When the pandemic started, the mayor (who I know is not tech-savvy) started making thoughtful video messages for the community. The videos contained municipal updates, gratitude for local businesses and health care providers, and directed people on where to find accurate information from the provincial and federal governments. Throughout the pandemic these videos continued and included other topics like volunteer appreciation and messages of congratulations for the high school graduates. These videos made me feel more connected to my community during a time of isolation. 

When the mayor didn’t know something with respect to COVID-19, he didn’t pretend to have the answers. He was frank and up-front but assured us the municipality was trying its best. Around the Council table, it was the mayor who suggested ideas like an economic task force made up of local stakeholders, property tax deferrals and rent subsidies at municipal facilities. 

Many residents watched the mayor juggle conflicting messages from the province while also trying to support the community’s main industry: tourism. An example of this is when the Government of Alberta buckled down on health restrictions and discouraged out-of-town travel, but allowed ski hills to remain open. People from all over flocked to our small remote community while our active case counts climbed and our small hospital struggled. The mayor took to the media, encouraging people to save their visits for a safer time. 

Many of us also watched as the mayor demonstrated his collaborative leadership skills with Parks Canada - as a town within a national park, the Municipality of Jasper shares governance with the federal government. When the province started easing its health restrictions, the national parks did not. The mayor once again took to the media, encouraging people to pack a kit (gloves, hand sanitizer, etc.) and come support the local businesses while taking in some nearby hiking trails. 

 

I can only imagine how challenging it must be to maintain open and positive relationships with residents, businesses, and multiple levels of government (especially during a global pandemic), but I think Richard Ireland is an excellent example of someone who navigates these relationships with competence, tact and empathy.  

 

Multiple times during the pandemic Manitoba's intensive care units were overwhelmed by the number of COVID-19 patients and ultimately patients had to be flown to other provinces to receive care. This was undoubtedly a failure in leadership to adequately prepare the health system capacity, however the responsibility for this failure is shared among health care administrators and political leaders. 

 

Both Van Wart's 2013 article and Katie Gibson's review of Barbara Kellerman's 2016 essay on leadership present the view that leadership is a system rather than an individual. This idea resonated with me as it seems unrealistic to expect one person to have everything it takes to manage the complexity and chaos of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Ontario COVID-19 Science Advisory Table is a good example of a horizontal and collaborative network that displayed leadership during the pandemic. This group of scientific and health care experts was assembled due to the lack of an existing table with the necessary cross-disciplinary lens to address the emerging crisis. The credibility of the Ontario COVID-19 Science Advisory Table came from both its objective evaluation of emerging evidence and evolving knowledge and from fact that it drew in multiple perspectives and was not reliant on one individual. 

-Natalie James

In contrast to Putin’s authoritarian style of leadership, Zelensky presents himself as an equal to those that he governs; he is aligned with democratic practices and seems to share the values of his country. 

Zelensky is also an effective communicator. He appears to be transparent when describing the situation and next steps. I think in a time of uncertainty and destruction, people find comfort in a leader that can be firm, honest and express genuine humility. 

Kayla Byrne

 

Tizard's article however is oriented towards public sector executives and the difficult decisions they need make in advising elected officials and administering departmental operations. These leaders are not out kissing babies and cannot rely on shallow people-pleasing in the face of real economic, environmental and social challenges. Frank and honest messaging from leaders is pivotal to earn the respect of staff and is a component of integrity.

 

However, this article was written during a time of austerity policies in the UK where public sector leaders were forced to cut staff and social programs. It is a reminder of the lose-lose situations public sector leaders must navigate where achieving results means taking away popular services and leading people who have been demoralized by lay-offs. Tizard's statement is a testament to the arduous reality of leadership.
-Natalie James

When I first began working in the public service I did not see the same collaborative efforts, within the corporation or with outside community based organizations.  Efforts to encourage this, or to emphasize the value this could bring to our organization and the services we were offering did not appear to be of importance.  I am happy to say that in the last couple of years there seems to have been a shift and I am seeing more collaboration within my organization as well as between government departments and community based organizations in the work that I am doing.  There have been fairly significant upper management turn-over due to retirement and for the most part these positions have been filled from outside the organization.  This has brought new ideas, a new openness to change and new approaches. 

One thing that I have noticed in this process of collaborating from my perspective as a public servant, is that there seems to be more expectation that as a government body we should bring more “solutions” to the table.  I think that some of this expectation is due to the fact that there is less of an understanding of the pressures that are faced from a public servant perspective.  Community is better situated to be able to pivot, to change direction or approach based on the need that they see whereas government processes and changes take a much longer time, and seem to have more layers of approval needed in order to actually operationalize any changes.   
Francine Keough

A more wide spread establishment of these clinics has certainly gotten media attention and with that concerns have been raised about how effective these will be.  Many have highlighted that these clinics have led to some doctors closing their clinics in order to join one of these collaborative clinics, and thereby creating more patients without a family doctor.  

I personally think that this is a fantastic idea, I think that it will address some of the issues within our system and provide people with a service that is more suited to what they need in the moment.  A team of health professionals available as a one stop shop can help ensure that you see the right provider that can address your needs while providing a higher quality of care.  
Francine Keough

I have spent several years working in local government and have seen and experienced greater success with new policies, programs and studies when the municipality collaborated with other relevant organizations and the community at-large. By collaborating, as noted by Tizard, several things happen: 

Situations where I have seen collaborative leadership fail is when one person (or the organization as a whole) takes credit or ownership over joint successes or bogarts the vision of the project; basically collaborating for the sake of saying you did, which effectively wastes everyone’s time. 

It sounds silly, but I think leadership through collaboration is simple: Check-in with stakeholders and work together for common ground.

Kayla Byrne

A few years ago, a small volunteer group that I was a part of utilized collaborative leadership to successfully implement a community-wide plastic bag ban. 

At first, we, the small group of volunteers, wanted to implement this change all on our own - we were the do-good hippies and we wanted credit for our work! We penned away at some call to actions and hand-delivered them to every business in town. To our disappointment, no one got back to us. Through networking and a little research, we found a few businesses that had already gone plastic-free and asked them to make a presentation to the local chamber of commerce. Through that, the chamber got on board and extended the project’s reach and clout. From there, we were able to make a collaborative presentation to Town Council, which led to the passing of a waste reduction bylaw and the banning of plastic bags at all businesses. 

Through collaborative leadership, we were able to experience the numerous benefits of this style of leadership, as described by Tizard.

Kayla Byrne

 

An interesting practical implementation is the Free Municipality Experiments program, that was launched in 2012. Municipalities that participate in this program are exempt from national regulations, which means they have the autonomy to test out new solutions and pilot innovative approaches. Municipal and regional leaders can then share their lessons learned to inform broader policymaking. Denmark has also implemented an Innovation Barometer and developed the Copenhagen Manuel to serve as a guide for countries to measure public sector innovation. 

 

By prioritizing citizen-centred results and recognizing that challenging problems need new ideas, Denmark's public sector leaders have cultivated an environment for bottom-up innovation.

 

OECD. 2021. Public Sector Innovation Scan of Denmark. https://oecd-opsi.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Public-Sector-Innovation-Scan-of-Denmark.pdf

Natalie James

 

Just over a year ago, I made the decision to go back to school in an effort to advance my career with the city. I met with human resources and was informed that the city would assist me with partially funding the academic exams and programs I was considering, under the city’s professional development policy. Firstly, the city paid for my Journeyperson exam, which allowed me to receive a provincial seal in my trade. The passing of this exam, in turn benefitted the city, as I was qualified to train others in my field on city equipment, including all new hires and those needing to upgrade their skillsets. Following the completion of this certificate, I enrolled both in this public policy certificate program and a horticultural program through another university, which positioned me for advancement. The steps taken in advancing both hard and soft skills, demonstrated to the city how interested I was in advancing. In under a year, I have moved into a management position, now overseeing teams of people within my organization. The city has offered additional training opportunities to me, which I look forward to completing in the coming years. This investment has been mutually beneficial, and from my personal perspective, has created a loyalty for me with the organization. From the city’s perspective, I believe this supports a healthy talent management strategy, which promotes internal hiring, and has the opportunity to save both time and money in external hiring processes, when they are able to train and promote from within. Lastly, while I have to adjust to my new positions, I do not have a learning curve in adjusting to the city, which must be a benefit to them as well. Overall, investing in your own people as leaders, helps promote an engaged, loyal, and skilled workforce. And personally, it has made me feel like a valued employee. 

Jamie Rideout

 

Seonaid MacDonell

I recently reviewed a strategic plan for a private sector business who released a new vision related to employee engagement. Their vision was to transform service through investing millions of dollars in employee training and development. Fundamentally, I believe in investing in the workforce, however, funding this strategic direction with public funds makes it subject to public opinion. And public opinion can be challenging to maneuver. With that said, I agree that the dynamics of government would make it hard for effective visioning and strategic thinking.

 

Governments have accountability to the public, and the public’s understanding of the benefits of strategic visioning can be limited (i.e., not everyone is an expert on every strategy/vision). So, when the government conducts public engagement on strategy and visioning, they will not always receive the support they feel they need to advance or to think outside the box in driving real transformation. On the flip side of that, if the government doesn’t engage the public they are accused of not being transparent and open. To further complicate the matter, politicians making the decisions are often hoping to get re-elected, so moving forward against the public opinion has the potential to impact them personally.

 

It is very common in the public sector to have strategic plans and visions, however, the question is does the dynamic of government allow for effective visioning or strategic thinking – and to that, I say there is a ways to go yet. 

Jamie Rideout

 

I believe St. John’s is going in the direction it has set. The city has focused on its rich culture and tourism market in recent years and has been consistent in its efforts to communicate the unique attributes of our community. St. John’s is working to drive economic development and support businesses who were severely impacted by COVID-19 related to changes to their operational matters. In addition, recreation programs are resuming for residents, including children and seniors. 

 

Based on my organization/city’s vision, I see a preferred future for St. John’s:

 

 Jamie Rideout

While the foundation hasn’t changed much, based on the amount of books written on leadership in these past two decades and videos like the two we watched for this module, we know that the practice (or the idea of practicing) is changing — managers and governments are acknowledging their flaws and practicing ways to improve them. 

Both Mintzberg and Savoie draw our attention to one of the common conundrums of managing: Being a manager disconnects you from what you are managing.

 While I have experienced this, I’ve never put the experience into words or acknowledged that this is something that can be practiced. As discussed at last Tuesday’s class, managers (or at least good ones) are practicing connecting with their team through regular check-ins and open communication — a big improvement from the singular annual performance review of the recent past.  

Kayla Byrne

 

From personal experience as a citizen, I have found completing a government engagement survey can be infuriating, especially when the questions are very leading and none of the multiple choice responses reflect my beliefs or interests on the issue at hand. The original poster's quote: "if you  are not transparent, people can see right through it" perfectly describes the situation as I often think about the public servants who wrote the survey and what pressures they faced, both partisan and from within the public service and who's interest is really being served by the less-than-transparent survey. Often public engagement can be viewed as step in the process, a checkbox that must be completed regardless of the results, which decreases public perception of transparency. 

 

Because of the high expectations of citizens for transparency and the high costs of doing it well at the expense of other services, another phrase that might describe transparency in government is "damned if you do, damned if you don't". 

-Natalie James

 
-Natalie James

 

Some examples of think tanks in Canada are:
 Smart Prosperity Institute: to advance practical policies and market solutions for a stronger, cleaner economy.

 

Fraser Institute: to improve the quality of life for Canadians, their families, and future generations by studying, measuring, and broadly communicating the effects of government policies, entrepreneurship, and choice on their well-being.

 

Institute for Research on Public Policy: to improve public policy in Canada by generating research, providing insight and influencing debate on current and emerging policy issues facing Canadians and their governments.

 

During my days working in community, strategic planning was an important part of the work, not only to ensure that as a team we knew where we were going, the things that we hoped to accomplish and how we were going to make these things happen but also from a funding perspective.  Many of the funding opportunities available required a proposal which had to outline activities, timelines, partnerships, etc.  In order to develop a proposal for funding (large and small pots) strategic planning was required to more fully understand the needs in the community as they relate to the requirements of funding, how it fit with the organization, a need to understand the players in the community (partnerships) that would help ensure that the program or service was, what was needed and was going to be delivered in a way that there would be uptake.  This required a team approach to working and ensuring that, as an organization, we had an understanding of how we all fit together, how individual positions supported one another and enabled us to reach those short term goals under the overarching longer term vision of who we were as an organization and who we were in the community.

When I think about my current position, in a policy department, I consider the idea of strategic thinking in a different light.  Discussions in my current position focus more on longer term goals, and slow moving changes.   Sometimes to the point that once the change is actually initiated or implemented, there is a need for something different.   Where I work is a “political beast” – many of the decisions made and actions taken are dictated by the influence of politicians, which are often influenced by the service user.  When there is this type of influence ever present it becomes difficult to plan for the day to day but it also becomes more important to see the larger picture and envision how to make systemic changes that will have a longer lasting influence and impact.   When we are so heavily influenced by political agendas, strategic thinking becomes more difficult.  Changes in government, brings changes in thinking, priorities, and can ultimately influence the day to day service delivery.   

Francine Keough

There has been a multitude of literature on the link between effective leadership and innovation. I think that one example of an environment where effective leadership has led to innovation is an example of The ScaleGood Fun. The fund provides funding up to $250,000 to various start-ups with a social impact focus. The first recipient of the ScaleGood Fund is Areto Labs. The Edmonton-based startup leverages AI to monitor and moderate toxic social media behavior. Areto uses natural language processing to sort through social media posts and measure their tenor, flagging hate or toxicity. I believe that with the rise of social media and digital governance, programs like Areto are necessary to help moderate the online campaigns. I think that leaders helping to promote and fund platforms such as the ScaleGood Fund create a platform where startups who may not have had had the opportunism prior, due to a lack of funding can thrive. 

Writen by Chelsea Davidson

I do agree with this statement to an extent. I think everyone has experience the red tape that the bureaucratic level on some degree or another, this can occur across a series of platforms on both the federal and provincial levels. I believe that when processes stall, it can be a reflection of the lack of vision or foresight (in addition to other factors). I think that the current series and checks and balances in balance to ensure that the government functions in an effective manner, can sometimes result in a delayed hindered process, where government workers can act and feel like cogs in a wheel, that serve a larger purpose as they do not have the freedom and space necessary to develop and promote actual change but rather must work within the confines of an already established system. 

By Chelsea Davidson