Appel de candidatures – Membres du Conseil d’administration de l’AIP2 Canada

Soyez un leader de la P2 : joignez-vous au Conseil d’administration de l’AIP2 Canada!

Soyez un leader de la P2 : joignez-vous au Conseil d’administration de l’AIP2 Canada!

Le comité de nominations de l’AIP2 Canada est à la recherche de membres pour pourvoir quatre postes lors de l’élection de 2019. La durée de chaque poste est de trois ans à compter du 1er septembre 2019.

Ce que nous recherchons

L’AIP2 Canada cherche à constituer et à maintenir un Conseil d’administration composé de leaders engagés à s’unir pour une meilleure prise de décisions.

Nous recherchons des personnes qui possèdent des points de vue et des expériences diversifiés, qui démontrent une bonne compréhension des normes de gouvernance et qui ont une vaste expérience dans les domaines liés au plan stratégique 2018-2020 de l’AIP2 Canada (en anglais). Les candidats potentiels seront évalués en fonction d’une liste d’attributs et d’expérience souhaités dans divers domaines ciblés par le Conseil comme étant prioritaires pour les années à venir.

Le comité de nominations passera en revue toutes les demandes de candidature et basera son choix sur les critères définis pour le mandat du Conseil.

Les administrateurs devront consacrer environ six (6) heures par mois aux activités liées à la préparation et à la participation aux réunions du Conseil, et devront assurer la liaison entre le Conseil et divers comités ou groupes de travail.

Prochaines étapes

Voici votre chance de participer à l’orientation de l’AIP2 Canada, à la mise en œuvre du plan stratégique et à l’avenir de notre organisation! La période de nominations est en cours et se terminera le 10 mai. Tous les membres en règle peuvent présenter leur candidature.

Vous pouvez nommer une personne ou proposer votre propre candidature. Nous recherchons principalement des candidats possédant des qualifications ou une expérience dans les domaines suivants :

  • Création et consolidation de partenariats stratégiques
  • Gestion financière et production de revenus
  • Gouvernance d’organismes à but non lucratif
  • Expérience au sein d’organisations bilingues
  • Expérience en matière de participation autochtone
  • Représenter la jeunesse de façon aisée et confiante
  • Élaboration, mise en œuvre et gestion du rendement de plans stratégiques
  • Gestion du changement

Formulaire de nomination – (en anglais)

Trousse de nomination (comprend une description du processus d’élection)

Description de tâches – Membres bénévoles du Conseil d’administration

Nous avons actuellement quatre postes à combler; si nous obtenons plus de quatre candidatures, une élection en ligne sera organisée.

Préparez-vous à prendre de meilleures décisions ensemble!

Pour obtenir de plus amples renseignements, veuillez consulter le site Web.

Call for IAP2 Canada Board Members

Header image - Be a leader in P2: Call for IAP2 Canada Board Members

Be a Leader in P2: Stand for the IAP2 Canada Board!

The IAP2 Canada Nominations Committee is seeking members to fill four board positions in the 2019 election. Each position is for a three-year term, beginning on September 1, 2019.

What we’re looking for

IAP2 Canada seeks to build and maintain a board comprised of leaders committed to inspiring better decisions together.

We are looking for individuals who reflect diversity of thought, background and experience, demonstrate an understanding of governance norms, and who have significant experience in IAP2 Canada’s 2018-2020 Strategic Plan. Prospective candidates will be assessed against a list of desired director attributes and experience in the areas the Board wants to strengthen in the coming years.

The Nominations Committee will review all applications and identify applicants based on criteria needed for the Board term.

Directors may spend up to 6 hours a month in preparation for, and attendance at, meetings as well as act as committee and task force liaisons.

Next Steps

Here is your chance to help steer IAP2 Canada, implement the current Strategic Plan, and chart the future course! The nomination period is on now through May 10, and any member in good standing may apply.

You can nominate a person or self-nominate, and in particular, we need people with the following skills:

  • Building and leveraging strategic partnerships
  • Financial management and revenue generation
  • Non-Profit Governance
  • Experience with bilingual organizations
  • Experience with Indigenous inclusion
  • Comfortable and confident in representing youth
  • Development, implementation and performance management of strategic plans
  • Change management

Nominations Form

Nominations Package includes Election Process

Board Director Volunteer Description

There are currently four positions open, and if we get more than four applications, there will be an online election.

Get ready to inspire better decisions together!

For more information visit the website

IAP2 Canada Board Elections ; Élection des membres du conseil d’administration de l’AIP2 Canada

PICTURE THIS: Whom do you see on the IAP2 Canada Board?

It’s a huge sign of the growth of IAP2 Canada: so many people, wanting to get involved in its plans – present and future! The election period will run from now through June 5, so, IAP2 Canada members, watch your inbox for an invitation from Election Buddy.

So who is in the race? Fourteen people have thrown their hats in the ring to serve on the Board from 2018-2021 — but there are only six seats available. So it’s up to you to choose, and we are pleased to introduce you to …

IMAGINEZ UN PEU : Qui verriez-vous pour siéger au conseil d’administration de l’AIP2 Canada?

Avec tant de personnes qui souhaitent s’impliquer dans ses projets, actuels et futurs, c’est un signe incontestable de la croissance que connaît l’AIP2 Canada! La période de mise en nomination commence dès maintenant et prendra fin le 5 juin, et nous invitons tous les membres de l’AIP2 Canada à surveiller l’invitation qu’ils recevront par courriel de la part d’Election Buddy.

Alors, qui est en lice? Quatorze personnes se sont lancées dans la course pour siéger au conseil de 2018 à 2021 – mais seulement six sièges sont disponibles. C’est donc à vous de faire un choix, et nous sommes très heureux de vous présenter…

Rose Bilou
Rose Bilou – Alberta
Suncor, Senior Advisor, Stakeholder & Aboriginal Relations
Kristen Farrell
Kristen Farrell – Ontario
Canadian Tire Financial Services

Chrystal Fuller – Nova Scotia
Principal – Brighter Community Planning and Consulting and Consulting
Drew Ferrari
Drew Ferrari – BC
TransLink- Senior Advisor, Government & Public Affairs
Bruce Gilbert
Bruce Gilbert – Newfoundland
Chief of Staff, NL NDP Caucus
Rose Bilou
Susan Harrison – Ontario
Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO), Supervisor, Regional & Community Engagement
Eileen McCord
Eileen McCord – Alberta
Sr Advisor, Stakeholder Relations, Communica Public Affairs
Catherine Rockandel
Catherine Rockandel – BC
Rockandel & Associates, public engagement specialist & process facilitator
Dominic Savio
Dominic Savio – Saskatchewan
SaskPower – Director
Michelle Snow
Michelle Snow – Newfoundland
Director, Public Engagement, Government of Newfoundland Labrador
Shiona Sommerville
Shiona Sommerville – USA-Mass
Program on Negotiation, Harvard Law School, Project Manager
Anila Sunnak
Anila Sunnak – Ontario
The Canadian Partnership Against Cancer
Mark Szabo
Mark Szabo – Alberta
Szabo+Partners, Principal
Ellis Westwood
Ellis Westwood – Ontario
Senior Director and Deputy Group Leaders, Public Engagement, Hill+Knowlton Strategies

President’s Message – March 2017

P2 and the Global ‘Open Government’ Movement: Connections and Opportunities

Open Government and the Emergence of Open Dialogue

Bruce Gilbert PhD
Bruce Gilbert, IAP2 Canada President

The term Open Government means different things to different people. Its meaning has also evolved over time. Initially, particularly in the 1980s when the push for what would become Freedom of Information legislation was gaining strength across western democracies, the term was used as a type of synonym for government transparency and accountability.

In those days, not unlike today, the term was aspirational in nature. It envisioned modern and progressive ‘open’ governments that would intentionally and freely share information on government activities including decision-making. Such open governments would no longer hide or hoard information – rather they would proactively share it, in a timely and transparent manner, to establish with voters/citizens that they were indeed accountable to them.

Over time, partially due to technological innovations, the idea of Open Government expanded to also include the concept of proactively sharing government data sets. The terms Open Information and Open Data soon found their way into the public administration lexicon.

The idea that governments should make their data sets freely available to the public – and to do so in machine-readable formats and without significant cost to users – became the new Open Government frontier. Open Data approaches, challenges, and technologies soon dominated most conversations about Open Government, although interest in Open Information also remained strong. Around this time, additional ideas about the true meaning of Open Government started to emerge or grow. Although always somewhat implicit in many definitions of ‘government openness’, the idea that ‘open governments’ were also ‘engaging and collaborative governments’ started to gain strength.

US President Obama’s 2009 Open Government Directive – seen by some as the initiative that established the standard for government openness around the globe, and which certainly propelled the Open Government movement forward, established that openness was about more than data and information dissemination when it described how governments needed to be ‘transparent, participatory and collaborative’. The 2011 Open Government Declaration of the Open Government Partnership – an international entity for government reformers committed to open governments and which now has 75 national members including Canada – clearly supports this expanded interpretation of openness when it calls for ‘greater civic participation in public affairs’ and outlines how open governments need to ‘empower citizens’.

With such developments, the term Open Dialogue (or Dialogue) joined the terms Open Information and Open Data in the discourse about Open Government. Open Government became referred to as a ‘three-legged stool’ with Dialogue being described as an essential leg. Today, some interpret the Open Dialogue term literally (i.e., an open government is one that engages in dialogue-based activities with its citizens). Some others, like me, interpret it more broadly (i.e., an open government is one that engages with citizens, and collaborates with stakeholder groups and interests, using any/all tools, technologies, methods, and approaches, including dialogue-based ones, considered appropriate and which are aligned with widely-accepted P2 (think: IAP2) values and standards). Put another way, P2 IS the third leg of the Open Government stool.

What has this got to do with us as P2 practitioners (or with IAP2)?

  • Open Government is a global movement and it is here to stay;
  • Many of the high-level goals of the Open Government movement are squarely aligned with those of the P2 movement including: informed, aware, and engaged citizens; enhanced and accountable government decision-making; community empowerment; inclusion, equity, and justice; and participatory democracy;
  • A major dimension of Open Government – indeed one of its three key ‘pillars’ – relates directly to our work; IAP2 holds a tremendous amount of expertise on all things related to P2 including those involving: dialogue; stakeholder, community, and citizen engagement; and collaboration involving civil society, business/industry, academic and government entities;
  • Our expertise in P2 is also directly relevant to the Open Data and Open Information pillars of Open Government; this is because data and information disclosure efforts are meant to be responsive to citizen, community and stakeholder needs and interests, and this requires appropriate P2 interventions;
  • We can help the global Open Government movement; many of us are involved now, but more is possible; people active in that movement, from both within government (public servants) and outside of government (civil society leaders), can benefit from our knowledge, skill, and experience;
  • We need more government people to join IAP2 (especially those in senior roles given so few are currently members); a huge amount of our collective P2 work directly or indirectly involves governments; government people have a lot to teach us about P2 and Open Government; all of us can all benefit from enhanced cross-sector learning, sharing, and networking.

What does this have to do with you?

Take the time to tell/remind your colleagues, friends, and family members who work in governments about the IAP2. Ask them to join us as members. When giving them your 30-second ‘elevator pitch’, use the term ‘Open Government’. Remind them that IAP2 and its members have important expertise that is directly related to one of the three pillars of the Open Government movement. Tell them about the many learning, networking, and skill-building opportunities available to them via IAP2. Tell them we need them. Don’t forget to tell them how much fun we are to be around.

President’s message – Oct. 2017

Post-Conference Ruminations

bruce
Bruce Gilbert, IAP2 President

According to participant evaluations from the recent Montreal IAP2 conference most attendees thought the event was a tremendous success. They described it as worthwhile, educational, fun, refreshing and well-organized. I am one of those people. I loved the event. It had a vibe that is difficult to describe or explain. Somehow it felt comfortable and safe while being challenging and daring at the same time. Kudos once again to the organizers who made it all possible.

What I most liked about the conference was that it allowed me to rub shoulders with people different from me. It exposed me to new ideas. It forced me to reflect upon my practice and to question some of my assumptions about P2. It pushed me out of my comfort zone and caused some vague foggy ideas about P2 floating around in my mind to come into focus. With this in mind, below I ruminate on two of my key insights or learnings from the conference. Each is worthy of considerable discussion and debate. Who knows – one or both might even make for an interesting if not raucous future webinar or conference session?

Social movements are important manifestations of P2, but do we care enough about them?

Effective public participation does not always rely on convenors, P2 professionals and organized P2 activities. As case studies from Quebec reminded me, sometimes citizens can just decide that its time to participate. They don’t wait for any decision-maker to invite them to any carefully organized table. They don’t need or want to be facilitated or managed by P2 professionals, although movement organizers can usually be found working behind-the-scenes. In such instances, citizens demand to have a seat at the decision-making table often to the chagrin of decision-makers.

Social movements that bubble up from the grassroots may be messy for some, but they are also important. They demonstrate participatory democracy-in-action. They make change happen. They give people hope and remind them of their responsibilities as citizens. Some practitioners may consider such movements to be ‘outside’ of our well-established professional ‘P2 framing’. I think it is, or should be, framed ‘inside’. Indeed, I think this dimension of grassroots civic participation gets short shrift in our P2 practitioner world.

Some questions I would like us to consider and hopefully discuss in this regard are: Is there a role for professional P2 practitioners in social movements? If yes, how and where can/should we get involved? What is the role of the P2 practitioner when decision-makers ‘brush off’ the empowered and advancing publics? Do we lose credibility among those with the resources to pay us – such as government decision-makers – when we work to support social movements that challenge the status quo (and which often do not have resources to pay us)? Doesn’t our own ‘need to earn a living’ put us on the side of the status quo, and if yes are we happy there? How can we make our skills and abilities available to those who need support but cannot afford to pay?

Decision-makers are important to P2, but where are they?

A big part of any P2 practitioner’s job is to find effective ways to connect the views, ideas and insights of the public (citizens and/or stakeholder groups/interests) with decision-makers. As such, practitioners often serve as brokers or mediators between two groups (i.e., those with something to say and those who decide things). In my view we spend most of our P2 practitioner time talking about how to engage the former not the latter. Clearly, most of our P2 focus is on tools, techniques and approaches for engaging the public.

But what about the decision-makers? Aren’t they – particularly the senior ones – absolutely essential for effective P2? Don’t they also need to be sold on and fully supportive of P2 for it to be meaningful and effective? If they are actually the beneficiaries of P2, as we so often state, why aren’t they more enthused about P2? Why are so few of them members of IAP2? Why were so few at the conference? Why are P2 budgets so often the first to get cut in times of corporate or government restraint? Do senior executive and politicians really care about P2, or are they just doing enough to get by?

In my view, we need to urgently engage decision-makers at the highest levels in a dialogue about P2 with emphasis on its value to them, their organization, society and democracy. But when we do this we will also need to be honest with them bout the limits of P2. We will need to acknowledge that P2 is not the solution to every problem. We will need to be prepared to hear that P2 can cause problems for decision-makers especially when wildly divergent public views on a topic ensure that at least some forces will become hostile to the decision-makers once a decision on a matter is finally taken.

When it comes to government decision-makers, we will need to be ready to discuss how the somewhat uneasy ‘mash-up’ of representative and participatory democracy unfolding in Western societies since the 60s has caused and is causing problems for some (many?) elected officials. Simply put, most politicians see their role as ‘representing, advocating and speaking for their constituents’. As such, for some elected officials at least, P2 can be seen as a threat. Some believe that their role is diminished or lessened when outside P2 professionals arrive to gather input from the people (“Hey – that’s my job!”). In their eyes, an uninvited P2 participatory democracy ‘guest’ has ‘barged into’ the traditional and well-established representative democracy system that they actually signed up for.

Suffice to say, there are some skeptical decision-makers out there and we need to talk to them. We need to help them understand how P2 does not demand a weakened role for them, but rather requires that politicians play a more mature and facilitative role. If we do our job well, and help them to develop the skills they will need in their new roles, many will likely be delighted to discover that decision-makers who champion effective P2 also often do extremely well on voting day.

Thanks for your time! Reactions, counterpoints, rants and comedic-responses all gratefully accepted!

Sincerely,

Bruce

President’s Message – July 2016

bruce
Bruce Gilbert, IAP2 President

Dear Colleagues and Friends

I hope you are now enjoying the well-deserved and long-awaited balmy days of summer in your respective corner of our amazing country. Suffice to say that now is not likely the best time to capture the attention of busy people with a lengthy summer Message about P2 matters. With this in mind I would like to use my brief opportunity here to say three things:

  1. Welcome aboard to the new Directors and Deputy Directors who have recently joined the IAP2 Canada Board. Thank you for stepping forward to become part of the leadership team for this important P2 organization. We’re pleased to welcome Jorge Avilès, Sarah Rivest and Michael Waters to the Board, along with new Deputy Directors Morgan Boyco, Kristen Farrell and Dhurata Ikonomi. Thank you also to the returning Directors and Deputy Directors: Jan Bloomfield, Hugo Mimee, Amanda Mitchell, Brenda Pichette, Noreen Rude and Ashleigh Weeden, and Deputy Director David Turner. Their particular responsibilities will be announced in September.

IAP2 Canada is a flourishing, creative and productive entity only because people like you have offered up your skills, knowledge, experience and elbow-grease for the P2 cause.

2. The 2016 IAP2 North American Conference (Who Cares About Public Participation?) being held in Montréal is now sold out. Congratulations to the organizing committee members for making this a reality. Thank you for your dedication and hard work especially since some of you will likely need to continue working on this event over the summer months when your friends are at the lake, the park or with their families. We clearly owe you. You have also at least partially answered the conference theme-question noted above – it’s obvious that you care a lot.

3. 2016-17 promises to be another very busy year for IAP2 Canada. Rest up and get ready to become involved with one or more of our projects, activities, committees or communities-of-practice in the fall. We are an organization that almost completely relies on the efforts of our member-volunteers. We need you.

Enjoy your summer!

Cheers,

Bruce

From the Board, Sept. 2015 — Amanda Mitchell

AMANDA MITCHELL-2Whenever I go to a conference, I have a rule: if I can learn five new things or meet five interesting people then it was a success. By that criterion, the IAP2 North American Conference in Portland was a definite success story. Here are my top 5 highlights.

  1. The people. The best thing about IAP2 conferences is being in the same place as fellow practitioners, making new friends and meeting old. It was a pleasure to finally meet in person so many people who I talk to regularly on the phone – including members of the IAP2 Canada Board and the municipal P2 practitioner’s community of practice.
  1. Hearing about innovations in the field, like Toronto exploring Mindcraft for public consultations, Montreal’s experimentations with augmented reality and Portland’s new map app.
  1. Having the space to reflect. During the IAP2 Spectrum at 25 workshop we had a frank conversation about the strengths and weaknesses of the spectrum, which will ultimately help to advance the practice.
  1. Canada House! The IAP2 Canada board held a Canadian-themed house party complete with Hawkins Cheesies, ketchup chips and Timbits which allowed people to connect in a relaxed environment.
  1. Portland. With its ambitious cycling infrastructure, light rail lines, food carts, craft breweries, and ping pong tables in public parks, exploring what makes Portland weird is never boring.

Thank you to the IAP2 USA and the Cascade Chapter for organizing the conference. I left Portland feeling recommitted to my practice. Next year, I hope you can join us in Montreal. The organizing team is hard at work and you’re sure to get more than five things out of it.

What 5 things did you get out of the North American Conference? Comment on this blog and let us know!