Home > News & Events
Tackling a Real World Challenge: SIPA’s Public Policy Case Competition
A nuclear power plant in the U.S. has been attacked by terrorists. Now a new federal agency charged with securing U.S. power facilities is asking for help in developing a strategy. Or Albania is in danger of losing much-needed development funding because of disagreements in Parliament over legislation that would make the nation eligible. How would you get the legislation through Parliament so Albania can move forward? These were the hypothetical situations posed to students in the annual Public Policy Case Competition held on February 5, 2010 at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs.
The Public Policy Case Competition is a case-based, problem-solving competition in which policy students tackle a global policy and development challenge. With the increased complexity of policy decisions compounded by globalization, energy constraints, security concerns, and financial instability, there is a significant need to prepare the next generation of policy students to meet these challenges. The annual competition brings together students and consulting practitioners to bridge the gap between theory and practice.
Thirty SIPA students, selected from a pool of applicants, were split into teams of three. Each team tackled one of the two policy questions: public sector (power facility security) or international development (aid to Albania). Each team was crafted to contain a variety of skill-sets, work experiences and consulting acumen. While the competitors varied in their academic concentrations, all demonstrated strong analytical, quantitative and presentation skills, along with a desire to make a difference in policy and development through consulting. The competition was judged by representatives from Deloitte, Chemonics, KPMG, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Development Alternatives Inc. (DAI), and an independent consultant.
Public Sector Track:
Each of the five public sector teams received a case entitled Developing a Power Production Protection Agency to Meet the Nation’s Energy and Homeland Security Challenges. Read the case here. The competitors had five hours to develop a policy solution.
The winning team (left) comprised John Hreno (MPA ’11), Kate Brick (MIA ’10), and Andrew Gisselquist (MPA ’11). Their approach included absorbing the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and applying the security model of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to commercial facilities, which includes new technology, background checks and security clearances. View the winning team’s final presentation here.
Competitor Andrew Gisselquist described the experience: “The case made the real challenges we talk about at SIPA that much more concrete, though the time constraints certainly kept it a step away from reality. As the five hours flew by, we each had to take responsibility, make decisions, and move forward – there was absolutely no time to worry that the three of us hadn't worked together before or about what our exact roles should be. In that sense we were fortunate that our work styles and skills complemented each other and that each of us was comfortable stepping in and controlling the situation if the others seemed to be falling off the tracks.
“We were surprised to win because every other presentation was so strong in its own way. In the end, we succeeded because we had fun making a forceful public presentation to the judges and they appreciated it. That's the takeaway here – the process of creation is one thing, but what matters is what finally goes out the door.”
International Development Track:
The five international development teams received a case entitled Navigating a Political Boycott:
Daniel Lexington and the Albania Millennium Challenge Corporation Threshold Program, where legislation that will allow Albania to qualify for development aid is being held up by the Socialist Party. Read the case here.
The winning team (right with judge Eric Howell from Chemonics) comprised Jeffrey Berger (MIA ’11), Anna Chen (MPA ’11), and Ayelet Haran (MPA 11). Their approach included creating positive incentives for the Socialist Party to end the boycott, consolidating anti-corruption initiatives of both parties (courts law, corruption investigation), and drawing on support from business groups, advocacy groups, and the public at large. View the winning team’s final presentation here.
Competitor Anna Chen said this of her team and the competition: “Our range of experience and knowledge of different regions, and how they would react, was great – we complemented each other very well. Our strategy was to get our ideas onto the board and translate them into a presentation that would convince our clients we knew how to proceed, even if we were not 100 percent sure. We were trying to be cohesive in addressing what we would do in case our proposals were not as successful as planned. This exercise really tested my ability to quickly grasp important information and ignore extra information that was not important to the task at hand.”
Among the judges for the public sector track was Lorna Stark, a partner in KPMG’s Government Advisory Services practice. She praised the students’ initiative and resourcefulness. “It’s a great opportunity for the students to get a taste of the real world, and the challenges that might cross their paths. Most problems don’t have a neat textbook solution. This competition reinforces that, and goes a long way in preparing them for their careers and whatever lies ahead.”
View a Facebook photo album of the day’s activities here.
02/10/2010