Lessons Learned from the Consolidation of DND/CAF Staff ... · Goss Gilroy Inc. (GGI) was hired by...

UNCLASSIFIED / NON CLASSIFIÉ

Prepared by: Goss Gilroy Inc. Management Consultants Suite 900, 150 Metcalfe Street Ottawa, ON K2P 1P1 Tel: 613-230-5577 Fax: 613-235-9592 Email: [email protected]

Date: March 19, 2019

Lessons Learned from the Consolidation of DND/CAF Staff through the Carling Campus Initiative

mailto:[email protected]


Lessons Learned from the Consolidation of DND/CAF Staff through the Carling Campus Initiative i

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ............................................................................................. i

Acknowledgements ........................................................................................ ii

1.0 Introduction .......................................................................................... 1

1.1 Objective of the study .......................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Methodology ........................................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 Background and Context ....................................................................... 3

2.1 The issue ................................................................................................................................................... 3

2.2 The initiative ........................................................................................................................................... 3

2.3 Context....................................................................................................................................................... 4

2.4 Project delivery of refit and relocation projects ...................................................................... 5

3.0 Lessons Learned .................................................................................... 9

3.1 Governance and oversight ............................................................................................................... 10

3.2 Funding and approvals ..................................................................................................................... 12

3.3 Change management ......................................................................................................................... 14

3.4 Relationship management............................................................................................................... 16

3.5 Outcomes management .................................................................................................................... 17

3.6 Project management .......................................................................................................................... 19

4.0 Conclusions ............................................................................................. 23

List of Acronyms ........................................................................................... 24

Appendix A: Methodology for the Study of Lessons Learned......................... 25


Lessons Learned from the Consolidation of DND/CAF Staff through the Carling Campus Initiative ii

Acknowledgements

This study was undertaken by a team of 4 consultants, all of whom brought a unique and valued

contribution. Goss Gilroy Inc. would like to thank these team members, including Sandy Moir,

James Hamilton, Laura Conroy and Marianne Corriveau.

The study team would also like to thank Public Services and Procurement Canada, the Department

of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces, Shared Services Canada, Treasury Board

Secretariat of Canada and Brookfield Global Integrated Solutions who supported our work

throughout the assignment.

Of course, no study of this kind can be undertaken without the generosity of those who

participated in interviews and workshops. Many of those we consulted for the study were asked

to provide additional documents, clarification and participate in the validation of the findings. We

thank them for their insights and commitment to continuous improvement in their organizations

and the Government of Canada as a whole.


Lessons Learned from the Consolidation of DND/CAF Staff through the Carling Campus Initiative 1

1.0 Introduction

Goss Gilroy Inc. (GGI) was hired by the Office of the Chief Audit Executive at Public Services and

Procurement Canada (PSPC) to undertake a Study of Lessons Learned from the Consolidation of the

Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces (DND/CAF) staff as part of the joint

PSPC-DND/CAF Carling Campus initiative. The study was undertaken to inform other current and

future large scale transformation initiatives that will rely on infrastructure as a lever to drive change.

As such, PSPC would like to thank its partners that participated in this study such that PSPC can benefit

from these lessons learned for future initiatives.

This study was launched in late February 2018 and data collection was completed in September 2018.

1.1 Objective of the study The objective of the study was to gather lessons learned related to the management of the initiative

from 2010 (or acquisition of Carling Campus) until present day.1 This involved capturing stakeholder

perspectives on what did and did not go well throughout the planning and ongoing implementation of

the initiative. The lessons learned study included how the work of PSPC, Shared Services Canada

(SSC), DND/CAF, as well as Treasury Board Secretariat, impacted the overall success of the joint

management of the initiative. The study considered the overall contextual factors influencing the scope

of the initiative which includes being a large, complex, multi-year assignment with changing

requirements.

1.2 Methodology Based on a planning phase that included key informant interviews and a review of documents, GGI

designed and implemented a methodology that included a series of interviews and a half-day

workshop. We also consulted and reviewed many different documents from a variety of sources.

Appendix A provides more details regarding the methodology for the study.

During the examination phase, every effort was made to obtain the views of all relevant stakeholders.

Public servants from PSPC, DND/CAF, SSC and Treasury Board Secretariat were consulted. The study

design sought representation of public servants at all levels of the organization, including employees,

managers and executives. We also consulted many from outside of government including

representatives of private sector entities involved in the initiative (vendors and consultants). In all, we

spoke with almost 30 individuals with varying degrees of responsibilities related to the initiative.

1 This includes the relocation of the first wave of DND/CAF employees in January 2017 and the ongoing monitoring activities that are currently in place



To conduct the analysis, the study team met several times to discuss and consolidate the main findings

and identify the lessons learned. All the lessons contained in this report are based on the consultations

and supported with the team’s knowledge of leading practices in these areas. It was critical for the

study to validate the views and opinions of respondents. We did this in three ways.

1) We tested and validated concepts from documents, interviews and a workshop.

2) As we synthesized and reviewed the results, we sought out areas of agreement and

disagreement and identified where opinions were held by many or a few or by only certain

types of participants. Any areas of disagreement or confusion were followed up with additional

validation through a review of documents and judgment based on our professional expertise

and experience. Also during the analysis of the evidence, the team brought their considerable

and varied experiences to help interpret what we heard and to apply known leading practices.

3) We shared preliminary findings with the project’s Director General Interdepartmental Steering

Committee (DGISC) and the Senior Project Advisory Committee (SPAC).



2.0 Background and Context

2.1 The issue The 2008 DND/CAF Accommodation Strategy stated a clear desire to consolidate DND/CAF’s strategic

and administration functions. DND/CAF personnel have been distributed in many locations across the

National Capital Area (NCA), mainly leased commercial space. These locations have been costly to

lease, refit, secure and renew on a recurring basis. To address this strategic objective and these

inefficiencies, in 2008, the Government began evaluating sites for the purpose of consolidating

DND/CAF operations in the NCA. In 2010, the auction of the Carling Campus, the former headquarters

of Nortel, presented Public Works and Government Services Canada (now PSPC) with an exceptional

real estate opportunity to purchase a facility that represented considerable value for money for

Canada.

Once the Carling Campus was purchased, PSPC began working with the DND/CAF and SSC on

consolidating a large part of the DND/CAF’s headquarters operations at the Carling Campus. An

undertaking of this scope presented a number of unique challenges. Though some of these were

anticipated and their related risks mitigated for the Carling Campus initiative, others were

unanticipated and have resulted in both delays and additional projects costs.2

2.2 The initiative The infrastructure aspects of the initiative, which consists most significantly of the refit of the Carling

Campus and consolidation and relocation of DND/CAF personnel at Carling Campus (referred to in this

report as the ‘refit and relocation project’), is expected to generate savings for Canadian taxpayers as

well as an increase in the operational efficiency of DND/CAF operations. The consolidation will see

DND/CAF move from over 47 offices to approximately 7 major locations in the NCA, which is expected

to produce $750 million in net savings in accommodations costs over a 25 year period, plus an

additional $160 million for DND/CAF in cost avoidance. These savings are based on the reduction of

higher cost leased accommodation in the Ottawa downtown core occasioned by the movement to a

crown-owned suburban location. This major refit and relocation project represents one of the largest

office consolidations in Canadian history. 3 The infrastructure aspects of the initiative also include GC

Workplace 2.0 accommodation standards and a modern work environment, as well as provide an

opportunity to better leverage new technologies and new Information Management/Knowledge

Management policies and practices.

2 Proservices RFP nº 10057755 3 Proservices RFP nº 10057755



The initiative served as a catalyst for DND/CAF to reconsider its use of infrastructure as a lever to

operate in better alignment with and contribute to the achievement of its Defence Priorities and

Strategic Outcomes. These included a new security and strategic environment with new

organizational structures, renewed governance model, new business practices, and new HR policies,

which were driven by other initiatives such as the Security Review Initiative and the Defence Renewal

Initiative.

The Carling Campus initiative was also viewed as an opportunity to contribute to tri-partite objectives

(between PSPC, DND/CAF and SSC) of “streamlining project planning, implementation and

operations”, in a manner consistent with the GC’s objective to “utilize sustainable development

initiatives to the Departments’ maximum fiscal and cultural advantage.”4

As noted, the initiative consists primarily of a number of refit and relocation projects to be delivered in

three phases. The infrastructure aspects of the initiative and the refit and relocation projects are

included in the scope of this engagement. The Security Review and Defence Renewal Initiatives were

not included in the scope of this engagement.

2.3 Context

The opportunity In 2010, the Government of Canada (GC) (through PSPC, then known as PWGSC) was presented with

the opportunity to purchase the former Nortel Carling Campus located at 3500 Carling Avenue,

Ottawa, Ontario. On November 18, 2010, the Treasury Board approved the acquisition of Carling

Campus from Nortel Networks Technology Corporation and Nortel Networks Limited, which was

effectively purchased on December 17, 2010. Three years later on December 12, 2013, PSPC, DND/CAF

and SSC presented a joint request for the approval of planning, design and implementation authorities

to launch the Carling Campus Initiative.

The Carling Campus opportunity came at a time when PWGSC (now PSPC) had been evaluating sites to

support DND/CAF’s identified need to undergo a transformation in terms of its use of space and

resources within the NCA. While the DND/CAF’s existing 40 plus locations were in the

Ottawa/Gatineau core and thus closer to Parliament and to Other Government Departments, and made

it easier to employ staff from Quebec and Ontario, the 40 plus locations were leased at capacity,

presenting expansion challenges, and were costly to operate.5

As well, DND/CAF was dissatisfied with how their employees located in Ottawa-Gatineau were

fractioned and how this negatively impacted the department’s horizontal integration, efficiency and

decision-making ability. For DND/CAF, the transformation initiative was driven by a need for

4 PSPC (2013). Project Charter. Carling Campus Project. Page 2. 5 CCP Presentation to SPAC, July 4, 2018. Slide 5.



increased quality and speed of decision-making, a need for increased intra-departmental collaboration

and organizational effectiveness.

The initiative allowed the consolidation and relocation of at least one third of DND/CAF full time

equivalents in the NCA – a number then estimated at 8,500 employees – from numerous downtown

core locations (from over 40 across the NCA) to a single suburban campus. The move was expected to

start in December 2015 and to be completed by June 2019. The initiative also included change-

management support to impacted DND/CAF staff. In its end state, the Carling Campus workspace will

conform with Workplace 2.0 combined with modern IT infrastructure and security features.

2.4 Project delivery of refit and relocation projects

Roles of key players The Project charter, which covered the refit and relocation projects that form part of the infrastructure

aspect of the Carling Campus initiative, as well as other documentation (such as the DND/CAF

Performance Measurement Plan) define the roles of the three main departments, PSPC, DND/CAF and

SSC, as follows:

PSCP is the “mandated custodian of the Campus and the Single Project Authority, accountable to

Treasury Board for project delivery.”

DND/CAF is the “tenant of the buildings and grounds, responsible for the definition of

requirements, and remains accountable for the information technology infrastructure within the

DND/CAF legislative mandate.” DND/CAF is also responsible for the physical security of the site.

SSC is the “provider of information technology infrastructure services within the SSC legislative

mandate to support National Defence’s business operations.”

Implementation details The three priorities identified in the project charter were cost, time and scope. The charter also

highlighted a number of anticipated challenges relating to the significant scope and scale of the

initiative, procurement timeframes, design and construction security protocols, the differences in

departmental motivators of the parties involved (PSPC, SSC, DND/CAF), and departmental initiative

requirement implementation interdependencies.6 The Project Charter identified a governance

structure, financial structure (including cost-sharing principles), and other considerations about

management approach, dispute resolution mechanisms, requirements and solutions, security

requirements, a communication strategy, reporting mechanisms, and processes for project charter

updates.

6 PSPC (2013). Project Charter. Carling Campus Project. Page 5-6.



PSPC applied its National Project Management System methodology to ensure “efficient, effective and

standardized project management”7 and delivery. A number of key documents were developed to

support the initiative design and delivery (e.g., joint management plan, performance management

plans, etc.) along with the fulfilment of numerous reporting requirements.

Initial scope and timeline The refit and relocation projects comprise the refit of 11 buildings totalling 2.5 million square feet, and

was estimated to cost over $500M, and requires over 5 years for completion.8 Over time, less space

was required for special purpose freeing up this space to include additional workspaces. The refit of

and relocation was intended to occur in three phases.

Phase 1, which included four buildings (buildings 6, 7, 8 and 9), was designed to host 3,741

workspaces with occupancy planned to start in 2017.

Phase 2, initially intended to host 3,900 workspaces, included buildings 2, 3, and 5, as well as a

pavilion and a service centre. After design, however, the Phase 2 buildings were found capable of

hosting 4,382 workspaces and were designed as such. Occupancy was initially slated for 2018-

2019.

Phase 3, which included building 10, was designed to host 1,323 workspaces, rather than an

anticipated 1,190 with occupancy anticipated by 2019.

In total, there would be 9,446 workspaces, as opposed to the anticipated 8,500.

Costs The refit and relocation project tracked three sets of costs: purchase costs, fit-up costs and transition

costs. Purchase and fit-up costs are costs associated with the purchase and renovation of the campus

itself. Transition costs are costs associated with carrying costs such as on-going operations while

waiting for the relocation to happen. According to a joint tri-departmental presentation to SPAC, the

total project authority (purchase, fit-up and transition) has evolved to reach $837.6M (excluding HST)

by February 2018 , the third time the project was presented to TB. The overall performance was

deemed to be on time, on budget and on scope. The deck presented the following overall status /

budget update as of December 2013, June 2015 and February 2018.9

Project Authority December 2013 ($M)

June 2015 ($M)

February 2018 ($M)

Purchase 208.3 208.3 208.3 Fit-up 506.0 506.0 537.3 Transition 41.2 77.9 92.0

7 PSPC (2013). Project Charter. Carling Campus Project. Page 2. 8 BGIS (2017). Lessons Learned Report. p.4. 9 SPAC presentation deck, July 2018. Slide 8.



Total (excl. HST) 755.2 792.2 837.6

As of July 1st, 2018, the value of the fit-up work done was $316.2M, or 58.8% of the budgeted $537.3M,

with:

Phase 1 complete (budget spent at 94.2%).10

Phase 2 in progress (budget spent at 41.2%).

The largest outstanding spending in Phase 3 (5.2% of current budget).11

Budget and schedule amendments Approval to increase the original fit-up budget of $506.0M to $537.3M was received. Reasons for the

increase in costs, as articulated in the status reports to TB,12 include:

Upgrades to DND/CAF’s security policies (resulted in $19.6M additional costs);

Accelerated procurement process combined with low quality design packages for Phase 1

(resulted in $12.2M additional costs);

Revised IT security requirements due to the inability to use existing IT pathways (resulted in

$4.3M additional costs); and

Increased IT costs (by $1.6M), offset by decreased IT fit-up costs (by $6.4M).

Approval for a change in schedule was also received with a delay for the final move-in date for all three

phases from March 2019 to late Fall 2019. Reasons for the schedule change, as articulated in the status

reports to TB, include:

Phase 1 move-in date delayed nine months (from December 2015 to September 2016) due to the

combined effect of the slower than planned ramp-up process for the design consultant and

construction manager as well the recapitalization work (glazing and seismic upgrades) that had to

be added to the Phase 1 buildings scope of work;

Phase 1 move-in date further delayed three months (from September to December 2016) due to

the large number of changes and corrections resulting from Buildings 8 and 9 being tendered with

66% design packages; and

Phase 1 move-in date further delayed one month (from December 2016 to January 2017) due to

DND/CAF’s decision to wait until after the Christmas and New Year break to ensure a better user

experience.

10 Note that some site work part of Phase 1 is ongoing. 11 SPAC presentation deck, July 2018. Slide 10. 12 PSPC, DND/CAF, SSC (March 2018). Carling Campus Project: Semi-Annual Report to Treasury Board. As of December 31, 2017. Pages 4 to 6.



These delays resulted in the Phase 2 post tenders construction schedule and the Phase 3 preliminary

schedule that suggest that the Carling Campus Project move-ins will resume late Fall 2018 with a view

for all move-ins to be completed late Fall 2019.

Procurement and competitive process PSPC contracted out the work using a Real Property-2 (RP-2) procurement vehicle, whereby the GC

identified a requirement for the services of a company to provide Real Property Management, Project

Delivery and Optional Services for PSPC buildings located on the Carling Campus and Tunney’s Pasture

Campus. The Request for Proposals went out on MERX on September 21, 2012. Bidders engaged in the

competitive process were only required to submit a single bid for both campuses. The contract was

issued to the successful bidder on June 3, 2013.

The bid was won by Brookfield Global Integrated Solutions (BGIS), who then became the sole vendor

group responsible for the management of construction and retrofitting operations of the Carling

Campus facilities. This included the hiring of subcontractors involved in various aspects of the site

renovations and upgrades required for the campus to host DND/CAF’s employees and meet

departmental security requirements. As such, BGIS hired and oversaw the work of a consortium of

NORR Architects and HOK (hired as principal architect) and EllisDon Construction (hired as

construction manager).



3.0 Lessons Learned

Through the analysis of the consultations and documents, the study team has identified eight lessons

in six major areas as outlined in the figure below. Most of these lessons have been learned and

implemented through continuous improvement throughout the management of the Carling Campus

initiative. The value of this work will come from using the lessons for other infrastructure initiatives in

the future. Perhaps the one area that remains an area for improvement for the Carling Campus

initiative is outcomes management where there has been little integration of the project outcomes and

initiative outcomes.

Each of the lessons is described in more detail below. In each case, the lesson is outlined and

supporting evidence subsequently presented.



3.1 Governance and oversight

Governance Governance is a tool to increase accountability of all players. The need for governance exists anytime a

group of people come together to accomplish an end.13 Governance determines who has power, who

makes decisions, how other players make their voice heard and how accountability is rendered.14

Governance is a critical function in any transformation initiative or large scale project. Effective

governance should include proper levels of decision-making, delegation and sign-off.

Lesson 1: Effective governance design should support decision-making at appropriate levels and ensure partners deliver on their respective accountabilities, in accordance with the Project Charter.

The Carling Campus initiative integrated major transformational objectives for DND/CAF, both

operational and strategic, with a large construction refit and relocation project managed by PSPC and

IT infrastructure managed by SSC. As a result, many accountabilities were shared by the partners and

there were significant interdependencies between the separate accountabilities of each

partner. Further, governance of the infrastructure initiative also included other stakeholders to the

project, including Treasury Board Secretariat, vendors, advisors, etc.

The governance structure for the infrastructure aspects of the initiative included representatives from

all three organizations and consisted of:

The Executive Steering Committee

The Interdepartmental Senior Project Advisory Committee

A Director General Interdepartmental Steering Committee

A Joint Project Management Committee

A Senior Project Manager Committee

Project Team Committees, dealing with Schedule, Design, Construction, Site Design Development, Furniture Focus, Telecommunications, Security, Budget, etc.

According to many of those consulted for this study, the multiple levels of governance has minimized

delays and prevented the need for all matters to be escalated to senior management.

Observations related to managing shared accountability to help maximize buy-in and participation of

partners and support discharge of respective accountabilities include:

Maintaining a co-chair or rotating chair model for governance committees.

Maintaining a strong secretariat function to establish and distribute agendas, take and distribute records of decisions, and tracking of action items.

13 Institute on Governance. (2018). https://iog.ca/what-is-governance/ 14 IBID



Clarifying roles and expectations of other stakeholders in regular attendance.

It was also observed decision-making and problem solving related to the refit and relocation projects,

and communication between partners was enhanced by the co-location of PSPC’s, DND/CAF’s, and

SSC’s project management office. Using a single integrated project management schedule was

identified as important to identifying interdependencies, monitoring overall progress, and addressing

issues.

We understand DND/CAF developed a governance structure to support the change management

accountabilities of DND/CAF for the Carling Campus and its other renewal initiatives, although the

study did not examine these.

Oversight Project oversight offers an ongoing independent and comprehensive review of a project, including its

people, processes and effectiveness. Project oversight begins during the planning phase and continues

until the project’s completion.15

Lesson 2: Mechanisms to assess project progress should be implemented from project initiation to provide project managers, stakeholders and oversight bodies with updates on and insight into progress.

Currently, Treasury Board receives semi-annual progress reports on the refit and relocation project

that are informed by semi-annual Project Health Reviews (a special type of review that is conducted

between predetermined project gates). The integrated project team semi-annual progress report was

first issued in 2015 and replaced the annual report and mid-year dashboards previously submitted to

Treasury Board.16

PSPC engaged the services of a third party to conduct the semi-annual Project Health Reviews. These

Reviews assess three factors – time, scope and budget.17 The assessment process followed the

Treasury Board Secretariat Reviewer’s Handbook for discovery and analysis.

Periodic lessons learned exercises are/were also completed by each of the participating departments

as well as by the integrated project team and by BGIS. The purpose of the lessons learned exercise led

by BGIS was to identify significant successes achieved (and how to replicate them) as well as how

issues, problems, and other setbacks were encountered, how they were overcome, and how they

could be avoided in the future.18 Conducting ongoing lessons learned exercises were seen as team

building opportunities by some stakeholders, which allow for better mutual understanding of

participants needs.

15 Modus. (2018). Project Oversight. http://www.modus-group.com/expertise/project-oversight/ 16 PWGSC.DND/CAF.SSC. (2016).Carling Campus Project: Semi-Annual Report to Treasury Board 17 PWGSC.DND/CAF.SSC. (2016).Carling Campus Project: Semi-Annual Report to Treasury Board 18 BGIS.(2017).Lessons Learned Report Carling Campus Project



It is the view of the study team that implementing mechanisms that form an integrated part of the

project delivery from project initiation are an effective way to provide updates/reflections on progress

to help inform project managers and key stakeholders, as well as provide insight into progress to

oversight bodies.

3.2 Authorities and approvals

Lesson 3: Complexity should be minimized when designing the approach for seeking expenditure authorities, where possible.

According to the TB Policy on the Management of Projects,19 in exercising oversight, TB Ministers limit

the expenditure authority exercised by departmental ministers, requiring those ministers to bring

expenditures that exceed those limits to TB Ministers for approval. Based on a department’s project

management capacity and the assessed project complexity and risk, project approval limits are then

established. In the case of the Carling Campus initiative, given the planned expenditures and project

complexity, all departments had to seek TB Minister approval for expenditure authorities (EAs).

According to the policy and those from Treasury Board Secretariat interviewed, there are no

requirements dictating the approach departments take to seek authorities except they must be

calibrated with the assessed project risk and complexity and approvals can only be granted for project

phases that have been appropriately defined and assessed.

In the case of the Carling Campus initiative, the approach for seeking approval from Treasury Board

for authorities was divided into three phases, each of which required separate EAs and Treasury Board

Submissions. Further, for each of these three phases, authorities were sought for each of the three

departments (PSPC, DND/CAF, and SSC) involved in each of the three phases. As a result, nine

separate budgets were approval for the Carling Campus Initiative.

The reason why each department sought separate EAs when both DND/CAF and SSC provided funds to

PSPC to execute work on their behalf was not discussed during consultations for this study. However,

the interviews with Treasury Board Secretariat personnel revealed that it is not uncommon for

projects to be structured where each participating department seeks its own authorities.

The approach designed to support the authorities for the Carling Campus Initiative was unanimously

described as being complex and creates challenges to managing the financial aspects of the Initiative.

As well, according to most, the benefits from using this complex authority approach were not evident.

Although funding within a phase could be reassigned to future years, by having separate EAs and

Treasury Board Submissions for each phase, authorities cannot be transferred between EAs. In the

case of the Carling Campus initiative, while the EA1 was exceeded, at the time of writing, EA2 is

19 TB (2007). Policy on the Management of Projects. https://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=18229. Accessed February 11, 2019.

https://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=18229



expected to be underspent. However, as mentioned, authorities could not be transferred without

Treasury Board approval.

The administrative burden of managing authorities and approvals under this approach was identified

by study participants as heavy given that each of the nine budgets require individual management.

Each of these nine budgets required the development of a substantive estimate, once information was

available and known with sufficient certainty, prior to seeking approval. This also required ongoing

management and reporting of nine budgets at the departments and to Treasury Board. Changes

involving expenditure levels (delays or accelerations) within each of the phases required each

department to adjust cash flow statements accordingly to each of the nine budgets, as appropriate.

Further, all three departments must account for their authorities both departmentally and to Treasury

Board despite the fact that a portion of these were transferred to PSPC via Memorandum of

Understanding (MOU) or recovered through Specific Service Arrangements. Consideration of

alternative approaches might explore opportunities for fewer budgets, while still maintaining

sufficient accountability reporting.

This approach also created financial management challenges unique to initiatives that cover a number

of years. It is generally expected, and was indeed the refit project team’s experience, that priorities

and GC policies change over time (such as the level of DND/CAF security required or the Greening of

Government policies). The limited flexibility created by this approach of nine budgets, created

challenges in managing the financial impacts of changing priorities and policies.

Managing the financial aspects of complex infrastructure initiatives can also be complicated by the fact

there is a great deal of unknown information, which was particularly the case with Carling Campus

where Building Condition Reports described several buildings as being in poor quality. For example,

the phase-based approach to the approval of authorities ignored known additional expenditures in the

development of Phase 1 budgets.

The consequences of these various layers of complexity created by this approach of nine budgets and

three EAs have been:

Significant investment of time and resources to write multiple Treasury Board Submissions and

other authorities design documentation for one Initiative.

Significant investment of time and resources for budget management at all three departments.

A requirement for overly complex MOUs between the players.

A requirement to establish complex communication and financial reporting protocols between the

departments.

Some possible alternative approaches that might be pursued for future complex initiatives to reduce

complexity that could be considered include:

Having a lead agency (in this case, PSPC) responsible for the management and reporting of the

budget for the refit and relocation projects. While there could still be multiple authorities, funds



would flow from the three departments to PSPC early on and PSPC would be solely responsible for

the expenditure management and reporting to senior management and Treasury Board.

Structuring the initiative with one department seeking expenditure approval to exercise

expenditure authority from Treasury Board. The lead agency (in this case, PSPC) would then

define, identify and seek Treasury Board approval for the EAs for each phase when sufficient

information is known. Regular reports to the Senior Project Advisory Committee and Treasury

Board Secretariat should be in place to ensure sufficient accountability for expenditure authority

attribution to departments.

Defining phases by time rather than by building. There wo uld be more certainty about the

expenditures anticipated in the next two years, for example, rather than the various activities

required to fully move into four buildings. This would also allow for an evolution of requirements

from the client as well as the policy and standard perspectives.

The extent to which these alternatives can be fully exercised for future complex initiatives should be

explored by PSPC with Treasury Board Secretariat, Office of the Comptroller General (policy owners)

and Treasury Board Secretariat, Government Operations Sector, to leverage flexibilities in the project

management policy and the design of Treasury Board submissions. This engagement needs to occur at

the earliest stages of the initiative to ensure funding authorities are simple and also reflect the

necessary oversight.

3.3 Change management According to leading practice, successful change management requires buy in from those affected by

the change, and support for staff and managers to help them adapt to change. Change leadership is also

critical to success. Change leadership requires leaders to take both accountability and responsibility

for the change, that is, accountability for outcomes management and responsibility for driving the

change operationally.

Lesson 4: Change management should be treated and resourced as a priority from the earliest phase of the Initiative to support successful transformation.

Given the transformation objectives associated with the Carling Campus initiative, change

management had to be championed and owned by DND/CAF since they were the organization

undergoing the change and only they could facilitate that change throughout the lifecycle of the

initiative. This study focused on the change management activities for the Carling Campus Initiative

and did not include study of activities related to the Security Review and Defence Renewal Initiatives.

Change management for the initiative had a number of important features:

Early planning and consideration of change management;

Support from organizational leaders;

Clear roles/responsibilities and governance;



Communications ;

Regular monitoring of progress; and

Individuals’ adoption of the change.

The study team found change management was generally well done by DND/CAF. DND/CAF’s

approach to each of these features is described below as they present good practices for change

management.

Early planning and consideration of change management. Front-end change management activity

implemented by DND/CAF included a change management plan, the establishment of a change

management team, and clear initiative parameters in terms of what exactly was changing and how.

Support from organizational leaders. DND/CAF secured senior leadership endorsement for the

project and the related alignment of resources by delivering important change management activities

(e.g., stakeholder analysis, Transformation Steering Committee for change governance). The DND/CAF

transformation team enhanced their skills in change management by administering and receiving

executive coaching in leading change, providing support to leadership, and aligning changes with the

project timetable.20 Since not all managers had the key skills to lead in this type of transformation

environment, it was important to ensure training and coaching support was available to managers as

well.

Clear roles/responsibilities and governance. DND/CAF developed a Master Implementation Plan

that proposed a governance model for managing the transformation. This model laid out change paths

at both the organizational and individual levels, identifying them both as equally important.

Communications. DND/CAF engaged in extensive communication from leaders and the

transformation team. Best practices in communication involved developing a strong communication

strategy with key messages, making the information about the relocation available, accessible and

tailored to intended audience, and dedicating resources to the communication. Examples of the

communications developed by DND/CAF for the initiative were a dedicated Carling Campus webpage,

mentions in the Guard of Honour newspaper and the Maple Leaf newspaper, the development of a

Chain of Command toolkit, communications on the NDHQ concourse, a liaison officer, TV screen

messages and visual presentations in various DND/CAF buildings, IT capabilities to describe the

campus, and the creation of an email address for Carling Campus related information requests.21

Regular monitoring of progress. The DND/CAF change management team highlighted the

development of performance measure metrics for the assessment of the transformation success both

at individual and organizational levels as a best practice. DND/CAF also developed a value model for

HQ2020 that highlighted key initiative interdependencies, corporate opportunity and risk, and

20 SPAC CMP Presentation Deck. Slide 1 / SPAC joint deck. p.22. 21 SPAC CMP Presentation Deck. Slide 6.



organizational practice potential, as well as the necessary activities for enabling initiative and strategic

outcomes success.22 As the initiative is still ongoing, measurement against these measures is still in its

early stages.

Individuals’ adoption of the change. DND/CAF identified several best practices in regard to adoption

of change.23 In particular, the team recognized that the operationalization of the change happens at the

individual level. As such, the team tried to remain nimble in acknowledging and addressing the

concerns of employees, understanding there was no “one size fits all” approach, and that varied,

ongoing communication was crucial to keeping employees continually engaged throughout the

process. It was mentioned that transformational initiatives are largely cultural transformations and

the transitions need be tailored to reflect the micro-transformation level (individual) as much as the

organizational one.

It was reported that the physical move to the Carling Campus initially encountered resistance and

reluctance at the DND/CAF employee level, but with continuous engagement from the communication

team, site visits during phase 1, and outreach efforts, those consulted for the study felt that the

resistance was effectively managed and eventually resulted in positive feedback.

3.4 Relationship management

Lesson 5: To support successful relationship management, relationships should be defined and invested in early on, and be supported with ongoing effective communication and trust-building opportunities.

Relationship management should encompass all parties affected by an initiative, including the

organization leading the transformation (DND/CAF), the organizations carrying out the refit work

(PSPC, SSC) and other partners, such as central agencies, and those outside the GC (vendors,

municipalities and others). This was particularly true of the infrastructure aspects of the initiative due

to the shared accountabilities for the refit and consolidation.

While relationship management was a challenge in the early days of the initiative, this facet has

become one its key strengths. The early challenges were driven by departments working in silos and

the tension stemming from the different organizational cultures. There were also challenges with

respect to available capacity (i.e., skills, availability of personnel, turnover). The vendor responsible for

the refit (BGIS) prepared a lessons learned report suggested some solutions to these challenge,

including improving collaboration strategies, creating an integrated organization chart of all

stakeholders, and increasing verbal communication amongst stakeholders among other things.

22 DND/CAF. Value Model for HQ2020. Slide 1. 23 SPAC CMP Presentation Deck. Slides 2-3 / SPAC joint deck. P. 23-24.



Relationship management was greatly facilitated by co-locating PSPC, DND/CAF, SSC and BGIS team

members at the Carling Campus. This co-location increased access to the members of each team, eased

communications, and facilitated issue negotiation and resolution.

As well, periodic team-building opportunities played an important role in improving and maintaining

strong relationships. Team-building activities included one-day team building / lessons learned

workshops and social activities (e.g., summer BBQ, Christmas lunches). Part of the focus of these

activities was attracting, retaining and motivating individuals to work together with a common goal

over that period of time while maintaining a healthy professional morale.

Some relationship management challenges remain. For example, a Health Check report from 2017

mentioned “communication issues among the many stakeholders and large number of meetings on

numerous deliverables without a common record of decision has been rated as the number one

concern during the interview process.”24

3.5 Outcomes management Outcomes management is a term for the identification and tracking of the various outcomes and

benefits of transformation initiatives. Success must be defined and a plan to measure progress

established. Performance is then assessed before, during and after implementation.

Lesson 6: Outcomes management should be broadly defined, ownership for outcomes should be clearly assigned, and where there are interdependencies among partners for outcome achievement, these should be clearly understood. Further, achievement of outcomes should be the preoccupation of all partners. To this end, operational and strategic outcomes should be tracked regularly and inform decision making.

The refit and relocation projects of the Carling Campus initiative are an example of relatively

straightforward real property projects. What is unique is the projects are being undertaken to support

a complex organizational transformation within DND/CAF. As a result, outcomes management (or

benefits realization) must occur at both the refit project level and the operational and strategic

transformational level.

PSPC is the lead for project management and thus is responsible for determining the extent to which

the refit and relocation project is on time, within scope, and within budget. DND/CAF is a consumer of

the project information, and is also the lead for defining and measuring the outcomes related to the

transformation.

24 Hans Gartner. Richard Hart (2017).Carling Campus Project Independent Health Check Semi-Annual Review. p. i.



In the case of the real property refit and relocation at the Carling Campus, the monitoring of success

focused largely on the project management triangle of budget–time–scope, with a special emphasis on

scope. The study found that the tracking of budget–time–scope was generally well-done.

Beyond, budget-time-scope, DND/CAF is accountable for defining the requirements that PSPC then

delivered on. As such, DND/CAF is also interested in the overall quality of the refit project relative to

those requirements. This is measured by ensuring Acceptance Test Plans are consistent with

Requirements Traceability Matrices and Detailed Test Procedures. These are then mapped to

DND/CAF’s Statements of Requirements for both accommodations and facilities, and IT Networks to

identify gaps. Identified deficiencies are then to be addressed prior to occupation (or immediately

after in the case of minor deficiencies).25

PSPC, as the provider of office accommodation to the GOC is also interested in occupancy costs across

the entire real estate portfolio. Cost savings was identified in the Project Charter. More specifically, it

was noted consolidation at Carling Campus and release of previously occupied space would:

“enable PWGSC rationalization of its downtown real estate portfolio.”26 and

“improve the affordability and quality of the of the government's real estate portfolio as it allows

the subsequent release of low-quality, high cost spaces and contributes to the reduction target of

PWGSC holdings in downtown Ottawa.”27

Based on the study team’s review of documents for the initiative to date, cost savings have not been

measured or reported (perhaps due to the fact that only phase 1 moves have taken place). However,

we understand that financial updates on the initiative include “transition costs” which include factors

such as unused space prior to move-in, empty space for which the GC continues to pay a lease, etc. The

study team did not find fault with this approach, although the project management teams from the

various departments did comment that developing these transition costs figures, which are often

estimates, can be onerous.

Many assessments have been undertaken by PSPC regarding progress towards the refit project’s

success and DND/CAF has been conducted satisfaction surveys with employees who moved in Phase 1.

DND/CAF is accountable for achieving the operational and strategic outcomes related to the

organizational transformation that would accompany the refit project, and their relocation and

consolidation at Carling Campus.28 These include:

A modern workplace making smart use of affordable, interoperable tools and systems to improve

networking, access to data/customer svc.

25 DND/CAF (2014). Performance Measurement Plan, November 2014. p.9. 26 PSPC (2013). Project Charter. p. 2. 27 PSPC (2013). Project Charter. p. 2. 28 DND/CAF. Value Model. Slide 1.



Open networked environment that enables more effective ways of working together, sharing

services, information, exchanges of talent, and enhances access to government information and

services.

Whole-of-Government approach that enhances service delivery and value for money by focusing

on efficient and, where reasonable, consolidated operations to increase flexibility.

A capable, confident and high-performing workforce that stresses the importance of competent,

engaged and productive leaders, managers and employees.

Collective evidence-based options for decision-makers

These outcomes would then lead to:

Improved strategic decision-making.

Lead and efficient headquarters.

Improved strategic clarity, business execution, innovation, openness and trust.

However, it was determined there was very little integration of the two lenses for outcome

management. DND/CAF is accountable for the achievement of transformation outcomes. It is through

DND/CAF’s definition of requirements they ensure the refit Carling Campus will help them to achieve

their desired transformational outcomes. PSPC is accountable for delivering the refit project.

According to PSPC documentation (such as the Project Charter), PSPC’s responsibility ends at

delivering a set of buildings that meets the agreed-upon requirements. This is a reasonable

assignment of accountabilities, but there are clear interdependencies among these accountabilities.

It is the view of the study team that the achievement of end-user outcomes must be the preoccupation

of all concerned. Thus, outcomes management should be broadly defined, ownership for outcomes

should be clearly assigned, and where there are interdependencies among partners for outcome

achievement, these should be clearly understood. Additionally, decisions must be made knowing and

considering the impact of the decision on the achievement of outcomes.

3.6 Project management

Contracting There is a long history of outsourcing real property project delivery services in the GC, also referred to

as Real Property Services Management (RPSM).29 The first generation started in 1998 with the

issuance of 13 contracts valued at $1.8B.

29 PSPC. Real Property Services Management (RPSM) Overview Factsheet.



Lesson 7: Key features of construction contracts should include clear roles and responsibilities of key players and clear performance metrics for the contractor, and should also allow for scope and financial flexibility and efficient delivery.

In 2013 (the third generation of RPSM), the Real Property-2 (RP-2) contract was established for

property management (and other) services for the newly-acquired Carling Campus and Tunney’s

Pasture.30 The RP-2 contract outsources property management, project delivery services, and tenant

services, among other services.

The fundamental aim of this kind of contract is to increase the efficiency of the delivery of these types

of services since the successful vendor is not required to follow complex and cumbersome federal

government rules and policies, as well as to download some risk from the GC to the contractor. With

these types of contracts, the role of the GC is to provide “intelligent oversight” and “neutral guidance”,

rather than directive management, which includes: reviewing and approving annual plans submitted

by the vendor; reviewing and approving the design; brokering key decisions; and reviewing and

approving milestones (linked with budget, cost, quality, and timelines).

For the purpose of the optional project delivery services for Category III projects, through which the

refit and relocation projects were transacted, the RP-2 contract had some very positive features,

including:

Flexibility. The clause for optional project delivery services is very short (less than half a page) and

generic. As well, there is no ceiling on the dollar amount that could be included in services

delivered under this clause. All of those consulted for the study agreed that this flexibility was an

advantage since the project team at PSPC could scope the work how they wished to meet the

objectives of the project.

Efficiency. While the procurement of the RP-2 contract was a long process that followed the

various procurement rules and regulations, the contracting of sub-vendors was much faster than

the GC could have achieved since BGIS could leverage industry contracting best practices (e.g., fee

structures). Reportedly, the BGIS RFPs attracted bids from large and well-respected firms. They

pre-qualified 4 design bidders and 3 construction manager bidders.

Contract features that might have improved the suitability of this vehicle include:

Clear roles and responsibilities, in particular in relation to the contracting authority. Early issues

were experienced with clarifying the “rules of engagement” for PSPC and other stakeholders when

dealing with vendor and sub-vendors. There was general agreement among those with direct

involvement in the project that the right balance was quickly found and all players are satisfied

with the current level of involvement of PSPC. Failure to maintain the proper balance could result

30 PSPC. RP-2 FactSheet.



in the contract authority influencing rather than overseeing, diminishing benefit of downloading

the risk to the vendor.

Performance measures for the contractor: There are no specific project delivery service key

performance indicators (KPIs) built into the RP-2 contract (existing indicators are generic such as

“project quality,” “project timelines” and “project cost efficiency,” among others). During the study,

it was reported that the KPIs and associated baseline and benchmark performance ranges related

to the refit and relocation project were still being negotiated. The result is that PSPC does not have

a strong legal basis to holdback 15% of the fees for non-performance.

Taking these advantages and challenges together, the study found that, in the case of the refit and

relocation project, the contracting approach had more advantages than disadvantages. Many of those

consulted for the study, however, felt this was largely a function of the personalities involved on the

PSPC and vendor sides, rather than due to a well-designed and executed contract. Thus, in future

initiatives, the selection of the contracting vehicle must consider these complexities.

Resource planning In project management practice, resource planning is a significant challenge for project management.

Projects require enough staff – even when things do not go quite according to plan.31 Further, federal

real property managers and staff require a concise presentation of the various considerations—

ranging from principles and logic to practical advice—that are needed to deliver real property

services. 32 The challenge of resource planning becomes more acute for transformation initiatives since

the required skills are broader and include change management.

Lesson 8: Participating departments in transformation initiatives should engage in HR planning early to ensure appropriate change management and project management capacity for the full lifecycle of large and complex initiatives.

The importance of change management in informing the development phase of a transformational

initiative was flagged by most of those consulted in the study. In the case of the Carling Campus

initiative, developing skills and implementing formal structures within departments to address change

management was a challenge for some departments in the beginning. DND/CAF and SSC hired

dedicated resources to support this role within their departments. However, both organizations cited

the challenges associated with finding qualified resources in change management.

31 PM. (Expert Blog). (n.d.) Resource Planning in Project Management – A Challenge for PMO, Project and Line Managers .https://www.theprojectgroup.com/blog/en/resource-planning-in-project-management/ 32 Treasury Board Secretariat. (2011). Guide to the Management of Real Property.https://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rpm-gbi/doc/gmrp-ggbi/gmrp-ggbipr-eng.asp

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_management



The study team heard that real property expertise was strong at PSPC and DND/CAF. However, it was

noted having multiple buildings under construction made the project complex from a capacity

management, resources, and logistics perspective. This created some unevenness in capacity,

particularly related to project management. Stakeholders also highlighted the need for the early

establishment of a dedicated Project Management Office (PMO) as part of the design phase to help get

initiatives up and running quickly.

Many stakeholders emphasized the importance of having experienced and knowledgeable people

involved in the project, although recognized that staff will come and go in long term projects. That

said, at times the departure of key individuals meant the loss of an entire skill set or capacity (e.g.,

experienced project managers, corporate memory and relationship management) which significantly

increased HR and competency risks. Accordingly, a project HR plan (e.g., determining the capacity of

HR to undertake a project early on) should be developed in the design phase and adjusted as necessary

throughout the project. HR planning includes a consideration of the available skills sets brought by

vendors. Thus selecting contractors via least cost (cheapest price) may create a liability from a HR

planning perspective as it does not guarantee the immediate presence of trained staff. Best value

criteria, on the other hand, if designed properly, can ensure that contractors have sufficient capacity to

undertake required work.



4.0 Conclusions

The overall assessment of the lessons learned study is that the Carling Campus initiative has been and

continues to be a success. The end-user (DND/CAF) is satisfied with the extent to which the refit and

relocation projects will help them meet their objectives and the refit and relocation projects are on

track in terms of budget, time and scope.

The study found that there were several early “growing pains” which have been reflected in this report

as lessons. In some cases, actions were taken to address these growing pains and have contributed to

the success experienced. These areas include governance, oversight and change management.

In other cases, the lessons are in areas that are committed for the rest of the project lifecycle and

cannot be meaningfully altered. These include the structure of expenditure approvals, the contracting

approach and the availability of project managers and change management practitioners in

government.

One area where further improvements could be made to support the larger transformation initiative is

in outcomes management. The study found that there has been effective measurement of the progress

of the refit and relocation projects against the time-budget-scope metrics, but that measurement of the

transformation initiative outcomes is still in its early stages. In terms of the operational and strategic

outcomes, outcomes management should be broadly defined, ownership for outcomes should be

clearly assigned, and where there are interdependencies among partners for outcome achievement,

these should be clearly understood. As well, it is critical that decisions be made with the resultant

impact on the achievement of outcomes kept top of mind. Further, progress towards outcome

achievement should be periodically reported in initiative tracking documents (where data are

available).



List of Acronyms

BGIS Brookfield Global Integrated Solutions

DND/CAF Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces

DGISC Director General Interdepartmental Steering Committee

EAs Expenditure Authorities

GC Government of Canada

GGI Goss Gilroy Inc.

HR Human Resources

HST Harmonized Sales Tax

IT Information Technology

KPIs Key performance indicators

MOU Memorandum of Understanding

NCA National Capital Area

NDHQ National Defence Headquarters

PMO Project Management Office

PSPC Public Services and Procurement Canada

RP Real Property

RPSM Real Property Services Management

SPAC Senior Project Advisory Committee

SSC Shared Services Canada



Appendix A: Methodology for the Study of Lessons Learned

The study was undertaken in four main phases: planning, examination, analysis and validation, and reporting.

Phase 1: Planning Start-up-Meeting: A meeting was held on February 21st 2018 between GGI and representatives

from the PSPC evaluation branch to discuss the background and approach to the review.

Documentation was identified and sent to GGI shortly after the meeting.

Preliminary review of documents: After the start-up meeting GGI conducted a document

preliminary review of several key documents to gain a more in-depth understanding of the Carling

Campus initiative.

Site tour: On March 23, 2018, GGI also attended a tour of the DND/CAF Carling Campus at 60

Moodie Drive. In attendance for this tour were members of the PSPC evaluation branch, the GGI

consulting team, and staff from the DND/CAF and SSC. The tour of the facilities was conducted by

the Carling Campus Project Director of Real Property Services (PSPC) and his team of project

managers. It included a tour of both completed facilities and areas still under construction. This

helped to t shed light on the process and phases involved in the construction (wiring,

communications, security, etc.).

Methodology Report: Based on this preliminary work, a methodology report was developed that

outlined the approach to the lessons learned study.

Instrument design: In order to capture stakeholder perspectives about the unfolding of different

aspects of the relocation initiative, GGI developed an interview guide to find out what did and

didn’t go went well and what could/should be done differently in the future.

Phase 2: Examination Key informant interviews: The examination phase included the conducting of interviews with

key players and stakeholders of the initiative at PSPC, DND/CAF, SSC and Treasury Board Secretariat, as well as representatives of private sector entities involved in the initiative (vendors and consultants). These were officials from government departments and agencies who played key roles and were able to share in-depth qualitative information on lessons learned to date. A total of 22 interviews were completed, with 26 individuals from a variety of stakeholder groups:

o PSPC: This included interviews with members of the PMO and the Real Property Services

Directorate who could speak to the approvals process, funding approaches, and

governance/accountability.



o DND/CAF and SSC: This included interviews with individuals who are knowledgeable of

the initiative, had regular interactions with the PSPC PMO and were active and involved

members of their respective organizations within the Carling Campus project team.

o Treasury Board: This included interviews with representatives of the Government

Operations Sector who could comment on the various submissions to and approvals as well

as representatives of Acquired Services and Assets Sector regarding policies affecting the

initiative.

o Vendors and external consultants were also consulted to provide an overall view of the

program and its day to day operations (initiative scope, governance/roles, initiative

management and relationship management).

The majority of interviews were conducted in person. GGI consultants lead the interviews, and at

times, members of the PSPC evaluation team were present for the interviews. Findings were

compiled in an evidence matrix.

Review of documentation: Throughout the study, GGI received a number of documents related

to the relocation initiative. Some were provided by the project authority, others were provided by

participants from the different departments, prior to or following their interview. Approximately

twenty to twenty-five documents were reviewed in depth and coded against the study

questions/areas of exploration. Findings were compiled in a document review evidence matrix.

Data collection workshop: GGI had originally intended and planned to conduct 2 workshops, one

to solicit views from all affected stakeholders (including PSPC, DND/CAF, SSC and Treasury Board

Secretariat); and a second one for the purpose of validation, after the completion of the data

collection phase and the compilation of findings into preliminary lessons learned. In the end, due

to scheduling and coordination complications over the data collection period, it was deemed

preferable by GGI and the project authority to limit the number of workshops to a single, post-data

collection, findings validation workshop (see validation workshop discussion below).

Phase 3: Analysis and validation To conduct the analysis, the study team met several times to discuss the main findings and identify the

lessons. As a result a presentation of preliminary lessons was completed. Validation of the preliminary

lessons was completed using the following approaches:

Presentations to senior committees: GGI shared preliminary findings with the following committees:

o August 28th, 2018: Director General Interdepartmental Steering Committee

o September 14th, 2018: The Senior Project Advisory Committee



Members of each committee posed questions and provided their advice regarding additional level of details or areas requiring clarification.

Findings validation workshop: The validation workshop was held after incorporating comments

from the senior committees. In preparation for the workshop, the team prepared a presentation

deck and a one-page handout about the main lessons learned. The workshop included

participation from PSPC, DND/CAF, and SSC. In addition, a separate follow-up findings validation

interview was conducted with a vendor representative since they were not able to attend the

workshop.

Phase 4: Reporting GGI developed 2 main deliverables as part of the study. The first was a presentation of preliminary

lessons that was developed during the validation phase. The second was a final report (this

deliverable).

Lessons Learned from the Consolidation of DND/CAF Staff ... · Goss Gilroy Inc. (GGI) was hired by...

Documents

Transcript of Lessons Learned from the Consolidation of DND/CAF Staff ... · Goss Gilroy Inc. (GGI) was hired by...