Canadian Government Executive - Volume 26 - Issue 02

March/April 2020 // Canadian Government Executive / 23 W hether you’re trying to decide on which brand of cereal to buy, a holi- day destination, or hav- ing your in-laws for dinner, making the wrong decision can be paralyzing. The same can be said when se- lecting which alternative service delivery (ASD) model to implement. Many believe ASD is a natural product of New Public Management reforms that swept the world in the 1980s. Others say it was the answer to the complex question of how to address fiscal pressures and service modernization while protecting the public interest. For example, Ontario’s 1999 ASD guide- lines state: “Among the goals that the On- tario Government has set for itself are: to provide quality service to the public, fo- cus on core business, decrease spending, balance the budget, eliminate barriers to business and create a prosperous economy. To achieve these goals, the Ontario Public Service has begun to make fundamental changes in the way it works.” The driving force for any infrastruc- ture project lies in the services enabled, whether clean water, education, health- care, or transportation. As the scale and scope of such projects respond to the type and quality of public services required, de- livery models must adapt. In Canada, the procurement vehicle of choice is public- private partnerships (P3). Canada is known for its pioneering spirit in the P3 market. Community-based public opinion polls show positive support for P3 projects. But no one suggests that P3s are a panacea. It is prudent for project sponsors and their teams to exercise a duty of care in assessing all feasible service delivery models before making decisions. Eeny, meeny, miny, moe Traditional infrastructure projects are managed from conception to completion by the public service. This means that the core essential services of projects are pre- dominantly in-house. Outsourcing or contracting out occurs when government decides to transfer functions or activities to contractors for specific periods of time. Regardless, gov- ernment retains responsibility and is held to account in public for project results. Outsourcing can be advantageous, provid- ed there are qualified suppliers available to complete the required tasks according to the specifications outlined. P3s have features that are distinct from those of traditional and outsourcing op- tions. The ability to share risk with part- ners is one of the most appealing factors to government agencies. Access to man- agement or professional expertise not available within government is another. Financing has proven over time to be a lesser consideration in forging P3s, as many governments can borrow money cheaper than private partners. Building successful ASDs After selecting a model, it may be difficult for proponents to test the hypothesis. A detailed, properly-prepared contract is an asset in minimizing scope and scale changes. Assembling a team of qualified advisors to defend greater interests is equally important. Surrounding oneself with “yes people” can have devastating and embarrassing consequences. KPMG’s Transforming Government is a proven approach that outlines key project management, stakeholder engagement, and governance strategies that should be considered by proponents. Strategic Assessment • Define the future vision and strategy • Define evaluation criteria • Prioritize services for consideration Options Analysis • Develop detailed baseline • Test preferred options • Undertake initial market scan and mar - ket sounding Solution Design • Conduct structured stakeholder consul - tation • Determine the need for procurement strategies • Draft high-level implementation path - ways ASD models can be powerful tools in building much-needed or upgrading ag- ing infrastructure. They can also bring a wide range of benefits, including capital, expertise, efficiencies, innovation, and risk protection. But government officials must first assess systematically which ser- vice delivery models are feasible for their project and whether the preferred model is appropriate – fit for purpose and viable. Construction Dive reporter, Kim Slowey, highlights five SMART implementation considerations: 1. Pick the right model; 2. Build a solid team; 3. Advocate for transparency; 4. Solicit public approval; and 5. Find a champion. When it comes to ASD models, there is no one-size-fits-all approach. Each model has its own strengths and weaknesses relative to the project context. Project manage- ment principles – initiating, planning, ex- ecuting, monitoring and controlling, proj- ect closure – underpin successful projects. ASD projects inevitably run into a few bumps along the way. Nothing is perfect. The key is to learn frommistakes and keep pursuing better service that costs less. Sindiswa Moyo is project communica- tions specialist at York Region Rapid Transit Corporation. she is a candidate for the Master of Public Policy, Admin- istration and Law at York University (sindimoyo@gmail.com ). Millennial Outlook by Sindiswa Moyo Decisions, decisions, decisions Wisdom is bright and unfad- ing. She readily appears to those who love her. She’s found by those who keep seeking after her. – Solomon 6:12