Can Adoption of the United Kingdom's Osmotherly Rules Improve Accountability in Project Delivery in Canada?

IF 1.2 4区 管理学 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Gordon Grant, Lavagnon Ika, Michael Hayle
{"title":"Can Adoption of the United Kingdom's Osmotherly Rules Improve Accountability in Project Delivery in Canada?","authors":"Gordon Grant,&nbsp;Lavagnon Ika,&nbsp;Michael Hayle","doi":"10.1111/capa.70055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Major projects, by which many policies get implemented within the Federal Government of Canada, often experience cost overruns and benefit shortfalls. Yet modicum of accountability seems to prevail. While both Canada and the UK grapple with the challenge of balancing ministerial accountability with their respective operational responsibility, Canadian Project Sponsors (CPS) do not have the same leverage as their UK counterparts, the Senior Responsible Owners (SROs), with the public pressure they can wield through an appearance before a parliamentary committee. This is an accountability challenge, not just in terms of the standards needed to assess the behaviour of CPS, but also their relationship to a forum such as a parliamentary committee where they may be held accountable <i>ex post facto</i>. We conclude that Canada may learn from the UK's Osmotherly Rules, which provide guidance on the role of SROs, when they are asked to offer evidence to parliamentary select committees.</p>","PeriodicalId":46145,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Public Administration-Administration Publique Du Canada","volume":"69 1","pages":"63-78"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/capa.70055","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Public Administration-Administration Publique Du Canada","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/capa.70055","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Major projects, by which many policies get implemented within the Federal Government of Canada, often experience cost overruns and benefit shortfalls. Yet modicum of accountability seems to prevail. While both Canada and the UK grapple with the challenge of balancing ministerial accountability with their respective operational responsibility, Canadian Project Sponsors (CPS) do not have the same leverage as their UK counterparts, the Senior Responsible Owners (SROs), with the public pressure they can wield through an appearance before a parliamentary committee. This is an accountability challenge, not just in terms of the standards needed to assess the behaviour of CPS, but also their relationship to a forum such as a parliamentary committee where they may be held accountable ex post facto. We conclude that Canada may learn from the UK's Osmotherly Rules, which provide guidance on the role of SROs, when they are asked to offer evidence to parliamentary select committees.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

采用英国的Osmotherly规则能改善加拿大项目交付的问责制吗?
在加拿大联邦政府内,许多政策都是通过重大项目来实施的,但这些项目往往会出现成本超支和效益不足的情况。然而,极少的问责似乎占上风。虽然加拿大和英国都在努力平衡部长问责制和各自的运营责任,但加拿大项目发起人(CPS)并不像他们的英国同行,高级负责业主(sro)那样拥有同样的影响力,他们可以通过在议会委员会露面来施加公众压力。这是一个问责制的挑战,不仅在评估CPS行为所需的标准方面,而且在他们与一个论坛(如议会委员会)的关系方面,他们可能事后被追究责任。我们的结论是,当sro被要求向议会特别委员会提供证据时,加拿大可以向英国的Osmotherly规则学习,该规则为sro的角色提供指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
20.00%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: Canadian Public Administration/Administration publique du Canada is the refereed scholarly publication of the Institute of Public Administration of Canada (IPAC). It covers executive, legislative, judicial and quasi-judicial functions at all three levels of Canadian government. Published quarterly, the journal focuses mainly on Canadian issues but also welcomes manuscripts which compare Canadian public sector institutions and practices with those in other countries or examine issues in other countries or international organizations which are of interest to the public administration community in Canada.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书