July 21, 1997

Prepared for:

Industry Canada

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0	INTRODUCTION	1

2.0	THE ASSOCIATIONS - ACCC AND AUCC	2

2.1	The Role of the Associations	2

2.2	Distributing Information	2

2.2.1	Facilitating Communication	3

2.3	Developing Program Policy	3

2.3.1	Communication	4

2.3.2	Marketing and Sponsorships	5

2.3.3	Program Sustainability	5

2.3.4	Other Policy Changes	6

2.4	Fulfilling the Program Reporting Requirements	6

2.4.1	Clients Trained and Payment Tracking	6

2.4.2	Student Business Advisor Information	7

2.5	Overall Program Impressions	8

3.0	INDUSTRY CANADA REGIONAL OFFICES	9

3.1	The Role of the Regional Offices	9

3.2	A Supporting Role For The Marketing Process	9

3.2.1	Providing Access To Trade Shows and Attending Launches	9

3.2.2	Suppling Resources	10

3.2.3	Mapping out a Regional Marketing Strategy and

Strengthening Business Relations	10

3.2.4	Networking for the Program	10

3.3	A Liaison with the Administrative Centres and

Headquarters and the Associations	11

3.3.1	Communication with Administrative Centres	11

3.3.2	Coordinating Monthly Conference Calls and Meetings	11

3.3.3	Communication Among Administrative Centres	12

3.3.4	Communication with Other Program Management Groups	12

3.4	Other Issues	13

3.4.1	Geographic Issues	13

3.4.2	Regional Differences	14

3.4.3	Translating Electronic Resources	14

4.0	INDUSTRY CANADA HEAD OFFICE	15

4.1	The Current State of the Program	15

4.2	Changes to the Program	15

4.2.1	Changes in Program Marketing	16

4.2.2	Changes in Program Culture	17

4.2.3	Communication	17

4.2.4	The On-Line Resource	20

4.2.5	Understanding of the Client Groups	20

4.2.6	Preparations for the Funding Phase-Out	21

4.3	Final Comments	22

APPENDIX A	Letter to the Associations

APPENDIX B	Letter to Industry Canada Regional Offices

APPENDIX C	Letter to Industry Canada Head Office

1.0	INTRODUCTION

This report summarizes the results of a series of interviews with representatives from all levels of program management, including Industry Canada head office staff, Industry Canada regional staff, representatives from the Association of Canadian Community Colleges, representatives from the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada, and selected students who worked closely with regional program managers. The list of program managers was provided by the Student Connection Program Industry Canada head office.

This report forms part of the evaluation of the Student Connection Program, as outlined in the evaluation framework. Prairie Research Associate's staff (PRA), interviewed representatives between June 19th and July 11th , 1997.

Before telephoning each individual and asking for an interview, we faxed each key contact a letter (see appendix A) outlining;

•	The purpose of the Program evaluation;

•	The importance of their participation;

•	Why PRA was conducting the interviews;

•	The outcome of the evaluation process; and,

•	A list of topics to be discussed in the interview.

An individual from PRA then attempted to contact each representative by telephone to arrange an interview.

We interviewed four individuals from the Associations, representatives from five regional Industry Canada offices, and four respondents from the Student Connection head office in Ottawa.

2.0	THE ASSOCIATIONS - ACCC AND AUCC

Two representatives from each of the Associations were interviewed for this portion of the evaluation. In both cases, the interviews were conducted by conference call, so that both representatives could participate.

2.1	The Role of the Associations

To understand the activities of the Associations, we asked them to explain their primary role in the Student Connection Program. The following functions were enumerated:

•	An information distributor;

-	A liaison between Industry Canada and the Admin Centres; and,

-	A representative for Administrative Centre feedback.

•	A partner with Industry Canada for the development of program policy; and,

•	A reporting agency with the objective of fulfilling the Program reporting requirements.

2.2	Distributing Information

We asked the Associations what kind of information they exchanged. The respondents said that they communicated the following types of information from Industry Canada to the Administrative Centres.

•	Changes in program guidelines and procedures;

•	Discussion on national level issues - issues that will effect more than one Administrative Centre;

•	Information on the on-line resource; and,

•	Other generic information.

Communication from the Administrative Centres to Industry Canada included;

•	Questions on funding;

•	Territorial disputes and concerns;

•	Narrative reports, and program reporting information; and,

•	Other general information.

2.2.1	Facilitating Communication

The Associations generally communicate with their individual Administrative Centres at least once a week.

I am in touch with every institution at least on a weekly basis. The level of communication adjusts itself naturally to what is required. I think it works pretty well... I know pretty much what is going on at each of the Admin sites.

If the institutions have any questions or concerns about the Program they will e-mail me or call me and I'll deal with it right away. It also works the other way around.

Methods of communication include:

•	E-mail;

•	Telephone; and,

•	Regional conference calls.

The method of communication depends on the type of information.

Some people prefer phone, some e-mail. E-mail is our ideal way of communicating... it is in line with the direction of the Program... you can say what you need without digressing.

Sometimes the human contact is very important, so we make an effort just to touch base [by telephone].

The [Associations] like the regional conference calls as they are able to share information.

2.3	Developing Program Policy

Suggested changes to the Program are brought up at management meetings. The respondents said these meetings are held to discuss current problems, how they can be fixed, and how to avoid further problems in the future.

The attitude towards the meetings was very positive.

The new management at IC headquarters has been very open to any new suggestions that we have.

We try to improve the Program and [they] are always willing to listen. We are able to make the changes very quickly... it is a very good relationship right now.

Specific areas in which the Associations had suggested changes included program marketing, sponsorship, curriculum, and the structure of the Program's communication network.

2.3.1	Communication

The respondents indicated that there have been significant changes to the Program's communication network and policies over the past year. All respondents agreed that the changes have had a very positive effect on the Program.

The original communication chain was described as problematic. Individual Administrative Centres communicated directly with Industry Canada, and Industry Canada would communicate directly with the ACs leaving a vacuum of information at the Associations. Agreements and program changes were made without the Associations' knowledge. Administrative Centres would be contacted by any number of people at Industry Canada headquarters and the regional offices for one specific piece of information. Not all the institutions would get program information at the same time. Communication was haphazard.

These deficiencies were especially problematic when a major component of the Associations' role is to be the disseminators of information to the institutions and to bring information from the institutions to Industry Canada.

In order to fix the problem, a management meeting was held with both the Associations, and Industry Canada.

We explained the issues and why things were not working well, and we agreed to adhere to the system where Industry Canada communicates to us and we send the information down to the Admin Centres and vice versa.

As a result of the management meeting, the Associations felt that the communication structure had been improved, but not perfected.

Now we communicate e-mail that we get from IC to the ACs. We try to have regular management meetings with IC [and the other Association] and we send the Administrative Centres a memo with updates.

It [the communication] is a lot more structured, and the roles are better defined now. Occasionally there is a lapse.

Duplicate communication may still be a problem. Some institutions contact IC directly without telling us. We don't know what the status of the issues are, IC approves it, and then we hear of it second hand. They approve program changes without our knowledge. Efforts have been made to streamline this... it is better than it used to be.

Although there was dissatisfaction with the current structure of the communication network, neither Association made clear suggestions for change.

I can't think of any changes right now. It seems to me that things are beginning to work now that all the hard work has been done.

2.3.2	Marketing and Sponsorships

One concern that Associations felt the ACs had was that although Industry Canada provided national marketing tools, there was little effort to actually market the Program nationally.

In much the same vein, the Associations said that the ACs felt more effort had to be put into acquiring national sponsors. The Associations recently acquired funding to hire a firm to seek national sponsors for the Program. They are currently in the process of reviewing the proposals they received from candidate firms.

We have tried to establish a more centrally managed approach to the Program. We are providing national marketing with Industry Canada. There is a more corporate focus to the Program.

2.3.3	Program Sustainability

There was some concern expressed about how program changes currently being made might affect the sustainability of the Program. There was some confusion concerning the increasing role of the web site in the Student Connection Program, and how the site "fits in" with the Program's goals and future.

We have had inquiries about the sustainability of the Program [from the Administrative Centres]. They [Industry Canada] want to sell the on-line resource. Some institutions want to just train clients... they do not want to worry about selling the resource, they are not ready to sell the resource. I think the on-line resource is sort of a separate thing from the rest of the Program.

In terms of clients trained, we have not really met the requirements, and that is scary. This is why lots of the institutions are wary of trying to sell the resource. They have not met the client's training requirements and now there is another element to worry about. If people are not willing to take the training they will not subscribe to the on-line resource.

2.3.4	Other Policy Changes

The Associations felt that the Program had become significantly more centralized over the last year. This change was associated with the changes in the communication policy.

The Program has become significantly more centralized over the last six months... the training site has lead to greater centralization.

Prior to January and the implementation of the new contract, it seemed like a more hands-off approach. There is a more intense relationship between the AUCC and its Admin sites.

2.4	Fulfilling the Program Reporting Requirements

2.4.1	Clients Trained and Payment Tracking

The clients trained report was seen as the toughest report to get from the Administrative Centres.

They [the Administrative Centres] find the Clients Trained Report to be very tedious. It is a tedious process for them and us too, as we have to keep coming back to them. We have to retype half of the reports here... it is sent in hand-written and in pieces. They modify the forms we made, use old forms, or send it in incomplete.

To solve these problems, one Association designed new electronic forms for the Administrative Centres. However, this solution has only been partially successful to date.

They modify the forms we made, use old forms, or send it in incomplete. I don't know why they do not use the electronic forms we designed. Maybe they are overworked, or maybe it is a student that completes them... maybe the student did not get the information in the first place...

In another attempt to aid the process, the Associations have tried to link the submission of the Client's Trained Report to the Payment Tracking Report, and therefore to their payments.

Now we tie the submission of the Clients Trained Report to the submission of the Payment Tracking Report. It is done on the same day and they know that if they submit it on time, then they get their payments on time.

One problem with using this strategy is the time lag inherent in the invoicing process.

What we wanted was to have the money up front so that when we got the request for payment we could turn it around in a matter of days. However, the government Public Works would not allow salary advances... we have to bill them on actual.

There is a six week waiting period to get the funds [from Industry Canada] after we submit the request. The payment is not fast in coming.

2.4.2	Student Business Advisor Information

The biggest problem mentioned by the Associations concerning the collection of the Student Business Advisor information was that students were hired at different times at each of the schools. This prevented a formal, structured data collection process.

Getting information on Student Business Advisors is tough because a lot of them were hired at different points. Things really fluctuate between schools and this can be really problematic. I don't know how you would get around the 16 versus 13 week problem [16 week term with a 13 week contract] it is just something that is built into the system.

I don't know what the solution is.

Finally, the Associations said that it really comes down to the individual Administrative Centre, and how accommodating and organized they are.

I think that the effort is there to get as much information as we can. We do not always get all the information that we need from the Admin Centres. Like any other thing, there are the good guys and the slower guys. Some institutions are excellent, and some are really not very good at it. We send three or four reminders and you never hear back from some of them. I don't know how to help this...

2.5	Overall Program Impressions

We asked the respondents if there were any final comments they had to make concerning the Program, how it has changed over time, and what direction it should take in the future. The following quotes summarize the comments we received.

There have definitely been substantial changes and improvements to the Program since the pilot. It is a lot... a lot better now.

Communication, which is the most important part for us, is very, very good. It has improved 150%... I can't say enough for it. The way it was supposed to work and the way it is working now is Industry Canada to Associations to Admin Centres and back the other way.

The regular management meetings are a great help and improvement. Before there was no formal management framework in place. The introduction of a formal management framework has been one of the biggest helps.

3.0	INDUSTRY CANADA REGIONAL OFFICES

We interviewed Industry Canada representatives from five different regional offices. In one case a student that assisted significantly with the regional program management was asked to provide additional insight.

3.1	The Role of the Regional Offices

To get an indication of how the regional Industry Canada representatives perceived their role in the Student Connection Program, we asked each of them to define their primary tasks and responsibilities. The following two roles encompass the responses we received.

•	A supporting role for the marketing process; and,

•	A Liaison with the Administrative Centres, Headquarters, and the Associations.

3.2	A Supporting Role For The Marketing Process

The regional Industry Canada offices saw supporting the marketing activities of the ACs as their primary role in the management of the Student Connection Program. To understand what marketing support the regional offices were supplying to the ACs, we asked them what activities they were undertaking. Most of the responses fell into one of the following categories.

•	Providing access to trade shows and attending launches;

•	Suppling Resources;

•	Mapping-out a regional marketing strategy and strengthening business relations; and,

•	Networking for the Program.

3.2.1	Providing Access To Trade Shows and Attending Launches

All respondents mentioned that they provided marketing assistance with trade shows and fairs. The assistance given was in many forms, including;

•	Informing Administrative Centres of up-coming trade fairs and events;

•	Publicizing the SCP at an event attended by Industry Canada;

•	Inviting students from the SCP to attend trade shows with Industry Canada representatives;

•	Training Student Business Advisors to coordinate Industry Canada displays, such as Strategis; and,

•	Inviting students to attend information and training sessions being held by Industry Canada representatives on how to "sell" to government.

All respondents said that they had participated in Student Connection events in the past, including launches, and information sessions.

3.2.2	Suppling Resources

The distribution of marketing materials was viewed as a major role by the respondents. This consisted of taking requests for additional materials from the individual Administrative Centres.

3.2.3	Mapping out a Regional Marketing Strategy and Strengthening Business Relations

Regional IC offices see their role in marketing the Program as general. They provide materials and information that alert ACs to strategic marketing opportunities that they may then pursue themselves.

I can't market for them [the ACs], they need their own regional flavour. They have to invest a little of their own time.

Administrative Centres have to market on their own. They are waiting too much on Industry Canada's lead. This will not work as the funding declines. Individual Administrative Centres have to do more of their own creative work on how to market without Industry Canada funding.

The regional offices have undertaken various tasks and activities with this goal in mind, and the following information and resources have been provided to the Administrative Centres.

•	Business lists;

•	Sector lists and industry lists;

•	Contacts with potential sponsors and partners;

•	Contacts with Chambers of Commerce, Regional Development Agencies, the Canadian Technology Network, and Business Associations; and,

•	Media contacts and promotional materials for publication in media releases and special reports.

3.2.4	Networking for the Program

Two respondents mentioned that they were working to integrate the Student Connection Program with the information network at their IC offices. The SC program would then become an information resource that interested business representatives could be directed to when they had a relevant inquiry.

3.3	A Liaison with the Administrative Centres and Headquarters and the Associations

Another large management area for the regional offices was communication. Areas of communication that the respondents focussed on in the interviews were communication with Administrative Centres, communication among Administrative Centres, and communication with Industry Canada headquarters and the Associations.

In general, the respondents felt that communication had improved substantially over the last year. One respondent remained optimistic that the on-line resource would help solve other communication issues in the future.

3.3.1	Communication with Administrative Centres

Although e-mail is the most popular form of communication among the respondents, there were some perceived problems with relying on it. Specifically, it is too easy to ignore, and did not always solicit the desired response from the recipient.

[Some Administrative Centres] do not respond to e-mail. To get a response from them it has to be word of mouth or face-to-face. I need feedback and I hardly ever get it from them. Is the Program running well? Is something else happening? Do they know about the changes? I do not get feedback from them. The onus has to be put on the Admin Centre for this.

Most regional offices send e-mail to their ACs at least once a week, however, the inherent drawbacks have prompted one regional office to switch the focus of their communication.

I always communicate by phone. It is hard because of the schedules, but e-
mail is too limited...

The other regional offices indicated that they did telephone their ACs and hold conference calls, but not with the frequency of e-mail communication.

3.3.2	Coordinating Monthly Conference Calls and Meetings

At Ottawa's suggestion, regional offices have been coordinating monthly or quarterly conference calls between the Administrative Centres, and which frequently include representatives from the Associations and head office. When asked, all respondents indicated that they were very pleased with the conference calls, and that they significantly improvement communications, and the level of cooperation between program groups. The conference calls were seen as a good way to facilitate communication between Administrative Centres.

3.3.3	Communication Among Administrative Centres

Although, with the exception of monthly conference calls, the regional offices did not participate in communication between Administrative Centres, they stressed the importance of this activity in the interviews.

If Admin Centres are having success they should share this information on their own. If they do not - the Program may as well wrap-up. I can't do anything about it.

They [the Admin Centres] have to do things for themselves. It is in everyone's benefit for them to help out other ACs. Just because there is no money does not mean they can't do anything for themselves.

Schools have to think of themselves as more of a team. Administrative Centres need to promote each other. They haven't started thinking about how to promote the Program in the whole province together.

The importance of this activity in the eyes of the regional managers is clearly linked to the impending funding cutbacks. The reality of the declining program budget is becoming more apparent in the communication between the regional offices and the ACs.

People are starting to worry about what happens when the government pulls out of the Program. I don't know what is happening [with the Administrative Centres] but it is becoming top of mind.

3.3.4	Communication with Other Program Management Groups

In general, the regional managers were not impressed with the level and quality of communication that they exchanged with head office and the Associations.

Two of the regional offices were very negative concerning the communication with the Associations and themselves. They felt that the Associations did not play a valid role, and that they were being excluded from important communications.

We feel we are a part of the Program delivery, but we would like to be appended to the e-mail from the Associations to the schools. We are out of the loop and don't know what is going on.

Another regional respondent said that things had been very poor between their regional office and the Associations in the past, but that there had been a definite improvement recently.

There is a duplication between what I do with the students and what the Associations do. I have not been aware of what the Associations are doing. I would get e-mail from headquarters and I was not certain if I should wait for the Associations or respond to the issues. This is less of a problem now.

The biggest problem cited with the communication between Industry Canada regional offices and head office was the fact that it was required so frequently.

The program is still very centralized. When Admin Centres call me (or more frequently the Associations) I always have to contact head office on issues. Can we get more responsibility so we do not have to contact headquarters? All the information is in Ottawa.

They don't know what is happening [in other areas]. It is hard to communicate with them all the time, it takes a lot of time and effort.

One respondent expressed the sentiment that although there was lots of communication between the regional offices and the head office, there was not enough between the different regions themselves.

I don't even know the other people running the other programs across Canada. Are my views unique? It would seem that as IC employees we should all get together and talk about the big picture stuff... we don't ever all get together, we just feed information into Ottawa and they feed back to us.

3.4	Other Issues

In the course of the conversation with the regional representatives, a number of other program issues and considerations were mentioned.

3.4.1	Geographic Issues

Two respondents had very specific concerns about the school boundaries, and how the Administrative Centre areas had been constructed. One had a problem with the fact that a large metropolitan area had been arbitrarily split down the middle, and that there were conflicts between schools and confusion on the part of the potential clients about who to call.

The boundaries for the Program areas are poorly designed. They split an area down a main street. It was poorly done, and has caused problems. Now we have agreements between schools to market in each other's areas, but there are a lot of problems with this... [some schools] are more aggressive than others.

The other respondent had problems with reaching a large potential rural clientele as all the SBAs were located in the cities.

We have many geographic problems. In the rural areas, where there are many successful businesses, they do not know about the net. In the city most everyone knows about the net. There is a large market in the rural areas, but we cannot get to it.

3.4.2	Regional Differences

All respondents indicated that most program marketing had to be undertaken by the individual ACs because of the inherent regional differences between the areas. Two respondents took the thought further, and indicated that the structure of the Student Connection Program was still too limiting, as it did not allow the Administrative Centres to respond to clear regional differences outside of program marketing.

PEI has very different needs from Ontario, the Prairies, and British Columbia. Issues are very regional. You can't dictate pricing and strategy for all the regions from Ottawa. Why are we charging the same price in BC as in PEI? We have to respond to the regional differences and markets.

3.4.3	Translating Electronic Resources

Respondents with French Administrative Centres in their areas had some problems with the length of time that it was taking to translate the electronic program resources. They felt that this was limiting their usefulness.

It is slower for us to get information. The CDs took six months extra to translate into French. This could be quicker. [Timely] translation of electronic materials is key. The web site is good, and we would like to be able to use it.

4.0	INDUSTRY CANADA HEAD OFFICE

In this round of interviews, we spoke with four Industry Canada head office representatives. We asked them to talk about how they felt the Program was doing, the biggest changes that have taken place, and the biggest challenges that lie ahead.

4.1	The Current State of the Program

Most of the respondents expressed guarded optimism when asked about the current state of the Program. Everyone said that there have been substantial improvements over the last year, in almost every aspect. It was stressed that when assessing the current state of the SCP, the status of the Program one year ago had to be considered, and that in this context, it had undergone a remarkable turnaround.

In order to get an idea of where we are now, you have to know where we have been.

The Program is working a lot better than it did before... it is going to be great. It is not great yet, but it is going to be.

In the last year, it has been changing and adapting what it delivers, how it delivers it, and who it delivers it to.

Last fall there was not a clear focus of where the Program was going, and what it was trying to do. Now there is a focus.

4.2	Changes to the Program

To understand how the Program has changed since the pilot, we asked each of the respondents to outline what they thought had been the biggest changes, and what prompted the changes in the first place. The areas that have been changed and significantly altered included the following.

•	Program marketing;

•	Program culture;

•	The management relationships and communication;

•	The on-line resource;

•	The understanding of the client groups; and,

•	The preparations for the funding phase-out.

4.2.1	Changes in Program Marketing

In the marketing plan drafted for the Pilot Program, Industry Canada headquarters had been assigned the role of providing a list of "hot leads" to the Administrative Centres. This activity never happened, as it was found to be infeasible. In the absence of this list, little marketing activity took place, and no marketing materials were made available to the individual Administrative Centres until the recent change in program management.

Marketing has been a big change... we did not really have marketing before, and there was certainly a high call for it.

The changes in the national marketing effort were therefore made because of a general lack of national support. A decision to address this issue and find out what was the most effective way of promoting program marketing at the national level was then undertaken..

Once we looked at the things we needed we realized that we did not have a standardized curriculum across the schools so we did not have a consistent message. We didn't have a consistent look, and each school was doing their own thing.

In a effort to standardize the national look and product, a variety of promotional packages and materials were developed for the Program with a uniform message, logo, and content. These materials were then distributed to the individual Administrative Centres and schools for them to use as needed in their own individual regional marketing effort.

What we did was standardize it [the Program marketing material], get a common look and feel. We released some more marketing money in the local institutions as well as that is how I feel marketing should be done after you get a consistent look.

One part of the marketing strategy that still needs work is the instillation of a consistent definition of program and the product across all SCP organizations. This is a program area that is currently being addressed by head office staff through on-going communication with the SCP organizations.

Standardization and definition of what the Project and product is all about were key marketing strategies, although we still do not have that message [the definition of the Program and product] out to the Associations and the schools yet.

One positive spin-off of the move to a unified look has been the effect it has had on the moral of the Student Business Advisors. One respondent indicated that they had received feedback indicating that it has given students a sense of belonging and national image. This is an important side-effect, as another respondent stated that making students feel like they are part of the Program should be more of a priority.

4.2.2	Changes in Program Culture

One of the key areas that respondents felt has changed recently is program culture. This has been a very important turn-around, as it facilitated further program changes and adaptations.

The attitude and mood of the organizational bodies that ran the Program was very poor last year, as one respondent described;

...there was tremendous hostility between Industry Canada headquarters and the Associations. You'd go to meetings and there were literally violent disagreements and yelling and outright hostility. It was a really uncomfortable atmosphere. There was an awful lot of mistrust and promises that were not followed up on both sides.

In an effort to change the mood and culture of the Program, communication was increased, and trust was bought by disclosing program details and information that were subjects of contention, such as financial details.

To improve things the biggest thing we did was just shut-up and listen more than anything.

To get the trust back it was partly a case of opening up the books and letting everybody see what we had and where we were spending it.

As a result of these actions, respondents said that there has been a palpable change in mood and program culture. Although things are not perfect, there are improvements.

That [the infighting] has now calmed down significantly... we have a huge way to go but at least we have an environment where we can improve things.

At first there was no constructive negativity, now there is constructive criticism. [We get] lots of feedback on the on-line resource, and the training program.

4.2.3	Communication

The chain of communication in the SCP is still a problematic area. Although many changes have been made to improve the way communication is handled, there are still problems that head-office staff see as restrictive to effective program administration.

We asked respondents of they felt fully informed on all aspects of the Program. Their responses clarified the nature of the current communication deficiencies.

I think that the communication fault is at the policy decision making level where the organizational chart sort of splits and the Associations are responsible for delivering the message to the schools and I don't see those messages. By the time it gets to the end of the line it can be a different message. I don't always hear the message at that basic [school] level. In that respect I don't always know if what is being said at the policy level is being done at the implementation level.

We asked why this communication problem existed, and were told that it went back to the pilot program, when the Associations felt that their administrative responsibilities were being handled by the Industry Canada.

There is a reluctance to send communication because the Associations are the administrators of the Program, so they feel they have an obligation to administrate. If we are the contact with the schools then that is a key administrative role that they are not taking part in...it used to be that the Associations really felt out of the loop.

A formal communications chain was set up for the Program in response to the problems expressed by the Associations. The formal chain has messages being passed from Industry Canada to the Associations, and then on to the Administrative Centres and the schools. The current problems have arisen as the formal chain of communication implemented to remove the managerial conflicts have given rise to a new set of complications.

...we have all made a conscious effort to ensure that the Associations take more of an administrative role. But now the pendulum has swung in the direction where they have taken on too much of an administrative role in order to compensate for the time when they were left out of a lot of areas, now they are trying to compensate by leaving us out of too much.

They have to justify their existence to us, but they also need to be of value, and if the communication bypasses them it reduces the value of the Association. This is part of the reason that they are not CCing me on the e-
mails.

Respondents said that the current communication set-up is causing problems because Industry Canada personnel do not get the information they need to effectively manage the Program. They can only react to problems that they find out about when they have grown so large that they bypass the normal communication channels.

Everything is handled very privately. I will not hear about something until it mushrooms into something that warrants more attention.

One respondent stated that the root of the problem lay with the fact that there was not a clear understanding of managerial roles. The Associations do not understand that facilitating communication would not compromise their role as program administrators.

I think the Associations have to become more at ease with their managerial role, and our role so they do not think they are compromising their role as administrators by including us in that communication loop.

Finally, when asked how this problem could be solved, the respondents said that a better understanding of what was expected of each administrative group might alleviate the problem.

Everyone has to become more at ease with their role and what their role is. The roles and responsibilities have to be spelled out more precisely, and in doing that there will not be such a grab for power, power being knowledge of the Program.

A key to facilitating this understanding is continued communication between the administrative bodies. This is clearly the intent of the head office staff, as expressed by one respondent.

The only thing to do is to keep the lines of communication open. The minute we stop talking we are sunk.

One other source of communication problems was the relationships between the Associations and the Administrative Centres. One respondent stated that they received complaints from the Administrative Centres concerning the Associations.

We're getting complaints like they are too black and white. They don't have any degree of flexibility. They give orders but don't explain why those orders are being given. There are too many of these comments to make me think that there is not some truth to it.

In response to these problems, face-to-face meetings were arranged between the Associations and the ACs. The respondents indicated that these meetings had appeared to have cleared up some of the misunderstandings in the short-run, but that continued communications and interaction was required to prevent problems from re-occurring.

The face to face meetings with the Associations actually meeting the schools were good. More of these kind of things are needed... some of the regions would rather have conference calls, and are trying it to see how it works. Whatever it is, we need to have more conference calls or more meetings, and it has to be a part of the Program.

4.2.4	The On-Line Resource

All respondents acknowledged that the on-line resource was one of the major improvements that have recently been made to the Program.

The development of a quality on-line tool was seen by the respondents as a key requirement long-term success. It is in-line with the ideas and technology that drives the SCP.

It reflects what we are trying to deliver... an understanding of a higher form of communication. It is congruent with what we are doing. Before it seemed like an inherent paradox that we were delivering a high-tech service with low-tech means.

The on-line resource solved several problems with the Program. The areas that it immediately addressed were:

•	The lack of quality, standardized training across all the SBAs in Canada;

•	The lack of program consistency at the national level; and,

•	The inability of the Program curriculum to adapt to the changes and requirements of Internet technology.

It gives us continuity across the country as far as making sure that all our students are trained to an acceptable level.

It gives legitimacy to our program because we have become a national program with one message that we take.

It is a dynamic teaching and learning resource that, unlike a manual, can be customized to a particular student and client need.

4.2.5	Understanding of the Client Groups

One of the biggest challenges facing the SCP management is reaching the target number of clients trained by March, 1999. This is key because the external perception of the Program's success will be gauged by whether or not this goal has been reached.

We have a certain number of clients we have set as the goal of the Program by the completion of March, 1999. In March if we have a spectacular program with a great on-line resource and so many students who have gone on to get related jobs in that field, yet we still haven't reached that level of clients trained, in some respects the Program will not be a success.

In response to this problem, head-office staff have been looking at the Program objectives and goals. An important observation made by one respondent is that the obligation of the Program is to introduce small business managers to the potential that the Internet has to meet their daily business needs.

Respondents said that they have to redefine who and what a client is. The original perception of a client as a person who received 15 hours of training for $150, and just learned how to connect to the Internet was the wrong idea.

Respondents stated that "clients" should include a wider group of people because the Program obligations would be met any time Internet awareness of small/ medium businesses was significantly increased. Suggestions included:

•	Individuals who attend a Student Connections presentation of an hour or more; and,

•	Individuals who access 50 pages or more of the Student Connection web site.

4.2.6	Preparations for the Funding Phase-Out

With the government funding for the Student Connection Program scheduled to be phased-
out, the managerial staff must develop the Program so that it can survive on its own. Respondents said that this goal is becoming more and more important as the funding continues to decline.

According to respondents from the head office, one of the most pressing and important tasks that they are faced with is setting up the framework of the Program so that it will be able to stand on its own when the funding is withdrawn.

At this point the important thing is to implement things well because we don't have an awful lot of time left until the money runs out, and we have to have solid stuff in place. The most important thing now is to do things right, get them in place and make sure everybody understands.

One respondent stated that it was unrealistic to expect all the Administrative Centres to survive once the government pulls out of the Program. With this in mind, extra future support should be given to Administrative Centres that have a good chance of making it on their own, as opposed to propping up other ACs that will close when the funding drys up.

We will have to re-evaluate the number of Admin Centres. Right now because the Program is government funded we have a mandate to provide the Program across the country, but realistically the Program is more in demand in some regions then others. As the funding is reduced, realistically I don't think that some Admin Centres will be able to function.

Finally, there are two other measures that respondents indicated which are being undertaken to help the Program be viable in the future.

•	The Associations are spearheading a sponsorship campaign; and,

•	We are also starting to pursue a franchise model based on the on-line resource that has been developed.

4.3	Final Comments

The respondents at head office mentioned numerous problems with the Student Connection Program that must be solved soon to meet the project goals. However they also expressed optimism at the progress that has been made over the last year, the problems that they have already overcome, and the positive feedback that they have had from clients, participants, and other individuals in government. Some final comments made by respondents include:

There is still a long way to go, but there is more focus now on target audiences and we have more definition of what we are doing.

We are functioning under a reduced budget (from the first year), and the results reflect the hard work that we have done.

We still have some kinks to work out, but I think that changes are now on the logistic level instead of the structural level that they were at one time. When people complain about their relations with their ISP provider instead of the fact that their students are starving, it is not as bad. Everything has to be put in perspective. There has been a significant change in the type of concern.

APPENDIX A

Letter to the Associations

June 16, 1997

CordName1

CoordTitle1

AdministrativeCentre1

CoordAddress1

CoordCity1, CoordProv1 CoordPostalCode1

BY FACSIMILE: CoordFax1

Dear CordName1:

In accordance with Treasury Board requirements, Industry Canada is required to implement an evaluation of the Student Connection Program by March 31, 1999. Prairie Research Associates (PRA) has been contracted by Industry Canada to conduct this evaluation. The evaluation will help management improve the program, and ensure that the program meets its goals as well as the needs of students and business. An important part of this evaluation process consists of telephone interviews with representatives from the ACCC and AUCC, such as yourself.

We would like to request the opportunity for a half-hour telephone interview with you concerning your experiences with the Student Connection Program to date. We hope to talk with at least two representatives from the ACCC and AUCC. Once all the interviews have been completed, we will summarize the results in a short report for the purpose of the evaluation.

The attached document is a short summary of the topics we will discuss with you in the interview. Naturally, if there are any other items of concern or interest which we have omitted, we will be happy to extend the list to fit your needs.

As a follow-up to this interview, we plan to contact you again in the spring of 1998 to see if your items of concern were addressed, how the program has changed, and to contrast your opinions and impressions of the program after a full year of operation.

A representative from PRA will contact you shortly to formally request an interview, and to arrange for a suitable interview time. If you have any questions concerning this project, please feel free to call me at (204) 987-2030. Thank you very much for your cooperation with this important project.

Sincerely,

Clint Skibitzky

Associate

STUDENT CONNECTION PROGRAM INTERVIEW TOPICS

Section 1	Communication With Other Program Organizations (specifically the post-
secondary educational institutions and Industry Canada).

a)	An important part of the AUCC/ACCC's role in the Student Connection Program is enabling communication, and the dissemination of information between participating educational institutions. How frequently have you been communicating with participating post-
secondary institutions? Daily? Weekly? Monthly?

- How do you communicate with the participating post-secondary institutions (Email, conference call, in-person, etc.)?

b)	What is the biggest barrier or problem that you face in facilitating this communication on a regular basis?

c)	Do you feel that there should be more or less communication between the AUCC/ACCC and the post-secondary institutions?

- How much or how often would you recommend communication? What forms of communication would you recommend?

d)	How have you been disseminating information from Industry Canada to the post-secondary institutions?

- What sort of information have you been disseminating?

- Do you have any ideas to improve this process, or to make it more effective?

e)	Are the participating post-secondary institutions sharing information on experiences in the various program aspects, such as program marketing? SBA training? SBA recruitment strategies?

- Do you feel fully informed on all aspects of the program? What would you suggest needs changing?

Section 2	Administration and Management

a)	As part of the on-going evaluation of the Student Connection Program, the AUCC/ACCC is to collect information on SBAs that will allow for the construction of a database. Do you have any suggestions for improvement?

b)	Another role of the AUCC/ACCC is to provide monthly accountable salary advances to post-
secondary institutions. Have these advances been regular?

- What kinds of problems have you encountered when dealing with these advances?

- Do you have any suggestions for improving this procedure?

c)	The AUCC/ACCC is to maintain an account of all fees collected by post-secondary institutions in addition to collecting and monitoring all financial and narrative reports from post-secondary institutions. Have these records been regularly maintained?

- What problems occur when collecting this data?

- Do you have any suggestions for improving this procedure?

d)	What kind of a payment schedule have you established with Industry Canada in conjunction with the participating post-secondary institutions?

- Do you have any plans to change this in the coming term? How will it be altered?

Section 3	Program Design

a)	Have you offered recommendations to Industry Canada on ways to improve and expand the Program?

(IF NO) Have you identified improvements? What has prevented you from informing Industry Canada? How would you improve the communication here?

(IF YES) What kind of recommendations have you made? Were Industry Canada representatives able to adopt any of the changes you recommended? Do you think they will in the future?

Section 4	Other Comments

Do you have any other comments or suggestions concerning the Student Connection Program?

APPENDIX B

Letter to Industry Canada Regional Offices

June 16, 1997

CordName1

CoordTitle1

AdministrativeCentre1

CoordAddress1

CoordCity1, CoordProv1 CoordPostalCode1

BY FACSIMILE: CoordFax1

Dear CordName1:

In accordance with Treasury Board requirements, Industry Canada is required to implement an evaluation of the Student Connection Program by March 31, 1999. Prairie Research Associates (PRA) has been contracted by Industry Canada to conduct this evaluation. The evaluation will help management improve the program, and ensure that the program meets its goals as well as the needs of students and business. An important part of this evaluation process consists of telephone interviews with representatives from Industry Canada Regional Offices, such as yourself.

We would like to request the opportunity for a half-hour telephone interview with you concerning your experiences with the Student Connection Program to date. We hope to talk with at least five regional representatives. Once all the interviews have been completed, we will summarize the results in a short report for the purpose of the evaluation. In this report we will not attribute any of the statements you make to you or to your office. All information will be anonymous.

The attached document is a short summary of the topics we will discuss with you in the interview. Naturally, if there are any other items of concern or interest which we have omitted, we will be happy to extend the list to fit your needs.

As a follow-up to this interview, we plan to contact you again in the spring of 1998 to see if your items of concern were addressed, how the program has changed, and to contrast your opinions and impressions of the program after a full year of operation.

A representative from PRA will contact you shortly to formally request an interview, and to arrange for a suitable interview time. If you have any questions concerning this project, please feel free to call me at (204) 987-2030. Thank you very much for your cooperation with this important project.

Sincerely,

Clint Skibitzky

Associate

STUDENT CONNECTION PROGRAM INTERVIEW TOPICS

a)	How often have you been in contact with the post-secondary educational institutions, and the administrative centre(s) in your area?

- Is this level of communication sufficient?

b)	Have you been able to supply lists of potential business clients to the post-secondary institutions?

- If yes, what was the source of these lists? If no, what has prevented you from communicating this information with the post-secondary educational institutions?

c)	In what other ways have you been able to assist with program marketing?

d)	Do you expect to assist with further program marketing in the coming program terms?

- How will you be providing this assistance?

e)	Have you been able to invite Student Business Advisors to participate at any local events sponsored by Industry Canada?

- What events have they been invited to? Did they participate?

f)	Have you been able to participate in any events sponsored by the post-secondary institutions?

- If yes, what events have you participated in? If no, is this because there were no events to participate it, or was it due to some other reason?

g)	What kind of support for the training of the Student Business Advisors have you been able to provide?

h)	Do you have any plans for further support in the future? How will you provide this support?

i)	Do you have any other comments or suggestions concerning the Student Connection Program?

APPENDIX C

Letter to Industry Canada Head Office

June 16, 1997

CordName1

CoordTitle1

AdministrativeCentre1

CoordAddress1

CoordCity1, CoordProv1 CoordPostalCode1

BY FACSIMILE: CoordFax1

Dear CordName1:

In accordance with Treasury Board requirements, Industry Canada is required to implement an evaluation of the Student Connection Program by March 31, 1999. Prairie Research Associates (PRA) has been contracted by Industry Canada to conduct this evaluation. The evaluation will help management improve the program, and ensure that the program meets its goals as well as the needs of students and business. An important part of this evaluation process consists of telephone interviews with representatives from the Industry Canada head office, such as yourself.

We would like to request the opportunity for a half-hour telephone interview with you concerning your experiences with the Student Connection Program to date. We hope to talk with at least three representative from the head office. Once all the interviews have been completed, we will summarize the results in a short report for the purpose of the evaluation.

The attached document is a short summary of the topics we will discuss with you in the interview. Naturally, if there are any other items of concern or interest which we have omitted, we will be happy to extend the list to fit your needs.

As a follow-up to this interview, we plan to contact you again in the spring of 1998 to see if your items of concern were addressed, how the program has changed, and to contrast your opinions and impressions of the program after a full year of operation.

A representative from PRA will contact you shortly to formally request an interview, and to arrange for a suitable interview time. If you have any questions concerning this project, please feel free to call me at (204) 987-2030. Thank you very much for your cooperation with this important project.

Sincerely,

Clint Skibitzky

Associate

STUDENT CONNECTION PROGRAM INTERVIEW TOPICS

a)	In general, how well do you think the SCP is working out?

b)	Based on the feedback from business, post-secondary institutions, and Regional Industry Canada staff, have you been able to develop program modifications for subsequent program phases?

- If not what has impeded this? How do you think the process could be changed to allow for program changes?

- If yes, what kind of program modifications have been developed? How did you get the information required to identify and implement the change?

c)	Part of the role of the management at Industry Canada headquarters is to set minimum guidelines for Student Business Advisors' training elements. What criteria are currently used for these minimum guidelines?

d)	Are the Administrative Centres adhering to the minimum guidelines?

- Are there any plans to change or adapt these guidelines in future phases of the program?

e)	How has Industry Canada headquarters contributed to the program marketing efforts?

f)	What difficulties have there been in communicating with...

Post-secondary institutions?

The Administrative Centres?

The ACCC or AUCC?

- Have there been any particularly good experiences with any of these groups?

g)	Do you expect organizational or administrative changes to the program in the future?

- What changes should be made?

h)	Have you any other comments or suggestions concerning the Student Connection Program?