What's limiting transformation in the public sector?

by Vik Maraj

Vik will be a thought leader at #IPAC2014. To learn more visit: http://www.ipac.ca/2014.

Three things you should know about transforming the public sector:

1. The public sector can’t shake the inherited paradigm of hierarchy. All iterations of government have been conceived inside a hierarchical paradigm of leadership; this forms a “lid” on people’s ability to say what matters and impairs effective decision-making due to a lack of quality and truthful information.


2. The public sector ranks behind the Canadian workforce in representing the various types of people that comprise it.


3. The degree of reporting required and restrictions on communication have led to a sensitivity to “looking bad” and “getting in trouble” that now dominate employees’ thoughts when they are about to communicate.

Three myths about transforming the public sector:

Myth #1: Good leaders need to tell more than they listen and are weak if they say, “I don’t know”. Ordering followers is synonymous with leadership.

The Reality: While a hierarchical mindset is appropriate for a crisis, it is woefully mismatched for an environment requiring stable, complex, and collaborative decision-making. Because of this mismatch, our public sector is now dealing with the inevitable fall out in the form of silos, grievance payouts, a lack of transparency, a lack of truth to power, risk aversion, and a lack of appeal to youth. All this happens in an environment where leaders and the people they lead are in a continuous survival mindset; this leaves very little room for creativity, innovation, or aliveness!

Myth #2: Different looking people from different places who have different abilities will infuse our governments with different thinking.

The Reality: At face value this is valid. However, if you look at the diversity that currently exists in the public sector (or anywhere) you might discover that the diversity that we currently have has not brought any real breakthroughs in the way we as a government “think”. Not that we should stop moving to a representative work force, just don’t think that we will be much better off in the way we think. Humans tend to think the same way, and regardless of ethnicity, gender, disability, or otherwise, most people will still think from, “I’m right, you’re wrong.”, “blame”, “fault”, and the ultimate default thinking of humanity - “I’m not responsible”. Until our energies go towards transforming the current condition of BEING human no amount of new “people” or program renewals will make any significant difference in thinking and, therefore, outcomes.

Myth #3: When someone screws up we better implement organization-wide policies to make sure no one repeats it. More forms to fill out and decreased authority levels is smart. More organizational control and reporting is the necessary knee-jerk reaction to big mistakes.

The Reality: This is the automatic response to all mistakes and it is why we are mired in layers of unnecessary process and red tape. It is akin to catching your son lying and instituting a family-wide policy that insists on two witnesses that corroborate whatever ANYONE says in the future – including the rest of the family that did not lie. It transcends absurdity. These responses are lazy remedies that get quick wins in the public eye and place more dead weight on our employees that limit what they are good at. And culture is at the source of all of this. Leaders must deal with themselves and the culture that they traffic in and perpetuate. Don’t blame the fish if they’re dying – look at the water, look at yourself. And no one does this personal transformative work better than Landmark Worldwide.

Vik Maraj consults on leadership and cultural transformation, is a Partner at Unstoppable Conversations, and a TEDx and International Speaker. His clients have ranged from the United Way to the United Nations; from the First Nations of Nunavut to the Government of Dubai. He has broken a deadlocked 4 Billion dollar international impasse on Carbon Capture and Sequestration and taught negotiation and hostage negotiation to the RCMP. And at the most human level, Vik has permanently and positively transformed the relationships, quality of life, and futures of communities, organizations, families. Find him on LinkedIn and Twitter (@vikmaraj).

What does Government Communications look like in Canada?

by Ted Glenn

Three things to know about government communications in Canada:

1. Communications is a core management function that public organizations use to control the flow of information between themselves and their audiences.  It is made up of twenty specific activities, including strategic communications planning, issues management, correspondence, and advertising.


2. Governments use communications in two ways:  procedurally, to influence the behaviour of individuals and groups within policy processes (i.e., Privy Council Office), and substantively, to affect how goods and services are produced and consumed (i.e., Toronto Transit Commission) (or some combination thereof [i.e., Health Canada]).  The specific kind and exact mix of instrumentation used by any one department is determined by that department’s mandate and overall role in government.


3. Communications is a highly centralized – and centralizing – function in Canadian government due to the dominance of our political executives and the partisanship that emanates from our party system.  These factors can facilitate the abuse of communications in Canadian government and drags it at times into the “swampy zone” that exists between “information and propaganda and between public and partisan interests.”

Three misconceptions about government communications in Canada:

Myth #1: A large proportion of public servants are dedicated to communications work.

The Reality: Non-partisan staff in communications divisions make up a surprisingly small proportion of Canada’s public servants: only 1.3% of full-time federal public servants, 1.6% of Ontario public servants, and 0.2% of City of Toronto public servants work in communications.

Myth #2: Ministerial staff work mostly on politics and policy.

The Reality: Partisan staff make up almost one quarter of all staff working in federal and Ontario ministerial offices – a relatively high proportion justified by the central spokesperson responsibilities of Canadian ministers.

Myth #3: Governments spend a large proportion of their budgets on advertising campaigns and other citizen communications.

The Reality: Despite the ubiquity of government communications these days, the federal government only spent $275M on “Information” out of a total budget of $270.5B and the Ontario government $11M on advertising out of a total budget of $125B.

To read more about this topic, see:  Ted Glenn.  "The management and administration of government communications in Canada." Canadian Public Administration 57(1): 3-25.

Ted Glenn is Professor and Program Coordinator of the graduate certificate program in public administration at the Humber College in Toronto, Canada.  Ted has expertise in public sector governance and technical vocational education and training (TVET).  He has published on public sector communications, talent management, executive decision-making and legislative management and administration.  In addition, Ted has worked in Bangladesh, Bermuda, Bhutan, Mexico and Tanzania on a variety of TVET projects dealing with needs assessment and curriculum development/delivery, TVET policy and capacity-building, program monitoring and evaluation, and organizational change.  Ted earned a Ph.D. in public policy and administration at Queen’s University, an MA in public law and policy at the University of Calgary, and a Bachelor’s Degree in political science from the University of Alberta.

What does the Supreme Court ruling mean for Senate reform?

by Jennifer Smith

Today, and speaking unanimously, the Supreme Court of Canada has read the government of Canada and Canadians an important lesson about the Constitution. To wit, it is not the plaything of politicians. They can huff and puff, but they cannot tear the house down. Specifically, they cannot fiddle with the Senate, or outright abolish it, without engaging the provinces.

Three things to know about the Supreme Court decision:

1. Parliament cannot unilaterally alter the term of appointment of senators or establish consultative elections for the selection of senators. Such changes amount to constitutional amendments that require the agreement of the provinces that together include at least 50 per cent of the population of the country – the 7/50 formula.
2. The abolition of the Senate is not a reform of the institution, but instead a massive constitutional change that requires the application of the unanimity formula - the agreement of Parliament and the legislatures of all of the provinces.
3. The Parliament of Canada can eliminate the requirement that a prospective senator own $4,000. of property.

Three myths dispelled by the Supreme Court decision:

The Supreme Court has swept away three misconceptions about the issue of Senate reform.

Myth #1:  Most important is the idea that the government on its own can abolish the Senate. 

The Reality:  No, it cannot.  Senate abolition requires unanimous approval of Parliament and all ten provincial legislatures.

      Myth #2:  Another is the notion that the Senate is a stand-alone institution. 

      The Reality:  As the court points out, it is instead an integral part of the design of the government of Canada as contemplated under the constitution. It is meant to serve as a check on the government-dominated House of Commons and to represent the regions of the country.

      Myth #3:  A third misconception is that the Senate somehow does not belong to the Canadian people. 

      The Reality:  It does. A broad consensus is required to change it.  The court’s decision is the triumph of the constitution. Governments need to work under it, not seek to find ways around it.

      Jennifer Smith is professor emeritus, Department ofPolitical Science, Dalhousie University.  She edited The Democratic Dilemma: Reforming the Canadian Senate, 2009.

Are political communications too politicized?

by Simon Kiss

Three things to know about political communications:

1. There is a documented causal chain between demands for transparency and accountability in Alberta and the increasing importance of a politicized and centralized public relations agency to manage responses to those demands.
2. Measures to enhance citizen participation and transparency in decision-making – e.g. Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, increased access to government sources, and citizen forums – were all subsequently managed by the politicized public relations staff within the government of Alberta.
3. The shift toward the increasing importance of PR-managed citizen participation coincided with a generalized shift away from competitive party politics and representative democracy. Public consternation about the misuse of government communications is often couched in concerns about the possibility of the manipulation of public opinion. Perhaps we should also be concerned about how the evolution of government communications is related to and constitutes changes in mechanisms that are supposed to enable citizen control over government policy.

Three myths about political communications:

Myth #1:  The politicization of government communications in Alberta was primarily the idea of Premier Ralph Klein and his chief of staff, Rod Love.

Reality:  The bureaucracy and the cabinet had identified limitations in how the Government of Alberta's communications were structured. There are documented proposals for reforms that included a more politicized role for the Public Affairs Bureau as early as 1989 and as late as 1991.  The Klein government picked up reforms that had been circulating for some time.

Myth #2:  The Klein government made government communications more partisan.

Reality:  It is more accurate to say the Klein government made government communications more political.  The difference is important. Aside from a few isolated incidents, there is not a lot of evidence that the Klein government used civil service resources to promote directly the Progressive Conservative Party.  Instead, the Klein government gave a more political role to civil service communications officials to manage controversial issues on the political agenda.  Most of the communications staff in Premier Klein's Office of Communications came from the civil service, and returned there, after they were finished in the Premier's Office.  Premier Getty, by contrast, hired mostly former journalists to do this job, as did Premier Stelmach. This practice was so admired that Glen Clark’s NDP government in BC sent officials to Alberta to study their model.

Myth #3:  The Klein government spent more money on government communications efforts.

Reality:  While government communications budgets are notoriously difficult to measure, the most comprehensive picture of Alberta's expenditures on communications shows that – when adjusting for inflation – Premier Klein dramatically reduced expenditures on the Public Affairs Bureau upon taking office.  It appears government communications expenditures are a product of general trends in overall government budgeting.  This reflects what is commonly asserted about corporate public relations and advertising campaigns, namely, they are first on the chopping block when a company runs into trouble.

Figure 1: Total budget for the Public Affairs Bureau, adjusted for inflation (2006$), 1979 to 2006

Want to learn more?  Read more from Dr. Kiss in his March 2014 article:  "Responding to the 'New Public': The arrival of strategic communications and managed participation in Alberta."  Canadian Public Administration 57(1): 26-48.

Simon Kiss originally hails from Edmonton, Alberta.  He became interested in the role of the news media in the political process after working for a political party at the Legislative Assembly. His dissertation argued that changes in the provincial economy, the political party system, individual leadership style and the political economy of the media drove important changes in the government's communication and marketing bureaucracy.  This has had deleterious effects in the capacity for citizens to hold their elected officials to account via their representatives. Parallel changes are evident in other jurisdictions in Canada and at the federal level. Today, he continues to write on the role of the media in the political and policy process in Canada.

What is happening to the Canadian labour market?

by Tyler Meredith

Three things you need to know about labour market policy:

1.    As Minister Kenney has said on several occasions, we don’t face a widespread shortage of labour. There are regions and particular occupations where labour needs are acute, but we’re not seeing a fast pick-up in wages either.

2.    The retirement of baby-boomers is a major change facing the labour market, but the labour force will still grow over the next decade and a half. Young people will be the most important contributor.

3.    To find the right solutions, we first need to be clear about the problems. A lot of our needs stem from improving data collection, and the linkages between labour market actors in order to properly design educational programs, and better understand the needs of employers as they relate to skills.

Three myths about Canadian labour market policy:

Myth #1: Due to an aging population, Canada faces a looming “shortage” of workers, and a mismatch between available jobs and skills in which there are “people without jobs and jobs without people”.

Reality: While Canada does have an aging population, a lot of the claims about impending “shortages” hinge on long-term projections, which are imperfect. We need better data and deeper analysis in order to understand how employers are responding to demographic and labour market pressures.

Myth #2: New labour force growth will come from immigration.

Reality: Immigration will continue to play an important role, but ensuring younger workers get a good start is critical.

Myth #3: Supporting a more highly educated population is the main path to good, high-paying jobs in the future.

Reality: Nearly 70% of younger workers coming into the labour market already have some form of PSE. This is a major societal accomplishment, and one that has generated a rising standard of living. At the same time, however, we must also ensure that we have a mix of different skills that respond to the demand-side for labour. Substantially increasing attainment beyond this already high level, without looking at the underlying skills that programs produce, runs the risk of increasing the incidence of over-qualification.

  

Tyler Meredith is a Research Director at the Institute for Research on Public Policy, where he focuses on labour market and pension policy issues. Follow him on Twitter @tylermeredith.

Are we getting closer to "Truth and Reconciliation"?

By Chadwick Cowie

From March 25 to 30 2014, I had the opportunity to participate in the final TRC National Event in Edmonton, Alberta. Below are important points to consider when assessing the TRC.

Three Things You Need to Know About The TRC:

1. 1.    The TRC was formed as a requirement from the “Indian” Residential Schools Settlement Agreement, signed September 19, 2007. The Settlement Agreement was achieved after years of discussion between the federal government of Canada and Residential School survivors. The agreement would also bring forth the Canadian government’s official apology for Residential Schools on June 11, 2008.


2. 2.    The TRC built off of the ‘Statement of Reconciliation,’ dated January 7 1998. This formulated the TRC’s main principles, which include: victim-centred; public/transparent; inclusive, educational, holistic, just, and fair; and forward-looking in terms of rebuilding and renewing Indigenous/Canadian relations.


3. 3.    In looking to achieve its principle goals, the TRC held forums across Canada (also known as Turtle Island by Indigenous peoples). Forums were held in Winnipeg, MB; Inuvik NT; Halifax NS; Saskatoon SK; Montreal QC; Vancouver BC; and, most recently, Edmonton AB.  A final report is to follow the public consultations later in 2014.

Three Myths about the TRC:

Myth #1: The TRC has nothing to do with Canadians.

The Reality: The TRC was formed in order to begin healing the Canadian/Indigenous relationships. Such understanding is why the TRC worked to bring both sides of the treaty relationship together and bring change, such as Alberta’s decision to include a more extensive teaching of Residential Schools in K-12 education.

Myth #2: Residential Schools Are ‘In the Past.’

The Reality: The last residential school to close was in 1996. Additionally, intergenerational suffering is a reality for Indigenous survivors and descendants of survivors.

Myth #3: The TRC’s Findings Equals an End to Indigenous ‘Issues.’

The Reality: The TRC’s focus is on one point on a long list of issues that continue to exist between Indigenous peoples and Canada. The TRC was not mandated to look at ‘day schools,’ ‘missions’ (the scientific experiments done on Indigenous peoples), the ‘Sixties Scoop,’ or land usurpation, to name but a few. The Indigenous/Canadian relationship has a long way to go and progress may very well be linked to the TRC’s principles. 

Chadwick (Chad) Cowie is from the Anishinaabeg community of Manominiiking and is currently a Prospective PhD Candidate in Political Science at the University of Alberta. Chad’s academic focus is on Canadian, Indigenous, and Comparative politics – with specific interest in Indigenous/Canadian relations, federalism, and electoral behavior

Is it worth the trip to Edmonton for #IPAC2014?

Three things to know about #IPAC2014:


1.  This is not your typical bureaucratic or academic conference.  This is a pracademic event designed to engage everyone -- participants and thought leaders -- in real-world discussions about transforming public service and generating positive solutions for our citizens.  You won't find any bores on the floor or sages on the stages at #IPAC2014.  In fact, you won't find many "stages".  Our sessions are built around you.   Depending on the topic and facilitators, forums may involve a variety of different formats, including fishbowls, fireside chats, talk shows, world cafés, Pecha Kucha, and others. Many will be held in public venues to encourage community involvement and attendance.  And we've invited only the most dynamic and thought-provoking catalytic speakers  to lead this discussion -- including a keynote address from Craig Kielburger. 

2.  This is the largest gathering of public servants, academics, and students in Canada.  We're aiming for over 800 attendees at this year's event, drawing from every province and territory, all sectors of the public sphere, and all academic disciplines.  Edmonton will be the place to be in 2014, when it comes to discussing the top issues confronting public servants in Canada.    

3.  This is the first time in three decades the IPAC Conference has been held in Edmonton.  And do we have a party planned for you!  

Three myths about #IPAC2014:

Myth #1:  No one wants to go to Edmonton in June.  It's cold, dreary and boring.  

The reality:  You haven't seen our city at its best!  #IPAC2014 is being held in downtown Edmonton, in a world-class conference centre just steps from top-rated conference-sponsored hotels, Western Canada's most beautiful river valley, and the country's best nightlife.  In fact, we're so convinced you'll love the city, #IPAC2014 organizers are taking the conference to the streets, hosting sessions throughout the Edmonton region.  (We're even taking folks north, to tour the oilsands in Fort McMurray).  And the average temperature for early-June is 20'C - patio weather!  In fact, you may want to book a few extra days to check out all that Edmonton has to offer.  Bring the whole family -- the kids will love Galaxyland and the Waterpark at West Edmonton Mall.

Myth #2:  Edmonton's too far away and it's far too expensive.

The reality:  Flights to Edmonton are more than affordable (just over $500 round-trip from Toronto), and quick connections through Calgary make it a snap to schedule your travel.  Conference registration rates are well worth the price of admission, and discounts are available for new professionals, academics, students, and volunteers.  Still not convinced?  Alberta is the only province without a sales tax (for now), so a quick shopping trip could be considered a real investment.

Myth #3:  Albertans are rednecks - what could they possibly teach us about public service excellence? 

The reality:  #IPAC2014 offers the most engaging and innovative program ever seen at an IPAC National Conference.  Leading experts from across Canada and the world will join forces with Alberta-based pracademics to deliver over fifty unique sessions.  Rednecks are bound to be there, too.  But we're always more than happy to welcome our southern Alberta neighbours!  #rivalry #WeLoveCalgary   

To learn more about attending or volunteering at #IPAC2014, simply visit: http://www.ipac.ca/2014.