Management Response - Evaluation of PSIC’s Outreach and Engagement Strategy, Initiatives and Activities April 1, 2012 – March 31, 2015
| Recommendations* | Management Response | Timeline/Target |
|---|---|---|
| Overcome misperceptions that progress is not being made between cases by releasing more information about the Commissioner’s leadership, speaking opportunities by the Commissioner and staff, updates about new service standards, notices about website revamps, the number of exhibits attended, new pamphlets and promotional materials, etc. | The website information architecture (IA) dates back to October 2013. It is PSIC’s intention to update the IA in 2017/2018/2019. The ideas presented in this recommendation will be considered in the strategic considerations during its development. The new IA will also be audience tested to ensure its functionality. Given the sensitivities of its mandate, it is important to note that PSIC identifies and considers all strategic considerations when determining what information should be made public along with the appropriate level of profile required. | 2018-19 |
Plan Advisory Committee meetings that are longer in duration but less frequent, with guest presentations or new topics that offer learning opportunities. Consider making the meetings more of an event rather than a gathering to receive updates. This idea could be discussed at the next meeting to determine whether it resonates with Committee members. … get more involved in contributing to IDWG agenda items and making presentations, even if PSIC sits as an ex-officio member. This may include sharing research acquired through international or other networks, or reviewing a case report to discuss lessons learned. This idea could be discussed at the next meeting to determine whether it resonates with IDWG members. | This recommendation will be discussed with Advisory Committee members and the IDWG (Internal Disclosure Working Group). | 2017-18 |
The website might benefit from a section that identifies which key stakeholders that PSIC can help—for example, information for Senior Officers, information for managers, information for whistleblowers, information for complainants of reprisals, etc. As previously suggested, reorganizing the “Results” page. Consider reformatting the Tools menu. Currently, the Communication Material and Products page could benefit from the addition of subtitles to group/re-organize the materials. | As stated in the management response for the first recommendation, PSIC will update its IA and will take into careful consideration the direction provided in this recommendation in addition to other considerations. | 2018-19 |
Create a series of at-a-glance, one-page visual documents with brief, simple captions (or adapt from existing documents or visuals). These would help shed light on how PSIC fits into a bigger picture, rather than focus solely on PSIC. While it’s understood that this information may exist elsewhere, it is proposed that these one-page, highly-visual documents could resonate more with readers who like more images, less text. Possible themes or topics: Addressing confusion or explaining the difference between PSIC and other recourse mechanisms Describing examples of wrongdoing recognized by the Act versus examples of harassment, staffing issues and personal conflicts that are not recognized by the Act Expanding the “cards” that address factors for determining wrongdoing so there is a complete set Comparing/contrasting the roles of an Auditor General, Ombudsman and Commissioners Presenting some highlights of the Act as it pertains to protected disclosures of wrongdoing Presenting some highlights of the Act as it pertains to protection from reprisals | PSIC will take into consideration this recommendation when developing its annual initiatives plans. The development of many of these communication products will require collaboration with key stakeholders including: the Treasury Board Secretariat, Agents of Parliament and Unions. PSIC will engage with these stakeholders to gather interest in these items. | 2018-19 |
Can case reports be used as learning tools? Recognizing that the Act prevents certain details about investigations from being released publicly, there may still be opportunities to speak more generally about issues that risk becoming future complaints. Scenarios can be extracted from actual case studies to provide actual examples of how whistleblowers were protected during the investigation or referral to the Tribunal process. If there is a need for cultural change, what cultural challenges exist and how might they be overcome? In addition, summaries of the case reports could attract more skim readers. | PSIC management will consider increasing the number of case studies currently published on its website to include a lessons learned element from the Case Reports when possible/relevant. Of note: summaries for case reports were posted to the website mid-March 2017. This will be an ongoing practice. | 2017-18 |
| Budget for more videos that “humanize” the protected disclosure process. Consider addressing the question, “Why should you disclose?” to help change the whistleblowing culture to one that is more empowering and positive. | PSIC will consider the development of additional videos into its annual communications planning cycle. | |
| Anyone can edit Wikipedia. There are options to edit the page (tab at top) or edit the section (click “edit” in the section). It is recommended to google PSIC or the Act to see if there are any other open source entries that could be corrected or updated. | PSIC will review and edit Wikipedia accordingly. We had taken measures to edit Wikipedia prior to the change of policy. This policy now allows subject-matter-experts to provide input/corrections to entries that relate to them. | 2017-18 |
* Please note that the recommendations that appear in the first column have been abbreviated to the purpose of preparing the PSIC management response. The complete recommendations can be consulted in the full report.