DCC ’ s Management Team in the 1980s included , from left to right : Ronald Lachance , Terry Kelly , George Moennich , Trevor Heavens , Pierre Galiungi and Lorne Atchison .
When I first started dealing with DCC in the late 1970s , it was very much separated from DND , he recalls . The projects were taken to a certain point by DND and then handed ‘ over the fence ’ to DCC .
This compartmentalized approach , in which DND did everything they were required to do for a project and then handed it off to DCC to get the work completed , often required change orders and even delays as the project progressed and the vision for the project hit the reality of it . The joint project office recognized the need for efficiency and speed , bringing DND and DCC together at the very beginning of a project . In this way , potential problems could be identified by both sides right from the outset — there was little risk of a “ them versus us ” attitude developing , because everyone was “ us .”
It worked well for both sides — DCC ’ s client relationship became even more one of allies , and the expertise that DND was losing in-house at the time was replaced , in part , by DCC .
Now , it ’ s essentially a single team that carries the projects through , Steve Irwin remarks of the dramatic change in the DCC-DND relationship . In effect , the previous approach saw DCC being told what DND needed , and then doing it to the best of their ability . Today , the two organizations work much more closely as true partners , with their efforts aimed at the same goal .
Consultant involvement and the matrixing of DCC systems and staff were also put to work for NAADM and the NWS . In 1986 , Lorne Atchison noted at a meeting that with respect to the NWS project , “ strong messages were apparent from government to privatize and in this case a combination of both DCC forces and consultant services were being used .” Project management services , estimated in 1987 to cost $ 35 million overall , were contracted out rather than being provided in-house , which enabled the project to proceed more quickly than usual .
DCC under review — again . And again . In 1986 , the Task Force on Program Review ( referred to as the Nielsen Task Force ) brought more high-level discussions to bear on the future of DCC . Its report noted DND ’ s importance as a government property holder and made a number of observations about the Department ’ s acquisition and management of real property , which it described as fail-safe but overly elaborate . The team also acknowledged that both DND and DCC were happy with their current relationship and
BREAKING NEW GROUND DEFENCE CONSTRUCTION CANADA
69