Now, this is interesting.
Team Wynne came to office with a promise to not look at any one issue in isolation from one another, because your new government believes that complex times require thoughtful, collaborative solutions.
Easier said than done, obviously - collaborative solutions tend not to reveal themselves through dedicated marketing campaigns, nor do partners necessarily have any interest in them. If I've learned anything from my journey through the GR/PR landscape, it's that stakeholders are focused on picking their own low-hanging fruit and the political interlocutors aren't interested in pitching shared strategies for multiple potential clients. In a competitive economy where resources are tight, there's not much incentive to work together.
Having said that, Wynne is right - the complex challenges facing our various sectors are connected. Like a sick patient, you can't fix Ontario's economy through drugs alone; the diet, exercise regimen and lifestyle all need revisted.
Our healthcare system is unsustainable; the backbone industries of our economic engine are atrophying or moving overseas; the people with the money aren't spending and those without feel more disenfranchised than ever. The two Opposition Parties, facing their own internal challenges, are sharks in the water, looking for any chance to tear a chunk out of the Liberal government's hide. Unions are digging their heels in; after the McGuinty battle with teachers and Hudak's insistence on gutting Unions permanently, folk like Sam Hammond and Sid Ryan are feeling surly.
The solutions we need are complex, but the ones we want to hear about are simple. The growing burden needs to be shared, but everyone feels they're already carrying enough of the load - someone else should take up the surplus. Oh - and nobody has sympathy for the politicians. Tales of expensed housing and DUIs without consequence have ensured that.
How does Wynne position herself, her team and her plan in such a way that they offer olive branches that have a bit more resonance than tanning beds the Opposition Parties (or their voters), engage stakeholders in collaborative ways, connect with the disenfranchised across Ontario, address economic and structural woes, present the Liberals as different (i.e. not as self-serving) as the rest - and do it all within an easy-to-communicate narrative?
Let's start with the brand. Every campaign needs a brand; something catchy that has multiple meanings and can link various parts of the plan together. What frame can be wrapped around healthcare reform, economic reform, youth engagement and private sector re-engagement in a clear, appealing way?
How about Work Smart Ontario?
What we're doing now isn't particularly smart - we're getting frustrated with systems designed in a by-gone age to address completely different social, economic, technological and demographic realities. Ontario doesn't need yet another coat of fresh paint - we need a systems overhaul.
Our healthcare system is actually a series of silos - not very smart and definitely not very efficient. Integrating the parts into a more seamless whole? That's smart. We also have a consumer-based culture of healthcare that views hospitals and drugs and the like as services and products; empowering people to have more direct ownership of their health and encouraging healthier lifestyles would help, too. It works for justice, too - and I do believe justice is in the headlines these days.
On that score - people spend more time at work/on the commute than anywhere else. If we're not as healthy as we could be, it stands to reason that work culture has something to do with it. Study after study backs that up - on the eve of the Knowledge Economy, we have a cognitive labour (productivity, innovation, so on and so forth) deficit. Not very clever.
Where are the best-case employment models that are empowering great work out of happy, healthy and engaged employees? They exist out there - there's a lot of great examples, actually; the problem is that nobody has take the time to map them out and connect the dots between best practices.
If government can highlight which employers are working and investing smarter instead of investing less and pushing their employees harder - if government were to create reward mechanisms for best practices and create standards to hold everyone to a new, cognitive labour minimum - it could nurture the right kind of growth without arbitrarily picking winners. Following the evidence-based results is pretty smart, too.
Speaking of the knowledge economy - are we properly preparing our youth (and newly unemployed or underemployed at all levels) with the savvy and skills they need to both do tomorrow's jobs, get hired and confidently navigate a changing employment landscape? Not really - not yet. But we could.
As part of a bold vision of modernized service delivery designed to reflect user patterns and the tools of tomorrow, the government could also rebrand training (the entire culture around learning) to ensure that more people are being reached and supported in the right way, with the right goal - strong individuals for a strong society.
Government doesn't need to pay for the whole thing; in fact, it would be much more effective were it to serve as stone in the soup. The funding government would put down or help connect for such a transition and its transmission would be based on collaborative models rather than the sector-focused, Labour vs. Management model of the Industrial Economy. In fact, if you want to talk about wins - there are emerging models of success out there right now government would just have to piggy-back on and presto, you've got your deliverables.
Many employers would hate this. Unions would really dislike it, which is why a clear communication plan needs to be articulated to them that isn't about driving wedges and picking fights, but outlining why shared solutions are the only way forward.
Change is painful, though - nobody is going to happily adjust their entire mode of operation to suite the whims of a passing Premier. Especially if that Premier isn't walking the walk herself.
Which is why, if Wynne is truly serious, she's got to set the example by implementing reform within her own Party, first.
There's been plenty of chatter over the years about empowering Riding Associations and providing better training to MPPs and staff around operational function. Now's the time to implement some serious reforms.
By creating an actual HR department and internalizing all the recommendations that have come out of countless occupational mental health studies, Wynne could demonstrate that she means business on work and workplace reforms. Not only does that make it harder for the Private Sector to push back and not tarnish their own brands - it also puts pressure on the Opposition Parties to shape up, too.
It's not easy to switch tracks; humans have an innate bias against creative solutions. It's far easier to dismiss new ideas as either unproven or not as reliable as horses and bayonets; instead of owing the failings of our own methodology we can simply blame others. But the Hudak Tories already have the corner on the do-the-same-thing-and-expect-different-results branding.
Team Wynne need to brand themselves as different than the others, different than what they were before but attuned to the needs of the present and ready with a plan to place Ontario at the head of the pack.
Ontario is a system - transit, the economy, healthcare, social service and crime prevention are all connected. You can't impact one without impacting the other; to develop sustainable solutions, you have to address them all. To get away with that, though, you have to communicate one clear message that resonates with all players at the table (and those that aren't).
The NDP don't really have a plan - the PCs are focused on cuts to spending and regulation, putting more cash into law and order to crack down on the inevitable fallout from this tried-and-failed approach. You don't have to spend less to be effective, of course - that's like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Cutting labour and services isn't the answer - working smarter is.
No comments:
Post a Comment