Distinguishing the real from the surreal in management reform: suggestions for beleaguered administrators in the government of Canada

Abstract: The authors believe that management reform initiatives can be jeopardized by the government‐wide application of idealized management frameworks. They suggest that, according to what they call “the law of mandated utopias,” the resultant management requirements become surreal in the eyes of departmental managers. The authors explore the ethical and practical dilemmas caused by the conflict between a public servant's duty to comply with centrally imposed requirements and the duty to manage people and public monies in a sensible way. The recent management improvement initiatives in the Government of Canada are used to demonstrate the practical limitations of the conceptual frameworks associated with performance measurement, performance audit, modern comptrollership, and human resources development. Suggestions are offered on how to improve management in departments while dealing with the surreal requirements generated by government‐wide reforms based on utopian frameworks. Sommaire: Les auteurs estiment que l'application de cadres de gestion purement théoriques, à l'échelle de l'appareil gouvememental, pourrait compromettre les initiatives de reforme de la gestion. Ils sont d'avis que, sous les effets de ce qu'ils appellent la «loi des utopies imposées», les exigences que les gestionnaires de ministeres sont tenus de prendre en compte peuvent leur paraitre surrkalistes. Les auteurs analysent les dilemmes concrets et déontologiques que pose l'obligation faite aux gestionnaires de se conformer aux exigences des organismes centraux tout en gerant des fonction‐naires et des fonds publics de façon judicieuse. Les initiatives actuelles d'amelioration de la gestion au gouvemement du Canada permettent de constater les limites concrètes des cadres conceptuels liés a la mesure et vérification du rendement, a la modernisation de la fonction de contrôleur et à la modemisation des ressources humaines. Les auteurs formulent, à l'intention des équipes de direction, des suggestions pour améliorer la gestion au sein de leurs ministères tout en faisant face aux exigences surréalistes engendrees par des réformes inspirkes par des cadres utopistes à l'echelle de l'appareil gouvernemental.     

Woe Unto You, Judges: or How Reading Frankfurter and Greene, The Labor Injunction, Ruined Me as a Labour Lawyer and Made Me as an Academic

This article is a contribution to the occasional series dealing with a major book that influenced the author. Previous contributors include Stewart Macaulay, John Griffith, William Twining, Carol Harlow, and Geoffrey Bindman.     

Biometric Security and Privacy Using Smart Identity Management and Interoperability: Validation and Vulnerabilities of Various Techniques

The central position of this article is that validation and interoperability are paramount for the effective and ethical use of biometrics. Illuminating the relevance for policymakers of the science underlying the security and privacy aspects of biometrics, this article calls for adequate and enforceable performance metrics that can be independently corroborated. Accordingly, the article considers biometrics and forensics for the dual challenges of addressing security and privacy using smart identity management. The discussion revolves around the concepts of “personally identifiable information” (PII) and interoperability with emphasis on quantitative performance analysis and validation for uncontrolled operational settings, variable demographics, and distributed and federated operations. Validation metrics includes expected rates of identification/misidentification, precision, and recall. The complementary concepts of identity and anonymity are addressed in terms of expected performance, functionality, law and ethics, forensics, and statistical learning. Biometrics encompasses appearance, behavior, and cognitive state or intent. Modes of deployment and performance evaluation for biometrics are detailed, with operational and adversarial challenges for both security and privacy described in terms of trustworthiness, vulnerabilities, functional creep, and feasibility of safeguards. The article underscores how lack of interoperability is mostly due to overfitting and tuning to well‐controlled settings, so that validation merely confirms “teaching to the test” rather than preparation for real‐world deployment. Most important for validation is reproducibility of results including full information on the experimental design used, that forensic exclusion is allowed, and that scientific methods for performance evaluation are followed. The article concludes with expected developments regarding technology use and advancements that bear on security and privacy, including data streams and video, de‐anonymization and reidentification, social media analytics and cyber security, and smart camera networks and surveillance.