The year 2016 saw two critical words circling the halls of Ottawa – ‘results’ and ‘deliverology.’ The first is not new to the federal public service, though occasionally it is touted as a major breakthrough (let’s not forget that Results for Canadians was the centrepiece of the government’s management framework at the turn of the century). The second proved a real attention-getter. It was in part because of the newness and awkwardness of the word itself, but also because of its friends in high places. Based on an approach introduced by the Tony Blair government in the UK in 2001, the concept of deliverology was introduced onto the Canadian federal scene with the creation of a centre of government ‘results and delivery unit’ to be based in the Privy Council Office (PCO). The intent is laudable – to put a sharper focus on government priorities to help ensure that government delivers on its commitments, goals are met and ‘results’ delivered to Canadians. As is so often the case with best intentions aligned to new approaches, though, the devil is in the detail, and government, in instituting the deliverology model, will need to take account of the Canadian context if it is to work effectively.
February 24, 2017
Connecting the Dots between M, E, RBM….and Deliverology