Advanced Leadership Program Followup

This is the kind of stuff that drives Canadians crazy. There is no reason for these taxpayer benefits to be paid to civil servants. How many executives in the private sector are sent to far away exotic locations for so called training. It is a perk and it needs to be stopped. In the overall government the expense is minimal but it gives Canadians the feeling that the government is not in touch with the realities of Canadian opinion.

Training senior people is a fundamental in any sound organization.  The American management association has offered such a program for years all over North America and here in Canada.
I find it most interesting that folks have forgotten that “merit” used to be the pillar of the Canadian public service…that is until Trudeau came along and began partisan appointments.
May I suggest that a review of all Human Resourcing costs is at the heart of this issue. If Canada can’t afford senior training, then so be it…but I wouldn’t react to the comic book crowd over at the PSAC building.

Everything the federal government does should be done in the most cost effective way possible.  The on-going expenditure review will, I hope, look at the costs and benefits of each  government program and make sure it is done cost effectively or not at all.  That includes training.

Regardless of how the expenditure review turns out, the federal government will still exist, there will still be a public service, and that public service will need capable, well-trained leaders.  You could ensure that by shutting down the ALP and putting all the people you think might be future deputy ministers through an executive MBA program at $100,000 a pop.  I don’t see that saving any money.  You could say we’re going to continue to have the ALP but reduce it’s cost by 25%.  That would save money.  

Or you could say we’re just not going to do any executive training for future senior leaders in the public service.  If you could show me another organization that spends $240 billion a year and does nothing to train people for senior leadership positions, I’d be willing to say the federal government could do without executive training.  But I don’t think such an organization exists.

And if you continue to insist that executive training is a frill we can do without, are you also going to shut down all the other training programs that the federal government runs for its employees?  The Canadian Forces College?  RMC?  You wouldn’t see much immediate impact if you shut down those programs.  

What about RCAF pilot training?  That’s incredibly expensive – unbelievably expensive.  But I tend to think that pilot training makes people better pilots.  And if executive training isn’t making people better executives, then it’s needs to be overhauled, not eliminated.

The challenge for Conservatives, and remember that I am one, is that we can’t just wish away the challenges of the machinery of government.  We have to make sure the machinery is rigorously cost effective.  But we can’t assume we can do without it.  We have to live in the real world.  And if taxpayers wonder about the cost of training for government executives, as they should, we remind people how much more expensive it is to train airplane pilots and surgeons and engineers.  And that the costs of the ALP were well in line with the cost of similar programs in the private sector.

Ian, I’m not suggesting we shut down all executive level training. However, I do think it can be done at a more reasonable cost. The lion’s share of these expenses is airfare to foreign lands. Surely, an executive training program can be done at a more efficient, more local, more Canadian level.

You’re suggesting that my solution is the other side of the coin. I think we agree that we need to find efficiencies in all parts of the system.

Why on Earth are we flying our senior bureaucrats to Mexico to learn about government administration?

Stephen and Ian, they should look at the trends in private enterprise towards simple, more cost effective collaborative learning. For example, there is a great Canadian alternative by Henry Mintzberg called CoachingOurselves, which Henry believes is the most powerful tool we have for management and leadership learning. Private industry, which really looks at dollars and sense, has made the move to this form of development. Why does the government have to lag so far behind?

Full disclosure, I work with Henry on CoachingOurselves, and we currently work with some fantastic people in the Federal Government.

Whoa, we’re actually flying our senior bureaucrats to Mexico to learn about government administration?  That’s mind boggling!

If it has to do with better weather we can’t compete with Mexico but we certainly could supply them with Tequila to ease their stress right here.

“And if you continue to insist that executive training is a frill we can do without”

Nowhere in Stephen’s article does he suggest that executive training isn’t valuable and I think it is unfair to suggest that he does. He IS suggesting that $50,000 site seeing trips is an opulent form of executive training (if it even constitutes training). Quite frankly, I’m surprised to read a conservative of your stature defend this kind of program and even more surprised that you would misrepresent Stephen’s point of view.

Its the optics, the training is needed.  But, just once, and, just for us normal regular joes, couldnt a conference be held in Thunder Bay??  Or anywhere Porter fly’s for 99.00$.

I think this debate proves that issues look quite different on the inside than they do on the outside.  Senior bureucrats might see no issue on executive class flights and first class hotels, but how does the guy who makes less in a year than these trips cost feel about it who has to pay for it through his taxes? The corporate comparison too is not valid – corporations are spending their own  money, not asking the taxpayer to pay their way.

Mr Harper should immediately put in place a policy in which any public servant who buys anyhing but an in-advance, economy ticket for air travel must pay for it out of their own pocket. I think this alone would put air Canada out of business, who it is my understanding stays afloat on the last minute, thousand dollar (or more) flights from Ottawa to Toronto, complements of the taxpayer..

So is there any evidence that sending senior bureaucrats out these wide reaching locations does anything to make them better managers? I would like to see that being discussed. If it is then in whose opinion were the costs justified.

So is there any evidence that sending senior bureaucrats out these wide reaching locations does anything to make them better managers? I would like to see that being discussed. If it is then in whose opinion were the costs justified.

That’s the point Stephen. Is there no one in Canada who is capable of training seniors managers? Bringing one person in to train versus sending 50 of them out to be trained seems to be a more reasonable solution.

That’s the point Stephen. Is there no one in Canada who is capable of training seniors managers? Bringing one person in to train versus sending 50 of them out to be trained seems to be a more reasonable solution.

Think about it. You could pay for an MBA program for the price of one of these trips. I read Brodie’s defense of it and I’m not convinced. I agree we should train management types but there is no way you can tell me these trips are really doing that.

…The lion’s
share of these expenses is airfare to foreign lands. Surely, an
executive training program can be done at a more efficient, more local,
more Canadian level.

Why on Earth are we flying our senior bureaucrats to Mexico to learn about government administration?

Because having a global perspective maybe makes them better overall managers? Because, at least until recently, Canada was regarded as being well-engaged with the rest of the world?
Because it’s all part of networking with their counterparts in other countries?

Sometimes learning takes a bit more than Powerpoints and handouts at some cookie-cutter  Canadian hotel.

I don’t know why the right-wing is so afraid of the world that they continue to wish Canada out of it. There’s such a thing as a country being too self-absorbed.

To those thinking that the government should fire the bureacrats and replace them with ‘business’ people… do you really think that business people would willingly jump to the government for the offered salaries? When a prominent exec gets attracted into government, the right ares the first up in arms about the required salary. Besides, government has pesky things like fairness, ethics, and rights to contend with.

Bureaucrats get a lower salary than equivalent jobs in business, but also get perks like these educational opportunities. It’s part of the package, it’s generally good for them and for Canada.  It’s served us well so far… unless you can prove otherwise. Why mess with it?

Given the current state of the western economies… an MBA isn’t necessarily indicative of talent. And government ain’t business.

What’s new?