Commission’s executive exchange program flatlines, for now

For the first time since 2004, the CRTC starts the new year without an industry executive working inside its walls under its executive interchange program, the commission says. The reason, analysts and industry insiders speculate, ranges from personal to political and economic to ethical. An extension of the Treasury Board’s “Interchange Canada” program, the CRTC executive exchange has involved placements for three private sector executives for fixed periods of time with the goal of sharing private and public sector knowledge to the benefit of the commission and its industry partners. In the seven years since its inception, three executives have served the commission in the program: Leonard Katz, from Jan. 2005 through October 2007, Robert Morin from April 2007 through April 2011, and Ian Scott from October 2007 through September 2008. But today the program appears to lie fallow, and there are no plans to use it anytime soon, CRTC spokeswoman Patricia Valladao told The Wire Report in the fall. “e have no current Interchange participants but we support goals of this program and we will use it based on requirements and timing,” Valladao wrote in a Sept. 19 email to The Wire Report. When asked at the time if the commission had any exchanges planned, Valladao said, “no.” CRTC staff later confirmed this was still the case on Jan. 5. Insiders and analysts suggest a number of factors may be causing industry players and commission staff to hold some reservations about the program. “There are certainly issues that you have to pay attention to,” Sheridan Scott, a partner at Bennett Jones LLP and former head of the Competition Bureau, said in an interview. One of those issues is finding commission roles for industry players without creating a conflict of interest, Scott said (she is no relation to the program’s former participant, Ian Scott). As an issue for any public service department running private-sector exchange programs, avoiding potential conflicts is a difficult line to walk for the CRTC, David Elder, a communications lawyer at Stikeman Elliott LLP in Ottawa, said. “One of the obvious things is to make sure that you never have to touch anything that has to do with your company or the competitors of your company,” Elder said in an interview. “As companies become more consolidated and more vertically and horizontally integrated, it becomes a challenge to find anything to work on,” he said. A CBC News story in October 2010 highlighted a potential source of conflict within the commission’s program. Ian Scott was listed as a lobbyist for his private sector employer, Telus Communications Co., as he served as a telecom adviser to CRTC chair Konrad von Finckenstein. Ian Scott told the CBC that he had not lobbied the commission since joining the interchange program and that he left his name on the list of registered lobbyists to avoid any impression he was trying to hide something. Elder said the perception that an executive from one telco could hold a privileged position at the commission probably wouldn't sit well with either the public or competing companies. He said a participating executive might also have access to confidential competitive information. “If you’re exposed to detailed information, and the commission obviously has a lot of confidential information about different companies, I think there’s a real concern,” he said. But with strict ethical guidelines in place and proper mechanisms to ensure conflicts don’t happen, Elder and Scott said the CRTC’s interchange program is a good idea. “The public and private sectors have lots to learn from each other,” Scott said. “I see huge value in trying to persuade people who work in the private sector to come and spend some time in the public sector and vice-versa.” Scott said she used the program to tap into industry perspectives during her time at the helm of the Competition Bureau. She noted it wasn’t always easy to attract skilled private sector employees into the public field. “It’s a huge sacrifice,” she said of the decision to enter a government interchange program. At the very least, she said, joining the program removes someone from their job for a year or longer. That can also leave employees and employers in a difficult position as the company needs to fill the employee’s previous role while they are gone and can’t necessarily ensure the employee can return to the same position when the exchange ends, one industry insider said. “Part of that is a reflection of the competitive environment we find ourselves in ,” the insider, who asked not to be named, said. “If there’s a job that needs to be done, someone’s doing it.” At the same time, the company employee taking part in the exchange is removed from corporate culture and may worry about losing internal career opportunities. “It’s not just a simple, 'Do we get enough value out of it to make it worthwhile on the investment?'” the industry source said. “It’s, 'Can we manage the personal career aspirations of folks who want to take on something like that?'” For company officials from outside Ottawa, an exchange program can also mean leaving their home or even their family. “Most of our industrial bases are outside of Ottawa, so if you’re looking for people who are working in the private sector, you’re probably looking in Toronto, Montreal, Calgary, or Vancouver,” Sheridan Scott said. “Not everybody wants to move to Ottawa.” Elder said shrewd private sector employees can gain a lot from the sacrifice of an exchange, adding that it can be an invaluable experience to get a better understanding of “how the sausage is made.” This can also make private sector employees more valuable to their employers, he said. “Anytime you can walk in somebody else’s shoes, I think that’s valuable.” nkyonka@thewirereport.ca

Commission’s executive exchange program flatlines, for now

News | 01/06/2012 5:15 pm EST

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us