Ex. Sudbury Chief Frank Elsner

Ex Sudbury police chief will be in Sudbury Court for "Examination of Discovery"

Ex Sudbury Chief of Police Frank Elsner will be called for " Examination of Discovery" a case against him for false arrest and negligence in investigation.

Elsner is facing allegations, coordinated with City of Greater Sudbury's legal services and human resources department to cover-up misspending tax dollars. Under Elsner's watch an employee who raised voice against corruption in Water Division forcibly removed from Wahnapitae Water Plant using police force.

The case against Elsner with regards to involved in an inappropriate relationship with an unnamed woman and   improperly used the Victoria Police Department's official social media account continues in Victoria.

Elsner paid huge price for his actions and admitted that his career in policing is over.  

Ed Archer: City's new CAO

New CAO begins job at the end of May

Ed Archer, currently the interim city manager and CAO in Regina, is the city's new permanent CAO. 
He begins the new job at the end of May 2016. 
Former Greater Sudbury CAO Doug Nadorozny, was fired in April 2015 and escorted out from the City hall.

 
Benkovich:
Incompetent and controversial practices
 

Benkovich on a loose leash 

The water department has more managers when compared to any other division in the City at a ratio of 1:2. For example, each water division manager supervises 2 employees.

Benkovich continually hires private contractors to do water main repairs despite the higher cost to do so.

Furthermore, Benkovich skillfully manipulates the City's administration. WikiLeaks Sudbury has learned that at least two "sun" vacation trips for Benkovich are paid by contractors. WikiLeaks Sudbury will soon release more information to the public.

Beware, the water and wastewater bill is expected to rise again.

---------------------------------------------------------------------End
Editorial
Released on December 10, 2015 (posted on January 15, 2016)

This article originally published on Harvard Business Review, 76 (1) 124 -134 (1998). Brief overview and excerpts of the articles as follows.

Human Resources configuration ineffective, incompetent, and costly

Should we do away with HR? In recent years, a number of people who study and write about business-along with many who run businesses-have been debating that question. The debate arises out of serious and widespread doubts about HR's contribution to organizational performance. 

Researchers acknowledge  that HR, as it is configured today in many institutions, is indeed ineffective, incompetent, and costly. But he contends that it has never been more necessary. The solution, he believes, is to create an entirely new role for the field that focuses it not on traditional HR activities, such as staffing and compensation, but on business results that enrich the company's value to all stakeholders, and employees. 

Researchers elaborates on four broad tasks for HR that would allow it to help deliver organizational excellence. First, HR should become a partner in strategy execution. Second, it should become an expert in the way work is organized and executed. Third, it should become a champion for employees. And fourth, it should become an agent of continual change. Fulfilling this agenda would mean that every one of HR's activities would in some concrete way help a company better serve its customers or otherwise increase shareholder value. 

Can HR transform itself on its own? Certainly not-in fact, the primary responsibility for transforming the role of HR, Researcher says, belongs to the CEO and to every line manager who works with the HR staff. Competitive success is a function of organizational excellence, and senior managers must hold HR accountable for delivering it.

Make no mistake: this new agenda for HR is a radical departure from the status quo. In most companies

today, HR is sanctioned mainly to play policy police and regulatory watchdog. It handles the paperwork involved in hiring and firing, manages the bureaucratic aspects of benefits, and administers compensation decisions made by others. When it is more empowered by senior management, it might oversee recruiting, manage training and development programs, or design initiatives to increase workplace diversity. But the fact remains: the activities of HR appear to be-and often are disconnected from the real work of the organization.

The new agenda, however, would mean that every one of HR's activities would in some concrete way help the company better serve its customers or otherwise increase stakeholder value. Can HR transform itself alone? Absolutely not. In fact, the primary responsibility for transforming the role of HR belongs to the CEO and to every line manager who must achieve business goals. The reason? Divisional  managers have ultimate responsibility for both the processes and the outcomes of the company.

They are answerable to shareholders for creating economic value, to customers for creating product or service value, and to employees for creating workplace value. It follows that they should lead the way in fully integrating HR into the company's real work. Indeed, to do so, they must become HR champions themselves. They must acknowledge that competitive success is a function of organizational excellence. More important, they must hold HR accountable for delivering it.

Of course, the line should not impose the new agenda on the HR staff. Rather, operating managers and HR managers must form a partnership to quickly and completely reconceive and reconfigure the function - to overhaul it from one devoted to activities to one committed to outcomes. The process will be different in every organization, but the result will be the same: a business era in which the question should we do away with HR? will be considered utterly ridiculous?

Perhaps the greatest competitive challenge companies face is adjusting to-indeed, embracing nonstop change. They must be able to learn rapidly and continuously, innovate ceaselessly, and take on new strategic imperatives faster and more comfortably. Constant change means organizations must create a healthy discomfort with the status quo, an ability to detect emerging trends quicker than the competition, an ability to make rapid decisions, and the agility to seek new ways of doing business. To thrive, in other words, companies will need to be in a never ending state of transformation, perpetually creating fundamental, enduring change.

Reference
Ulrich, D. (1998). A new mandate for human resources, Harvard Business Review, 76 (1) 124 -134

Related document
Should we do away with HR?