On February 12th, an new version of "We Are The World" was released in aid of disaster relief for Haiti. The video was made by Paul Haggis and includes over 80 artists and performers.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Saturday, February 13, 2010
World's Most Livable Cities....Guess who's Number 1.....
The Economist Intelligence Unit has just released the list of the world's top ten most livable cities....and Canada has 3 cities in the top ten.
In fact, the world's most livable city is....Vancouver. Not only are they hosting the Winter Olympics (great opening ceremonies by the way), but now they are #1 in the world. Talk about bragging rights.
Toronto is ranked number 4, followed by Calgary at number 5. For full disclosure, I should note that Australia had 4 cities in the top ten: Melbourne at # 3; Sydney at # 7; Perth at # 8; and Adelaide at # 9.
The Economist Intelligence Unit's liveability rating, part of the Worldwide Cost of Living Survey, quantifies the challenges that might be presented to an individual's lifestyle in 140 cities worldwide. Each city is assigned a score for over 30 qualitative and quantitative factors across five broad categories:
* Stability
* Healthcare
* Culture and environment
* Education
* Infrastructure
For those who are interested in looking at all the factors you can find them here.
The Olympics are another opportunity for the world to see why Vancouver is rated #1. Congratulations to Vancouver.
In fact, the world's most livable city is....Vancouver. Not only are they hosting the Winter Olympics (great opening ceremonies by the way), but now they are #1 in the world. Talk about bragging rights.
Toronto is ranked number 4, followed by Calgary at number 5. For full disclosure, I should note that Australia had 4 cities in the top ten: Melbourne at # 3; Sydney at # 7; Perth at # 8; and Adelaide at # 9.
The Economist Intelligence Unit's liveability rating, part of the Worldwide Cost of Living Survey, quantifies the challenges that might be presented to an individual's lifestyle in 140 cities worldwide. Each city is assigned a score for over 30 qualitative and quantitative factors across five broad categories:
* Stability
* Healthcare
* Culture and environment
* Education
* Infrastructure
For those who are interested in looking at all the factors you can find them here.
The Olympics are another opportunity for the world to see why Vancouver is rated #1. Congratulations to Vancouver.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
20 Years Ago.....
On February 20, 1990 a historic event took place in South Africa...the Apartheid regime released Nelson Mandela from his 27 year imprisonment at Robbin Island. It was a memorable day for those of us who believe in equality, democracy and human rights. I remember the anti-apartheid campaigns that we held on campus at University and still have a framed poster from that time. And I remember seeing Archbishop Desmond Tutu speak to the assembled crowd on the lawns in front of Queen's Park. What a moving experience.
What Nelson Mandela was able to accomplish after his release, moving South Africa to a full democracy without a civil war is truly extraordinary.
In looking at some of the stories related to the release of Nelson Mandela, I came across a reference to a new documentary about another hero of mine entitled "RFK in the Land of Apartheid". This documentary follows Robert Kennedy's trip to South Africa to confront the apartheid regime. I am always moved by some of RFK's speeches such as the one he delivered in Indianapolis the night that Martin Luther King was assassinated.
The speech that RFK gave on June 6, 1966 at the University of Cape Town for the National Union of South African Students Day of Affirmation which is dubbed the "Ripple of Hope" speech is truly moving. Listen to RFK give this speech and read it. His values and perspective is just as valid today as it was in 1966.
What Nelson Mandela was able to accomplish after his release, moving South Africa to a full democracy without a civil war is truly extraordinary.
In looking at some of the stories related to the release of Nelson Mandela, I came across a reference to a new documentary about another hero of mine entitled "RFK in the Land of Apartheid". This documentary follows Robert Kennedy's trip to South Africa to confront the apartheid regime. I am always moved by some of RFK's speeches such as the one he delivered in Indianapolis the night that Martin Luther King was assassinated.
The speech that RFK gave on June 6, 1966 at the University of Cape Town for the National Union of South African Students Day of Affirmation which is dubbed the "Ripple of Hope" speech is truly moving. Listen to RFK give this speech and read it. His values and perspective is just as valid today as it was in 1966.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
The New Population Bomb
In the January/February 2010 issue of Foreign Affairs there is an interesting essay by Jack Gladstone entitled "The New Population Bomb: The four megatrends that will change the world".
In his essay, Mr. Gladstone notes the following four major demographic trends that will affect the 21st Century:
1) the decrease in the relative demographic weight of developed countries;
2) the aging and declining workforce in these developed countries;
3) the substantial increase in population in the poorest, youngest and most heavily Muslim countries; and
4) the continued urbanization of the world with the majority of the population living in urban areas.
The decline and aging of the population in developed countries is relatively well documented. I actually wrote about this a few years ago as part of an Executive Brief on Organization & People Performance. This decline in the labour force of developed countries is a major challenge facing policy makers as it will impact the potential economic growth of countries such as Canada. A number of countries will actually see a decline in their respective populations, a decline in the active workforce and a significant increase in their seniors population. The percentage of the global GDP derived from Western countries is already on the decline from 68% in 1950 to 47% in 2003. Projections are for a rapid decline to 30% by 2050. The implication of this trend is that the overwhelming majority of GDP growth will occur outside of Western countries over the next 40 years. This is in line with the significant increase in the middle class in developing countries - they will be the engines of economic growth with their increased demand for goods and services. According to a World Bank report, the middle class will increase by 200% in developing countries between 2005 and 2030 (to 1.2 Billion people).
Western countries are also facing an aging population and a decline in the number of working age citizens. The most extreme example cited in this essay is South Korea that will see its overall population decline by 9% by 2050, its working age population drop by 36% over the same period and the number of citizens 60 years of age and older increase by 150%! This same trend is evident in other developed countries, though the swings are not as extreme. Even China will be feeling the impact of these trends as the average age of its population continues to creep up.
The impact on economic growth will be significant. The Canadian Parliamentary Budget Officer will be releasing a report in the next two weeks that will look at the impact of demographics on economic growth and the labour force over the next 50 - 75 years. That should be an interesting read, especially for Canadian policy makers.
I will tackle the two other megatrends in an upcoming blog post, as this one is long enough!
In his essay, Mr. Gladstone notes the following four major demographic trends that will affect the 21st Century:
1) the decrease in the relative demographic weight of developed countries;
2) the aging and declining workforce in these developed countries;
3) the substantial increase in population in the poorest, youngest and most heavily Muslim countries; and
4) the continued urbanization of the world with the majority of the population living in urban areas.
The decline and aging of the population in developed countries is relatively well documented. I actually wrote about this a few years ago as part of an Executive Brief on Organization & People Performance. This decline in the labour force of developed countries is a major challenge facing policy makers as it will impact the potential economic growth of countries such as Canada. A number of countries will actually see a decline in their respective populations, a decline in the active workforce and a significant increase in their seniors population. The percentage of the global GDP derived from Western countries is already on the decline from 68% in 1950 to 47% in 2003. Projections are for a rapid decline to 30% by 2050. The implication of this trend is that the overwhelming majority of GDP growth will occur outside of Western countries over the next 40 years. This is in line with the significant increase in the middle class in developing countries - they will be the engines of economic growth with their increased demand for goods and services. According to a World Bank report, the middle class will increase by 200% in developing countries between 2005 and 2030 (to 1.2 Billion people).
Western countries are also facing an aging population and a decline in the number of working age citizens. The most extreme example cited in this essay is South Korea that will see its overall population decline by 9% by 2050, its working age population drop by 36% over the same period and the number of citizens 60 years of age and older increase by 150%! This same trend is evident in other developed countries, though the swings are not as extreme. Even China will be feeling the impact of these trends as the average age of its population continues to creep up.
The impact on economic growth will be significant. The Canadian Parliamentary Budget Officer will be releasing a report in the next two weeks that will look at the impact of demographics on economic growth and the labour force over the next 50 - 75 years. That should be an interesting read, especially for Canadian policy makers.
I will tackle the two other megatrends in an upcoming blog post, as this one is long enough!
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Benchmarking the performance of the Australian Government
Came across an interesting study by KPMG on "Benchmarking the performance of the Australian Government Service"
In September 2009, the Prime Minister of Australia announced his ambition to further strengthen the Australian Public Service (APS). As a first step, he has established an Advisory Group on Reform of the Australian Government Administration to develop a blueprint for reform of the public service. Its mission is to advise on how to create “the best public service anywhere in the world unified in pursuing excellence and putting Australia and Australians at the centre of everything [it does]”.
To inform the Advisory Group’s work, the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet commissioned KPMG to compare the performance of the APS against leading public services around the world.
The Advisory Group drew up a set of key criteria which reflect the characteristics of a model public service. According to the Advisory Group, the public service of the future must:
-have a values-driven culture that retains public trust;
-provide high-quality, forward-looking and creative policy advice;
-deliver high-quality programs and services that put the citizen first;
-provide flexible and agile responses to changing realities and government priorities; and
- be effective and efficient in all operations.
This study compares the performance of the Australian Public Service (APS) to those of eight other public services in France, Denmark, Canada, Singapore, the United Kingdom, the United States and the Netherlands. It evaluates six key criteria, including the effectiveness and efficiency of operations, the ability to provide flexible and agile responses to changing realities, and the capacity to attract and retain people of the highest quality. According to the results of the survey, the APS is a high performer where responsive to changes in the economy is concerned but performs comparatively poorly in terms of its capability for coordinated, informed and strategic policy.
This is fascinating comparative study of the public service in these 8 countries and provides some food for thought for all those interested in the performance of public services.
In September 2009, the Prime Minister of Australia announced his ambition to further strengthen the Australian Public Service (APS). As a first step, he has established an Advisory Group on Reform of the Australian Government Administration to develop a blueprint for reform of the public service. Its mission is to advise on how to create “the best public service anywhere in the world unified in pursuing excellence and putting Australia and Australians at the centre of everything [it does]”.
To inform the Advisory Group’s work, the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet commissioned KPMG to compare the performance of the APS against leading public services around the world.
The Advisory Group drew up a set of key criteria which reflect the characteristics of a model public service. According to the Advisory Group, the public service of the future must:
-have a values-driven culture that retains public trust;
-provide high-quality, forward-looking and creative policy advice;
-deliver high-quality programs and services that put the citizen first;
-provide flexible and agile responses to changing realities and government priorities; and
- be effective and efficient in all operations.
This study compares the performance of the Australian Public Service (APS) to those of eight other public services in France, Denmark, Canada, Singapore, the United Kingdom, the United States and the Netherlands. It evaluates six key criteria, including the effectiveness and efficiency of operations, the ability to provide flexible and agile responses to changing realities, and the capacity to attract and retain people of the highest quality. According to the results of the survey, the APS is a high performer where responsive to changes in the economy is concerned but performs comparatively poorly in terms of its capability for coordinated, informed and strategic policy.
This is fascinating comparative study of the public service in these 8 countries and provides some food for thought for all those interested in the performance of public services.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
If we can put a Man on the Moon
Tonight I had the pleasure of attending a session with Bill Eggers, global director for Deloitte Research and director of the Deloitte Public Leadership Institute. Bill is responsible for research and thought leadership for Deloitte’s public sector industry practice.
You may have read some of his previous books (if you haven't read them!) , namely Governing by Network; Government 2.0; and The Public Innovator’s Playbook.
Well...he has a new book out called "If we can put a Man on the Moon: Getting big things done in Government".
Tonight in front of a roomful of invited guests Bill talked about his book and about how governments, in Canada as well as the USA, can make things work in this ever increasingly complex world.
People are frustrated with their government — dismayed by a series of high-profile failures (in the US: Iraq, Katrina, the financial meltdown). Yet both Canada and the USA have a proud history of great achievements: the Canadian healthcare system, the highway system, welfare reform, and the moon landing.
In this book If We Can Put a Man on the Moon, Bill Eggers and John O'Leary explain how to do it. The key? Understand — and avoid — the common pitfalls that trip up public-sector leaders during the journey from idea to results.
Bill talked about the Seven Deadly Traps that could result in the failure of an initiative. These are:
The Tolstoy Trap: Seeing only the possibilities you want to see;
Design-Free Design: Designing policies for passage through the legislature, not for implementation;
The Stargate Trap: Idea never makes it though the legislature or is so distorted that it will never achieve its intended results;
The Overconfidence Trap: Creating unrealistic budgets and timelines;
The Sisyphus Trap: Failing to understand the special challenges of the public sector;
The Complacency Trap: Failing to recognize that a program needs change;
The Silo Trap: Fumbling handoffs throughout the execution of the project.
Bill showed us an interactive map that illustrates the traps and shows a journey to success. I would encourage you to take a look at this website.
It was a fascinating talk and I would encourage you to buy Bill's latest book.
You may have read some of his previous books (if you haven't read them!) , namely Governing by Network; Government 2.0; and The Public Innovator’s Playbook.
Well...he has a new book out called "If we can put a Man on the Moon: Getting big things done in Government".
Tonight in front of a roomful of invited guests Bill talked about his book and about how governments, in Canada as well as the USA, can make things work in this ever increasingly complex world.
People are frustrated with their government — dismayed by a series of high-profile failures (in the US: Iraq, Katrina, the financial meltdown). Yet both Canada and the USA have a proud history of great achievements: the Canadian healthcare system, the highway system, welfare reform, and the moon landing.
In this book If We Can Put a Man on the Moon, Bill Eggers and John O'Leary explain how to do it. The key? Understand — and avoid — the common pitfalls that trip up public-sector leaders during the journey from idea to results.
Bill talked about the Seven Deadly Traps that could result in the failure of an initiative. These are:
The Tolstoy Trap: Seeing only the possibilities you want to see;
Design-Free Design: Designing policies for passage through the legislature, not for implementation;
The Stargate Trap: Idea never makes it though the legislature or is so distorted that it will never achieve its intended results;
The Overconfidence Trap: Creating unrealistic budgets and timelines;
The Sisyphus Trap: Failing to understand the special challenges of the public sector;
The Complacency Trap: Failing to recognize that a program needs change;
The Silo Trap: Fumbling handoffs throughout the execution of the project.
Bill showed us an interactive map that illustrates the traps and shows a journey to success. I would encourage you to take a look at this website.
It was a fascinating talk and I would encourage you to buy Bill's latest book.
Need for Increased Infrastructure
A recent survey of public sector leaders from around the world conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit on behalf of KPMG has identified the need for continued investment in infrastructure even as economic stimulus funding is slated to end. This is not surprising, especially in North America, as most of our major infrastructure - water & sewage; highways; schools, etc - was built in the 1950s to 1970s and is coming to the end of their useful life. I recall a recent report in a newspaper about the age of the sewer pipes in major Canadian cities - some of these pipes are from the late 1800's and are made of wood. You can just imagine the water leakage that occurs!
The report states that 70 percent of North American respondents said lack of funds remains the largest obstacle to infrastructure development, compared to 56 percent of their global peers.
“While stimulus spending was a first step, many government officials are clearly telling us that they need a long-term infrastructure investment strategy to meet the needs of their country,” said Stephen Beatty, head of infrastructure advisory for KPMG’s Global Infrastructure practice in the Americas and a partner in KPMG in Canada. “Modernizing the world’s infrastructure will require massive investment and cooperation by the public and private sectors for many years to come. But those countries that find ways to make the necessary infrastructure investments now are likely to be the leaders of tomorrow.”
The report also surveys the respondents view as to the effectiveness of governments in delivering infrastructure with the preponderant view that this is one of the barriers to delivery as is lack of financing.
I believe that the solution to "effectiveness" issues requires that governments work closely with their stakeholders in determining the infrastructure requirements and that they then work closely with the private sector to deliver on these requirements. A long-term capital investment strategy is also required to align resources versus the replacement requirements for infrastructure as well as planning for new infrastructure.
In March 2008, IPAC published a special issue of our Canadian Public Administration journal that was devoted to public-private partnerships. If you are an IPAC member, you can log in and go to CPA to see all these fascinating articles.
There is clearly much to do to renew our infrastructure in Canada and governments have a lead responsibility to ensuring that this infrastructure is in place so that our future economic growth is optimized. The KPMG report is quite interesting and I would recommend it.
The report states that 70 percent of North American respondents said lack of funds remains the largest obstacle to infrastructure development, compared to 56 percent of their global peers.
“While stimulus spending was a first step, many government officials are clearly telling us that they need a long-term infrastructure investment strategy to meet the needs of their country,” said Stephen Beatty, head of infrastructure advisory for KPMG’s Global Infrastructure practice in the Americas and a partner in KPMG in Canada. “Modernizing the world’s infrastructure will require massive investment and cooperation by the public and private sectors for many years to come. But those countries that find ways to make the necessary infrastructure investments now are likely to be the leaders of tomorrow.”
The report also surveys the respondents view as to the effectiveness of governments in delivering infrastructure with the preponderant view that this is one of the barriers to delivery as is lack of financing.
I believe that the solution to "effectiveness" issues requires that governments work closely with their stakeholders in determining the infrastructure requirements and that they then work closely with the private sector to deliver on these requirements. A long-term capital investment strategy is also required to align resources versus the replacement requirements for infrastructure as well as planning for new infrastructure.
In March 2008, IPAC published a special issue of our Canadian Public Administration journal that was devoted to public-private partnerships. If you are an IPAC member, you can log in and go to CPA to see all these fascinating articles.
There is clearly much to do to renew our infrastructure in Canada and governments have a lead responsibility to ensuring that this infrastructure is in place so that our future economic growth is optimized. The KPMG report is quite interesting and I would recommend it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
