Canadian Government Executive - Volume 24 - Issue 04

36 / Canadian Government Executive // July/August 2018 PROCUREMENT T he federal government, as the largest and most complex public service organization in Canada, has traditionally been quite active in attempting to improve how it manages and operates in order to deliver its myriad of programs and services as ef- fectively and efficiently as possible. To its credit, it has over the years conducted a broad-range of horizontal management reform initiatives across its many depart- ments and agencies. While reform initiatives – both IT and non- IT related – have been a constant feature of the government’s management agenda, they have seldom been fully successful. In the wake of the largely publicised problems faced by the new federal pay system (Phoe- nix), a broader look at the lessons from both the successes and failures of past initiatives would help the public service grasp how to achieve better results. Repeated priorities and lessons This has been done before. There are vari- ous studies that could help federal execu- tives successfully avoid prior pitfalls. Past studies, audits and other publications may have differed in scope and approach, but there are typically many similarities and common trends in their observations that would benefit future endeavors. However, these similarities also suggest that the federal bureaucracy has not always been proficient at acquiring and making use of past lessons. This is important in the context of the Association of Professional Executives’ ACHIEVING BETTER PUBLIC SERVICE CAPACITY AND GOVERNANCE OUTCOMES BY ROBERT D’AOUST BCOMM, MBA, CPA-CA, CFE THE REPEATED HISTORY OF FEDERAL MANAGEMENT REFORMS: 2017 “Executive Work and Health Survey,” which reported that a majority of execu- tives thought that the uses of technology and management tools were problematic. Similarly, under the “BluePrint 2020” red tape reduction consultations, “employees reported difficulty getting clear directions, siloed information, and poor client ser- vice, as well as process overload and cum- bersome technology.” (Clerk of the Privy Council’s 24th Annual Report, 2017). These issues are in contrast with the government’s long-standing objectives. A comparative review of past priorities, such as those reflected in the Clerks’ Annual Re- ports of the last 20 years, presents almost identical concerns. For instance: “We are removing unnecessary bureau- cracy from our work processes with a focus on outcomes and accounting for re- sults.” (Clerk’s 7th Annual Report, 2000) “That is why unravelling the web of rules at both the public service and de- partmental levels must continue. ... There is an ongoing need to improve our back office, including our financial and human resources systems as well as related busi- ness processes.” (Clerk’s 17th Annual Re- port, 2010). The present clerk has also indicated that the public service needs to pick up the pace of its modernization plan (Ottawa Citizen, March 2016). I It is also worth- while to recall that, going further back, government renewal initiatives such as Increased Ministerial Authority and Ac- countability (1986) and Public Service 2000 (1990 White Paper) – to mention only two – advocated similar ideas.