Sustainable Development

Sustainable Development Strategy 1997

Safeguarding our Assets, Securing our Future

Additional indicators tabled in NRCan's annual
Departmental Performance Report, under the current Performance Measurement
Framework.

Goal 5, Objective 5.1

Employee satisfaction with NRCan management practices. Reported
in 1999-2000.

What Does the Graph Mean?

• In 1999, the Public Service Employee Survey was conducted
  in all federal departments and agencies. The graph shown above illustrates
  NRCan's employee response to that survey:
  • Balanced Workload is based upon questions 5 and 10;
  • Workload Issues is based upon questions 11 to 17;
  • Expectations is based upon questions 23 to 29;
  • Career Development is based upon questions 36 and 37.
• NRCan employees' response to Public Service Employee Survey
  questions about flexibility to balance personal, family and work
  needs, as well as their current work arrangements were overwhelmingly
  positive.
• Responses to survey questions concerning workload highlighted
  that employees believe their quality of work suffered because of
  constantly changing priorities, lack of stability, and having to
  do more with less. In NRCan, only 50% of employees responded that
  they considered their workload reasonable, which is below the public
  service average of 56%.
• Departmental employees generally agreed that they know what
  their supervisor expects of them in the job, that they are allowed
  to determine how the do their job, and that they get feedback on
  their job performance.
• While employees responded that they are allowed to take
  training for their job, only 54% of respondents agree that their
  immediate supervisor helps them to determine their learning needs.

NRCan's Contribution

• NRCan's primary goal was to use the Public Service Employee
  Survey to engage all employees in dialogue about their work environment.
• This survey complements three NRCan upward feedback surveys.
• Since November 1999, issues requiring action at the departmental
  level were identified. The issues are: workload, harassment and
  discrimination, career development and fairness and cynicism.
• NRCan's Deputy Minister is committed to sharing with his
  deputy ministerial colleagues, the work NRCan is doing in taking
  the Public Service Employee Survey from results into action. The
  Department's Public Service Employee Survey Champion is working
  closely with central agencies and other government departments to
  respond to the survey results requiring government wide support.

Next Steps

• NRCan will develop and implement an Integrated Management
  Agenda (IMA) in response to the issues surrounding workload. An
  IMA would encompass priority-setting and allocation of resources,
  two areas cited by employees as impacting on their quality of work.
• NRCan will continue to refine its "Guide to Good Management"
  to ensure the Department understands what are considered exemplary
  practices in all areas of management. Supervisors and managers throughout
  the Department will be encouraged to use this tool.
• NRCan is committed to continued implementation of its five-year
  Retention, Rejuvenation and Recruitment (3R) Strategy. The 3R Strategy
  places career development and succession planning at the forefront,
  by providing employees with necessary tools to advance career path
  and development.
• NRCan will continue to promote the benefits of alternative
  working arrangements to enhance employees' ability to balance
  their personal, family and work needs.

Goal 5, Objective 5.1

Progress towards maintaining and enhancing NRCan's program integrity.
Reported in 2000-01.

What Does the Graph Mean?

• NRCan's Canadian Forest Service, Earth Sciences Sector,
  Energy Sector and Minerals and Metals Sector were asked to identify
  anticipated levels of program demands over a five year period
• The graph indicates levels of S&T program activity that
  is projected to remain unchanged, areas that will see activities
  decreased or terminated, and program areas that are expected to
  have an increase in activities or will be new to the department.
• The graph indicates a bias towards an increase in present
  activities and new activities in each sector over the five year
  period.

NRCan's Contribution

• As part of an assessment of its ability to deliver its S&T
  programs, both currently, and those expected over the next 5 years,
  NRCan identified and fully costed* its current and anticipated S&T
  capacity gaps.
• This process required assessing anticipated levels of demand
  in all of its S&T program areas over the next 5 years.
• Scenario building such as this process is intended to lead
  to more strategic investment of S&T resources in order to maintain
  the integrity and effectiveness of the Department's S&T
  activities.

* i.e., including costing of requirements for accommodation, special
space needs, IT/IM, HR support etc.

Next Steps

• An extensive review and prioritisation of the Department's
  current and anticipated S&T gaps over the next five years will
  lead to the development of a long-term strategy to address the gaps.
  It will be aligned to other departmental initiatives, such the Long-Term
  Capital Plan (LTCP).
• In the longer term, this process will better position the
  Department for early identification of , and adjustment for, emerging
  S&T capacity issues in the future.

Goal 5, Objective 5.2

Implementation of recommendations of audits, evaluations, and other
studies of NRCan's management and operations. Reported in 2000-01.

What Does the Graph Mean?

• Results from audits, evaluations and other studies in the
  year 2000 made recommendations on 132 items that the department
  should address. The graph indicates that 65recommendations have
  been acted upon and been completed with an additional 23 recommendations
  in progress.
• In total 66% of the Audit and Evaluation Branch's
  (AEB) recommendations have been or are being implemented; the remainder
  have not yet been acted upon to date.
• The data presented above represents mostly audit results;
  given that most of the activities carried out by evaluation in the
  past year have focused primarily on activities that were not the
  subject of follow-up studies (e.g. development of Results- based
  Management and Accountability Frameworks).

NRCan's Contribution

• Delivery of programs and services is only part of NRCan's
  mission. Objective feedback on the quality, efficiency and effectiveness
  of service is also essential. Audit and Evaluation Branch (AEB)
  carries out audits, evaluations, risk assessments, performance studies,
  and a range of other services with departmental managers, other
  government departments and central agencies to help NRCan carry
  out its many programs.
• Follow-up studies are performed to ensure that recommendations
  made by AEB and the Office of the Auditor General are implemented,
  thus ensuring good governance. This is also a measure of AEB efficacy.

Next Steps

• NRCan is revising its performance indicator to reflect its
  activities and programs more closely and to align better with the
  new federal audit and evaluation policies and will will improve
  upon it current performance.
• NRCan is also applying for ISO 2000 and National Quality
  Institute certification, which require more rigorous follow-up of
  audits, evaluations and other types of studies. Thus future performance
  reporting will be based on more extensive performance information,
  including risk assessment, RMAF development, and other major AEB
  activities.