Legal Excellence Program Evaluation, Final Report

5. RECOMMENDATIONS AND MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

5.1 Introduction

The LEP has been supplying the Department with roughly one-third of its intake of entry-level lawyers. Because of the growing demand for entry-level lawyers in the DOJ as a result of the implementation of the Law Practice Model, there is a need for the Department to review the role of the Program in light of this new policy.

While the LEP has proven to be an effective mechanism for recruiting high-quality entry-level lawyers, for it to assume a greater role or even to stay viable in this increasingly competitive legal labour market, the Program needs to be strengthened in terms of its governance and resourcing. There is also a need for more consistency in how the Program is administered, including the training provided to articling students. There are opportunities to improve program planning, sharing of information and best practices, and performance monitoring and reporting.

This chapter summarizes the key findings of the report leading to the recommendations. It also contains the management response to these recommendations that has been prepared for the LEP.

5.2 Issues

Issue 1: Role of the LEP in recruiting entry-level lawyers

The recent announcement to concentrate external hiring at the LA-01 level has sent a strong signal that the Department is moving to change its legal staff complement. This means that there will be an ongoing need to recruit entry-level lawyers.

The LEP’s role in recruiting future LA-01s needs to be reviewed in light of the new direction the Department is taking. It is important that the role for the LEP (relative to other DOJ recruitment mechanisms) be defined on the basis of a clear understanding of the needs of the Department and with consideration given to efficiency and effectiveness, rather than to be determined by the current budget availability or any historical expectation of the Program.

There are considerable advantages to hiring through the LEP, most notably that DOJ articling students have been evaluated by several managers over the course of their articling term, and in a sense they have been already “test driven”; they have learned about the federal government and the role of the Department in supporting it; and they can be hired immediately following the successful completion of their articles as there is no need for a second competitive process. The disadvantages are that it takes time and resources to develop articling students and they are only available for hiring as counsel following the successful completion of their articles and admission to the Bar.

The LEP has largely been managed by very busy people who have many other competing responsibilities. As a result, its capacity to be proactive or to link hiring priorities to departmental needs has been limited. There is considerable opportunity to improve the Program and to make it more useful to both the Department and to articling students. But in order to do this, it will need dedicated resources, both financial and human.

Recommendation 1

Given the recent decision to concentrate external hiring of legal counsel at the LA-01 level, the Director General, HRPDD should consult with the portfolios, sectors, relevant ministerial committees (e.g. HR.Com, Employment Equity, Official Languages) and regional offices to determine which process or combination of hiring processes will be used to hire the entry-level lawyers, and subsequently, to establish the role of the LEP and the ongoing resources required to support this initiative.

Management Response

Agreed.

We will determine the combination of hiring processes to be used to hire entry-level lawyers, including the role of the LEP in such recruitment. This assessment will take into account the objectives and numeric goals of the Law Practice Model and resource requirements.

Recommendation 2

Develop results-based objectives for the LEP, supported by a performance measurement and reporting strategy that will support management decision-making at the national level.

Management Response

Agreed.

We will clarify the objectives of the LEP and the related performance indicators. Performance and related information will feed into annual HR planning exercises to determine the annual intake of articling students. Performance information will be used to support decision-making around ongoing improvements and changes to LEP

Issue 2: Governance structure

The evaluation found that the LEP lacks a clear governance structure. As a national initiative, there are no explicit roles and responsibilities set out for the key departmental stakeholders. Consequently, the Program is comprised of a set of loosely connected and regionally managed operations without having a management framework with clearly defined roles and responsibilities. The evaluation found that this situation has caused confusion, undermined program coherence and cohesiveness, and resulted in lost opportunities for sharing of information and best practices. There is a need for a strong coordinating function between the NCR and the regions that will work to enable LEP teams across the country to establish and achieve common program objectives and ensure that there is more coherence in the way the Program is managed in the Department.

Recommendation 3

Strengthen the governance structure for the LEP, including establishing a central coordination function and a clear definition of roles and responsibilities of the key departmental stakeholders, in light of the role established in Recommendation 1.

Management Response

Agreed.

We will review the overall governance arrangements for LEP. It will clarify the roles and responsibilities of all key departmental stakeholders and in particular the role of the central coordination function located within HRPDD.

Issue 3: A common framework for program consistency

There is a need for the LEP to have greater implementation and management consistency across the Department. Because the provincial law societies set rules and regulations pertaining to the recruitment and training of articling students, there is an acknowledged need for certain flexibility in how the LEP is managed from region to region. This flexibility is also important as there are marked differences in the labour markets across the country and the competitive market or lawyers. However, the evaluation identified a number of areas where more consistency is desirable. For example, the DOJ provides varying levels of financial support to students during their Bar Admission Course and bar exams. Other areas where there is need for more consistency include program planning, student training, supervision and performance evaluation.

Recommendation 4

Develop standardized principles and guidelines to build greater consistency into the management and implementation of the LEP across the Department.

Management Response

Agreed.

We will review the overall LEP program design, determine where and to what degree national consistency and regional flexibility are required and develop clear standards and guidelines to improve overall program management.

Issue 4: LEP national spokesperson and communication strategies

The evaluation found that there is a need for the LEP to have a “champion” or spokesperson as the absence of one has meant that the Program has lost a lot of its visibility both within the Department and externally. The spokesperson should be the main DOJ point of contact responsible for promoting the Program. It is important that there is strong and continuous communication between the Program and its key stakeholders: internally, with DOJ management at all levels, relevant ministerial committees and the DOJ Articling Student Alumni; and externally, with university Career Services, student bodies, bar associations, law societies and legal career service organizations.

Recommendation 5

In consultation with the heads of portfolios, sectors and regional offices, the Director General, HRPDD should nominate an “LEP Spokesperson”, for approval by Senior Management, who will be responsible for promoting the Program.

Management Response

Agreed.

The DG, HRPDD will consult with Direct Reports and propose the nomination of the Spokesperson for the Program.

Recommendation 6

The LEP Spokesperson should oversee the development and implementation of a communication strategy designed to strengthen ties with the Program’s stakeholders and support increased program cohesion and visibility.

Management Response

Agreed.

We agree that there is a need to develop a communication strategy designed to strengthen ties with the Program’s stakeholders and to increase program visibility.

The role of the Spokesperson will be addressed under Recommendation 3, including his/her role with respect to the development of a communication strategy.

Issue 5: Sharing of information and best practices

The evaluation found a need for the LEP to have a formal mechanism for exchanging program-related information and sharing of best practices, particularly in the area of marketing and student training. This would help enhance program consistency and cohesion, improve the efficiency and effectiveness of resource use and encourage innovation among LEP teams.

Recommendation 7

Develop opportunities and mechanisms to share information and best practices among LEP supervisors and managers across the Department.

Management Response

Agreed.

We will share information and best practices more broadly across the Department.

Issue 6: The name of the Program

The name of the Program does not contain words that reflect either its mandate – recruiting and training articling students, or its home organization – the Department of Justice. While the LEP is increasingly known among law students as a DOJ articling program, it is advisable to change the name of the Program to one that is more self-evident.

Recommendation 8

Change the name of the Program to reflect its purpose more intuitively (e.g., Department of Justice Articling Program).

Management Response

Agreed.

The LEP Working Group will consider different names for LEP which more intuitively reflect the nature of the Program.