Navigating Major Programmes

LECIA: In Canada, we used to have this agreement between provinces and the feds. The provinces, you look after health care and schools and roads, and we'll transfer some money from the federal government for you to look after those. We're going to look after the prisons and the military and municipalities. You know, you build the community centers and so on. Now we've got three levels of government mucking around in every piece of infrastructure.
SHORMILA: You're listening to navigating major programs, home to the conversations Elevating the infrastructure industry. I'm Shormila Chatterjee.
RICCARDO: I'm Riccardo Cosentino.
EVGENIA: And I'm Evgenia Jelena. And together we press the industry's experts about the complexities of program management, emerging digital trends, and the critical leadership skills required to approach this multi billion dollar project.
RICCARDO: Let's see where the conversation takes us.
SHORMILA: Hello, everybody, and welcome to an episode of Master Builder. I'm Shormila and I am so happy that we have a full house today. We are all three here, which I don't know that happens very often, but I'm joined by Evgenia. How are you, Evgenia?
EVGENIA: Hi, Shormila. I'm doing great, thank you.
SHORMILA: Oh, great. And Riccardo is here as well. How are you, Riccardo?
RICCARDO: I'm great. I'm really looking forward to this one today, Full house.
SHORMILA: I mean, there's a reason why we all attended this one is because, uh, we have all had the pleasure of working, uh, alongside our guest today, which is Lecia Stewart. How are you, Lecia
LECIA: I'm well, thank you. Wonderful, wonderful, uh, to hear your voices.
SHORMILA: Yeah. So good to see you. So before we dive in and, uh, we've, even before we hit record, have been already our brains are buzzing about all these questions we want to ask you. If you could just introduce yourself and tell us a little bit about who you are and what you do.
LECIA: Okay, well, I'll try and, uh, make this short and leave the details for the conversation. Uh, uh, I'm Lecia Stewart. I am the founder and principal of a consulting firm called the Stewart Group, which, namely, somebody told me once, when you're starting up a firm, don't make people look for you. Just name it after yourself. So that's how it really started, which I started in, uh, 2005, actually.
SHORMILA: I didn't realize it's been that long.
EVGENIA: Wow.
LECIA: Right? These days we do consulting, uh, work at the Stuart Group on large infrastructure projects. I would say the core of our work is in the transportation field, rail projects. Often I can get the odd toe into an operating uh scenario in transit. But my real passion is on rail infrastructure. Urban rail, commuter rail, intercity rail and largely on the front end of those projects, really helping clients uh, uh often through the concept and definition stage, uh, putting together teams for uh, the procurement phase and then helping them get out into the market. I do have a background in rail on the build side at uh the Stuart Group. I've avoided uh building anything again uh, but uh, it was an informative experience. I was the um, founding project director and president for Vancouver's commuter system called the West Coast Express which was the first uh, big infrastructure project I led. And it opened in 1995. Took 18 and a half, well actually 17 and a half months from start to finish. And it was uh, uh what we call, it's not what we do anymore. Right. But it is a good testament to what you can do if you simplify things and move away the clutter. And I ran it as president of the operating company for three years which was terrific experience to see where infrastructure sort of design meets public and uh, real time operating utilization and then really figuring out how to manage a project to deliver the kind of operating performance that you hoped it would and the changes you need to make. So startup is a super great experience and steady state operation, although wasn't really exciting was really good training for me uh and I've been able to bring that expertise I think back into the front end of infrastructure. When we look at you know, concepts and uh, the construction phase. I went on from that to do something quite a bit more complex which was a big extension of Skytrain called the Millennium Line and it was um, 21km 13 stations, also done this time in three and a half years. So think about that. And we didn't really have a design pardon exactly what wow. And it was 97 and uh, the government of the day decided they weren't convinced that a light rail system given all the installed Skytrain that we had already built here was the right technology. So I got thrown in to do a technology review and come up with an estimate in three months to m move from Skytrain technology to from light rail technology to Skytrain. I'm kind of agnostic about that but you know, tell me what you want to build and why you want to do um, it. And it was green lighted. And so when we started we were still negotiating on the sort of alignment with five different municipalities station locations. It was really, it almost killed me. But we did open that in three and a half years and it was also under Budget in record time. So that's kind of my, kind of my thing.
EVGENIA: And then later in life, later after that. I think you also have experience with some corporate.
LECIA: Uh yeah, I did a full 10 years in government which was um, super, super formative experience. I tell anybody in business that it's really worthwhile to do a stint in government, you know, three years, four years, whatever, learn how the process works. It's easy to stand on the outside and be very critical, but it's very different to really understand the complexity of government. So I spent 10 years in government and then uh, went on uh, after the Millennium Line. I can say for certainty I didn't want to see government for a while. I didn't want to be in another, I didn't want to be in a municipal hall, I didn't want to wrestle with that. So I went east actually. It's probably where I uh, maybe I didn't meet you till after, but I was the senior vice president for Bombardier for High Speed Rail and they had, I remember vividly them offering me the job and I went, well that's weird. I'm not an engineer and you're a manufacturing company, you make great things. But what would I do? They said well we need someone who doesn't think like us and you know we're trying to open up a new, an entirely new market here of high speed. Of course Bombardier made regional jets so we had a lot of expertise on uh, what the composition of intercity travel was and how we thought that would calibrate to a high speed market. And it was after 9, 11. So there was a lot of hope that there would be a diversification in travel patterns in the key city pairs around North America. So after um, turning the job down a few times I took it and I got, I got to Montreal on discovery. It was 2001 when I started. I was the only um, woman in the senior executive ranks. I was the only non engineer, I was probably the only Anglophone.
SHORMILA: I was gonna say was that a triple threat?
EVGENIA: Oh no.
LECIA: And I was the only person to ever move from the west to Montreal. Right. So I was a, ah, full on science experiment back there.
EVGENIA: An alien
LECIA: and I thought, I thought for sure they would come by and figure out that I was a complete phony and didn't really know what I was doing. Right. I really wanted to uh, experience in a publicly traded global company. And there weren't very many, you know in the beginning of the 2000s. There still aren't very many. There's, there's More. So there I went and um, I tell this story. The first week I was there, some very nice gentleman came by my office out in San Bernard, says typical kind of gray, blue, sterile kind of SNC or Atkins Realis type engineering office. And they said, madame Stewart, we are here to paint your office. And I said, well, why? Well, we, we just thought that you would want, uh, a different color. I went, no, no, it's fine. Don't draw any attention here.
EVGENIA: Go away.
LECIA: Right next week they came back and said, madam Stuart, we are here with your plants. And no one had plants, right?
EVGENIA: I had plants, special treatment already.
LECIA: I thought, well, why, why do I have a. Well, we heard you were here and that you might like some plants. I did keep the plants, I would say, you know. And I proceeded to get on a plane and visit 17 cities a month. Which wasn't so bad when, when we used to get to operating reviews where we got to travel around on the uh, uh, the Challenger and the Learjet. Then the Stock went from $21, which is where I started, at about $15. They decided all the executives needed to get off the plane and get onto the commercial
EVGENIA: Get on the train.
LECIA: The president had got to continue to travel. And we still had 17 cities, uh, of operating reviews all over, all over the world. So yeah. And by the time I left in 2005 it was trading at $2.30. So it was a tough but a tremendous, tremendous experience. I was on the growth side of the business, which was very challenging because when everybody else is chucking bodies out the door and downsizing and laying people off, I was getting resources and attention to build this next division. So it was a, it was a, it was a great experience. I um, didn't build anything, but I had great campaigns for high speed rail.
EVGENIA: Sometimes it's the strategy that makes, makes the work exciting and you can, you know, you're in growth, you can justify that.
LECIA: It's a punishing file. These days I'm working on the Alto high speed rail project and I had sworn, uh, really ever since 2005 I've noticed, or 2005, I guess I have not touched a high speed project. I would get a call a month, typically, Right. Of some project somewhere and I would just say, yeah, uh, probably not the right person for that. Right. Because I was kind of, I was scarred. I was scarred from that file. And also I did work on the Toronto Montreal corridor with Bombardier back in um, 2003. We got it all the way to uh, the cabinet table for a funding decision. When prime, um, Minister Chretien stepped down and uh, cabinet meeting was cancelled and Paul Martin became leader and he was not as big a fan of rail. So it perennially, you know, we get the hole and we dig it and we throw the high speed, uh, study of the day in the hole and resurrect it five or ten years.
EVGENIA: Lecia it seems like you've, you obviously have an amazingly interesting and diverse experience and you've delivered and worked on major transit projects from almost every angle. You're describing. Owner side, work advisor, public sector. What's your favorite angle? Where do you see where you personally enjoy working the most? Where do you think is, I guess the power pocket is if you were to look at these projects and who actually moves them forward?
LECIA: Well, you can't be an advisor and a consultant in this business if you haven't done it. So for me, sort of a sum total, right? Working on the owner side and getting big projects built, incredible experience working on the private sector side and bidding on multi billion dollar, uh, projects and then trying to, you know, trying to figure out how all, you know, the value and money comes together and then finally being able to provide advice is only because I was able to do those things and I can see things from both the private and public side. And you know, the answer to the question is I obviously like this spot more than the owner's side or the straight, uh, pure public sector side because I've been doing it for the longest and it's not that I haven't, uh, I don't get an offer a month to go build something somewhere. One thing about, um, the advisory services business that I've been really clear about is you have to be prepared to tell truth to power. You know, I'm not a big firm, I am not an advisory, ey, Deloitte, whatever. So why do people come to me, right, or come to this small boutique consulting firm, the Stewart Group? It's because I will tell them the truth. Uh, they don't have to take the advice. Right? Uh, I'm absolutely happy to help you, whatever path you decide to take, but I'm pretty good at, uh, getting to the bottom of things and then helping teams that are stuck. You know, institutionally there's so many trade offs you have to make. Um, when I left Bombardier in 2005, the President at the time said, you know, well, you could, you could do or be anything you want here. And I said, yeah, but I don't, I don't see myself in your job. And he said, at the time, you know, I, I get that. I wish I'd done it years ago. And he called me up literally the following Monday and he started talking to me about something going on in Toronto and I said, well, I don't work for you anymore. He said, oh, that's just a detail. We'll put you on a contract. And that's exactly how it all started. You know, they were my, my anchor client for a while, but. And immediately when I was able to sort of shed all of the trade offs of whose, whose time was it, what department was a priority, this or that, all the internal corporate things where they couldn't really see their way. If somebody pays you for your advice, the chances are they're going to listen to it and there's a very big chance that they're going to take it as well. And I found that was really the Runway. I thought, this is interesting. I used to work in the company and I wasn't able to break through in the same way as I was, uh, until I left. Riccardo, you're smiling.
EVGENIA: He might have similar feelings. Ah, but no,
RICCARDO: yeah, yeah,
LECIA: but he still has a job
RICCARDO: comment. No comment. Because I'm still, I'm still employed by corporations. Right. So I'll keep my mouth shut.
LECIA: Yeah, well, it is, you know, and big government is the same, right? There's a lot of rules and there's a lot of, a lot of process in government and getting to, getting to actually be a doer. I couldn't do today what I did, uh, with West Coast Express and the Millennium Line. It would be impossible. You know, you, you just, uh, the world is a more complex place obviously than it was in 2001. And there's just a lot of, um, installed barriers to doing things differently and making change that uh, we do need to think about as a profession that we are taking way too much time to do what we need to do in big infrastructure. And uh, it's costing way too much money. So, you know, it's really for all of us to ponder. How do we do it differently?
EVGENIA: You are alluding to something that I wanted to point out, that the two projects that you mentioned that you worked on, Millennium Line and West Coast Express in Vancouver, delivered years ago, they were delivered on time and on budget, something that is virtually unheard of today. Transit projects. The immediate question that comes to mind, what was different? Or what are we doing? What's wrong now? Or what can we learn from the past?
LECIA: Yeah, well, that's not a simple question. Sometimes you get a bit lucky Right. Sometimes you find the right tailwind and you get the right people. People make all the difference. Right? Empowering people to do their jobs and not strapping them down with an unending amount of process and then clearing the way. There's always people, uh, on higher ups and issues that will come up in leadership. Your job is to clear away the shopping carts so that the people who've been, uh, appointed to do these, uh, jobs can do them. So you do have to have a fair amount of, um, ability to take the heat, make the decision, make the call. The thing about projects is they move very, very quickly. And you have to make so many decisions every day. And if you ponder on each one and over analyze it and then you make a mistake, it sticks out terribly. Right. If you move very quickly, people maybe don't notice the little, the little bumps along the way. For sure. On all of those projects, there are things that I look at and go, ugh, I would have, I would have done that guideway a little differently. I wish I'd have had a little stronger, you know, QA person in the, in the precast yard because the color of the concrete over low heat is terrible.
EVGENIA: Right?
LECIA: So, but on balance, uh, you know, you got away against, you got away that, against, uh, doing what the public gave you a social license to do, and that is get something built and get it done as, as quickly as possible. I have a couple of thoughts on, uh, why, uh, infrastructure has become so burdened with delays and costs. And, um, it has a lot to do with the kind of programmatic approach that came across the border. We had a lot, you know, Canada has a history of doing things kind of efficiently. We did. You, uh, would always, you know, I was building infrastructure. We would do, you know, benchmarking against US roads, US transit systems. We'd go, God, we did that for 50 million a kilometer. And they're spending 250 million a kilometer in Los Angeles to do the same thing. And we would chuckle and think ourselves really smart and clever. And then all of the kind of smaller, um, engineering firms, particularly in Canada, got bought up by big firms and they brought over the border a way of doing business that came out of the Federal Transportation Administration, perhaps, you know, oversight from various levels of government. In Canada, we kind of had this, we used to have this agreement between provinces and the feds is, you know, the provinces, you look after health care and schools and roads, and we'll transfer some money from the federal government for you to look after those. We're going to look after the prisons and the military and municipalities. You know, you build the community centers. And so now we've got three levels of government mucking around in every piece of infrastructure. Rather than transferring sort of revenue on a tax basis. Right. On a per head basis, you're responsible for transportation. We get government in all projects at all times. And that's one of the key contributors. Everybody thinks they need a report, they need an oversight, they need an accounting. We gave you $27 million for that, uh, intersection. And so that has not helped. I'm of the view that government, uh, should agree one level of government or another is responsible for certain infrastructure and then they should get out of the way. That's really, it's slowed down the development and funding, uh, of projects as you get into this cycle. And then larger institutional sort of agencies. I understand why they were created. Um, I'm just not sure that we don't need to have a second look at this big agency approach. You know, when I was building infrastructure, we had a project office. We had, you know, 30 people in it for the project. And then they all lost their job at the end of the project. And you know, it really, it was just, you know, uh, and they loved it. They loved it. Right. The best thing they could do was work, work themselves out of a job. That was a win. And now it's become very institutionalized. And you know, you do want to, you do want to retain, I think as government, you do want to retain some capacity to manage and develop these things. But it is, it is a fine, it's fine line.
EVGENIA: Yeah, it almost, it almost sounds like you have a, uh, similar ideas when you're describing being, you know, an independent advisor and consultant. That lean approach to, you know, addressing the problem. Something that we could use, you know, across government levels.
LECIA: Yeah, I can help your people succeed. Right. But I don't need to bring in 20 people to oversee the work. Of the 20 people that you've hired to do the work. Right. That generally doesn't result in a lot of value add. You can build a, you know, a big, uh, a big bottom line, a big top line in a business, but not the business I want it to be in.
EVGENIA: Ever talk to us a little bit about your views on how kind of the influence around these projects? So you're someone who gets to see, you know, business cases, feasibility study, even before they become publicly available. Walk us through that process. I'm, um, I'm always fascinated to know how those decisions are shaped, how, you know, who's uh, influencing those Things before they become private. What, sorry? Before they become public. Uh, how has this been for you? Behind the shadows.
LECIA: Behind the shadows. In the shadows. Um, so, first of all, you got to understand. Riccardo asked me at the beginning if I'd ever considered running for politics, and I said no. Uh, but I had been asked many times. I learned that, you know, we need to have a little more respect for people in political office than probably we do right now. And I've worked with a lot of really incredible people who served in public office who are there for all the right reasons and do some great things, but they need help. Because it's you. You know, you go into these big, complex agencies, whether it's health or transportation or education, and you want to make change, and yet you can't find a way. There's always someone who say, well, we tried that before. So when working with. And I do. I still do some concept work on some formative rail projects, for instance, where I'll do a concept plan for government. And you really have to work through those early decision makers who are often elected councils. They can be, uh, they can be elected, uh, municipally, federally, provincially, and they're critical. If you do not have a political champion and a public infrastructure project, you don't have a project. So shame on everyone who holds people, uh, in political office with disdain. It's wrong, it isn't necessary, and they're a critical bridge for us. The alternative is that you don't have a democracy. Right. So this is what, uh. And it's hard sometimes. People in technical fields don't necessarily like to, uh, explain how things work, you know, to the uninitiated.
EVGENIA: the political science behind the.
LECIA: And I think. I think that's one of the things I'm really good at. I'm really. I, uh, simplify things. I'm not an engineer, you know, I'm a business grad. Uh, I simplify things. I allow the space to talk it through and ask, uh, any question you want and not feel intimidated by that. Right. Building up, uh, understanding and champions, uh, for these initiatives is the number one thing you need to get started. You can always find people to do the work. It's really getting the mandate and the funding to get it going is the more challenging part.
SHORMILA: And something we should just. I was just going to say something just kind of going back to you, the individual, a little bit. The thing that you just said resonates with what you said at Bombardier, that nobody thinks like you and I. My experience with you has always been, you've had this ability to have very direct conversations, but not in a way that people feel defensive. How did you like the ability to tell the truth and have these difficult conversations regularly? How did you get comfortable in that? Because a lot of people, to Evgenia's point, we, especially on the technical side, we want the numbers and the data to do the talking. We don't always have the, I don't know, the gumption, uh, necessarily to have those conversations. And I think that's where a lot of the things fall apart, to be honest with you, is when there isn't everybody sort of avoiding conflict and the Canadianness maybe gets in the way. Where did you find that? How do you have that?
LECIA: I gotta tell you a secret. I gotta tell you a secret.
SHORMILA: Then tell me.
LECIA: Because my first, uh, my first degree was in journalism, and I was a reporter at, uh, three Canadian daily newspapers as a child. Reporter, huh?
EVGENIA: What do you say? Second degree, Shormila.
LECIA: I literally had to go out and interview people absolutely cold on matters that I knew absolutely nothing about. That someone would have spent five years writing a PhD thesis on something and they would be releasing this report. It could be science, it could be technology, it could be anything. And you had to summarize that in probably, you know, 14 or 10 or whatever paragraphs that made sense under extreme pressure. Right? Deadlines all the time. This is back in the days when there was actually print newspapers. Right. So I worked at the Ottawa Journal, I worked in Calgary at the Albertan, and I started at a small newspaper in British Columbia, Nelson. And I think, to answer your question, that's really where I got the training to be comfortable with subject matter that I may not know deadly squat about initially, but to be able to handle, uh, handle that and, you know, sort of work my way through with people and um, process to figure out what, uh, what needs to be done. So you just. It's a skill set that either you got it or you don't. You got to be super fast on your feet and you got to work well under, under, uh, adverse conditions, I guess. So that's part of it. That's really part of it.
EVGENIA: That's truly interesting. And you know what, the more I get to talk to people and to interview, I'm starting to realize and kind of reflecting back some of the people in our line of work, you know, major projects, uh, delivery side, I'm thinking bid management, proposal management. Some of the successful people that grew in this industry are actually coming from either English language undergrad or journalism or political science. Um, and specifically those kind of non technical roles that they were kind of able to learn fast and synthesize information and then cater to these different subject matter experts or disciplines. I think there is something to it. And you're obviously confirming my observation with your experience.
LECIA: Let's look at the build out of the skytrain system in British Columbia. It's not a well known fact that all of the expansion projects in the last uh, 20 years have been led by women who were non engineers. Right. I was a non engineer. I led the uh, construction of the Millennium Line. I was followed by Jane Byrd who was a lawyer, who led the Canada Line project, who was followed by Amanda Farrell who was a um, English grad, who was my first assistant corporate secretary at the Millennium Line, who built the Evergreen Line and then went on to of course head up the big mega agency TI Corp. And the Broadway subway is being led by, wait for it, a woman. I think we finally got an engineer in one of the spots. Well, for a while actually. Lauren Mathias, who's just gone to um, Seattle, incredibly bright young woman, is um, a finance grad. So I just think that it. Maybe it's. Maybe it's a bit of an anomaly out here. Maybe it's uh. I think there are more women in the field. There are more non technical people because there's nothing wrong with being technically excellent in those leadership roles. But it's not the only skill set that you need. Right. In either case, you need uh, great developmental skills in human behavior, in leadership. These are the hallmarks uh, of great leaders in our industry who uh, display characteristics that are not necessarily noted for the most excellent design for that tunnel that we've ever seen in our life.
SHORMILA: Right.
LECIA: They leave a lasting footprint by their um, through their leadership abilities.
EVGENIA: I'm so grateful for you, um, highlighting this interesting fact. I, I think this is really, it's, it's an, it's an anomaly. It's, it's pretty unique and I think it's not really covered very well broadly. I think it's one of those things.
SHORMILA: I think. Do you know the T shirt with the Beatles names on? I feel like we need to.
EVGENIA: This is our first. Yeah, yeah. First merch Hall.
SHORMILA: Riccardo.
EVGENIA: What do you think?
SHORMILA: Like a sewer barrel?
EVGENIA: Yeah, yeah.
SHORMILA: I'm okay.
EVGENIA: We're calling it. We're Going to Get Teachers by Christmas Light rail system. Um, uh, women. Yeah.
LECIA: It's. The interesting thing is I'm in touch with all of those women regularly. I'm going to see Jane next week. Jane Bird. I see Amanda, uh, for lunch on Monday like we do. Uh, although it's not an expressed bond, it's in a way, it's not organizationally prominent individually. There is an incredible bond there that um, we all get together in about 30 seconds. We've solved, we think we've solved all the problems, which of course we have not.
EVGENIA: But you're collectively have lived through such a unique experience at different phases of these projects. And I'm sure each one of you would have a slightly different version of the story, um, and slightly different experience. I would hope that as the Skytrain, uh, extensions progressed, it got, you know, better, easier in some way or another for the next woman coming after. But I want to ask you a question. You're describing a very perfect scenario of in a way women supporting women, you know, learning from each other and kind of that, you know, transition project based. Talk to us more about it. How has your experience been as a woman in, you know, highly technical, male dominated field?
LECIA: No problem. Honestly. It's been uh, uh, for as many times as you might have got a bit of a stink eye off of one corner or whatever, it's also been an advantage at times for certain. When I started out, ah, you know, I started at the West Coast Express in 1993, I really was one of the very few women at the time that was, you know, heading up any infrastructure. And because you're the only one, it was like they made room, they made space. Uh, I probably got into more rooms and had more opportunities in some ways because I was a woman. And they figured, oh God, do you know anyone? Do you know anyone? Uh, when I was building out the team at the Millennium Line, I remember all my male colleagues who were in a sort of a leadership role. The only rule I had for them on uh, sort of equity was have you interviewed anybody that doesn't look like you? And they'd go, well, what do you mean? Uh, I just want one candidate or whatever that maybe doesn't look like you. You don't have to, you don't have to hire them. We don't have to hire them, but you have to have interviewed someone who. Wow. But I don't know anyone like. Oh, I know, that's why I'm asking you, have you interviewed anyone?
RICCARDO: That's the point.
LECIA: And just that little thing, we had a 50% women at the, at the leadership table on that project. That one little thing was no, there was no targets, there was no metrics. It was just a very simple way and a non threatening way in a Way to say, let's just think about this a little differently. And then they would call somebody and say, do you know any women or any, anybody of diversity that does this work? Right. And they go, well, I don't, but someone else does.
SHORMILA: And you know, but that's something that I always admire of you, Lisha. You don't seem to have a chip on your shoulder. You're not trying to necessarily lead with it. But I mean you are who you are and it's sort of like I am an expert who happens to be a woman who.
LECIA: And a non engineer.
SHORMILA: And a non engineer. And I think very differently. And I love that. I mean we kind of have these internal debates of like, how much do we focus on that even in the podcast? And I feel like you're sort of like, I'll use it when it's advantageous and when it's not, then we'll roll with the punches. That sound, it kind of sounds like
LECIA: that's exactly the theory, uh, or the practice. Right. I am surprised. I did a little uh, International Women's Day talk out at Translink, which has a very, very diverse group of employees and is a great employer. Right. But I was surprised at the extent to which the young women, uh, that are in, you know, managerial roles or you know, moving up were still very, very, they felt very held back by gender related issues. More having a young family. Right. Needing to accommodate, you know, being a wife, being a mother, all of the things caring for parents and still be, uh, considered for leadership roles. And I actually, I just have to say, not nothing to do really with trans. I was just really surprised that at this time we're still struggling with things that, um, I wrongfully conclude, uh, and admittedly I'm wrong about this, are in the rear view mirror. They're not. And, and it does, it does continue to be challenging for many.
EVGENIA: Hm. Because there's a couple of ways you can look at that. I mean you can look at it statistically and you know, we get those statistics in terms of equity, diversity and inclusion. But then you can look at it as, you know, everyday examples. And on the one hand somebody with, with you know, experience that you had in your perspective where you kind of just embrace who you are, what you do and you know, gender and diversity is just part of that and you focus on what you're trying to do versus I think what you're describing. There's a lot of narrative, I hear that as well with kind of younger women that now are able to vocalize and discuss A lot of the problems that maybe in the past we just never opened and we never openly discussed like we knew those problems existed but it was not on the table up uh, for discussion. But now we're talking about it and I wonder if it has something to do with, with that as well where you know, perception of the actual problem versus us talking about it versus what's actually happening is just gets a bit convoluted and it's how you deal with it personally. Just again, do your best, keep going or you stop and try to change the system. And I don't know if we can change the system.
RICCARDO: Let me ask a question. I just want to take you back to the conversation we were having about project on time and on budget. And now in the good old days you were able to achieve that and today we're less able. But I don't think it's a coincidence and maybe I'm drawing a line that doesn't exist. But did the agency responsible for this project, was it the same agency was Translink responsible overall for West Coast Express, Millennium Line, Canada Line?
LECIA: No. All of those big projects were done uh, by the province. Some were paid. Well, they were all paid. The capital costs are generally borne by the provincial government here in British Columbia and the big linear expansion projects have fallen to the province Evergreen Count of the Line, Millennium Line. And of course before 1998 there wasn't even a Translink. Right. It was ah, all run by a crown corporation called BC Transit, which ran both the greater Vancouver area and otherwise. Uh, do I think that that really makes a difference? Uh, no, I think you know, regional or municipal level levels of government should be able to execute these things as well, provided they have the right tools. I always think that the, you know, the main funding agency should be the one that delivers it. There's good accountability there. So. And I have studied governance across um, North America extensively. And if you can show me a governance model that delivers consistent results on big capital infrastructure, I'll eat my handbag. Because it doesn't seem to matter that it really is about uh, the people that run the projects that is the determining. There are some, you know, some factors. Aligning the main funding resource with the decision making is not never a bad idea. Right? It is, uh, there is um, an accountability is super important. But um, I would not say that I have seen a difference in performance. I've worked in Edmonton where we delivered some outstanding results on uh, infrastructure run by the municipality. I've seen it happen in other cities. I've seen Provincial agencies do it well. So I don't um, I don't consider governance a determining factor on infrastructure delivery.
SHORMILA: But are there, are there kind of common elements of the people? When you say the people, maybe,
RICCARDO: but the people within those organization. Like if you could have the same people over and over again doing new projects, the same team,
LECIA: they'd be very tired, wouldn't they, Riccardo?
RICCARDO: Yeah, but I think, well no, I mean, uh, look, I, I do, I do think, I think my, my question was not more about, was less about, I mean a little bit about governance, less about municipality versus provinces, but it was more. Do you think that the culture of the delivering organization has a role to play in the success of the project? I think you're answering, you already answered that.
LECIA: You said yes, sure, of course. Uh, I'm back to sort of project by project, uh, delivery accountability. The more you diffuse projects across a program and there's corporate functions and project related functions, the harder it gets to be accountable for a decision and the more sort of finger pointing that occurs between a corporate entity. Like everything that I've ever done has been spun off as a single purpose with a very, very deliberate focus. Right? And there was nothing else and there was no one else. So you, you kind of see, you're nodding your head but that, that's it, right? Uh, you then, then you, then you can populate the project with you know, good people, medium people, great people. But you're accountable for that, right? If you're, if you're in a leadership role. And so you pick your team, you're accountable for the project and you, you drive it from that uh, from that perspective. And uh, really a single purpose board is also useful.
RICCARDO: Beautiful. You, you literally led me to the next question. I didn't know that we're going to be connected, but like you're actually just connecting it. By the way, I'm also a very big proponent about having a single purpose entity. That sole responsibility is delivered the project, the accountability. But I think we all understand that why that politically maybe at times is not possible, not palatable. And uh, in my studies, in studying major program major projects, one concept that I've come across is should major projects that spans several political cycles, should major project be made politically resilient. And I think a single accountability like uh, what you described is uh, a little bit try to create that insulation from the political cycle. But I've actually had different views. I've had people saying yes, a politician's life is four years, five years. And so you do need to make the project resilient to the political cycle so that the mega project doesn't die every time there's a new new. There's a new government. But then there was another school of thoughts. It's like if you believe in democracy, no, the politician is the ultimate decision maker and, and the politician needs to do what the politician needs to do on every cycle. And so the major project will die if the new master doesn't want it.
LECIA: Yeah, um, well, projects don't usually die exclusively based on political cycles. They die because they're in some trouble. They've become an annoyance or an irritant. Uh, they've lost the sort of mandate and support of uh, the broader stakeholder group and they become an easy target in a changing political cycle. So I've seen many, many projects live through many political cycles. Different, you know, completely different regimes. And the common thread there is, is that they were being well executed and they weren't in. I mean it's always hard, right? But if, um, and I think we could look at high, um, speed rail right now where there's been a, um, pretty solid effort to create an agency and an entity removed from the direct sort of political cycle until it's not right. And uh, you know, I would say that's a good, it's a good for things that take 15 years to do, whether it's a nuclear power plant or almost. You know, there's so many complex pieces of infrastructure. The entity that you form, you do want to keep it an arm's length away from the annual budgeting process and so on and so forth. You want to get those projects funded and moved off. And there are ways, there are ways to do that. That's exactly what we did on the Millennium Line. We created a special purpose crown agency whose only job was, was to design and build that Millennium Line. And when we dropped the keys off to uh, uh, the operating agency, which was Translink, we were gone, we were out. Right. And it really, it kept us from getting mixed into the. All the other items that are preoccupying government and decision making. Right. We had a single purpose board. There was no one lobbying them for money, you know, for this or that. So there are things you can do, but you have to be pretty thoughtful. And I do recognize that culture is uh, often the determinative factor. I work all over the world and I will go to a place and it doesn't matter what I did, you know, in Edmonton or in Toronto or in Los Angeles. I happen to be in Hawaii now, where I did work actually. And what an eye opener to kind of step back and realize that all of the things that we drive for often in a project, uh, was not necessarily their priorities or their culture or their interest. And um, humbling, but a really solid reminder. I was putting together um, an agreement on a project that when it was being reset it was um, five years late and about $5 billion over budget. And they were going to take a bunch of sort of stations that had been built in design, build, bid, construction, management, design, build. There was canopies that didn't meet the platform and there's a lot of things going on and it's in the pineapple fields. It didn't really go anywhere. Kind of went from nowhere to nowhere. But they wanted to complete the project, wrap it all into a big P3 structure. Riccardo, I'm sure your ears are curling and get uh, you know, one contractor to finish off the last three stations in an urban setting and take all the as built assets and take responsibility for the whole thing. Well, it was a, you know, it was a financial engineering job which you probably would have loved working on. Nobody wanted to do it. And it, and it collapsed. So what I was brought in to do was uh, put a memorandum of understanding between the state authority, which was the special purpose entity set up to build the Honolulu Rapid Transit project, and the municipality who were going to be the operator and maintainer. And what would be. How would they manage a procurement when they had. Well, again, uh, not understanding the culture of the place was really, really made it a very, very challenging undertaking to get a simple memorandum of understanding of who does what during a procurement phase. But a good reminder that, you know, the tools in your toolkit are only as good as your understanding of the culture of the people. Uh, and I mean small sea culture, right. Of any, uh, uh, place that you step foot in, uh, it's way different.
SHORMILA: That's a great sort of segue to kind of my big question of, you know, like, Riccardo's stepped into the foray of nuclear. I'm trying to do a little bit more work in defense. And major projects like these are all. They're kind of ramping up their ambition. We don't have the people in Canada to do a lot of this work. How can we kind of rapidly create these teams or these consort. Like, what's your thought on kind of the future of how we're going to do all this in Canada quickly?
LECIA: Funny you should say that. So the biggest new project I've got in my little portfolio firm here is a $20 billion doubling of the North Coast Transmission line. Now, if anybody's looked at my resume, you might have noticed that it's not flush with electrical transmission experience. And I was understandably a bit nervous. You know, I had been thinking about energy and you know, how critical it is and you know how it is. Just as you're talking about defense or you're talking about, uh, nuclear, all of these things, all the money is going into these areas, right? It's big, big boom. But lo and behold, the knowledge we have of projects and governance and people and, you know, risk is completely transferable, right? It's really in the, you know, the case of the North Coast Transmission line, uh, it's being developed in collaboration with the First Nations. So they will be a 50, 50 asset, um, owner. And there is some co development as well. So structurally very interesting understanding how to, you know, how to put those pieces together. Uh, so I would say that when I, when I look for people and I look for talent, I look for people who have, you know, great general experience, who've done a lot of, you know, think a lot of different things and are not intimidated because they're not a subject matter expert in nuclear or a subject matter expert in. Because there are those people, right? They can do that. That's not why they're hiring you, Shormila, or you, Riccardo. You know, I don't mean to diminish your brilliance, but I'm pretty sure that you didn't.
SHORMILA: Riccardo diminishes my brilliance often. Don't worry, Lecia
LECIA: It's because of the confidence in you that people would say you could be successful over there. Why don't you go have a look at that? You have to look at other people the same way because we will have a lot of people who have, uh, expertise in areas that we're really not going to be expanding. And we're canceling hospitals, right? We're canceling a lot of things and we're driving tons of money. Well, we're going to have to get those firms and those people and those individuals into those new positions pretty quickly. And I'm confident that, uh, the people I've worked with on projects, uh, can absolutely, uh, make those moves.
SHORMILA: I mean, we could talk for hours. I was going to kind of get to our marquee question if, if, uh, if that's okay. So our marquee question for, for this series is, I mean, we are, we call this series Master Builder. Do you feel like a Master Builder? Do you have time to reflect and, and Say, wow, like the, the, I mean, just your introduction, there's a lot of candor in how you were explaining it, Alicia. But there are all huge projects that change the, you know, the fabric of Vancouver and the rest of Canada. Like, what is your thought on your experience and kind of as you, as an individual and what you've done in the last few decades?
LECIA: I'm always looking forward, uh, Shormila, that uh, for me, you know, I'm honoured to have had the opportunity to serve, uh, it in the way that I have lasting infrastructure. I've done some really fascinating, uh, and incredible things in private practice. And I focus, uh, constantly on what's coming next. I'm not a kind of a person who wants to sort of loll in the past. I, uh, still, as I said, uh, you know, if you look at the portfolio of things we're working on here, they're big, they're big projects. You know, Alto High speed rail, north coast transmission line, Broadway, subway. Like, there's a lot of very significant things that are still left to be done. And although I don't want to actually lead the entire project anymore, I feel quite fortunate to still have a role that is significant in some small, measured ways on these, uh, nation building initiatives.
SHORMILA: And that's a great answer, but it was a trick question that we anoint you just by you being on the podcast. But I mean, I've always loved that about you, is that you're always ready to take on a new challenge.
LECIA: You have to give it, whatever it is to get, you know, give it away. Like you don't want to be encumbered with, with grandiose thoughts. You know, it's, uh, it takes, it always takes a team of people. And uh, I can, I can look at all the people that I've had the pleasure of working with. And we've only ever done things, uh, not individually but really collectively. Right.
EVGENIA: Amazing. Thank you, Lecia I think this was a very, very insightful conversation. Truly appreciate you coming to join us on this podcast. I still have a list of questions, questions that uh, I could have asked. They would have been a lot.
LECIA: Yes, we can go for wine. We can go for wine and have
EVGENIA: them detailed and like, I'd love to drill down on how we can change the state of British Columbia and major projects and make them happen.
LECIA: Well, I, I, I will, I'll close with one thing. I'll close with one thing, and that is my current focus is on execution, that we're at an interesting stage in the country where we have a lot of ideas, and we're talking about a lot of things that we're going to do things in Canada, we're going to build more things, we're going to supply more things. We're going to have to change how we do business in order to execute that. And change is really, really hard. It's really hard. Uh, particularly in government, um, people have not typically been rewarded for taking chances, uh, and, or taking risk. And we're in a place in our country where we have to do just that. And it takes tireless focus on execution, because the minute you turn your back, things slide back to the sort of status quo, or the timeline to do it in is far too long, or the turnaround time for decision making, or we need that report six weeks before the board meeting. Well, how are you going to cut the time for projects in half if your administrative review cycle doesn't keep up with the same thing? And so I'm focused on breaking down those needless, uh, barriers of time and process that get in the way from us being able to execute on the commitments that we're being asked to do.
EVGENIA: I wrote that down, so I'd like to be part of that.
RICCARDO: I think that, uh, I think that's the pull quote that we'll put on the, in the, in the caption of the podcast.
LECIA: There you go.
RICCARDO: Yes.
LECIA: Try to make it a little more articulate. All right, guys, that was super fun. I'll take my leave. It's been a pleasure. I'm gonna go and, uh, build some more transmission lines. Stainless towers made of lattice steel. Goodbye.
SHORMILA: Thank you so much.
LECIA: Thanks.
RICCARDO: That's it for this episode of Navigating Major Programs. If you enjoyed the conversation, please follow the show and consider leaving a review. To continue elevating the conversation, join us on navigating major program's LinkedIn page. I'm Riccardo Cosentino alongside Shomila Chatterjee and Evgenia Giulina. Thank you for listening.