I think it would be in setting up the right measurement. You succeed because you stay focused on what you're going to measure, and measuring commitments is not the outcome needed. They're well on track for the commitments. Wouldn't it have been so much more exciting to say, “well on track for having occupancy” by those years?
I would say that the lesson is this: They did a great job at setting a metric, one that focuses on outcomes as well as the midpoint should be there. A commitment is a great midpoint, but then the outcome is one I would hope they would focus on.
Here, Public Services and Procurement Canada is trying to pilot accelerated ways of disposing of buildings, and I think it's a good lesson learned to see how that pilot is going. There were 10 buildings that were put into that to shorten the period of time. Usually it takes about eight years to free up a building and move it into the lands initiative, and they're trying to do it in three. Building on some of their lessons learned throughout the pandemic—doing things not sequentially but together—could speed up the process.
It was too early for us to tell whether or not that will materialize, so I'd like to see them focus in on that, on better ways to free up buildings and get them into the federal lands initiative.