Plan, Do, Check, and Act

The ability of leadership to manifest its vision should be evident in the creation of structures and programs that express and realize elements of that vision. Have you seen these lately? Does Dundas Place for example realize elements of the original vision? In my opinion Dundas Place is a good example of a watered down realization aimed at satisfying a group that disagreed with the original vision. Proper requirements weren’t gathered and that vision wasn’t traced to the finished solution. Missing requirements often manifest in a solution that makes no stakeholder group satisfied. We need to establish better policy that addresses our core issues as being the products of systems. Council puts the budget before the initiatives for example, I think that’s the wrong choice and telling of the priorities. I can’t help but think people, process then budget is an import sequence. Governance with an emphasis on citizen lead policy leadership and democratic budgeting is the future state we need to maintain a productive and beneficial local democratic ecosystem. We continue to invite input after the fact.

These big reveals are a risk if the die is already cast. They create sunk cost and reveal painfully the litany of missed requirements.

I think a fear and animosity of participating in a dysfunctional process is preventing us from affecting the change we require. Bad processes create fear of failure and conflict. How do you fix that? Often just by implementing some renewed internal governance then making it clear who is responsible, accountable, consulted and informed. Now that the London Plan has been successfully defended, build an initiative and reengage meaningfully around it and at the same time restart advisory committees. The word advisory is critical and words and names matter. Advise is sought before action.

Stop guessing what people want. Build a funnel to collect from people the initiatives they need. Liaise with citizen advisory committees and standing committees as a source of changes that will be required.

What is the City of London doing to work towards developing an place that is sustainable? By that I mean; support and integrate new communities established within the city over the last decade (Our Toronto expats and our new post-secondary grads). One third of all real-estate listings are being purchased by a current Torontonian according to CMHC. London could offer a lot more cultural, social and recreational lifestyle options that would position it as an attractive and fulfilling place for talented knowledge workers. The recognition of the role of the knowledge economy in the development of the city and its region has been overlooked. I hope that this would bring the type of population that would increase and not decrease the labor force participation rate, working families that are statistically less likely to own a car currently. The incoming residents have experience with infrastructure that lacks local exposure and therefore support. Infrastructure like protect cycling, local transit and regional transit. Our new neighbors are likely to have higher expectations than longtime residents. I would emphasized the role of technology, innovation, education and training in developing the knowledge economy of the City. I’d consider this to be of vital importance not only for the success of the region, but for the success of the province as a whole. Committees provide the line of sight the Council needs to prioritize a rapidly evolving citizenry. Committees can also provide citizens and opportunity to contribute more upstream with Council and therefore be more bought into solutions when they are implemented or proposed, their requirements having been satisfied. This all hangs on not just having committees though, you need a process that produces projects and governance to hold the result accountable to someone. From my experience it’s also import to consider processes as passive and only the will to act can truly move things forward.

More often than not I see council doing the work of the bureaucracy and not giving the bureaucracy what it needs to better do its job. The role of the Active Transportation Manager was as a result of the efforts of the Cycling Advisory Committee, Councilor Elizabeth Peloza and Shawn Lewis, a good example of giving the organization the tools it will need to do its job in the future. Our advisory committees need a stronger policy to support them and better incorporate them into the processes much further upstream, at the source. Form meaningful relationships with citizen committees by allowing them to populate the agendas of standing committees. Standing committees wouldn’t be beholden to intake all projects, they’d remain structurally the same, however identifying use cases is the most critical step in my opinion. Put in writing a governance policy that will hold CoL accountable to the outcomes of these committees.

Realize aspects of an openness agenda through action like programs and initiatives that have verifiable and testable results. Borrow a framework like a typical Kaizen event:

• Set goals and provide any necessary background
• Review the current state and develop a plan for improvements
• Implement improvements
• Review and fix what doesn’t work
• Report results and determine any follow-up items

… Plan, Do, Check, and Act, a scientific approach to making improvements. Develop a hypothesis, run experiment, Check, Act… repeat. Cycling Advisory, Accessibility, etc. should be paired with SMEs and staff and have a written process that produces projects.

The Transportation Department will fix potholes without the help of a Council. If Transportation is struggling, and it concerns Council the remedies are service level agreements and detailed requirements and accountabilities. Council should get to work writing the requirements of a road itself, who’s it for, what are the use cases? What is the minimum viable product that accommodates all of the use cases? The bureaucracy, committees and council should engage at all phases and on all things just with varying degrees and clearer roles and responsibilities.

It’s in the CoL’s best interest to build a network of diverse urban leaders that gather to identify, discuss and distribute solutions in response to the challenges London faces. The City Council has the responsibility for the management core and objectives, while members are responsible for collaborating, bringing their expertise to projects and distributing the projects. Eventually we would build a series of projects and initiatives to support the objectives and showcase the innovation and creativity that is happening in communities across London. A series of successes and projects better received having been contributed too.

Austerity policies do more harm than good. No one is going to be inspired to live here based on a $200 property tax savings. Make the role of the committees more central to the city and enlist the support of the committees in planning the future of the city and not just approving or providing feedback on solutions. Identify areas for collaboration between committees and policy making, expand them and look for more opportunities to collect requirements from citizens. Don’t use public engagement to seek approval for solutions they haven’t contributed in asking for.

The objective of good leadership is to articulate and win support for a vision while building coalitions of stakeholders around that vision. I think it’s important that any vision be written as requirements, in an active voice, that it be traced to policy and outcomes. Requirements and policy must be testable and verifiable to measure their success.