specific programs in those agencies that will be orchestrated around this goal. Froman will receive staff support from the Department of Commerce, and President Obama signed a directive giving him greater authority via another coordinating body, the Export Promotion Cabinet, to, for example, “evaluate the allocation of federal government resources” for trade promotion and to recommend reallocations to the director of OMB. It also authorizes co-location of offices, cross-training staff, and the evaluation of employee performance. In addition, individual agencies’ own priority goals support Froman’s cross-

agency goal. For example, the State Department has committed to increase its market-oriented export activities by 15 percent, and one of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s priority goals is to expand nominal U.S. agricultural exports to $150 billion by fiscal year 2013. So there appears to be a serious commitment at the top of the U.S. federal government to pursue these cross-agency priority goals by providing the leaders the tools to make them work.

Next steps The next big step will be OMB-organized quarterly progress meetings for each of the 14 cross-agency goals. By law, the first meetings need to be completed by June 30. In the meanwhile, the goals leaders are busy developing their action plans, identifying metrics, inventorying contributing programs in the various contributing agencies, developing strategy maps, and where needed, developing governance structures.

John Kamensky will speak at the APEX Annual Symposium May 29–30 in Ottawa. See www.apex.gc.ca for details.

May 2012 // Canadian Government Executive / 21

Paul Crookall is editor

SHARED SERVICES

emeritus of Canadian Government Executive.

A more elegant public service Elegant: adj, ingenuously simple and effective, excellent, first rate. — Shorter Oxford Dictionary

Which quote inspires you more? “The real job that we have to accomplish is change the culture in official Ottawa from one of being spending enablers to one of being cost containers.”

Or, “You don’t need to decrease performance to decrease cost.You simply become better at what you are doing.”

Or, “Our approach is not so much saving dollars as looking at how we do things, which will lead to a better product/service. It’s easy to call for a ten percent acrossthe-board cut. But that won’t get you service improvements.We are in a process of renewal, of getting better at what we do, at less cost.”

22 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

he first is what federal Treasury Board President Tony Clement declared at the March 10 Manning Conference. The second is from Lois Bain, ADM at Ontario Shared Services. The third is from Byron James, New Brunswick’s Secretary to Cabinet. Some public servants are tired of being told to do more with less while waiting to see whose job is eliminated. Others are inspired to provide better service while cutting costs – as noted by Deloitte in a 2008 report describing Alberta’s shared services: “The opportunity to improve service delivery and client satisfaction across government has been incredibly satisfying for employees and leaders.” In this special section, we look at three examples where shared services are being used to improve service while reducing costs – Ontario, New Brunswick, and the federal government. Public sector change is challenging. “Layoffs have been more difficult to push through, outsourcing is tougher, offshoring pretty much unheard of, performance management can be a real challenge and changes to the terms and conditions of employment are strongly resisted,” advises Phil Searle of Chazey Partners. “Governments to this point have been less inclined or able to move as fast or as comprehensively as needed.” Key to success seems to be: an attitude of improving service while reducing costs; intensive customer relation management; meaningful measurement of agreed upon

targets; new tools including project management, Six Sigma and scorecards; and client participation in governance. This is not about centralizing, but about service improvement. “You must follow a truly ‘internal’ customer focus, listen to and address concerns,” Searle has found in advising on shared services. Success does not seem to come easily or quickly, it requires adaptation, persistence and learning – and development of a new toolkit. Researchers at Harvard agreed: “As public service leaders look for methods to increase their capacity to deliver, they find that traditional answers are not feasible – cutting programs, raising taxes, borrowing ... the fixes of the past decade, have reached their limits. (Shared services) requires a new mindset, not just a retread of traditional responses.” They studied multiple shared service initiatives, and determined they follow a life cycle – visioning, launching, growing and transforming (see Shared Services: Horizons of Value, Leadership Lessons on Accelerating Transformation to High Performance, JFK School, Harvard University 2010, available at www.lnwprogram.org). In this section, we look at three organizations at different stages of that lifecycle. Liseanne Forand describes what they are up to at Shared Services Canada, which is just moving from visioning to launching. We look at New Brunswick, which is just moving from launching to growing, and at Ontario, which is in the transforming stage. Cutting isn’t the answer. Getting better while reducing costs, becoming more productive, restoring respect for and pride in public service is needed. Innovation and inspiration. These articles talk about lessons learned in shared services, but we think they can be applied anywhere. Let’s use them to build a more elegant public service. For a private sector comparison, we offer two more articles online: Jeannette Horan, the CIO at IBM, and Alison Brooks of IDC offer advice on implementation. Both articles are available at www.canadiangovernmentexecutive.ca

SHARED SERVICES

Simple principles

Ontario’s shared services approach Ontario was one of the first and most successful at implementing shared services. Started in 1998, the province is realizing its mission “to drive in efficiencies and drive out costs.” The beginning was tough – an unwillingness in some parts to embrace the model, the absence of an enterprisewide business plan, the newness of it all, and the initial failure to consolidate staff under Ontario Shared Services (OSS). Since 2004, Ontario has revved up, reducing the administrative cost to government by 26% while realizing one-time and ongoing cost savings of $225 million per year, reducing the OSS budget share to 1.3% from 1.9%, and increasing the number of clients served per employee by 44%. Automating expense claims alone freed up 45 staff. During that time, OSS evolved from the sort of back office transactional support we most envision, to driving transformational change across the public service. Ontario now has one of the leanest and most effective public services in Canada – with the second lowest cost per citizen of any province. The Harvard Study spoke glowingly about Ontario as an example of Horizon Four: Transforming. Their observations are two plus years old now, so we went to Lois Bain, the associate deputy minister, for an update.

Number of OPS Employees Served Per Ontario Shared Services FTE (Fiscal 04-05 to 11-12)

Q What impact will the Drummond report have on Ontario Shared Services? Drummond has recognized the value of a shared services model; it’s about how we can serve our clients better. We are excited he sees the opportunity of extending shared services into the broader public sector to help achieve the kinds of cost-savings practices the OPS has benefited from. Efficiencies are generated from running end-to-end processes and leveraging savings for your clients, in payroll, payment processing, supply chain, mail, print and distribution. You don’t need to decrease performance to decrease cost. You simply become better at what you are doing. The story is about consolidating, reviewing business processes and driving for efficiencies. OSS uses a variety of tools including benchmarking to move to best-in-class services. We are currently prepping for NQI (National Quality Institute) assessment for level two. We’ve consolidated the ministry’s print shops and re-engineered the work, becoming the first and largest public sector organization in Canada to attain Forest Stewardship Certification and saving the government $2.5M annually and 70 million sheets of paper each year. That means we are lean and green. The same approach holds true in procurement. Our modernization initiative uses lean Six Sigma process improvement methodologies to streamline procurement (28-day reduction in the procurement cycle time) and meets the challenge of balancing appropriate controllership with valuefor-money, making it faster and easier for ministries and vendors. OSS also uses rigorous annual SysTrust auditing practices to provide necessary assurances to the government about the effectiveness of our controls and the integrity of our systems. For us, it is always about improving.

Q Some public servants complain about having to “do more with less.” Others are proud of driving costs down while improving service – of increasing innovation and productivity. Which attitude prevails here: is the glass half empty or half full? We’re proud, that’s one of our hallmarks. We have service standards and service partnership agreements so we can show cost reductions while maintaining or enhancing service levels. We depend on clients for feedback, communicating their needs and how we are meeting them. May 2012 // Canadian Government Executive / 23

SHARED SERVICES

Q What is your governance model? In the early days of shared services we had a customer council made up of CAOs and regional directors who helped us transition from silos to shared service. We have moved to clearly articulating service level agreements and defining service standards. We build relationships so that when things don’t go well there are open lines of communication. Resistance is less now that we are seen as a strategic business partner. We want to work with clients to understand how their business needs are evolving so that we can support them and manage our services accordingly. It’s about leadership, engaging employees and designing and adapting your business model so that you are always providing the best service possible. We consolidate to the appropriate channels.

Q How do you learn? There was more industrial tourism in the earlier days. We have a network, we study other provinces, and they study us. We listen to our clients; we do extensive consultations. It’s about understanding our client’s needs and working with them to deliver. We learn from benchmarking what is best-in-class. I like listening to our staff, getting out there, talking with them about what’s working, what isn’t, what their pain points are. We learned through town hall sessions that there are still a lot of systems that cause unnecessary work for them; we’ve tackled some

cies – there is some resistance so you need policies that say we will all do it the same way. We distilled our core contribution and consolidated our products and service lists. We learned to use enterprise data for enterprise solutions. In procurement, we did a spend analysis to promote smart consumption to help ministries understand where they spend their money. Then we focused on vendors of record and looked at price and efficiency so clients could ask fundamental questions and reduce costs. We helped save over $220,000,000 per year. Today we support ministry oversight requirements by creating “dashboards” to give ministries easy access to key data. The Procurement Dashboard provides online access to procurement spend data that previously wasn’t available. People say “we are different” and I get it. Some agencies are special and we try to accommodate their business needs. But when we are paying people, or invoices, does the process used matter? Commodify what you can and individualize where absolutely necessary. We have specialists who can help departments, from developing e-forms to stuffing envelopes. We’d like to help ministries with their non-core work and be their strategic partner to support their business transformations.

Q What’s next? As budgets become tighter we have been approached by some municipalities and organizations in the broader public sector. Could we, for example, run the financial systems for a small city? Could we do payroll, printing or manage their surplus assets? Increasingly we see opportunities to help. In many ways it may be easier to extend shared services to backroom government functions than to citizen-facing functions because there are less politics and sensitivities involved. Every level of government wants to show your tax dollars going into providing their service, but the same issues don’t exist when you are making back office functions as efficient as possible. We have come a long way but there can still be resistance when it comes to making the business case for moving forward, especially when the inefficiencies are in other organizations. Having a burning platform helps motivate. The financial crisis is here, so people are more open to different solutions. It is going to be tough and challenging; but there are lots of interesting things in Drummond’s report. Fourteen years in, we are excited by the challenges ahead. We are focused on being strategic and innovative business partners for our clients so that we can help them serve the people of Ontario better.

“You don’t need to decrease performance to decrease cost. You simply become better at what you are doing.” of those – responding to what they need to do their job and how they like to tackle their problems. For example, they identified that staff on reduced hours had to send in a cheque for 98 cents per month to keep their benefits up. But it cost us significantly more in staff resources to process their cheque. Were we ahead? The frontline asked why do we do this? We got the right people in a room and said: “can we fix this?”

Q What did you learn? Simple principles. Have strong leadership, governance, a strong mandate with political support, consolidate early. Use enterprise systems, have one system to drive out your business processes. Our focus was on simplifying and automating, streamlining poli24 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

SHARED SERVICES

New Brunswick’s service success story

“Get better and cut costs” is the mandate of New Brunswick Internal Services Agency, says Byron James, Secretary to Cabinet and Head of the Public Service. It’s a more positive and motivating motto than the traditional “do more with less.”

nd that’s reflected in the look and feel of the still new agency. From the open-space, natural light, built-forcollaboration physical plant, where almost 350 staff work together, to the attitude expressed in a wall poster: “The best things in life aren’t things.” NBISA is, according to the Harvard model, just transitioning from the “Launching” to the “Growing” phase. Spearheaded by an exploratory group formed in March 2008, it became operational May 2010, with a shared services model for 21 specific internal services. “Service New Brunswick is a success story, so we applied the same concept to ‘back office’ government services, creating the New Brunswick Internal Services Agency,” James explained. “We’re now combining these bodies under one ministry, and expanding their role.” Some of the initial successes: five services (accounts payable, payroll and benefits, IT services, IT infrastructure and applications, and print optimization) are up and running and stable. A new data centre

has been built and 16 data centres will be consolidated into two. Accounts payable began with 110 people when NBISA took it over; it’s now down to 97, while the a/p invoice volume is now at about 600 (less than a day’s work) compared to 10,000. A print optimization program has been introduced which will reduce overall print costs by about 30 percent; and T-4s have been automated and are now available electronically. And, like Apple’s Steve Jobs, they’ve designed their space to support collaboration, and work to aggressive timeframes with a “let’s figure out a way to do it” attitude and “ruthless prioritization” to deliver on time. Town hall meetings help communication. The workforce is engaged and enjoys getting better while reducing costs – as I walked through the area with chief operating officer and acting VP transformation, Andrea Seymour, an employee proudly advised her, “five of us are retiring this year, and you won’t need to replace any of us.” Seymour described their learning process: “New Brunswick had several unsuccessful attempts at internal shared services. In 2008 we decided to take a different approach and to build this from within. Using a collaborative transformation strategy we engaged a broad cross section of government employees in the development of the service delivery model and redesign of services. Our commitment was that we would engage consultants only where we had a skill gap, and that we’d build knowledge transfer as a key deliverable of those contracts, as opposed to having them do it for us and leave. “We worked with three external firms in the design and implementation, and their staff were pretty well embedded in our team. The Intersol Group played a key

role in assisting us with transformation and change management, and Chazey Partners was instrumental to our successful process of re-engineering and transitioning employees. We had Deloitte do a cross-country and international survey of what others were up to. Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario freely shared their lessons learned and, as we were told: ‘It’s like a game of leap-frog, learning from each other what works and doesn’t, jumping ahead, then someone else takes the lead.’ The lessons we learned from others, which we built in from the start, were: • Have enabling legislation; • Co-locate staff in one complex, don’t leave them embedded in client organizations; • Structure service delivery as a business: have a profit goal (savings) with the savings being turned over to the shareholders (the government) and governance that includes a board of directors; • Prepare a business case for each of the functions and develop accountability frameworks to ensure benefit delivery; • Benchmark relentlessly – your processes, other jurisdictions, who does it best in your public service; and • Adapt rather than adopt.” The start-up team also listened to vendors about their knowledge of shared services. They listened to and learned from employees (at all levels) province-wide through collaborative workshops. They visited B.C., Alberta and Ontario, and generally immersed themselves in learning the state of the art. And they took eight months to develop a “roadmap” of where to go, which included developing a robust strategy and project plan and creating the governance model (nine potential models were assessed). May 2012 // Canadian Government Executive / 25

SHARED SERVICES

The resulting shared services agency features: • Specific legislation mandating the agency, defining objectives and purposes with regulation making authority to prohibit creation of “shadow shops”; • A governing board of directors (with up to 11 members, six of whom must be DMs) and an ADM steering committee; • Service partnership agreements, with key performance indicators including reporting measurement and metrics; and • Client satisfaction surveys, assessing knowledge, professionalism, timeliness and resolution (by February 2012 satisfaction rates on all four factors ranged from 85 to 99 percent for both IT help desk and accounts payable). The Agency legislation was proclaimed in May 2010 and deployment of services began. Through a “rolling wave” implementation approach payroll, AP and IT services from 29 departments and agencies were re-engineered, and in less than a year were fully deployed to the new agency.

“Collaboration transforms complexity and resistance into clarity and commitment.” — Christopher Comeau, Intersol Expanding the management toolkit was essential. At start-up, NBISA had a single director of project management. There are now six staff who have achieved Prince II certification, and they share that expertise and certification opportunity with staff from other departments. There were no lean Six Sigma specialists; there is now one black belt and two more in training. Forty-seven staff members have received yellow belt training and because services are now stable, continuous process improvement projects are underway in each service delivery area. This approach is aligned to the province’s Balanced Score Card initiative, and NBISA is proud of their evolving dashboard of key performance indicators and service partnership agreements specifying each party’s responsibilities.

New Brunswick Internal Services Agency

It’s not centralization Government veterans are familiar with the pendulum swing from decentralization in the good times to centralization in the tough times. NBISA sought to stabilize in the middle, (see chart). And by having client departments on the Board, the approach changes from doing “to” to doing “for.” Further, a group of ADMs provide advice to the executive management team and act as champions in the broader government community. One of the major impacts of NBISA, Seymour reports, is that “we have a better understanding of the costs of services and have learned to better leverage our purchasing power.” On March 1, corporate services was integrated government-wide under the new Department of Government Services, in-

Why Shared Services?

Shared

Decentralized  Disparate processes



 Multiple standards 

 Duplication of effort  Different control environments  High cost and costs unclear across the business



Responsive to Business and Operational needs Business/ Operations control decisions

26 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

Highly customer focused



Commercially driven



Customized solutions to meet Business/ Operational requirements

 Not N t scalable l bl



Service Partnership Agreements Clear unit costs



Flexible e b e de delivery ey



Clear understanding of drivers and activities

Centralized 

Common systems and support



Consistent standards and controls



Tight control environment



Economies of scale

The Best of Both Worlds



Remote from business



Unresponsive and inflexible



No Business/ Operational control over costs



Viewed as central overhead



Prevalence of shadow operations

SHARED SERVICES cluding Service New Brunswick, the Internal Services Agency, procurement, printing, translation, records management, event management and web. “Our vision for change means focusing government efforts on core services, accountability and continuous performance improvement,” Premier David Alward announced.

What gets measured In business school one often hears, “what gets measured gets managed.” NBISA measures everything it can – as we walked past a photocopier Seymour observed, “when we started, there was one print device for every 2.4 employees in government. We’ve moved it to 1:3.8, with a long-term target of 1:8. In this office, we’re at 1:12.” James put it this way: “Previously, we hadn’t spent much time on measuring ROA (return on assets) or ROE (return on effort). The real change has been in how we view things, moving to a strategy map and balanced scorecard reporting. We have five departments and agencies that are early adaptors of tools including Six Sigma, Balanced Score Card, and process improvement. Our approach is not so much saving dollars as looking at how we do things, which will lead to a better product/service. It’s easy to call for a ten percent across-the-board cut. But that won’t get you service improvements. We are in a process of renewal, of getting better at what we do, at less cost. “Our approach on the board of directors (James is a member, but another DM chairs it) is more collegial than formal. We focus on development of the business plan, resolving differing interests, and leaving it to NBISA to manage the operation and deliver quality results in a timely manner.” James’ advice to others considering shared services: know the metrics, don’t bite off too much at the start, and provide senior management commitment and support from the very top level, ensuring everyone knows this is a corporate priority. And hire a shared services head who is respected.

Connecting with clients “Change is difficult and often people don’t want to let go,” observed DM Finance Jane Garbutt. “It’s a matter of building trust and

NBISA vision: to be an outstanding organization that provides quality services driven by quality people in a competitive environment; is client-focused and valued by stakeholders; and strategically delivers innovative, effective and efficient services.

Mission: based on sound business practices, to transform the delivery of transactional services to the Government of New Brunswick.

realizing it is a partnership. People want to do better and showcase what they can do. But we need to create the environment in which they can do that. And we need to showcase our successes.” Shortly after the transition to NBISA, the Department of Finance ran into a problem and some critical files became inaccessible on the network. Agency staff connected with employees in Finance. The two teams collaborated (a foundational principle of the partnership agreement) and together they averted what could have been a critical problem. “You need to maintain a link with the clients, not just take it over, in order to combat the desire to build ‘shadow’ functions,” Garbutt said. She also distinguishes that you need a development team and an operations team; design and operation are separate skills. “Considering how challenging it is to undertake this type of change they’ve done an amazing job,” she concludes. Marc Leger, DM Post-Secondary Education and Labour, chairs the board of directors. “We have three key documents: the business case for NBISA; the annual report; and Service Partnership Agreements with each department. The board sets the direction, approves the business case and accountability framework, then lets NBISA manage,” he notes. “We trust the agency, but verify results. You need a dual focus on quality/results and net savings. If you just cut costs, you hurt both the programs and the people.” His advice: involve users up front; listen to users and your staff, in both group and individual sessions; get the right people in the right seats on the bus; accept that it takes time to get it right and achieve the

benefits, so have a dual focus on fast results and long-term strategy; and, keep a corporate mindset. Set clear expectations through the partnership agreements. These are living documents, built by the agency staff in collaboration with the departments, then filtered up to the president of NBISA and the departmental DM for signature. The documents codify what is to be done by both the department and the agency. They also stipulate how future change will happen – defining the partnership from both an input and output perspective.

Lessons learned Seymour summed up: “To deliver real value, we have to work incredibly hard to improve our quality (through service excellence) and to realize savings (for example, by reducing costs through IT asset management). It’s about leadership, having committed people, with stamina, with ideas, skilled at implementation, following a robust management strategy. “Working the same way as before won’t do it. We have to get rid of the check-thechecker overhead, get rid of unnecessary steps in each process, bring in the best practices, and think differently. We have a legislated mandate, we have a board of directors that helps us to run like a business, gaining DM community support and cabinet secretary support. The board is also great at removing roadblocks outside the NBISA. “We are responsible for undertaking policy, not setting it, and for delivery and implementation. The Management Board is responsible for setting HR and IT policy (through the Office of the CIO and Human Resources). The Department of Finance responsible for setting accounts payable policy through the Office of the Comptroller. By virtue of this, we work closely with central agencies in delivery of service. “We contribute to the government’s goal of reaching a balanced budget by delivering improved service at reduced costs, liberating the energy and funds of departments so that they can focus on their core services. We have an amazing team, committed to delivering across the public service.” May 2012 // Canadian Government Executive / 27

Liseanne Forand

SHARED SERVICES

is president of Shared Services Canada.

transFOrming gOvernment

it infrAstructure Shared Services Canada (SSC) was created on August 4, 2011, to streamline, standardize and transform the government of Canada’s IT infrastructure services to deliver a digital platform for the federal government of the future – one that is modern, reliable, secure, and provided at a reduced cost.

he government’s IT infrastructure has traditionally been managed in silos, with each department establishing the services that it required to carry out its business. As the pace of technological change increased, so did the challenges faced by departments in ensuring that their infrastructure could support new needs. Over the years, the infrastructure became more and more fragmented, as well as costly to manage and maintain. The former Auditor General, Sheila Fraser, in her Spring 2010 report, noted that the government’s systems could not “be easily updated to respond to the changing business needs flowing from new laws, regulations or industry standards” and warned that “an aging critical system could break down and prevent the government from delivering key services to the public.” The creation of SSC is one part of the government’s response to those risks. It

28 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

brings together resources from 43 departments and agencies with a mandate to establish whole-of-government solutions and to improve the delivery of IT infrastructure services. For the next eight years, SSC will transform the government’s IT infrastructure in three key areas: email, data centres and networks. There are over one hundred different email systems across the government, which is neither efficient nor costeffective. The government has over three hundred data centres countrywide and their use is not rationalized: some operate well below capacity while others struggle to meet demand. Add to that over three thousand overlapping and uncoordinated electronic networks and it becomes clear that we have an opportunity to find efficiencies, reduce duplication and leverage the government’s buying power to achieve economies of scale.

The first project that will be undertaken is consolidation of the email systems of the 43 partner departments into one secure, reliable and cost-effective system. Planning is already underway and we expect to implement a solution within the next three years. Among other benefits, a single email system will simplify the maintenance of the Government Electronic Directory which is currently costly to maintain and difficult to navigate for both employees and Canadians seeking information and services. Functionality, security, reliability and cost will be factors in developing a new system that is simplified and modernized in terms of both directory services and addresses. The streamlining of government of Canada data centres is another important project that will be done in a gradual way. The initiative is expected to take about eight years to implement. Our objective is to reduce the number of data centres from over 300 to fewer than 20, while improving the way in which they are managed. Detailed and long-term planning will allow us to make use of common servers and technology, leveraging synergies and skills, instead of contracting for additional storage space and services. As we streamline and renew data centres, we will also streamline the telecommunications network backbone that supports

SHARED SERVICES

them. We will eliminate overlap and duplication; converge voice, data and video transmission; and increase the efficiency and security of the network overall. Security of systems and information is top of mind for SSC and its government partners. As we plan the transformation of IT infrastructures and services, we will take advantage of the opportunity to work horizontally with partner departments to improve delivery of services to Canadians in a secure, reliable and integrated manner. As SSC establishes its transformation plans, it will learn from the many organizations, both public and private, that have adopted shared services models for horizontal internal functions such as the delivery of IT infrastructure. Governments at every level and of widely diverse sizes are now benefitting from their adoption of this approach, including very large state governments like California, with a population of over 36 million; some functional areas of the U.S. federal government; and a number of Canadian provincial governments, including Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario. Their successes are encouraging. Between 2002 and 2011, B.C. reduced its data centres from over one hundred to two. Michigan reduced its email systems from 40 to two, and shifted from obsolete

and unreliable infrastructure to modern enterprise solutions in the process. Ontario reports that its IT transformation initiative, launched in 1998, is saving at least $100 million annually. It is also worth noting that as Ontario’s shared services have evolved, its rationale and approach have changed from aggregation and consolidation in order to decrease costs, to a focus on service innovation that supports the public service and improves organizational performance. Just as the achievements of other organizations inspire us, the challenges they have faced help us appreciate what we need to succeed. Every aspect of SSC’s mandate, structure and model has been carefully considered in order to deliver increased efficiency, better quality and service excellence. A first key element for success is that the IT services we deliver are mandatory for the 43 identified departments and agencies. A number of jurisdictions reported that initial attempts at enterprise approaches were unsuccessful due to their voluntary nature. By making services mandatory, the focus is shifted from whether to how: how can we deliver service improvements using a more modern approach? Secondly, SSC has been given the authority to operate on an appropriations basis, rather than by cost recovery. This approach will enable a new partnership to emerge whereby SSC will work with departments to manage organic growth and renewal cycles for IT infrastructure as a partner, and not a traditional IT service provider. Thirdly, because commodity-type services tend to be more easily consolidated and standardized, and present opportunities for innovative sourcing models, SSC will put a special focus on ensuring that its procurement activity is driven by its broader and longer-term objectives and conducted in a manner that is fair, transparent and inclusive.

And finally, SSC is relying on IT expertise that exists in government. Our partner departments and agencies have developed many innovative processes, principles and tools over the years. SSC will work with departments in an open, transparent and collaborative manner, engage their expertise and leverage best practices in terms of other new and cost-effective approaches. Over the past few months, we have been busy building our organization from the ground up. Through two Orders in Councils (August 4, 2011, and November 15, 2011), SSC’s workforce has increased to just over 6,000 employees. Through this transition period, our priority has been to maintain operations so that partner departments can continue to deliver quality services and programs to Canadians. We have also established relationships with key stakeholders and partners that will help us successfully deliver on our mandate. April 1, 2012, marked the end of SSC’s transition to a new department and the beginning of its transformation of the government of Canada’s IT infrastructure. Just as other departments do, SSC will report through Parliament and to Canadians on its plans and priorities, and on how it will achieve its transformation objectives. IT infrastructure is the backbone of modern government operations. A modern workplace depends on it, and we will measure our success by how completely we are able to meet that need. Every step in the consolidation and transformation process will lead to a more effective and efficient organizational and operational infrastructure that meets the requirements of partner departments. Our business model will be value-driven and rely on horizontality and collaboration as its foundation. In conclusion, SSC has begun its first full fiscal year firmly focused on its objective to be a modern public service organization that is fiscally prudent, lean and responsive to the needs and expectations of Canadian taxpayers. May 2012 // Canadian Government Executive / 29

New Professionals

Blaise Hébert is a passionate Web 2.0 advisor with Policy Horizons Canada. He spends most of his time researching and understanding the complexities of digital engagement.

Dungeons & Dragons

Revealing the mysteries of digital engagement It’s Saturday afternoon. I’m staring at my dice and a stack of sourcebooks. All I can think of is that in two hours my friends will be coming over to play our weekly game of Dungeons & Dragons and I haven’t figured out what they’re going to do. I’m toast. I mean seriously toast! For the last month, Eric has been complaining that I haven’t given the group enough room to shine or self-organize. They say that they’re tired of me surprising them with impossible challenges and monsters of epic proportions and watching them squirm. Then, when all the chips are down, I make a character appear to save the day. Why aren’t my friends happy? Do they not know that they’re just the audience to a tightly scripted fantasy adventure story, where I’m the lead writer? Why aren’t they engaged and engrossed by my story? I thought I was being original, but they keep asking to be part of the story. How could they possibly not see themselves reflected in my creative brilliance, or even understand my narrative genius? What if the problem isn’t them? What if the problem is me? Thinking about it, this problem sounds familiar. It feels like I’ve seen this level of disengagement before; AT WORK. Especially since the rise of new collaborative technologies. The systemic assumption is that everyone will use them. But they aren’t.

Engagement, for better and worse Like most people working with Web 2.0 environments, I just fell into it without any formal training or background. Contrary to popular belief there are no true ex30 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

Through that revelation, I opened the door to challenge my premises on what makes an engaging collaborative project. Some of the most valuable lessons were not about trying to create the perfect experience, but to come up with situations where all participants act as a team, accomplish a challenge and feel rewarded.

Knowing how to approach the beast

perts, masters, gurus or yogis of Web 2.0. Everyone is an amateur, of varying degree. We all face the same challenges when trying to run Web 2.0 related projects: how to get participants excited enough to work through the duration of the project? How to sustain engagement? It’s funny. Many people tend to think that engagement works like a binary code. Participants are seen as ones and zeros. You’re either engaged or you’re not. But if you think about it, people will play games and complete tasks with differing levels of enthusiasm. Here are some factors that one needs to take into account to maximize motivation: time, interest, complexity of task, stimulation and reward. For the past three years I’ve been juggling with these concepts, never quite finding the right balance to keep participants fully engaged. I realized that the answers might be found within my other passion: role playing games.

In my experience, most digital engagement projects fail because of the assumption that participants will do all the work without being prompted or stimulated. The same thing goes for adventurers when faced with the gates of a nightmarish castle. If you don’t define the goal in advance (writing policy/developing advice/acquiring a lost amulet) why would anyone bother? It’s easier to go visit the elves in the forest, since they offer better stories for free. Once you have identified the goal, you’ll be faced with your biggest dragon: silence (or lack of participation). When tackling a complex problem it is important that participants (or adventurers) know how to approach the beast. They need to know their roles and responsibilities. That’s where the Game Master comes in. He (or she) acts as a feedback mechanism to stimulate interactions and support the adventurers as they learn how to work together. Without this active facilitation, there is no dialogue. Despite the fact that these technologies are original and can save the day when the chips are down, people want to be part of the story. In essence, it boils down to this: in order for a group to succeed at any task, it needs to be properly contextualized, stimulated and supported with a clear understanding of the goals, benchmarks and rewards.

Nick Simmons is a senior consultant with Interis Consulting (Nick.Simmons@interis.ca). Murray Kronick is the co-president of the Performance and Planning Exchange (PPX) and a principal in Business Performance with Interis (Murray.Kronick@interis.ca).

Performance management

Designing ‘balanced’ performance indicators Canada is a hockey-loving nation and now is the time of year when performance in the National Hockey League comes to the forefront. Fourteen of the 30 sets of players and coaches are now, to use hockey parlance, heading to the golf course. These teams did not earn enough points during the regular season to allow them to advance to the playoffs. Similarly, some players will either be handsomely rewarded with new lucrative contracts or be looking for a new employer as a result of their great or poor performance over the season. Goals, assists, ice time and perhaps penalty minutes will be the set of performance indicators used to determine bonuses or future earnings.

all stakeholders are aligned, which helps make Australian indicators a little bit smarter than those that we are accustomed to in Canada. Obtaining agreement on PI targets is critical to those who are accountable for achieving the objectives – the SMARTA model helps to realize this. An individual PI is most useful if aimed at a specific area. A set of PIs will be far more beneficial to measure the overall success of a program and its outcomes. To build this set of PIs, ask yourself this question: is the set of PIs mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive (MECE)? That is, when the PIs are grouped is there no overlap (mutually exclusive) and when

All too often we see sets of activities and outputs linked to a set of strategic outcomes with little or no explicit logic in the middle. At the same time, federal ministers are seeing their spending reduced courtesy of the March 2012 budget and Deficit Reduction Action Plan (DRAP). And every level of government across Canada and the world has seen funding cuts as a result of austerity measures. In times of reduced spending, how can governments demonstrate taxpayer value for money? This can be achieved through a comprehensive set of performance indicators (PIs) clearly linking activities to outcomes. Conventional wisdom is that a PI should be SMART – Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Timely. The Australian government takes this one letter further, and appends “Agreed” to the end of the acronym, to ensure that

combined, do they cover all possible options (collectively exhaustive)? This will identify any inconsistencies in the performance measurement framework. All too often we see sets of activities and outputs linked to a set of strategic outcomes with little or no explicit logic in the middle. Essentially we are “waiting for a miracle to happen,” expecting that our day-to-day activities will somehow give rise to the expected strategic outcomes. We offer five design principles to combat this problem: 1. Develop an Outcomes Map or Logic Model as the foundation for the logic. This will establish the appropriate PIs for immediate, intermediate and final outcomes and their explicit linkages.

2. PIs should contain a mix of quantitative (numbers based) and qualitative (tells the story behind the numbers) measures. For clearest measurement, quantitative are preferred. However, qualitative measures should not be overlooked in the analysis of how well a program is performing. For example, we could measure client satisfaction quantitatively, asking clients to rate their satisfaction on a scale from 1 to 5. To add richness to this measure, we could also collect free-form comments to understand the reasoning behind the satisfaction level. 3. PIs should be balanced across a number of dimensions. Any individual PI will, by definition, distort the picture of what is happening. 4. The set of PIs should have some lagging, real-time and leading indicators. These will tell you what the performance was, is and will be, respectively, giving you the full picture. 5. PIs should be used primarily for internal management purposes and secondarily for meeting external reporting requirements. Performance reporting can take the form of internal management reports, public reporting, or to parliamentarians through the Departmental Performance Report (DPR) or an annual report. Using these five design principles will result in a comprehensive set of performance indicators that are balanced and clearly link activities to outcomes. This may not help you with your next NHL contract negotiation, but will ensure that the true value of your organization is clearly demonstrated to your stakeholders. May 2012 // Canadian Government Executive / 31

Procurement

John Read provides procurement consulting services to public sector clients. He served for almost 15 years in the Public Works procurement arena.

Money, politics and the ‘requirements’ of defence procurement

There is defence procurement, and then there is Defence Procurement. The Department of National Defence – by itself, or through PWGSC – buys a gazillion dollars of “stuff” every year. Judging by the lack of media coverage, Parliamentary Committee discussion and questions in the House, the process works: the military gets its food, uniforms and spare parts with little fanfare and inadequate recognition. What makes headlines is Defence Procurement, the big stuff like ships, planes, trucks and the like. Here are six reasons. First, money. Talk billions of dollars, and everyone pays attention – users, budget setters, suppliers, reporters and lowly taxpayers. Second, politics. Typically, one party proposes and the others, by definition, oppose. Third, priorities that link the two. It starts with the political decision of what is needed but then gets into the contentious spectrum of who should get the money. Governments can buy what they need wherever it comes from; buy what they need but make sure as much of the money as possible stays in Canada; or buy what is something like what they need, as long as the money stays here. Fourth, principal-agent relationships. These flow from the priorities. Technically there is a divergence of interests between 32 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

those who own a business and the people who actually run it. If there is no congruence between the interests of the military, the politicians and the taxpayers, there are headlines. Fifth, and perhaps less obvious, there is human nature. Confirmation bias and the sunk-cost effect can have significant influence on defence procurement. Confirmation bias has individuals seeking and valuing information that supports their point of view, while discounting anything that argues to the contrary. Sunk-cost is the tendency to continue down a chosen path, investing time, money and other resources in something that is known or appears to be sub-optimal. Finally, hiding in the shadows is self-interest, the real reason for those decisions. They include re-election, promotion, power and money. Spin encompasses everything. It operationalizes confirmation bias and the sunk-cost effect, and tries to sanitize self-interest. Without them, the spin industry would wither. Defence procurement in all its forms is for the war fighters. They need – they deserve – our full and unconditional support. By the way, this also applies to police, fire fighters and border guards. There is hope. Recently the government used its new National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy (NSPS) to

contract for the building of ships. All parties seem to agree about “…years of work that went into making the NSPS a revolutionary procurement activity free from political influence or regional favouritism, one that, in the words of the third-party fairness monitor who helped oversee the NSPS, was ‘rigorous, fair and transparent’.” Let’s be careful, though – in this case and more generally. This is a success of process; we must now focus on the success of outcome. The strategy is not a complete success until those ships are in the water, working as they should, meeting the needs they were designed for, and for the right price. There are growing suggestions that the government is rethinking the possible purchase of the F-35 fighter jet plane. Initially the F-35 was the only fighter that could meet Canada’s needs; now “…it’s a question of relative choices. You take the one that meets most of [the requirements].” The moment the government chooses to meet only most of the requirements, it destroys any rationale for procurement without competition. And that makes it hard to maintain a consistent story. With the F-35 file now in the hands of PWGSC, let’s hope they can repeat their shipbuilding success.

Your newest employee is a Canon.

DR-6030C

DR-9050C

Departmental Document Scanner

Production Document Scanner

60 ppm

90 ppm

Some people sell scanners. Canon sells digital imaging solutions. With an extensive line of high-speed document, you can be sure that there's a model which meets the unique document scanning demands of your business. Our versatile product line is designed to maximize productivity in high-volume, centralized, data capture environments. Canonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s high-speed document scanners maintain the integrity of documents at rapid speeds for mission critical document conversion and content management. For more information, please contact your Authorized Canon Distributor or visit www.canon.ca/contactus/ ww www.canon.ca

Canon is a registered trademark of Canon Inc. imageANYWARE and imageFORMULA are trademarks of Canon Inc. ÂŠ 2011 Canon Canada., Inc.

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.

Coaching for high performance

Ignite The Third Factor Peter Jensen Thomas Allen Publishers, 228 pages, $19.95 Leaders these days are coaches. And coaches must have a developmental bias. They must be passionate about growing and developing people. “Success for these coaches is not only about the results but also about building competence, commitment, capacity and passion in their performers. They take on a bigger role than simply supervising, directing, or managing,” Olympic coach Peter Jensen writes in Ignite The Third Factor. Jensen, a sports psychologist, has worked with many Canadian athletes and has attended seven Olympic Games as a member of the Canadian team. So he understands coaching from his own background as a successful coach. But he also has interviewed other athletic coaches, to understand what makes them tick, and works with companies and governments to improve the coaching abilities of their staff. His own mentor in the 1970s was Dr. Kazimierz Dabrowski, a distinguished

34 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

psychiatrist who studied the lives of exceptional human beings and highlighted something he called the third factor, which played a major role in the moral and emotional growth of such individuals. The study included Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Gandhi, Søren Kierkegaard, Dag Hammerskjold and Martin Luther King Jr. Each had to transcend something to be successful – and they did it by themselves. Solzhenitsyn, for example, grew up in a very restrictive culture yet came out of it a free thinker. So Solzhenitsyn had things within himself that allowed him to rise above the situation in which he was placed. This leads us to Dabrowski’s three factors model. The first factor in our development potential is nature: the various elements that establish the physical and mental grounding of a human being. This includes genetic coding but might also involve other things such as alcohol consumption by a mother during pregnancy. The second factor is nurture: the social and environmental elements that contribute to shaping us, such as parents, friends, school, financial status and culture. Nurture modifies your nature. But individuals have the potential, like Solzhenitsyn, to transcend those two factors through their own actions. That is the third factor: individuals can make a conscious choice to change, and to achieve a higher level. The third factor is the role we as individuals play in our own growth. “This self-development often happens in time of conflict, when the person becomes dissatisfied in some ways with themselves. Initially there may be an external conflict, a failure, loss or disappointment, but the person internalizes it, and the dissatisfaction between ‘what is’ and ‘what ought to be’ is the impetus

for the emergence of the third factor,” Jensen writes. This third factor is the key to high performance because it requires engaging the will and becoming increasingly more self-responsible and aware. We can’t go back and reset our genetics, or select better parents to raise us. We have to work with what is. Nor can people be pushed to the highest level. They have to have their own desire to get better at what they’re doing. That means as a coach you must take an active role in developing in your charges the self-sufficiency to perform. You don’t order them to perform. You ignite the flame – the third factor, their own desire to want to perform well. Jensen’s study of exceptional coaches reveals five approaches that enable them to ignite the third factor and that he feels are transferable to coaching performance at work: • Self-awareness: Coaches need discipline so they assist, rather than inhibit, their charge’s development. You need to understand your impact on others, and make sure your own temper or impatience or pickiness doesn’t become a roadblock. If the performers are spending time adjusting to the coach it will be very difficult for them to move on to high performance. As famed basketball coach John Wooden said, “Manage yourself, so others won’t have to.” The coaches he interviewed all have a tremendous capacity to step back at critical moments and see what needs to happen from a neutral position. They do this in evaluating performance, in evaluating themselves and their own actions, and in evaluating new ideas or possibilities for improvement of their team. “This is not about managing moment-to-moment situations but also about being able to see what

thE lEadEr’s BookshElf is needed in the long-term rather than getting caught up in tunnel vision due to, for example, past successes (‘I’ve always done it this way’),” he notes. • Build trust: You need to build trust so the other person is assured you are in their corner and that you are there for them, not for your own aggrandizement. “Without trust, you won’t get to first base developmentally. Your role will be vastly diminished, from the high ground of a developer of people to, at best, a supervisor, a checker who makes sure things are being done right and corners aren’t being cut,” he says. “Olympic coaches understand that exceptional performance occurs only in a safe environment where athletes can develop confidence and self-awareness.” Trust, he stresses, is a two-way street. In order to receive it, you must extend it. The more of it you give away, the more you will receive in return. Prior to the 2006 Olympics in Torino, women’s hockey coach Mel Davidson established a month-long training camp in P.E.I., intended to build trust. The players were in cabins and tents, and every time they would approach her to say things weren’t going well she would listen to the complaint and send them back to work it out with their colleagues. Trusting them to build trust with each other was fundamental to the team’s success.

NOW!

• Encourage and use imagery: To help your charge understand what is possible and encourage them to strive to achieve their potential, you need to paint pictures of the future that is possible. Individuals can’t do what they can’t imagine, and you must liberate their imagination. That imagery is not purely visual; it can be stimulated through any of the senses. “Helping someone to become a more effective presenter at weekly meetings may work best if the person experiences through imagery what it feels like to stand at the front of the room and answer tough questions, rather than what it looks like. But most likely, more than one sense will be involved in any performance imagery,” he advises. The folks in your office aren’t athletes with ample chances to practise their skills. Someone you are helping, for example, might need to become more assertive in situations without confronting. Jensen says they can practise by doing repetitions internally, as athletes do, imagining obstacles they might meet and playing out to be more assertive (and feeling how it would feel to be more assertive). • Uncover

and work through

blocks: The third factor emerges when the individual is conflicted. So when progress slows, you need to help the individual clarify what is blocking self-development and help

them to work through that impediment. Jensen urges you to constantly debrief subordinates on performance in an informal way, so any potentially emotional conversation about stalled progress is natural and not seen as an attack. Hockley coach Davidson allows the dozen or so staff people – doctor, physiotherapist, massage director, media director, et al – to attend game-day team meetings and film sessions with the players, but they must attend all or none since she doesn’t want an influx of people before the gold medal game to heighten the drama. • Embrace adversity: High performance involves pushing past boundaries. And you can’t push beyond those boundaries without disappointments. Indeed, at times a good coach will even set up challenges that will create adversity, such as the track coach who creates noise in long jump practices to prepare athletes for Olympic crowds or the manager who piles on assignments for a talented employee, so the individual can grow. Those five factors are helpful to all of us who have to coach others. But it’s important to step back, and embrace the foundational steps contained in the book’s title. You don’t push people to high performance. You assist them to self-develop. You ignite the third factor.

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

May 2012 // Canadian Government Executive / 35

MPA

Master of Public Administration

(Management)

A national recognized program for Public-sector professionals that embodies integrity and transparency in government. On your terms. Self-directed and flexible, via blended learning delivery.

Visit our website masters.management.dal.ca mpam@dal.ca 1-800-205-7510

GoVErNiNG diGitallY

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

The (lost?) art of reading ﬁction Do we read books anymore? Travel on airplanes or trains these days and the evidence is mixed. While books are now rivalled by on-demand television and personal devices offering movies, games and who knows what else, a respectable cadre of passengers still board with book in hand. And alongside those old and worn paperbacks, tablets and e-readers rapidly gain ground. Yet dig a bit deeper and there are important and consequential questions about what people are reading, how they do so, and why it matters. For Nicolas Carr, reading is endangered: skimming is instead the new norm. For students and professionals, current and future public servants, fiction is often and understandably displaced by emails, social media, reports and decks, to say nothing of the advent of video. Nonetheless, as a welcome and calming distraction to such a torrent of information and imagery, genre fiction such as crime novels, romance and fantasy hold their own. Best-selling authors thus remain so year after year, as legions of fans await the next, often turnkey or franchise offering. Familiarity breeds loyalty as readers return to what they know (or perhaps, to be bold, what their favourite talk-show host suggests they ought to know). Some simply await the movie… What fares less well in such a marketplace are classical literary and contemporary creations; the former often viewed as excessive in length and stylistically impenetrable, the latter competing with mass marketing and the aforementioned preference for the tried and true. In this respect, it is not clear whether the Internet and social media are

spreading new creative voices to a wider audience, or mainly expanding opportunities and reach for the most vocal and visible. Similarly, if people predominantly consume Facebook postings and tweets from sources and acquaintances they already know, the prospects for online enrichment greatly diminish. Nobel Prize-winning author, Orphan Pamuk, argues that what people read matters greatly, both individually and for society as a whole. While he lauds genre fiction as a comforting diversion he also points out that literary novels – those with greater complexity and texture in characters and storylines – have long played a more fundamental role in terms of learning and development. His claim is that literary novels enable us to explore deeper meanings in our own world through multiple worldviews and experiences we could otherwise never have known. In addition, grave and hopeful lessons of history are kept alive, transcending generational divides. In a similar vein, researchers have recently found that reading fiction is an important determinant of empathy and thus crucial to improving interpersonal relations and understanding. In settings of religious and cultural diversity such as Canada today, such attributes matter greatly. Innovation has long been correlated with diversity too, meaning that the economic dimensions to literary invention should also not be overlooked. Whether technology facilitates or diminishes literary appreciation is certainly debatable, but it is perhaps telling that a leading elementary academy, the Waldorf School of the Peninsula in the heart of

Silicon Valley, shuns the usage of digital devices in classrooms. In a community with near technological ubiquity, parents and teachers instead emphasize unplugged forms of cognitive development such as literature and performing arts (for more insight, an October 2011 article on the School can be found online from The New York Times). Aside from educational importance, the relationship and differences between literature appreciation and digital literacy also matter for the public service as a whole – a consummate knowledge organization. While undoubtedly a bit much to assign novels as a workplace requirement, fiscal austerity alone cannot create an agile and adaptive workforce. Much as technology companies encourage employee freedom and creative experimentation, so it must be for public servants. Social media enables the creation and sharing of new forms of literary undertakings that can have tremendous value in bettering governance. Though e-government has, at times, become synonymous with online, transactional processes and efficiency, truly citizen-centric service capacities require empathy and creativity in fostering shared narratives with diverse groups of clients. Here too literary appreciation and fine arts are skill sets the public service can ill-afford to lose. What people read and how they read are thus important pieces of the crucially important challenge of fostering a learning society, one with increasingly digital dimensions. Bottom line, then, when crafting your upcoming summer reading list, be sure to choose wisely. May 2012 // Canadian Government Executive / 37

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).

SIBs are no easy sell On March 29th, the federal government brought down one of the most anticipated budgets in recent years. The budget contains a number of different themes. The first includes new spending initiatives such as for aboriginal schools, the Pan Am Games, the Coast Guard and Via Rail. The second theme contains a number of policy initiatives that have been sitting in the Department of Finance’s in basket for years but could not find sufficient support from previous governments. These include the abolition of the penny and the raising of the OAC threshold from 65 to 67. The third theme highlights reducing the size of the federal government by announcing some selective cuts and promising to become more efficient. In this category the government sliced the CBC budget by $100 million, eliminated Katimavik (a Trudeau era youth program), and did away with the Public Appointment Commission (part of the Federal Accountability Act). In many ways, this budget is reminiscent of several mid-1990s budgets when the Liberal government sought to remedy the fiscal situation by encouraging the creation of alternative service delivery (ASD) mechanisms as a means of making government more cost effective. At the time, the government avoided getting on the New Public Management bandwagon by choosing instead to pursue a non-doctrinaire approach to ASDs by looking for ways to experiment with new governance and delivery models. In the recent March budget, the Finance minister continues this approach to deficit fighting by declaring his intentions to 38 / Canadian Government Executive // May 2012

look at a new ASD model in the most indirect way possible. In the finest example of bureaucratese, Jim Flaherty states that, “the government will continue to explore social finance instruments as a way to further encourage the development of government-community partnerships.” He goes on to say that, “the minister of Human Resources and Skills Development is also testing ways to maximize the impact of federal spending to support community-level partnerships, including pay-for-performance agreements and encouraging leveraging of private sector resources. Building on these partnerships and the work of the Canadian Task Force on Social Finance, the government will continue to support the momentum building around social finance initiatives and will explore social finance instruments. For example, social impact bonds hold promise as a tool to further encourage the development of governmentcommunity partnerships.” Social impact bonds (SIBs) are currently being experimented within the U.K. in the wake of the arrival of the Cameron government. Based on his big society theme, David Cameron has championed moving the delivery of public services from the public sector into the private or not-for-profit sectors. Unlike earlier efforts, the SIBs enable government to calibrate its costs by paying an arms-length organization for the degree to which they are successful in achieving a predetermined set of social outcomes. At its core, the risk of meeting the program’s objectives rest with the delivery organization and the investors’ returns depend on the outcomes that are

achieved rather than program inputs. This approach has the advantage of encouraging the providers to offer a variety of program delivery mechanisms and to develop innovative work environments instead of relying on established institutional arrangements used by governments that are already known to be ineffective. While the early SIBs in the U.K. are oriented around correctional services, there is great potential in Canada for experimentation in areas like aboriginal health or on-reserve education programs where current efforts have had only mixed results. Given the importance of outcome measures and explicit goal setting for SIBs, not all programs are suitable for SIB pilot projects. At a minimum, the benefits to government of a SIB must be greater than the costs of program delivery, the outcomes of the interventions must be measurable and attributable to the initiative, and they must not create any negative impacts. SIBS might also be a tough sell to the public. Governments are not used to using investors to solve social problems, measuring outcomes and paying for results in a transparent way. In the case of SIBs, austerity may prove to be the mother of invention. However, to succeed the government needs political champions, beyond words nested in budget papers, for SIBs to have a chance to make a difference in delivering social programs.

media:scape™

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

expect 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

Get it dry cleaned.

Clear advice to help you manage risk. KPMGâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Advisory Services in Risk Consulting. Visit kpmg.ca/risk for more.