cpsrenewal.ca by Nick Charney

Learning plans are a crutch and I'd rather learn without one

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Fri, 25 May 2012 09:00:00 +0000

First let me start by saying that the line of reasoning I am about to present to you may go somewhat against the grain; feel free to take issue or prove me wrong, as you will see below, its been done before.

I am not a fan of learning plans

My main contention is that organizations that are serious about learning don't have learning plans they have learning cultures. They don't have forms that need to be filled out, justifications that need writing, and approvals that need approving. Rather they position learning a cultural cornerstone of everyday activity, encourage inquisitive minds and guard against permission based barriers.

my crutches by dimtri_66

Learning plans are inherently antagonistic

I also think that learning plans reinforce organizational power differentials by reducing employees to applicants and managers to approvers. This leads to skirmishes over justifications and shrinking resource pools.

Learning plans are biased towards a particular model of learning

In general, organizational training authorizations forms (the one's I have seen) are biased towards classroom or conference (learning event) based training. Where, for example, is the box on the form that allows me to express my desire for a more nuanced approach to learning?

They are also biased towards the here and now, I was recently asked to complete a 3-year training plan. How can I honestly complete it when the things I want to learn - the prescient things in my field - haven't even been invented yet?

Let me tell you a little story about learning plans

A few years ago, my boss at the time informed me that I needed to fill out a learning plan. We had an excellent relationship and while we agreed that we didn't really need a learning plan that is was mandatory.

So, I decided to have a bit of fun.

I took out a stamp my wife got me when I was a teacher's assistant and stamped the learning plan with it; the stamp read "Complete and Utter Bullshit". Signed it, turned it in, cajoled the admin into giving it to my Director General (DG), knowing full well it would get a good laugh but wind up back on my desk.

We were a small team (about 7 in total) so it didn't take long (I literally split a single office with the admin and our DG sat in the office next to ours). A few hours later the learning plan was on my desk with a little note asking me to redo it. This time I decided to write a single line on the training form:

"All I want is the flexibility to discuss reasonable learning opportunities as they arise."

Again, I signed it and sent it up the pipe. Again it came down with a redo post it affixed to it. Finally I acquiesced. I wrote down a conference that was a few weeks away knowing full well that it would be near impossible to get it through the approval chain given that it was in DC (technically an international conference and thus subject to greater approvals).

Long story short, I submitted the form trying to prove that learning plans don't actually work and my DG proved me wrong.

She approved my training plan, and personally shepherded the request through the system and wound up in DC attending an O'Reilly Media Government 2.0 conference. That woman went to the wall to get me to that conference. But I doubt proving me wrong was her motivation, she just wanted to honour her commitment because that's the type of person she was (and probably still is - we no longer work together).

I suppose in retrospect that learning plan did teach me something: that a learning plan is less important than the relationship between the people negotiating it.

That the former is only as strong as the latter.

That I ought invest more time in building relationships than filling out forms.

That a learning plan is a kind of crutch, and I'd rather learn without one.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

MBR Liespotting: Proven Techniques to Detect Deception

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Tue, 22 May 2012 09:00:00 +0000

I decided I was going to read a book a week for a year, here's a quick review of this week's book. You can see the ongoing list here.

Basic Info

Liespotting: Proven Techniques to Detect Deception by Pamela Meyer

Why I read it

I watch a lot of TED videos, Pamela has one, it caught my eye. It wasn't ground breaking by any means but it was interesting enough for me to plunk down twelve bucks on the eReader version (I borrowed my wife's Kobo Touch for the first time, which I thought I would hate but didn't). Here's the talk:

How it connects to the Public Sector

I'm not sure that there is a direct connection, unless you think you work in an office full of liars, at which point you probably need a little more help than just this book ;)

That said, the book did reinforce (heavily) the point that face to face communications are always preferable whenever there is any skin in the game because a face to face meeting gives you the opportunity to observe those with whom you are dealing, thus making you more likely to catch deception before it catches you.

What I got out of reading it

I actually found the book difficult to read at times.

Much of the book is dedicated to describing facial features, body language or mannerisms. I felt as though the content would have been better suited to a video (or series of videos) than a book. It was rife with bullet point statistical filler and the chapter on deception audits was (in my opinion) incredibly far flung.

That said, it wasn't all bad. I will definitely be paying closer attention to people's physical comportment whenever I think the truth may be getting stretched or listen more carefully to my friends whimsical narratives of the long weekend to determine the degree to which they are embellishing their exploits.

And, if that's something you'd be interested in than Liespotting may be a good fit. If not you may want to steer clear... and that, my friends, is the god's the honest truth.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

Rethinking Government Grants and Contributions

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Fri, 18 May 2012 09:00:00 +0000

I have spent the last 5 years working at the confluence of People, Technology and Public Policy. I've spent those years struggling to understand how these things inform one another both as a citizen and as a public servant; it is a complex and often confusing undertaking

As an early adopter of new technologies and proponent of a more collaborative and open approach to government feel as though we are quite literally staring into the chasm.

As a citizen, I am eager to find a way across it.

As a public servant I understand that the chasm can often be intimidating.

It is simultaneously full of the unknown and opportunity, of terror and excitement, and of risk and reward. I also realize that this dichotomy is giving rise to an interesting tension. Bureaucracies around the world continue to resist change while those working inside them are growing increasing frustrated by creed of business as usual.

This tension is boiling over all over the globe; so much has changed in past couple of years. We've seen revolutions, riots, and the occupation of our city streets.

We must ask ourselves how much longer can we simply stand at the edge of the chasm staring into the unknown.

We must be open to rethinking the role of government in an ever changing society.

It was Albert Einstein who said, "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them"; yet if there is one thing we as a society are guilty of is it is clinging to old mental models of what the public service ought to be, of what it ought to look like, of the types of solutions it ought to offer up.

I want to position an alternate vision for government grants and contributions, but before I do that, I want to take a minute to speak to grants and contributions more broadly.

On paper grants and contributions programs are quite simple, the transfer of government money to organizations, businesses, individuals, or other levels of government in order to achieve a specific outcome. In reality, they are an incredibly complex environment.

In Canada alone the federal government allocates approximately 27 billion dollars a year through grants and contributions programs; in the province of Ontario that number is roughly 85 billion. Federally these transfers are managed through over 800 different programs. Provincially, I couldn't even ascertain a number (feel free to update any of my numbers). The throughput of these transfers are usually reported at the departmental level, making cross-cutting or macro analysis difficult, if not impossible. But that is just one side of the equation.

Now, I've never applied for government monies myself, so went out and spent some of my personal time speaking to those who have. I sat down with a handful of small business owners, community associations, charities and researchers.

Their experience was varied, but a number of trends emerged. First, many had to hire consultants as intermediaries because they were unable to navigate the process themselves. The felt that the process was too complicated and that they required additional expertise to ensure they completed it properly. Second, many reported that the cost of securing the grant often outweighed the benefit of receiving it; some even saying that they had decided to abandon the process altogether. Third, the entire process is on lock down. Applicants are left in the dark as to the likelihood of their application being approved, how much competition they face, or when they will actually receive the funding. Fourth, everyone I spoke to identified the process as adversarial, that government officials are more likely to be gatekeepers looking to check boxes rather and hand out monies rather than be active stewards seeking the best possible return on government money. Fifth, the process is incredibly slow, and little consideration is given to the time sensitive nature of some requests, forcing many recipient organizations to live hand to mouth.

I should admit to not having worked directly in government grants or contributions programs and thus am unable to speak directly to the experience of those working on the inside. But let me be clear, I'm not trying to trying to be critical of those in that line of work nor the evolution of the system thus far. What I am trying to do is posit a more participatory and open model of grants and contributions (under the larger rubric of open government) that addresses the specific concerns raised by recipients during our conversations. Accordingly, I'd love to hear what you have to think about the alternative model I am about to present.

Characteristics of an alternative model

silueta by cardrea

For a new model to be truly transformative it must break the traditional trade-offs of the status quo. It must eliminate money contingent on things like hiring intermediaries, diverting labour away from core activities, being left out of the process, meeting minimum government set thresholds and moving slowly.

To my mind it starts by moving to a single window online; its client recipient focused not administration focused (which is to say it focuses on the user experience from the citizen perspective). Information should be easy to locate; and search should be central (like it is with the city of Calgary's web site).

It should make recommendations to citizens like Amazon does its customers; "People who applied this grant program also applied for these ones" or "People who spoke to this government official also spoke to this one".

Application criteria should be clearly articulated and as uniformly presented as possible across the spectrum of grant niches. There shouldn't be a different form for every program but a persistent set of reusable tombstone data that follows applicants and never needs to be re-entered into a form.

Applicants should be able to access examples of both successful and unsuccessful applications that citizens can see and learn from; they should see success, attrition, and failure rates on the grants they are applying for, and be able to instantly access online support. It could pair applicants up based on key markers like geography, program applied to, interest areas or desired outcomes. It could directly connect applicants who are competing for the same limited pool of grant money and provide them the information they need to decide whether or not to abandon their bid, team up with their competitor(s) or go head to head with them for the cash.

Imagine the efficiencies that could be gained by connecting like minded charitable organizations or art groups, or the innovation generated by connecting small business owners. Why not allow citizens to easily leverage their existing social networks in order to gain support, insights, or measure sentiment around their applications.

It could also build in persistent online profiles for public officials that indicate their expertise and make that expertise more universally accessible.

This vision of grants and contributions is one of government as convener. One where government officials could pull large applications out of the mix and put them up for larger public consultation should the application merit it. It could even target those consultations based on the geographical areas or interest communities that will be impacted by the grants.

This vision is one that ensures that public servants bring their expertise in public administration to bear, using more complete information to them to make more effective recommendations to elected officials, who are ultimately responsible for making the tough decisions.

After those decisions are made, public servants would work directly with recipients to ensure funds were transferred promptly, that they were allocated under the conditions of the grant and stay tuned in to the process, and finally evaluate the grant throughput and make those findings available within the window.

Governments could even go a step further and provide the tools to manipulate the data for further analysis or create a parallel incentive structure for entrepreneurs looking to build applications or data visualizations. Keeping the data accessible means that it can help inform anyone who chooses to look at it, be it other applicants, the media, public servants or elected officials.

The art of the possible

Often in government we think that there is little place for re-imagining things; we get so bogged down in day to day operations within the status quo that we forget that we aren't just responsible for delivering our mandates today, but also ensuring that they are delivered in a relevant manner tomorrow.

This vision, I think, is one that could help governments do just that.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

MBR: Policy Paradox by Deborah Stone Part 2

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Mon, 14 May 2012 09:00:00 +0000

I decided I was going to read a book a week for a year, here's a quick review of this week's book. You can see the ongoing list here.

Basic Info

Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making by Deborah Stone

Part 2 ...
This week took a bit longer to finish, here is the tail end of the review. I won't get too detailed but I thought I would share what is by far one of the most appropriate quotations from a the book I came across:

"Only two things limit the number of and kinds of alternatives considered: poverty of imagination and considerations of practicality. " (p. 245).

It is the quintessential challenge facing the public service, and applies to policy, management, and our daily work. I needn't remind you that I've always been a proponent of greater greater creativity in the public sector and moving away from the status quo.

Unrelated, I really liked the chapter on rules (and how to make them in a policy environment). In particular I thought the book's treatment of the primary tension in rule-making (the balance between precision and flexibility) to be well articulated and a solid reminder of what policy makers should be consider and strive for whenever crafting policy.

Cheers

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

Like it or not, this is the workplace culture your organization is competing with

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Fri, 11 May 2012 09:00:00 +0000

I came across this gem via Peter Stoyko's blog; it's the Valve employee handbook. Before I share my thoughts, here is what Peter had this to say about it:

Behold: the employee-orientation manual of the future; except, I hasten to add, this manual is for an extremely successful company from the here and now, the video-game maker Valve. Take particular notice of the forthright language … the lack of finger-wagging “thou shalts” … and the networked, fluid, collaborative model of organisation, including the emphasis on mobile workspaces (a subject I’ve been thinking a lot about in the last few years).

My own hypothesis is (and feel free to disagree) that in a hyper connected world where the expectations of entrants to the labour market are set by market makers (like Valve) your work culture will be the single most important determining factor when considering how to attract top talent. I fully acknowledge that salaries and benefits are important but my experience is that most people I know (at least those who are even marginally entrepreneurial) will gladly trade some of their fixed benefits for more engaging work and all the intangibles that come with it.

If you haven't bothered to read the handbook (you should btw, it will open your eyes to say the least), here is a choice quotation about how the company approaches the issue of hierarchy:

Valve is not averse to all organizational structure — it crops up in many forms all the time, temporarily. But problems show up when hierarchy or codified divisions of labor either haven’t been created by the group’s members or when those structures persist for long periods of time. We believe those structures inevitably begin to serve their own needs rather than those of Valve’s customers. The hierarchy will begin to reinforce its own structure by hiring people who fit its shape, adding people to fill subordinate support roles. Its members are also incented to engage in rent-seeking behaviors that take advantage of the power structure rather than focusing on simply delivering value to customers. (p16)

It's too late for guys (and girls) like me

The worst part of this isn't that I'm working in an alien culture but rather just how further removed from the norm it will be for the next generation should it continue down the twisted path of hierarchy first, everything else second.

At some point, the results we aim to achieve must matter more than the myriad of forms, templates, and platitudes we used to get there.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

MBR: Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Mon, 07 May 2012 09:00:00 +0000

I decided I was going to read a book a week for a year, here's a quick review of this week's book. You can see the ongoing list here.

Basic Info

Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making by Deborah Stone

Why I read it

It was recommended to me as essential reading by a friend of mine; hell, he even lent it to me!

How it connects to the Public Sector

The book is straight out of a university course on public administration; it deals with everything from multiple understandings of equity to the purposeful use symbols and numbers to define a given issue.

What I got out of reading it

The real mark of this book is its ability to expand your breadth in a structured way without sounding as though it is prescribing policy solutions on either side of the typical left/right spectrum; after all its not often you can pick up a policy book that isn't prescriptive.

Here are a couple of choice quotations, first from the chapter on Efficiency:

"Efficiency is always a contestable concept. Everyone supports the general idea of getting the most out of something, but to go beyond the vague slogans and apply the concept to a concrete policy choice requires making assumptions about who and what counts as important. There are no correct answers to these questions to be found outside the political process. The answers built into supposedly technical analyses of efficiency are nothing more than political claims." (p65, Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making by Deborah Stone)

And now from the chapter on Symbols:

The strategy of focusing on a part of the problem, particularly one that can dramatized as a horror story, thus is likely to lead to skewed policy. Yet is is often a politically useful strategy. It is a good organizing tool, because it can make a problem concrete, allow people to identify with someone else, and mobilize anger. It also reduces the scope of the problem and makes it more manageable. (p147-148, Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making by Deborah Stone).

Now, I'd be lying if I said I was done this book yet. As it stands I am only about half way through, but in my defence its a bit thick and there is a lot of meat on the bone. I'll finish it up this week and review the second half next week, but so far I think that Policy Paradox is good reading for anyone interested in public policy (though if you already have a political science degree as I do, some of it may be review).

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

Survivor's Guilt

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Fri, 04 May 2012 11:52:00 +0000

In case you were wondering, I was not directly affected by Workforce Adjustment (WFA). That said, I can't help but feel a pang of survivor's guilt for those who were (of which I know many); its one of the reasons I took the entire week off.
I should be back to regularly scheduled blogging next week.
Good luck to everyone affected.
Cheers

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

MBR: Scheming Virtuously The Road to Collaborative Governance

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Mon, 30 Apr 2012 12:15:00 +0000

I decided I was going to read a book a week for a year, here's a quick review of this week's book. You can see the ongoing list here.

Basic Info

Scheming Virtuously: the road to collaborative governance by Gilles Paquet

Why I bought it
Actually I didn't, Gilles sent me a copy years ago after having sat on a panel with him and subsequently accepting his invitation to virtuous scheming. Despite my enthusiasm for the book I only wound up reading about half of it at the time as life got in the way (as it tends to do); it's been sitting on my shelf waiting to be finished ever since.

How it connects to the Public Sector

The book argues for a new, more collaborative governance model and points at a number of things that we (public servants, civil society and public intellectuals) could change in order to achieve it. That said, the target audience seems varied and at times the text becomes incredibly complex and frequently invokes Latin and/or French to convey the underlying sentiment.

What I got out of reading it

The best chapters of the book were by far chapters 5 (Stewardship vs leadership) and 8 (An agenda for change in the federal public service), the latter of which tackles the issue of change head on:

"No change will occur if employees continue to perceive that rewards go mostly to those whose policy skills and political savvy are geared entirely to serving mindlessly the whims of their supervisors, irrespective of their capability for meaning-making, their capacity for community-building and their ability to inspire trust and confidence, and to deal with people at all levels." (p198)

The core message being, it isn't enough to simply follow orders blindly, one must speak truth to power at every opportunity.

Cheers

Ps - Sorry for the lack of post last week. It was an odd week and I took my wife to NYC for the weekend so I was naturally a little sidetracked.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

MBR: The Grand Design by Stephen Hawking

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 09:00:00 +0000

I decided I was going to read a book a week for a year, here's a quick review of this week's book. You can see the ongoing list here.

Basic Info

The Grand Design by Stephen Hawking
Why I bought it

I was hard pressed to find anything novel in the business section and I'd never read anything by Hawking so I figured why not.

How it connects to the Public Sector

Again, there was not explicit connection to the public sector. It is, after all, a physics book about the genesis of the universe and the laws of physics that govern it.

What I got out of reading it

This book was a difficult read despite being only 200 pages long. While written in a fairly straightforward manner, I definitely felt the fact that I had not dabbled in physics since high school.

Reading the book was also a humbling experience. Once you know a bit more about the science of the universe and the timescale upon which it has existed you can't help but feel at least somewhat (if not fully) inconsequential.

While there wasn't a whole lot of learning to be applied to the public sector (with the possible exception of its modeling techniques and measurements) what it did allow me to do was close a bit of the conversation gap between me and a friend of mine who is currently doing his PhD in bio-chemistry. The biggest lesson I pulled out of reading The Grand Design is perhaps that reading things that aren't normally in your wheelhouse may be difficult, but it may help you bridge the gap between your world and the worlds of those around you. This is most likely important in business, friendship, and of course, public service.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

Peak Bureaucracy: Perhaps it's time we considered alternatives

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Fri, 20 Apr 2012 09:00:00 +0000

The Atlantic published a great piece last week by Eric Garland entitled Peak Intel: How So-Called Strategic Intelligence Actually Makes Us Dumber, here's a particularly powerful excerpt:

"Hierarchical organizations have a very different logic than smaller firms. In less consolidated industries, success and failure are largely the result of the decisions you make, so intelligence about the reality of the marketplace is critical. Life is different in gigantic organizations, where success and failure are almost impossible to attribute to individual decisions. Though a given conglomerate might have hundreds or thousands of "executives," each is much more beholden to a complex culture of bosses. Even if people mean well, they're living and dying by a system where the incentives are to seek advancement by pushing responsibility downward and pulling credit upwards. In large, slow-moving bureaucracies, conventional thinking and risk avoidance become paramount, irrespective of how many times a day people at that organization use the word "strategy" or "innovation." It is far more preferable to fail conventionally than to make a daring but uncertain decision without the full backing of the entire organization. Because massive bureaucracies are so much more common than they were even a few years ago, decisions are simply not in vogue right now."

While Garland, a (private sector) strategic intelligence analyst, is speaking mainly about large privately held companies the same could easily be said about public sector bureaucracies. In fact, it is probably one of the reasons why federal public servants in Australia prefer working in micro-agencies over larger departments. According to the Canberra Times, the recent Public Service Commission (of Australia) Survey found:

"... significantly higher levels of employee engagement than in the rest of the federal bureaucracy, suggesting micro-agency staff feel more involved with their work, their colleagues, their supervisor and their workplace."

And that:

"Micro-agency employees also rated their leaders more highly on every measure tested, such as whether the agency was managed well, and whether senior executives engaged with staff and communicated effectively."

Size, it would seem, acts as a force multiplier. The larger the organization the greater distance the work needs to travel for feedback and approval, the more consensus building needs to take place, the less likely any single person or decision is to be linked to success or failure. Even my rudimentary analysis of the (Canadian) Public Service Employee Survey seems to support similar conclusions.

So what does it all mean?

Well it could mean that public sector organizations could be more effective if they were smaller; and to be clear, I don't mean that in the "cut jobs" sense but rather in the "perhaps departmental mandates are too wide" sense. Theoretically one could divvy up existing mandates into smaller more manageable chunks and split resources accordingly to deliver on those mandates while leveraging administrative support solutions on a model of shared services. In practical terms, I'm not sure how much of that could be accomplished given established legal and policy frameworks. Surely there is a robust set of rules and conditions that must be satisfied before one can start rearranging the entire apparatus. That said, if the real problem is a disconnect between individual decisions and outcomes than perhaps we can pursue measures that make upstream decision-making more frequent (Note: by "upstream" I mean further down the hierarchy).

If Garland is right (and I think he is), this should free up decision-makers to make decisions in a more timely manner and generally cut the distance between those in the trenches and those directing the troops; and if the survey results are to be believed, then faster decisions and closer proximity should generally lead to better employee engagement and performance. Sadly, my sense is that pushing decision-making upstream would be incredibly hard to accomplish given the tendency for even the most straightforward request to get caught up in the hierarchy.

That said, many bureaucratic bottlenecks arise from the system itself, not the people within them. You could call it a design flaw of command hierarchy, scalability at the cost of efficiency (at least with respect to complex and interdisciplinary knowledge work). If you need proof, I suggest you speak with any of the system's Directors General who have more staff than a first year psychology class at a major Canadian university. You will quickly realize the predicament that they find themselves in. It's not that they don't appreciate your effort or want to get you comments on your work, its that she simply doesn't have the time to get her hands dirty with everything her employees generate. Add to that her fiduciary responsibilities, human resource issues, management meetings, interdepartmental meetings, and the list goes on. As Garland said, even the most well intentioned and hard working individuals (of which I know many) are to a degree stuck in the system.

As we continue to move forward within the confines of austerity there clearly remains an opportunity to design a better system. Perhaps we have not only reached the period of peak intelligence as Garland argues but also the point of peak bureaucracy. The point where governments couldn't possibly become any more bureaucratic, the point where bureaucracy (the slow process, not necessarily the number of people) starts to decline in absolute terms.

The point where we have to start seriously considering the alternatives.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

Internet + Custom Suits + Ottawa = A Good Time

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:00:00 +0000

Hi Everyone,

I just wanted to take a minute to put an upcoming event in Ottawa on your radar.
Indochino, a (Canadian!) custom menswear company is coming to Ottawa next week as part of its Travelling Tailor promotion and from what I've heard from friends in Vancouver and Calgary this is like the Apple Store of menswear.
Now if you don't think style is all that important in the public service, I'd encourage you to check out this piece I wrote on the confluence of style and the public service for Apartment613. It was crafted after a conversation with Ottawa based fashionista (and public servant) Jes Lacasse. Ironically one of the things that didn't make the final cut of my article on Apt613 was my lamentation about the lack of quality men's clothing in Ottawa; the nice thing about Indochino is that once you are measured up and in their system you can simply order custom suits/shirts as needed without having to go into a store front.
Below is a video outlining a bit more about the company/process for those who are interested. I should probably also mention that if you RSVP your custom fitting in advance you get a free custom dress shirt with every suit purchase you purchase (not a bad deal if you are in the market for a new look).
The event runs in Ottawa from April 24th to April 28th.
See you there.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

MBR: Steal Like an Artist

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 09:00:00 +0000

I decided I was going to read a book a week for a year, here's a quick review of this week's book. You can see the ongoing list here.

Basic Info

Steal Like an Artist: 10 Things Nobody Told You About Being Creative by Austin Kleon

Why I bought it

I was getting tired of reading business books and wanted to try something a little different; besides the public sector is probably due for a healthy dose of creativity.

How it connects to the Public Sector

No particular connection to the larger public service discourse to be honest (but I didn't expect much of one when I picked it up).

What I got out of reading it

I have mixed feelings about this book. I really appreciated the aesthetic and the simplicity of the book compared to some of the tomes I've been reading lately, but I'm not sure I walked away with a whole lot of new tangibles.

The most valuable part of the book for me was chapter 4: Use Your Hands. I've been thinking a lot lately about the need to step away from the screen more often (which is one of the reasons I'm trying to read more books) and Kleon drives the point home fairly well. The trick, Kleon says, is to divide your workflow into analogue and digital halves and proceed only to the digital side when the creative process is completed. I already move off the screen to do creative work (via my whiteboard), but I think I'm going to make the divide more explicit. I'm also planning on picking up a nice Moleskine notebook so I can move slightly away from my reliance on digital notes and use my hands more often.

In sum, Steal Like an Artist was the easy read I was looking for given the week I was having.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

Information Follows the Hierarchy

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 09:00:00 +0000

Information wants to be free may be a slogan that is en vogue with technology activists but it is also a slogan that diametrically opposed to how bureaucracy actually works.

Le triangle des bermudes

On the Internet information is omnidirectional; it is easy to find, verify and re-purpose. Whereas in the bureaucracy, information is at best bidirectional (much of it is actually unidirectional); it is difficult to locate, verify and re-purpose.

In short, inside the bureaucracy information follows the hierarchy, which in turn creates a need-to-know culture, a culture where information is parceled out slowly if at all.

This, in my humble opinion, will be the core challenge that needs to be addressed in back offices of any bureaucracy looking to deliver on Open Government for its citizenry.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

I need a (small) favour

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 13:00:00 +0000

Hi Everyone,
I have a small favour to ask you.
I've started to work informally with a small Startup based in Waterloo. We are developing a product that helps people turn their digital social media footprint into a weekly mail out to family, friends, and/or stakeholders. We've reached the point where we need some beta testers. There will be absolutely no cost to you to demo the product, we just want your honest feedback. If you are interested in helping us by testing out the service please let me know.
We'd really appreciate it.
Cheers
Nick
Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

MBR: Bureaucratically Incorrect: Letters to a Young Public Servant

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 15:06:00 +0000

I decided I was going to read a book a week for a year, here's a quick review of this week's book. You can see the ongoing list here.

Basic Info

Bureaucratically Incorrect: Letters to a Young Public Servant by Bob Chartier

Why I bought it

Although I had been looking for this book for a while now, I haven't been able to locate it (its out of print) until recently. As it happens my friend Laura found herself with two copies and she was kind enough to give me one.

The author, Bob Chartier, is a Canadian civil servant, a leader in his own right, and a friend. I've had the pleasure of sharing the stage with Bob a couple of times in my career and he has always been kind enough to share his knowledge with me the old fashioned way; through real conversation.

How it connects to the Public Sector

The book takes the form of a series of letters from an experienced public servant to a young one (whom Bob affectionately addresses as Grasshopper). Each letter focuses on particular lesson and the book covers a gamut of public sector issues and if Bob was more technologically inclined he probably would have published the book as a series of blog posts. They are short, poignant, and to the point.

What I got out of reading it

Given that I have spent time with Bob in the past, I was familiar with some of the stories he shares in the book, but that didn't detract from the experience at all.

I put down the book feeling like the book should be online somewhere (maybe I will speak to him about that) or a should establish another site that takes the premise to the next level; a fictitious exchange of letters (emails?) between those at opposite ends of the spectrum of public service experience.

If you can't get your hands on a copy of the book, you can always check out this article he wrote to get a better sense of where he is coming from.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

The Kind of Work I'd Like to Do

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 09:00:00 +0000

Hi Everyone,
The last two weeks have been pretty hectic, while budgets were tabled and bureaucrats tasked with sorting it out, I've spent a considerable amount of time dealing with things a little closer to home.
It's funny how family issues focus you on that which is most important to you. While I choose to withhold some of the details, I will say that my daughter and I have made more trips to the hospital in the last two weeks than any parent should. Things finally seem to be turning the corner and we continue to hope for the best, trust in the expertise of her physicians, and appreciate being able to lean on those who have offered their support.

"shock" by Meredith_Farmer

While the last two weeks have been difficult, they have also reaffirmed by faith in the system. The care my daughter had received has been absolutely top notch. Our doctors and nurses have gone out of their way to ensure my daughter is well attended, that her parents understand what is going on, and that we are relevant and involved in the decision making.
While often heart wrenching, it was also incredibly humanizing. Sometimes the little things are the things that matter the most. A doctor paying attention to the fact that my daughter was sad about missing pizza day last week at school and scheduling appointments around it the follow week or making time in between ORs (surgeries) to see her for a follow up.
I can't help but think this is what public service is about - tangible, humanizing, high impact, and relational.
I think it's the kind of work that people with passion for public service would want to do; I think it's the kind of work that I'd like to do.
After all, who wouldn't want to leave work every day knowing they made a difference in the life of a little girl, my little girl.
Cheers,
Nick
Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

MBR: Predictably Irrational by Dan Ariely

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 09:00:00 +0000

I decided I was going to read a book a week for a year, here's a quick review of this week's book. You can see the ongoing list here.

Basic Info

Predictably Irrational Revised And Expanded Edition: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions by Dan Ariely

Why I bought it

Ariely's TED talks caught my eye (a common theme so far), namely has a couple of TED talks that caught my eye, namely:

In both of which Ariely explores the realm of behavioural economics by sharing details of some of his more interesting research experiments (he is a university professor).

How it connects to the public sector

"... we are not only irrational, but predictably irrational - that our irrationality happens the same way, again and again. Whether we are acting as consumers, businesspeople, or policy makers, understanding how we are predictably irrational provides a starting point for improving our decision making and changing the way we live for the better." (xx, Predictably Irrational, Dan Ariely) (emphasis added).

What I got out of reading it
There are a myriad of things that effect our day to day decision making, most of which never gets a second look, but probably always should. As it relates to work, I was particularly interested in the section on relativity (I was also fascinated by the section on arousal, but for unrelated reasons).
After reading the chapter on relativity, I started thinking differently about how I see success, to whom I compare myself to, and whom I try to learn from an emulate (e.g. the grass is always greener type thinking). There was a really neat visual experiment early in the chapter that really drove the point home (click to enlarge):

The question Ariely poses in the book is which circle is bigger; but ultimately it's a trick question. They are both the same size. The lesson in general is that relativity larger determines perception. The lesson, as it relates to a concept like success is the same, so be mindful of whom you are comparing yourself to. In social media fuelled world, where you can see every intimate detail of your extended network of friends, acquaintances and colleagues, its often easy to get so caught up in what other people are up to that you lose your bearings.

But there was a lot more to the book than this particular example. Overall, I walked way appreciating Ariely's penchant for experimentation and story telling. Both of which undoubtedly made Predictably Irrational an enlightening and entertaining read.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

8 Simple Rules for Budget Time

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 09:00:00 +0000

I know I'm a day early, but I couldn't resist given that the (Canadian) Federal budget drops today. If you are a federal public servant you may want to consider following 8 simple rules of Budget Time:
1ST RULE: You do not talk about the budget.
2ND RULE: You DO NOT talk about the budget.
3RD RULE: If someone you don't know asks you about the budget, the conversation is over.
4TH RULE: Only two types of estimates matter; main estimates and supplementary estimates.
5TH RULE: One of the Annexes has the information you are looking for.
6TH RULE: No tweeting, no Facebooking.
7TH RULE: This will go on as long as it has to.
8TH RULE: If this is your first Budget, you can find it here.
(Note: all of the above is clearly aimed at providing some much needed levity.)
Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

MBR: A Whole New Mind by Dan Pink

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 09:00:00 +0000

I decided I was going to read a book a week for a year, here's a quick review of this weeks book. You can see the ongoing list here.

Basic Info

A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule the Future by Dan Pink

Why I bought it

I love Dan Pink, I find his blog insightful, he shares compelling and interesting content on twitter, and his TED talk on the surprising science of motivation is a must see (Note: it is based on his previous book Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us).
Watching Pink deliver a guest lecturer at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto (which you can watch via TVO's Big Ideas as I did) prompted me to add A Whole New Mind to my reading list.

How it connects to the public sector
Pink argues (rather compellingly) that the forces of abundance, automation, and Asia are radically changing the skill set that will make people successful in the new economy. His argument relies on a scientific differentiation between the function and form of the left and right side of the brain. The last century, Pink argues, was dominated by left brain directed thinking (i.e sequential, literal, functional, textual, and analytic) whereas the next century will be dominated by right brain directed thinking (e.g. simultaneous, metaphorical, aesthetic, contextual, and synthetic).
My experience in the public sector thus far bears this out, my success has largely revolved around the fact that I bring different (right brain directed) thinking to groups of people who are traditionally used to a particular (e.g. linear / hierarchical) way of seeing things (left brain directed).

What I got out of reading it
Reading this book right after Godin's Linchpin was incredibly timely. It provided me with everything that Linchpin didn't. In fact, I'd argue these two books take aim at the exact same idea, only Pink delivers it in a way that is scientifically rigorous, evidence based, and therefore far more real and compelling than Godin's. In other words, what Godin explains as inexplicable magic, Pink describes as science. Where Godin says there can be no map, Pink says here are the skills you need to work on (and here is how to get started). As such, I'm going to try to devote more time to mastering Pink's "six senses" (design, story, symphony, empathy, play and meaning) on this blog and elsewhere; and I've even added some of Pink's suggested reading to my list.
A Whole New Mind was an incredibly satisfying read.
One of the best books I've picked up so far; and I highly recommend it.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

Mapping Internal Policy to the Hype Cycle

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 09:00:00 +0000

I've been thinking a lot this week about how organizations issue policies to govern the use of new and emerging technologies.

Here's what I've found:

Mapping Internal Policy to the Hype Cycle

View more presentations from Nicholas Charney

BTW, I strongly recommend viewing the presentation in full screen.

Cheers.
Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

MBR: Linchpin by Seth Godin

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 09:00:00 +0000

I decided I was going to read a book a week for a year, here's a quick review of this weeks book. You can see the ongoing list here.

Basic Info

Linchpin: Are You Indispensable? by Seth Godin

Why I bought it

I like the way Seth Godin thinks. I first saw Godin talk about Leadership on TED. The talk not only prompted me Tribes (an earlier Godin book) but also subsequently write about it here. His ideas on leadership and standing out generally appeal to the artist (Godin's term) in me. All in all, I figured it would be a good purchase.

How it connects to the public sector
The book has many disparaging remarks about bureaucrats, namely that they are:

[C]ertainly not attached to the outcome of events, and [they] definitely won't be exerting any additional effort. The bureaucrat is a passionless rules follower, indifferent to external events and gliding through the day.

It even goes on to use a visual that likens bureaucracies to zombies (eats brains, turns friends into monsters, and you must escape it).

But it also dangles hope - that life doesn't need to be like that - but restricts that hope to the concious choice of individuals. He essentially splits people into two camps, those who reinforce the status quo, and those who challenge it; then puts the decision of where to stand squarely on the reader.

What I got out of reading it
To be honest I was a bit underwhelmed with the first half of the book. It felt repetitive and slow moving. It's here where Godin builds a case for people to challenge the status quo, meaning that there is little in it for those of us who have already made that decision (or perhaps, more aptly, bought in to his point of view).
That said, I was far more satisfied with the latter half of the book. It spoke more directly to what I think I was hoping to get out of reading it, namely, the qualities that make people indispensable, things to aspire to, and traits to work on.
To be honest, if you are like me, you probably don't need to be convinced that your work (Godin calls it art) is important, or that investing yourself emotionally into your work ultimately pays dividends. But if are someone who does need that kick in the arse, unless someone hits you over the head with Linchpin, you are probably too busy keeping your head down to notice that this book is right there waiting for you. Meaning that while the book could lead to greater change, it is probably more likely that it adds more echo in the already cacophonous the chamber.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

Coding Better Government

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Fri, 16 Mar 2012 09:00:00 +0000

I was laid up sick all last week and didn't have time to put anything together. Rather than leave you hanging, I'm just going to point you at this TED talk about Coding Better Government by Code for America Founder Jennifer Pahlka.

Cheers

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

MBR: Accidental Genius by Mark Levy

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:00:00 +0000

I decided I was going to read a book a week for a year, here's a quick review of this weeks book. You can see the ongoing list here.

Basic Info

Accidental Genius: Using Writing to Generate Your Best Ideas, Insight, and Content by Mark Levy.

Why I bought it
As someone who publishes something weekly and earns a living writing various types of documents I was looking for a book that would give me some much needed structure to my approach to writing. This book did exactly that.

How it connects to the public sector
It doesn't, it's about the mechanics of writing, and how to get better at it.

What I got out of reading it
The book argues that freewriting (fast, furious, and unedited writing) is where you best work emerges. The best lesson I took away from the book was that you need to separate your writing and editing phases. I often find myself carefully crafting each sentence as I go. This, according to Levy, not only slows down my writing but also my thinking, which often results in inadvertently omitting key insights from my final written products. I used freewriting to draft last week's post on the confluence of Lego and Public Policy and I was really impressed with the results. Since reading it I've also completely changed how I structure all of my unfinished thoughts in Evernote. If you are interested in being a better writer, I suggest grabbing a copy of the Accidental Genius.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

All I really need to know about Public Policy I learned from Lego

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 12:30:00 +0000

I love Star Wars.

When I was a kid I used to queue up the entire trilogy (yes, the trilogy) empty my vast Lego collection out onto the floor and spend the entire day in the Star Wars universe building things I'd seen on the screen before me. It shouldn't come as a surprise then that I have passed those interests on to my children, both of whom love Star Wars (although they know 6 movies, animated series and countless video game versions) and Lego.

My son Kohl (4) with our new Lego AT-ST

Last weekend we watched Return of the Jedi then retired to the play room to play with the Lego (yes, I still play with Lego). I somehow got it stuck in my head that I wanted to build an AT-ST walker. But before I did wanted to gauge the kids (stakeholders) interest in the project; they were obviously on board. So with their blessing, I built the AT-ST pictured above completely from scratch (no instructions, no sets) in about a week's time. It's far more complicated than anything I ever built as a child and I am incredibly proud of how it turned out.

That said, what I never anticipated was just how much the experience would teach me about public policy. Here's what I mean.

Public Policy, like Lego, requires vision

You aren't going to get very far if you don't have vision. In my case it was fairly easy, as a long time fan I have a good sense of what the end product should look like. I think this speaks to the value that subject matter experts bring to the public policy discourse. But even then, I repeatedly went online to look at pictures of AT-ST walkers, I needed to check my assumptions against hard facts. The same applies to policy analysts who need to consciously check their assumptions against the data available to them. Moreover, not only did I look at photos of AT-ST's but I purposely sought out photos that exposed different sides of the walker to me or that were done in different medium (sketches, paintings, computer generated graphics, other Lego builds, etc). Policy makers need a well rounded understanding of their medium and that often requires expanding inputs beyond a small handful of expected sources.

But periodically checking in with photographs for direction also gave me the intelligence I needed regarding my resource pool. Given what I've already completed and that which I have yet to complete, do I have enough resources at my disposal or did I need to go back for more?

Public Policy, like Lego, requires the right resources

I started by building a small chunk of the AT-ST but soon realized that I didn't have easy access to the pieces I needed to work on it project efficiently. I have a huge (I mean huge) Lego collection. My kids have not only the benefit of all the Lego they've been purchased over the years, but also everything I was purchased as a kid as well (thanks mom!). Rummaging through an enormous bin of pieces can be incredibly time consuming. After all, I had very specific needs for the project in front me. I didn't need all the resources at my disposal, only a subset. So I decided to slowly source the parts I needed before continuing to assemble the walker. My requirements were fairly simple. Anything that was gray was in with the exception of wheels and really large platforms and priority was to be given to any parts that moved or could be used to make joints or connect angles.

But I also had to be realistic. I knew that I wasn't going to need every piece of Lego I collected, so I didn't need to go through the entire collection routing out all of they gray pieces, I just needed enough resources to complete the job. The rest could easily be returned for another project. Having the right resources was incredibly important; but knowing what resources were in my collection but not yet directly accessible to me (buried pieces) was even more important. The familiarity with the resource pool meant I knew whether or not my approach - an approach that hinged on a particular type of resource or its abundance within the collection - was plausible or not. For example, smaller pieces are generally the hardest to reach resources because they usually wind up at the bottom of the bin and as such require additional effort to secure. At one point in the process I even had to build a makeshift scaffold from some small buckets to hold back pieces from collapsing back into the large container in order to reach these exact pieces at the bottom of the bin. Additional work pays dividends when you are certain the resources you hope to uncover actually exist. But sometimes those pieces don't exist, you simply can't find them, or you can't access them without huge cost. That's why you need to be able to pivot your approach, why you need to be flexible. You need to be prepared in the event that the end product may not look exactly like your vision. Vision is, after all, limited to resources. Remember that a roadblock often means an improvement, not a detraction of the quality of the end product.

Public Policy, like Lego, has to stand up to scrutiny

The more complex the undertaking the more fragile it is. This is especially the case during the initial build when you are unfamiliar with how to best handle your creation with care. Quite frankly while you may have an idea of where the weak points are you aren't quite sure. Typically we expect breaks at the joints but tragically, the only way to know for sure is to purposely break that which you have just created.

So don't be afraid to knock it over, apply pressure, or add some weight. Make note of where it breaks, then rebuild it, re-test it, and see if it breaks in the same spot again. Repeating this process a couple of times not only shows you its strengths and weaknesses but also teaches you about the act of rebuilding itself; which is to say that it breeds a familiarity and expert understanding that is important. It's important because it will frame your reaction. It will determine how you reinforce the joints, what pieces you swap out or in or lead to a complete redesign that circumvents a problem that cannot otherwise be fixed.

In the end you want to build something that can support its own weight. A task that is made more difficult when you have moving parts. My walker for example has a moving head that moves both horizontally and vertically. Moving parts are complicated, awesome, but complicated. The more of them you have the more additional support you need, but the support you add should create a sense of robustness without undermining mission. In my experience the best support mechanism in this regard is transparency.

For example, the mobility of the head combined with its weight meant that I needed additional pieces to hold it in place. If I used coloured pieces it wouldn't be a walker anymore but something else entirely. Using transparent bricks maintains the mission while offering critical support to the most complex piece of the undertaking. There is greater willingness to accept additional support when that support mechanism is transparent and minimally invasive; you are also quick to accept it when you compare it directly to less palatable (or more intrusive) alternatives.

Public Policy, like Lego, should be a creative endeavour

Having fun is an inherent part of crafting. It's incredibly important, so don't be afraid use your imagination and be creative. If something doesn't work out right away, don't panic and don't abandon ship, its just bricks, there is nothing that can't be fixed, altered or tweaked, and there is always a work around. You just need to be willing to look for it.

Public Policy, like Lego, could be exciting to next generation

After I finally completed the project, the look on my kids faces was incredible. They watched me craft something amazing yet tangible; so much in fact, that it left them wanting more.

Shouldn't our governments strive for the same thing?

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect

Monday Book Review: Context by Cory Doctorow

noreply@blogger.com (Nicholas Charney) — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 10:00:00 +0000

I decided I was going to read a book a week for a year, here's a quick review of this weeks book. You can see the ongoing list here.

Basic Info

Context: Further Selected Essays on Productivity, Creativity, Parenting, and Politics in the 21st Century by Cory Doctorow

Note: you can download the book for free here

Why I bought it
I was literally in the Ottawa airport en route to Chicago for the weekend and needed some reading material for the plane. I stopped in the book store, had a look through the titles and was about to walk away empty handed when I spotted this on another shelf by the cash register.
I first saw Doctorow on TVO's The Agenda with Steve Paikin a couple of years back and have been loosely paying attention to his work since.

How it connects to the public sector
The essays in the book deal largely with technology, security, and copyright providing context (hence the title) around these issues in a practical and accessible way. Case in point on IT security:

"Users will always prioritise getting their job done over honouring your network policy, and who can blame them? If networks policy breaches aren't followed up with safe solutions to user' demonstrated needs, they'll keep on happening, no matter how much security you put between your users and their duties." -- Cory Doctorow, Like Teenagers, Computers are Built to Hook Up

What I got out of reading it
Context was a really easy read. Since it's just a collection of essays (on a host of related issues) it's hard to nail down a single take away. That said, over the course of the book Doctorow repeatedly shows how out of touch incumbent businesses are, how the regulatory responses they are lobbying for (to protect their incumbency) are flawed, and how much better off we would be if we simply thought through these issues with a bit more of a critical lens.
Much of the book has to do with copyright, so if you aren't interested in the subject matter you may want to skip this one. However, I'd encourage you to watch to the interview below before you make your decision. If nothing else, Doctorow is thoughtful and articulate, which makes him incredibly easy to listen to.

Originally published by Nick Charney at cpsrenewal.casubscribe/connect