Dr Bernard Meyerson, VP Global Innovation, IBM

“Do the impossible, it just takes a little longer.”

Innovation is linked to growth, 84% of executives say it is important or very important. The innovation engine can take years to get re-started after it stops. The good news is, if you want to find an innovator, look in the mirror. People are the key to innovation.

Look for people who can talk to other people about something other than their own specialty. Breadth of knowledge leads to communication, collaboration and innovation. An economy (or organization) is only as good as its supply of talent. No good people = awful results.

You have good people? Then pose big challenges. We took a man to the moon on 2K of memory. Grand challenges lead to grand results.

Never underestimate the power of on-going innovation. Sure you need the ‘ah-hah’ innovators that bring big ideas to the table. But, look for those people who are willing to take something that is broken and beat it into submission, day after day after day to fix it.

Innovation must evolve, an good example being Moore’s Law, the number of transistors on integrated circuits doubles every 18 months – 2 years. There is a limit to how far small can go, the atomic level gets kind of annoyed when you try to fold or tear it… We looked for new materials, the number of elements used today has grown exponentially since the early days of silicon. This is EXPENSIVE and as a result the number of companies that can do this kind of work has shrunk (300->2). Consolidation will continue unabated until we move beyond these limits and look at things differently.

The silicon era is over, the chip is done. Deep integration is now, the speed of light is too slow and it is too expensive to use cycles across server rooms. Instead, pack 50 chips into 2 mm and then figure out a way to cool it. Create agile systems that run, examine themselves, adjust, re-compile, test, run in an iterative cycle.

“Data is the new oil”

We need better tools, because big analytics is about changing the future, not about exploring the past.

1. Manage complex systems of systems that produce big data.
2. Big data leads to unprecedented insights.
3. Unprecedented insights lead to a smarter planet.

“People are inherently good, if you give them the tools and the data, they will act on it.”

This post is a combined post from two sessions I attended at GTEC today. The first was a keynote by Liseanne Forand (President, Shared Services Canada) and the second was a concurrent session featuring Kevin Radford (Senior Assistant Deputy Minister of Operations) and Maurice Chénier (Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Projects & Client Relationships).

The 20^th GTEC is paired with the one year anniversary of Shared Services Canada (SSC). Following a first year that saw more than 6,000 government technology workers merged into the new organization, SSC is practicing what they preach and engaged some of the departments they serve to implement Human Resource and Finance systems in record time. Liseanne Forand noted three objectives and three areas of focus for the Government’s IT department.

Objectives:

-        Maintain operations

-        Generate savings

-        Implement government-wide solutions for IT infrastructure

Areas of focus:

-        Consolidate data centres to less than 20

-        A single email system by 2015

-        A single network for voice and data

Kevin Radford and Maurice Chénier then discussed the day-to-day operations and the path ahead for the department. Kevin discussed their weekly operations meetings which serve to facilitate information sharing and help the leadership set priorities. It is a new world, with the government IT community thrust into the spotlight, rather than being given the more traditional back seat. An advantage is that now they speak directly to the decision makers in parliament about technology and what is needed to run government.

They discussed the more than 2,100 mission-critical systems, the hundreds of projects they have inherited and the multitude of opportunities to save money and do things better. One key challenge is prioritizing work for 40+ clients and establishment and maintain relationships going forward. The nature of the work often comes down to supply and demand once mission-critical is sorted out. They are working to become more predictive to plan for future work, especially around requirements for storage, networking, etc. One immediate benefit has been the clustering by departments to strengthen their business cases when they all have the same or very similar business requirements. This means the potential for more savings.

Maurice Chénier’s comments sum up the efforts from SSC so far. The power of the group is much greater than the sum of the individuals and it is the truly exceptional individuals they have merged into SSC that make day-to-day government work.

Louis Richardson, WW Social Business Evangelist, IBM

When CEO’s were polled about the top qualities in a leader, 60% provided creativity as the first on the list. Why is it important? Competitive advantage. Why is it hard to find? We are all creative, but business often stifles creativity. Kids start out creative, you do not have to ask them to take risks or create things, they just do it.

Creative thinkers show four traits:

-        Observation

-        Experimentation

-        Take risks

-        Communicate well

Do we do this? How does business stifle creativity? Give new employees tools like email and shared drives which are inherently closed technologies, then have them sit in on status meetings and conference calls for 60 minutes to get 5 minutes of information. Shared drive, email = silos. I have a great idea! Put it on the shared drive where only your group can access it, cut off collaboration. The content-centric model is broken.

How do we fix the problem? Create an environment where knowledge accidents can occur. Content is only one piece of this, Content, community, collaboration and most important, this model is people-centric. It is about the artist more than the art.

1. Start with people. Allow them to know and be known.
2. Encourage then to gather, share and grow.
3. Let them find the expert and ask questions, but open up your conversations. Share your solutions, discussion forums, wikis, blogs, status updates.
4. Open sharing exposes great ideas to the light of day, because they often do not call attention to themselves. Brilliant solutions happen everyday. Use bookmarking, rich media and post it where people can find it.
5. Integrate the existing content in the same place

CAUTION: People are social…if you do nothing, you will have a mess. If you try to stop it (block their internet) they will still be social, but you will no longer be at the table. If you are not at the table…you are on the menu.

This is a change that IT alone cannot lead, this is a culture shift, not a technology shift.

With GTEC just a few days away, some of this year’s key themes are emerging.  Beyond the explicit subject areas identified by GTEC, there are many nuances and undertones that are rising to the surface this year.

If you are an avid reader of this blog, then you already know the themes that are top-of-mind for our bloggers.  But I’d like to examine some of the workshops and sessions taking place at GTEC to dig a little deeper.  In particular, let’s focus on the two specials sessions happening on November 5^th – The CIO for the Next Generation and the Executive Roundtable.

The CIO for the Next Generation

This sold out, high-energy day designed for top talent and emerging senior leaders is taking a markedly different tone this year.  Why? Because EVERYTHING is different.  Change is the new normal and nowhere is that quite as evident as it is in Government of Canada IM/IT shops.  In fact, not just GoC IM/IT but massive transformations are underway in many provinces and municipalities across Canada.  With the sharing of services dominating the landscape, it is paramount that the next generation of technology leaders adapt, and uncover the opportunities that are possible with a new approach.

The session begins in an exciting and unorthodox way, with a keynote from a senior executive representing the business-side of government.  Linda Lizotte-MacPherson, the President of the Canada School of the Public Service is expected to set the tone for the day as she will share her expectations for the role of the CIO in the future. The day will advance rapidly with keynotes on major transformation initiatives and the changing global environment.  There will be an innovative unconference where participants can self-assess their skills against a CIO leadership model built by Accenture.  This unconference will include participation from multiple CIOs and senior technology leaders, and it will be followed by a CIO panel discussion. Corinne Charette, the Honourary Chair of GTEC and the CIO for the Government of Canada will conclude the session.

It is going to be an awesome day. I’ve had the opportunity to work with Accenture, Telus, Treasury Board CIOB and GTEC on this session, and I’ve witnessed firsthand their commitment to building value for participants. If you are one of the lucky ones that will be in attendance, be sure to write about your experience on Twitter, or perhaps even as a guest contributor to the GTEC blog.

Executive Roundtable

IBM is sponsoring a high-powered, invitation-only session for senior leaders that will hone in on “The Transformed CIO: The bridge between IT and Business in a Shared Services Context.”  The Executive Roundtable is happening at the same time as the CIO for the Next Generation, but clearly the discussions are complementary.  In fact, many of the senior leaders from the Executive Roundtable will be joining the next-gen CIO participants for a networking lunch.

According to the program description of the Executive Roundtable:

Attend this Executive Roundtable for a frank, peer-to-peer discussion on the transformation imperatives that are today facing departmental CIOs, as well as the implications and opportunities they face in moving towards this new service delivery model. Explore what the characteristics are of an effective partner to Shared Services, and the new relationship that must be forged between a department’s Business and IT stakeholders in order to make SSC most effective for the Government of Canada..

This is a familiar theme, and represents the thoughts, plans and strategies that are being established to thrive in this very different environment. The Executive Roundtable discussion will connect Canada’s visionaries for the future of technology in government.

Closing the Loop

These two sessions are, in parallel, connecting with some of the major themes for future IT success: it’s all about leadership, service delivery and building the requisite skill sets for the next generation. It’s about a changing mindset and transformed way of working.  It’s all about client service and customer relationship management. It’s about finding solutions—but not just technical solutions—true solutions to the client need.  It’s about living in and adapting to a new environment, where the role of the CIO, and the role of the IM/IT, has changed dramatically.  It’s about transforming the IM/IT shop, and creating a bridge with the business.

In the past there has been a perceived (real?) disconnect between the business of government and the IM/IT groups that support them.  The future is looking to an aligned vision where both groups work closely together to come up with true solutions for the betterment of the organization and to improve our service delivery to Canadians.

IM/IT groups across government will need to transform into client service organizations in order to thrive in this new environment.  With SSC entering the fold as the de facto lead on all things infrastructure related, it is more important than ever that future technology leaders develop their skills across all corners of the new paradigm. Pure technical skills and process leadership will remain important, but professional skills and business leadership are going to be (and have already become) the difference.

It is also evident that doing business with the government has changed—profoundly.  There is no question that participants this year will be looking for insight—and charting a path forward—for continued and ongoing collaboration between governments and industry as we move forward with a new vision for technology and shared services.

There are still many unknowns about the future of technology in government and the direction it will take.  One thing is for certain—the game has changed.  GTEC 2012 will seek to unravel the mysteries of this brave new world…

*Views expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.

I had such a hard time coming up with a topic for my second GTEC blog post. Reading back on the entries others have submitted, I am humbled by the expertise and experience in this roster of bloggers. I’m not a techie, I don’t have a background in fancy-yet-practical fields like public policy, and I haven’t been in government long enough to have gone through a huge change initiative. At a glance, the venn diagram of my experiences vs. what GTEC literally stands for is two separate circles.

So as I crouched into the fetal position under my desk, ugly crying, plagued with self-doubt and “oh god oh god why am I here,” I reflected on the red thread running through what GTEC facilitates and what the other bloggers are trying to achieve in their respective organizations. And, quite obviously, at the core of it all, it’s just about the people. Everyone has experience with people, in some way or another. You don’t need to be a techie or a public policy expert to know the value and significance of people. As Jodi Leblanc put it in her post, people ”are ultimately the heart beat of the organization.”

What can I say about people (and organizations and engagement) that hasn’t already been said by those more articulate than me? Good question. A lot has been written about ways the organization can instil meaning and purpose* in our work, or things the organization can do to drive engagement for their people. But as individuals, how can we – not as a job title or an FTE, but as actual living breathing people – foster that kind of thinking? More importantly, how do you define purpose and meaning for yourself?

*To be clear, I don’t mean purpose and meaning in the “Our Vision/Our Mission” way — we all have that. I’m referring to the Dan Pink mismatch-between-what-science-knows-and-what-business-does way.

I keep being told that we’ve shifted to a demographic that does not place pension and job security as high on the priority list (the media certainly loves to paint generations with these broadstrokes). And it’s definitely not the extravagant hospitality, fancy conferences, or our love of extra approvals and paperwork that’s keeping us around. Dan Pink would certainly agree that all of the monetary elements, the rewards, the proverbial carrot, aren’t (and never were) true motivators. But I remember joining the public service and having friends envy my inevitable pension and guaranteed job security. So if those things are either a) not as high on the want list or b) no longer true in the face of departmental reviews, what does government have that’s motivating its people? Surely it’s not an organization completely made up of apathetic, passive, waiting-for-retirement types. While those folks are definitely around, I’m surrounded by people that prove to be the exact opposite of that pessimistic caricature of the public service.

So maybe that’s it, that there are enough of us surrounded by hard-working, thoughtful, innovative individuals that completely throw the public service stereotype out the window. I’m not trying to paint the public service as a beautiful and unique snowflake. I just know that at the end of the day, I can feel frustrated and disengaged because of certain things related to my job, but I also know for an absolute fact that I am very, very fortunate to see some hope and optimism. You can’t apply for a specific group of people the way you apply for a specific job. After the recent instability in public service jobs and the rising trend to impose more restrictions and oversight, there are still people sticking around who are engaged and focused more on how to move onwards and upwards. If that doesn’t show you that the public service can be resilient, adaptable, and optimistic, then you are probably Ron Swanson and no one will change your mind.

It is great to back and blogging for GTEC.

I will first mention a quick thanks to David Tallan who pointed out an error in my last post. I wrote that Berners-Lee gave us the Internet, but actually I should have written that he gave us the World Wide Web. The excellent GTEC web crew then quickly corrected my error. Thanks David and Ashley!

This thank you message leads well into the topic of this post, the default to share. This is the idea that, as information workers, rather than a default to non-sharing, we should look at the barriers to sharing, as filters rather than as walls.

The process I put forward here is my personal process to help me determine and improve how I share on a daily basis.

1)  Message. As an information steward, I must be a responsible steward of information. Information shared is a message. The parable of the talents tells me that to be a good steward, I need to multiply the return on the assets entrusted to me, and not bury them in the ground for fear of losing them. Information has no value unless it is used. This value is multiplied through sharing. Questions:

• What is my audience for the message?

• Where will this information be of most use?

• What format is best for this message?

• How often does this message change?

2)  Communication tools. I have a variety of communication tools available, from GCPEDIA and GCCONNEX to our intranet site and email to Twitter and LinkedIn. They all have a variety of capabilities and a variety of audiences. Questions:

• What tools do my targeted audience use?

• What other tools may allow sharing with the unidentified, yet valid, portion of my audience?

• What formats does the tool support?

• What level of maintenance will this tool require?

3)  Filters. I filter the message and the tools available according to the responsibilities I have committed to.

• Organizational values and ethics

• Personal values and ethics

• Legal responsibilities (copyright, privacy, terms of use, maintain the public trust)

• My role in sharing. This is especially important for public servants.

4)  Results and continual improvement. The result is my best effort at appropriate stewardship of the information, with knowledge to carry forward for my next share.

• Did this tool (or tools) perform the job I needed?

• Are there any new filters that prevent future sharing?

• Are there better tools or formats to share this information?

• What data can I look at to improve?

The process is about intelligent stewardship of information to maximize the return. The example of David Tallan’s correction of my blog error seems timely, but in fact, it is everyday reality. The old saying that “two heads are better than one” or that “no one is smarter than everyone” holds true. I just need to see the barrier of my ego or of “being wrong” as a filter and put my best foot forward in the name of improvement. When I am wrong and I admit it, I can move forward to the betterment of the idea.

A good parallel from biology is the concept of altruistic actions and Richard Dawkins’ concept of the selfish gene. Individuals perform altruistic acts and help each other with a cost to the individual, because, in doing so, they improve the odds of the perpetuation of their shared genes.

In the realm of the information worker, the gene is the idea or concept I have to share. I share the idea with the thought of how sharing can help the idea to perpetuate, develop and improve. I try to maximize the benefit, while using the process above to limit the risk. The advantage in the world of information over the world of biology is that the cost of sharing information intelligently almost never exceeds the return on the investment.

Have a great GTEC!

DISCLAIMER: Note that while I work for the government this is entirely my own initiative and what I post does not necessarily reflect the view of the government, my office or my position therein.

When I was asked to write a post comparing technology and tools across time, I was intrigued because I believe that the tools and technology we choose shape the culture of our workplace.

Twenty pages of draft text later, I decided that the topic was more suitable for a book than a blog post. So instead, here are a few reflections on technology and collaboration from someone who has been around a bit.

Collaboration to me, means a group of people working together towards a common goal. Technology helps or hinders us in that collaboration by finding the people to collaborate with, in sharing stuff we are working on, in co-creating stuff and in measuring our progress towards a common goal.

The past

Before the existence of writing, collaboration was strictly a face-to-face affair and probably centred around survival. About 5000 years ago writing came along, and information could now be preserved and shared independent of a human to remember it. For the next 45 centuries written information was the domain of the elite.

When the printing press was invented, rooms full of scribes were gradually replaced with new technology – machines that could accurately reproduce information at an accelerated rate. Ideas could now spread further and faster than ever before. Collaboration over distance was possible although it took a long time. Information was very physical and real.

Around this time, Information geeks the world over began a quest for the ultimate classification system. Every great power had a great library.

More recently, the Cold War and quantum physics research produced the internet and the web. The “interweb” changed everything if you wanted it to. Information could now be in more than one place at once, and it could literally travel at the speed of light. Physical artifacts became digital—making it at once more accessible and more vulnerable. Everything became miscellaneous. Digital networks evolved into complex adaptive systems, and Digimon appeared in popular culture.

The web was a new frontier, unregulated and exciting, a new crop of 20 something techno wizards rose in business fame. Apple was born. The Cluetrain Manifesto was written and there was a boom in tech stocks. At the end of the millennium we panicked over a couple of missing digits (Y2K), and spent billions correcting the short sightedness of the previous decades.

In the GC, Government On-Line occurred and the Funding Fairy provided the means for departments to put their information on-line. Canada became a world leader, but the paper-based mentality that prevailed caused many to completely miss the opportunity presented by hyperlinks and digital logic, instead “brochure-ware” prevailed.

At the top of the hype curve, the tech bubble goes pop and we are reminded that gravity works. After the crash, the Web was reborn as Web 2.0 with user-created content and social networking taking centre stage. The Long Tail made its appearance and command and control hierarchies began to sense a threat, while the educated masses saw opportunity.

Government CIOs scrambled to keep the information plumbing from backing up while Amazon and Google raised the bar of citizen expectations for on-line service.

Tagging and folksonomies entered the vocabulary of information professionals, curating became something anyone could do. Librarians and archivists struggled to catalogue and preserve some of the exponential growth while the cognitive surplus emerged to build things like Wikipedia—making human knowledge more accessible than ever before. CIOs were either bewildered or excited at the possibilities.

GTEC played an important role by bringing together examples and people. It became an annual, milestone event. It was at GTEC 2007 that Ken Cochrane announced that the GC was going to build a “Collaborative Library” and it was at GTEC a year later that we launched GCPEDIA —bringing people and technology together.

Today

High speed wireless saturates the urban environment and ubiquitous network access is a reality. Digital natives experience continuous instant communication as part of everyday life while Government workplaces seem antiquated by comparison. The web and the collective forces that it enables are transforming all parts of connected society. Recorded information is produced at an accelerating rate.

Open source software matures and becomes a viable option for enterprise applications. Governments around the world join the Open Government Partnership, in Canada the Federal Government publishes the Open Government Action plan.

Holistic User Centred Design begins to challenge solutions approaches to designing technology. Humanists and engineers are learning to work together.

The digital divide becomes a social issue, web accessibility becomes law and massive resources are assembled to ensure all GC organizations become compliant.

Bureaucracies built to manage people, work and information over the last couple of hundred years are beginning to show their age. New groups emerge in the evolutionary sea of information we know as the internet. Powerful forces compete to control the new territory – Anonymous becomes an entity.

The GC invests heavily in GCDOCS, SharePoint and other technologies designed to manage/control documents. The idea of knowledge as a product of interconnected networks and not just documents takes shape. Social innovation tools appear in pockets. GCPEDIA, GCFORUMS, GCCONNEX and other grass roots tools struggle for institutional support while gaining users.

Examples of the power of social in communicating across silos and traditional boundaries accumulate. The idea of social networks in government becomes acceptable – as long as we call them “professional networks”.

Future – Sometime after tomorrow

There is no Web 3.0, but something else emerges— a diverse, complex adaptive system, no, a network of complex adaptive systems.

Control of information becomes less important, the cultural default is to share knowledge. Government is a platform and publicly funded data is routinely visualized by an army of professional and amateur big data analysts.
In the GC, Shared Services Canada provides reliable infrastructure, we share one email address across government, secure wireless is everywhere, non-government partners can easily and securely collaborate, the government cloud is a reality. Departmental CIOs become focused on transition and business improvement—information plumbing is rarely an issue. The government-wide technical architecture focuses on standards and interoperability, a diverse range of technologies and tools work together in relative harmony, vendors with “lock-in” strategies are shunned.

GC Ideas is in constant use, the GC App Store is the first place departments look when they need software. Government developers routinely contribute to open source projects. The Open Knowledge policy is promulgated across governments around the world. The Marvelous Mistakes page on GCPEDIA competes with the Fabulous Failures page for most valuable lessons.  Risk aversion all but disappears in an organizational culture that embraces experimentation and sharing lessons learned.

Tablet computers are everywhere, briefing binders disappear. The Golden Tablet program maintains a knowledge connection with departing employees. The GC20 suite of tools is adequately funded.

Dreams of a digital nirvana don’t come true, but all is not lost. Networks of people who are comfortable connecting virtually emerge and disperse continuously. The definition of Public Service changes as the lines blur between indeterminate employees and partners. The GovCloud becomes a reality. Agility is an operational requirement, and government organizations re-invent themselves.

Leadership learns to work with the nebulous “crowd.” Connections are made and governance structures adapt to include interfaces to the crowd. The focus shifts from one of command and control towards engaging with self-identified stakeholders.

Serendipity becomes a business principle, the internet of things emerges, power shifts to those who control the algorithms but a balance is maintained by the digital collective. The Virtual Government Network is an international network 200,000 members strong where new and innovative methods are shared. Public Servants feel more connected with each other, and with the publics they serve.

Global government becomes possible as a global consciousness emerges. The collective intelligence gets a handle on our wicked problems. Technology serves the three Ps of Profit, People and the Planet. Yes, life is good in my fantasy future.

Conclusion

The Government Organizations and leadership types we have today are a product of the technology and tools of the past. The challenge now is how to incorporate things like ubiquitous network access and dynamic peer networks into serving a self-organizing public.

In times like these it is important that executives demonstrate a willingness to experiment and learn and I would like to shout out to a few of those I am aware of. People like the CIO of AAFC, Peter Bruce on LinkedIn, the new Head of HR at CIC @dgtweets, or the President of Canada Science and Technology Museums @damyot,  and the Associate Deputy Minister of PWGSC, @AndrewTreusch.  These folks and many others like them are taking precious time to participate. I think we should applaud and acknowledge them for their willingness to learn. Speaking of innovators, I am looking forward to the ignite session at GTEC, maybe we’ll get to see some sparks fly!

Collaboration is a popular word these days. But collaboration is not a technology or a tool. Collaboration is people working together towards a common goal. Collaboration is more about values than it is about tech. We should be discussing exactly what those values are, here are four that I can think of, what do you think?

• Open and continuous communication
• Shared understanding of purpose/vision
• Commitment to the greater good
• Freedom from fear – respect and tolerance

New technology can open doors to new behaviour, but it is the people who share the value of collaboration who will deliver the outcomes. Fortunately we have events like GTEC and PS Engage to bring those people (you), together to explore and learn.

Technology in and of itself will not save us. But if we take advantage of the opportunities it presents and if we shape the tools we choose to use in a way that reflects the values of collaboration then I believe anything is possible.  What do you believe?

Thom Kearney can be found on the internet or in the crowd at GTEC.

IMAGES

The Tesla image is public domain http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tesla_colorado.jpg

This media file is in the public domain in the United States. This applies to U.S. works where the copyright has expired, often because its firstpublication occurred prior to January 1, 1923. See this page for further explanation.

The Target Image is original, released by Strategy Guy Inc. under Creative Commons Attribution.

Before tackling any collaborative or innovative project, I think it is important to address the issue of projects versus process.

Nick Charney commented briefly on a tendency that we have in government to treat ideation (the process of creating innovative ideas) as projects: “We had too short a shadow of the future and as a result treated ideation as a one shot deal rather than an iterative and continuous process.”

He is right. We tend to treat change as a project. Oftentimes, we lump an initiative that is yet another step in the change process into a tidy package, and we call it a pilot project. It seems like they are everywhere lately. And it’s no wonder—pilot projects are the anti-panic, low-risk, low-commitment, low-cost approach to change. However, I question both the effectiveness and appropriateness of this popular and easy-to-implement pilot project model.

Don’t get me wrong; I do believe that we need to be judicious about how we spend our time and taxpayers’ money. An exploratory stage or staged implementation can be quite helpful to reduce the risk of waste.

I have no issue with easing into new frontiers rather than slamming into them head first. That said, I think we do ourselves a disservice if we falsely name what it is that we are really doing and, as a result, take a less effective approach.

The problem I have with pilot projects is that we may shape our needs in order to fit the model, instead of the other way around.

For example, when launching a new Web 2.0 collaborative tool using a pilot project approach, we can mistakenly view the official launch as the objective around which all of our activities revolve. However, the work shouldn’t stop with the launch of the tool. We need to provide continuous training, refine new business processes, fix bugs, update software, and consider user feedback—just to name a few of the ongoing tasks that take place beyond launch.

A project-based approach, which is typically anchored in milestones and deadlines, may not afford the kind of ongoing engagement that is required to be successful in the long run.

Change requires flexibility, not milestones

Pilot projects are usually short-term and rather rigid in both structure and timeline. If the project is deemed successful, it is implemented on a larger scale. If not, then the project is often scrapped. These pilot projects do a disservice to both the great and not-so-great ideas that spawn them, because projects that do not adhere to their schedules are rarely looked upon favourably. But what if delays or adjustments can help transform an idea into something truly excellent?

Flexibility is essential to success. Any pilot project must be allowed to adapt on the fly.

We should steer away from the traditional pilot project model. It is important to plan, implement, evaluate and adjust accordingly in everything we do. If the approach needs tweaking, then tweak. If the approach no longer helps us to accomplish our objectives, then abandon it and look for a different approach.

I understand that using a term like “pilot project” can be less intimidating than simply proposing a new direction or process for a team, and sometimes a less intimidating approach is exactly what is needed to push a project through. But if we truly want to work smarter, iterative improvements and freedom to adjust as required must become common practice.

Abandoning an approach when it no longer meets our needs might not be as terrifying if change and flexibility play a part in every project, process, and daily task.

An iterative approach that can accommodate the lifecycle of our work would make us more resilient and adaptive. And from my point of view, it would better prepare us to adopt a more collaborative and innovative culture.

Let’s break from the restrictive structure that focuses on milestones, accomplishments, and schedules. Let’s focus on building a culture that strives for continuous, iterative improvement and excellence. Because change is not a pilot project.

Tags: Crowdsourcing, Ideation

It’s now time for a post on the GTEC blog from the technophobe in the group.  It’s not that I am afraid of technology.  OK, maybe I am a bit but I do embrace technology and I understand the relevance it has in our lives.  Ironically, I have spent the majority of my career immersed in a technology environment.  This is ironic for two reasons.  The first one I’ve already stated – I am a technophobe.  The second reason has to do with my background and training – marketing and communications.  So far though, this combination has worked in my favour.  My mantra has been and continues to be:  ‘Help me understand your project and I will engage your clients.’

No tech, low tech

When I started my career in marketing and communications over two and a half decades ago at an Ottawa ad agency, the designers I worked with were eclectic types who wore ponchos and worked on Macintosh SE/30 computers.  My job was to understand the client’s vision and translate her requirements into specifications that the designers could use to develop beautiful annual reports, splashy, glossy brochures and engaging, full colour newspaper ads.

Similarly, when I made my way to the City of Ottawa as a project officer a few years later, my first job    was to take all garbage calls (‘garbage’ as in curbside waste and not ‘garbage‘ as in calls no one else wanted to deal with).  It was the early 90s by now and the environmental movement was making its resurgence.  City residents were ravenous for information about curbside recycling and backyard composting.  The phone rang off the hook.  I kept a log book in which I manually chronicled the details of every call.  This would prove to be valuable intel that would inform the education and awareness strategy I would later develop.

Published by IBM

What is remarkable to me now as I look back at my early days in marcom is the absence of a technology presence. For over 10 years I happily went about my work as a marcom professional without the need to interact with a technology organization. I produced hardcopy newsletters distributed through the mail; I analyzed the results of paper surveys collected from education workshops and I traveled to local schools and community centres delivering workshops on waste reduction.  My clients had basic needs.  My partners were pencil to pad type designers.  My managers expected results.

Valuing the role of technology

Flash forward to the mid 00s when I was hired into a federal government IT organization.  Here I encountered a CIO who recognized the value of having marcom expertise on her team not only to decode the language of IT but to also convey the notion that technology can be a key driver for achieving desired outcomes and generating value.  Once business leaders in the organization recognized that IT was about much more than boxes and wires, they started to pay close attention to the enabling characteristics of technology.

And then something fascinating happened…

The social scene

The arrival of social media in the workplace seemed to change everything – particularly in the area of marketing and communications.  The tools of the trade were now shiny new online vehicles that had the potential to instantly reach farther or target narrower.  I was fortunate enough to be at NRCan during its foray into social media – a story of wiki supremacy that is more than familiar at this point.  While the implementation of the wiki was a great learning experience for all of us, it was a real turning point for me.  It became apparent that the proliferation of social media has the potential to generate extensive client data in a very short period of time.  For a marketer this is pure gold.

Now that I am a client of IT at the Public Service Commission,  I have noticed that the majority of my time, effort and budget is spent on technology driven marketing initiatives such as online surveys, web usability and social media engagement.  The skills represented on my marketing team include web writing, user experience, outreach, analytics, etc., but I long for an IT savvy worker who has the expertise to bridge the technology gap.  That said, I relish the opportunity I have to sit at the table leading the development of the client solutions interface.

Now, more than ever, it is critical for IT and marketing to really understand each other’s business; establish a more collaborative approach; and, develop common objectives in support of marketing initiatives.  I am witnessing the convergence of marketing and technology at the PSC.  Is the convergence happening in your organization?

I started my career in the public service in the month of May in 2009, in an IM/IT organization, and the topic of the GTEC Distinction Awards came up remarkably quickly. The head of the organization was canvassing his executives for the best of the technology best, and strongly encouraging nominations. The message was clear: this is important.

Since then, I’ve had the opportunity to attend GTEC and to become more familiar with the community, and the importance of the Distinction Awards has only been elevated in my view. The awards represent the highlights of twelve months of brilliance, teamwork, and concerted effort. They represent clear proof of the innovation capacity of the public sector. Most importantly, the awards represent initiatives that help Canada function better – sometimes quietly, in the background, and other times noticeably, improving the user experience for citizens’ interaction with their government.

Looking at this year’s nominees, and having worked with previous Distinction Award winners, I know what goes into these projects. One of the requirements is that the project must have reached completion between June 1 and May 31 of the year past, but many of these projects began long before that, requiring years of commitment, investment, and vision.

Last night, at the Ottawa Convention Center that will host GTEC in less than a month, the community welcomed the Distinction Award honourees with a reception – an event launched last year to ensure that the deserved recognition was received. As the President of SCOAP (Society of Collaborative Opportunities and Advancement of Professionals), Kevin D’Entrement stated, the honourees should already feel a sense of massive achievement. It is the very top tier of public sector innovation that makes it to that point.

Likewise, the CIO of Canada, Corinne Charette, had kind words for the honourees and for the innovation capacity of the public sector. Embracing the theme of this years’ event, Innovating and Collaborating: Making a Difference for Canadians, Mme. Charette emphasized that “collaboration is the key to successful project delivery.” It is fitting, then, that the community makes such an effort to come together when it is time to celebrate its achievements.

[The Distinction Awards Gala will take place on Monday, November 5, the first night of this year's GTEC conference this year. The shortlist of nominations is impressive. Keep an eye out for interviews and photos with honourees - GTEC had enthusiastic videographers and photographers roaming the reception last night.]