Interviews with Committee Chairs and
Vice-Chairs - One way to get quality time with
MembersSusan SwiftAPLIC Conference
Regina, September 9, 2014
2
Needs Assessment and Service Evaluation Conduct face to face interviews with
Committee Chairs and Vice-Chairs
Once per Parliament - in 2011 and 2014
Purpose get feedback on our services, and their current and evolving needs
3
Methodology
letters to each of the Chairs and Vice Chairs requesting a meeting and explaining why we want to meet with them
Legislative learner followed up to schedule half hour appointments
Committee Clerks invited to accompany us and coordinated with their schedules
4
Methodology
Consulted with researchers assigned to specific committees to establish questions
Sent questions in advance of the meeting
Legislative learner accompanied as the note taker
Follow up letters to participants citing concrete changes
5
Standard Questions
Standard set of questions for all can you think of a time when
the Service failed to meet your expectations? the Service did an especially good job for your
committee? any changes that would make our papers
easier to use? what should we be thinking about now to
make sure we continue to meet your changing needs?
6
Standard Questions
Beyond your Committee role are your constituency office and Queen’s Park staff
aware of our services? Have you had any feedback on the quality of services they receive?
what has been your experience with the customized work we have done for you?
News and current awareness How do you keep up on current events and
emerging issues in your riding, provincially, nationally?
7
Standard Questions
How important are our news products in your news gathering (Provincial Press Plus and Toronto Press Today)?
What other resources do you use to keep yourself informed about emerging issues?
Committee Specific Questions Based on specific needs of a particular
Committee e.g., PAC v. Estimates, witness bios
Ask questions about specific types of work researchers may be doing for that Committee and whether they value it, e.g., particularly labour intensive work – agency backgrounders, summaries of recommendations
8
Differences 2011/2014
2011 9 Standing; 2 Select interviewed 17 of 22 1 responded in writing = 81% participation rate Committee Clerk
accompanied us Members came prepared
2014 9 Standing; 1 Select interviewed 12 of 20 - one
from each committee = 60% participation rate Committee Clerk
accompanied us Members not as prepared Asked non-Committee
related questions
9
What we learned
We’re meeting their expectations Listening to the language they used we learn
what they value Answers come back quickly – timely response
and delivery Research is thorough Non-partisan Professional
10
What we learned
Helped to keep them organized Objective, thorough and factual Researchers are approachable and responsive
11
What we learned
Some disappointments Specific instances cited Issues around the Regulations Committee in
2011; addressed in 2014 interviews Comments about specific products Papers need to be short, easy to absorb and use
What more we could be doing Executive summaries in reports
12
What we learned
Find ways to ensure our reports are not lost in piles of paper
Move to electronic Committee portal for all docs Increase use of graphics
13
Why do the interviews
Validate that you are on the right track – regulations committee update
Helps you to articulate and validate your value proposition – why are we important to the Members – what do they value about what we do?
Can guide promotions; support budget Learn about what matters to them
14
What we learned
They use TPT and “all the Members are using it”
Majority of Member from outside Toronto use our Provincial Press Plus; a good number from Toronto use it too
PPP is very useful for when Committees travel
Twitter is a primary source of news and information for Members
15
Why do the interviews
All of this information helps inform your service and product decisions (e.g., TPT and PPP)
Learn about the missteps and address them Build relationships with the Members, Clerks Practical tips for improving services,
publications
16
Why do the interviews
Learn what they don’t know about you – then you can do something about it Not sure what is appropriate to ask us Didn’t understand researchers have different
specialties Didn’t know why we were taking notes Not always clear about the role of researcher –
who’s going to write the report?
17
Why do the interviews
Learn about Needs of New Members they don’t know about our services – another
Member told me to use you Provide examples of how they can use us – they
don’t have the context yet Committee chair needs a briefing on work of the
committee and where it fits in Regulations and other legal committees – can be
intimidating
18
Why do the interviews
Gives you an idea about their pain points and how the deal with them
Gives you credibility with staff and facilitates making changes
19
Top Related