But first, a story…
About ten years ago I lugged myself from my cubicle at City Hall to the TTC headquarters at Davisville Station. Though barely a 20-minute subway ride north, I remember it was hard to leave cozy corners of my desk overlooking clumsy skaters at Nathan Philips Square. When I arrived at the offices, I was greeted by the TTC’s project lead for what was then known as the Downtown Relief Line project. An engineer and many decades older, he spoke a different language from me, but he was always kind and more than welcomed my questions and rare comments. He brought me to a meeting room with a long oval table surrounded by pilling plush office chairs that reminded me photos I’d seen from the 1970s.
We were joined by the two other project leads of the same project in the meeting room. One from the City Planning division, and one from Metrolinx. Together, the three were responsible for facilitating the planning and development of a project that had no clear jurisdictional lead. It would be a project built in the city for the city, envisioned to run east from downtown through Leslieville before curving north to meet a transfer point yet to be determined on the Bloor-Danforth line. Like the rest of the subway, it was assumed the TTC would own and operate the relief line, whenever it got built. At the time, it was still unclear what the actual role was of Metrolinx was, in what we considered the City’s public transit system. For the most part, they were included in conversations about expansion projects because of their position as a provincial entity, from whom we inevitably needed funding from. Call it risk mitigation, or whatever.
It wasn’t the first time I was in a room with this group. We had standing bi-weekly meetings where updates on our respective work was discussed. Please don’t ask me about the details of these meetings, most of which was bureaucratic jargon easily summarized into “Ok great. and the next thing we’ll do is this or that,” followed by “yes, and I will report back when I have more details,” followed by “mm hmm and great, meeting adjourned.” I’d leave with no relief that the project being worked on would ever become a reality and provide some real relief to our overcrowded subway.
Little old me, a few years out of grad school, and with limited real work experience wondered, how could a project be successful (i.e., efficient and effectively delivered, surely, something many of us want of our governments) if there was no clear driver? It frustrated me how little clarity and agreement there was on who the penultimate “lead” was. Who would be held responsible when shit hit the fan? Each party had valid reasons for wanting a seat at the table; each represented very different interests.
By that afternoon, it had been a few months since I was assigned as the governance lead for the project. In that room, my role was to poke around and understand just enough to mitigate risk that things would blow up when the project was up for decision-making at City Council, or at the TTC or Metrolinx Board. The next major decision point for this project was to complete an Environmental Assessment, or what we called the Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP). The studies required to even get to that state of readiness would take months but it was unclear who the proponent should be. Each party had been “The Proponent” on other EA/TPAP processes that had much clearer jurisdictional boundaries. In that room, while unspoken it was very much understood there was immense power an organization holds in being The Proponent. Difference of opinion? Sure let’s try to resolve it, but otherwise you could be vetoed. While we could understand each other’s organizational interests, we did not want to be the deliverer of and perceived weakness at joint tables.
In a moment of silence, I asked, “Has there ever been a case where we’ve done an EA/TPAP with multiple proponents?” The group looked at me. I could feel my hear tracing and face burning up.
“Not that I’m aware of,” one said as they looked around at the others for support.
“Yes, I’ve not heard of that either,” another said. Everyone nodded as their brains churned on the implications of such a choice.
I followed up with, “Is this something you think might be possible? Would it be something we could take back and discuss internally?” They all nodded in agreement.
A year later, we submitted an EA/TPAP as joint proponents for the Downtown Relief Line Project. That is, before it was superseded by what is now known as the Ontario Line—a Provincial project.
Some notes on how I work
I share this story because I think it perfectly embodies the way that I work and my approach to research, writing, and strategy work. I’m a natural observer and data gatherer, and when I think I have the problem at hand sufficiently defined, I propose solutions. Sometimes the solution is posing a question to unlock a new way of thinking.
Before shifting my focus to food and creative work, I worked in a highly regulated environment on complex public policy files, where I coordinated across multiple stakeholders with diverse interests and managed long-term projects. That experience continues to shape how I approach my research, collaborative projects, and strategy, allowing me to bring rigour, quality, and clarity to every project.
I gather data and information through various formats – through people directly (i.e., conversations, informal chats, structured interviews, focus groups, workshops, observing dynamics and interactions), and online, through journals, news media, social media, and archives.
Like the way I develop recipes, I’m methodical and process-driven. My superpower is that I naturally gravitate towards understanding what lies beneath the surface, identifying underlying trends and patterns, and necessary structures and processes to make a project successful.
Values
Structure is necessary. I believe structure and clarity on the 5Ws of a project is necessary, especially to keep things moving (on time, on budget). It’s also incredibly important when working with multiple stakeholders with diverse perspectives. I’m someone who pays close attention to process and outcomes, and like to build that into how I structure a project. It’s a skill set I’ve honed from my time working as a policy consultant and project manager in government.
I’m collaborative. Getting to know the ins and outs of you, your business, organization, and needs, is important foundation for me before I can propose ideas or solutions. That being said, I’m also highly independent and self-directed so if you’re looking for someone to just come in and get shit done (with little guidance), I can also do that.
Deep research. Everyone and all our experiences hold a piece to the puzzle. That’s why, as much as I enjoy (and it’s easy to do) online research, I believe it’s important to observe people and groups and engage in conversations. I have a strong foundation in qualitative and quantitative methods and have been a Teaching Assistant for Quantitative and Qualitative Methods courses at Dalhousie University.
My Services
- Research Framework Design – Have a question but not sure how to structure the research? I can help talk through project objectives and identify methods for getting the information you need.
- Strategy Consulting – Have a strategic organizational or business question or issue? Feel stuck but not sure why? Let’s have a chat about it.
- Project-Based Research – Know what needs to get done? I can help with a range of research projects of varying size and scale. Some examples include: Literature or jurisdictional reviews, interviews, and facilitating focus groups and workshops.
Diana Chu 