to other departments, which had done a great digital project. We started using for it the online platforms we had created for ourselves. That was a way to publicly show the change that was going on, and it became a carrot on its own to other departments and our own team, frankly.
In an era of global digital collaboration, it does not really compute if public servants are anonymous and hide behind their desks. Governments need to be way more transparent, open-by-default on everything they do as long as it is not a national security matter. Why are policies developed behind closed doors? Why cannot every Canadian citizen whom the government serves have access to the draft of the policy before it is signed off and comment on it? The world would be a better place if governments went even a bit further down the road of being open and transparent and collaborative. It is better for the economy and better for the democracy if people participate. That is why we started doing all in the open.
My open-door policy worked great in other ways, too. There are twenty to twenty-five thousand people in GC. I basically said to them, “If you have a great idea, contact me,” and some did. Most people did not because they thought you cannot talk to a deputy minister if you are a technician. Yet, this is where the good ideas usually come from. They are not going to come from me. A great example is our Talent Cloud, which had the aim of bringing a “gig economy” approach to allow GC to hire short-term employment more easily and faster. There was a person with a vision on how to do it; she only needed some air cover and support. She came to me with the idea, we brought her in, and she got it done. Others had called her crazy before for what she wanted to do and how bold her vision was.
Tell a Bit More on the Skunkworks Approach—How Did That Working Method Really Work?
To get these projects off the ground, we usually did one or two meetings a week for the first month. My chief of staff was always amazing at keeping action items, at keeping people's feet to the fire on them, and keeping people honest about them. Once proper cadence and routine emerged with the concrete Skunkworks project lead, we would maybe meet weekly, then maybe once every two weeks. If I felt that the work was falling off the rails, then we would get back into twice-weekly mode.
The meetings were stand-up, half an hour each time, rapid fire or blitzing it, going very specific. The people who were working these projects were delighted that the CIO was giving them all the attention. It also kept them on their toes: we just talked, another meet was coming, you have to be ready and bring in your new work. So, the need for follow-through was not just from me, it had to be from everybody. My direct reports also worked hard to get their teams ready for these briefings, but they also watched out to not to get in the way for them.
In the meetings, I asked mainly, “What is in the way right now?” Meaning, what prevented the team from moving ahead? We might bring then someone in for the next meeting to get it fixed or decided. Like if the issue was privacy, we would have a privacy analyst along for the next meet and make a decision there and then to move things forward. I think a lot of civil servants are not necessarily used to making decisions on the spot. We did it; the team then told the deadline for the next step and had to update me by that time. With the hierarchy gone, delivery was that much faster.
Of course, as the CIO you cannot work this way for everything because you will lose your mind. That is why you got to be pretty astute about what you pick to be your Skunkworks to make a difference.
What Sort of Competence Did You Seek to Add to the Team?
I needed people who knew how to get policy signed off by ministers. That was our weakest point from the three legs of tech, people, and governance—which includes policy.
I would always say that policy is useless if you do not execute and do not make it executable. Policy often is a too abstract thing. Take privacy as an example. There were always privacy people on the policy side saying we should not do this or that for some reason. I often asked, “Did you talk to a technical person because probably we could fix all those problems?”
We clearly needed the good policy, too, because just doing tech without policy gets you in trouble. Policy coverage also gets the funding you need and gets the projects off the ground. I needed policy people who got it and who understood the process of policy to steer us through it. In the GC, any policy must go through Treasury Board Secretariat, a bunch of ministers, and so on. It is quite a process.
Who Was Your Most Valuable Addition to the Team?
Bringing Olivia Neal from Government Digital Service (GDS) in the UK early on as our Executive Director for Digital Change to lead the people side of our work and a bunch of special initiatives. She had run the digital service standard work in GDS. She had no staff when she started, and she ended up having a team of fifty to sixty people running a lot of government programs when she was done. She added so much in a number of ways.
First, I find that Canadians are often insular, only looking at ourselves and not liking to compare ourselves internationally. It means that we are not always in tune with what is going on in digital government or technology around the world. Olivia brought that view with her instantly. She also was not part of the group thinking going on, coming from outside and even from another culture. I cannot imagine the challenge she must have faced with pushback. The way she handled it; I learned a lot from her. Bringing her on early also showed that we could attract the best talent from around the world, as she came from GDS.
I got her onboard because Olivia had been looking to come to Canada, and I heard through the grapevine she was talking to a whole bunch of different groups in GC. I told her that she could have the most impact with us. Also, the other groups were kind of dithering, as the typical government hiring takes time. I made it my number one priority to get her letter of offer done fast. In office, people were wondering why was the deputy minister focusing on her so much? Well, because she can unlock ten things for us. These things will unlock the next ten more macro things. That is why it was worth my time. Also, I believe in managing people with respect and did not want to leave her hanging or stuck in the government hiring land.
In addition, there were the managers or directors in the team who helped to take the vision forward and execute. Let us face it: the day-to-day work was down to them and not me.
What Do You Consider as Your Biggest Achievements in the GCIO Role?
I think we set up a policy framework and a legislative framework that gives this role the teeth and an ability to avoid another Phoenix if the right leadership and courage is in place. It brings hope that users would not have to suffer the way they have suffered in not getting paid and so on because of Phoenix.
As the result, the role became a deputy minister one during my term. We got it authority to execute and push the otherwise traditional town—the government in Ottawa—to fit the digital age better. These are the preconditions for success for the next CIO, who can now focus less on policy and legislation and more on getting actual change done.
Second, I think that people who bought into the program of doing things differently felt that the work they were doing was meaningful and that they were not bureaucratic robots, even if it was just for a moment of time. I could see it in their eyes; they would also tell me that it felt good to do some real things, because sometimes in a central agency, you do not feel like you are doing real stuff.
Last, I am glad that I am still in touch with a lot of people who worked there. Even if I did make some mistakes, like I became too deadline focused at times, and might then forget the people working for us. That is why it still feels great that we are still talking to one another.
What Was Surprising for You in the Job, Looking Back
