Posts
There's a fantastic series of articles being published over at FutureGov Asia-Pacific at the moment, introducing some very interesting perspectives on social media and government.
One asks, Should policy be debated in social media?, providing perspectives from senior leaders in different jurisdictions across the region.
There is a fair amount of diversity in the viewpoints, however the overall consensus appears to be that it should.
Several of those asked to comment pointed out that it is happening anyway - regardless of what governments may wish.
It is my view that we're past the point where government agencies and politicians have the luxury to choose where and how they form their policy. They can no longer fall back on government-controlled due process.
The crowd is now in command. Australians have many ways to make their views known, and are doing so on the matters of most concern to them.
Government agencies ignore active discussions at their own and at their ministers' peril. If they don't consider the views being expressed through social media channels - even when they are not being expressed through a government social media channel - there is the potential for them to damage their own credibility and reputation and even to call the APS and Government into disrepute.
The most recent example has been the Australian Government's approach to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. Regardless of whether people support the actions of Wikileaks, there's been enormous public support for Australia to treat him 'fairly', providing appropriate consular support for him whilst under arrest in the UK.
For example, the Open letter: To Julia Gillard, re Julian Assange, hosted at ABC The Drum, has attracted over 4,600 comments (predominantly in support) alongside the more than 180 people directly signing the letter.
There have been large numbers of comments on other articles, blog posts, forum discussions, videos and tweets about the Wikileaks situation, with the same general viewpoint. The poll at the SMH (Should government agencies take more action to stop WikiLeaks operating?) is trending in the same way.
These comments have not been made directly to the Australian Government through channels and processes it had established for this purpose. There's certainly been no direct 'public consultation' on Wikileaks to help the Government consider its policy.
We've now seen public assurances from several senior Ministers that Julian Assange will, and is, receiving consular support, as would any other Australian in a difficult situation overseas.
This should be a wake-up call for all Australian public servants and politicians.
Ministers and agencies can still choose whether and how they hold a defined consultation around a given policy proposal. However Australians won't necessarily only make their views known when and through these processes, they will use social media - in spades.
Ignore them at your own risk.
Friday, December 10, 2010
Should government policy be discussed in social media? | Tweet |
Thursday, December 09, 2010
Australia is the second largest government user of Yammer - over 110 active networks | Tweet |
There's recently been some controversy in Australian government over the use of Yammer, a private and secure enterprise social network, which I discussed in my post, The ongoing struggles to balance IT security and staff empowerment.
I asked Simon Spencer, Yammer's newly appointed Asia-Pacific General Manager, how many government agencies in Australia were using Yammer.
I was expecting him to answer maybe 30-40 agencies.
He told me that, counting state and federal government, there were at least 110 Australian agencies now using Yammer - with a total of around 13,000 users.
I was surprised, I hadn't expected that much adoption.
However I was even more surprised when he gave me the global figures on take-up.
Simon said that Australia represents 29% of all government networks using Yammer. The US represents 33% and the UK about 26%. The rest of the world accounts for the other 12%.
I checked this with Simon three times and yes, it was correct. Despite our relatively small population, Australia as a nation is the second largest government user of Yammer in the world.
I was quite surprised. While I knew the NSW, Vic and QLD governments were all rapidly adopting Yammer, I had no idea that so many public sector organisations had found the service useful.
Admittedly Yammer is no newcomer. The company counts over 90,000 organisations as its customers across about 130 countries (Yammer now supports 94 languages). Around 80% of the Fortune 500 companies now use the service.
However for Australia to be the second largest government adopter of the service suggests there's a few things going on under the hood.
Firstly, this indicates to me that we're earlier adopters of social media tools in enterprise environments than I had expected. Speaking to Simon, he believes that Australia has adopted social media much faster than other countries, including within organisational networks. He said that he believes that Australia is on the leading edge of collaboration and use of social media.
Secondly the figures suggest to me that Australian public servants are seeking to use the tools they find productive in their personal lives.
Finally, given the example in my last post and other examples brought to my attention by staff at other agencies, it suggests to me that senior management and ICT are finding it challenging to meet their staff's needs within current infrastructure and policy settings.
ICT teams are finding that more and more of their effort and money is spent on maintaining ageing mainframes and legacy systems. This leaves less and less of their capacity available to discover, assess and implement productivity saving tools.
Equally senior managers are busy keeping Web 1.0 informational websites running effectively and managing all the other responsibilities of their jobs. They are struggling to find the time to research, understand and grasp the opportunities of Web 2.0
The Yammer example indicates to me that many public service knowledge workers want to keep improving their performance and agency productivity.
Clearly they aren't sitting back and waiting until ICT or senior managers are able to assess whether staff could be more productive with a particular tool. Public servants are going out and finding the tools themselves.
Want to learn more about Yammer?
Ross Hill's post Watching a Yammer network explode, is an excellent place to start.
I also recommend the following post and video from Deloittes following up Ross's post, How to keep a Yammer network exploding.
Wednesday, December 08, 2010
What Australian government data would you like to see online under an open reuse license? | Tweet |
The NSW government has introduced a new service where people can provide suggestions on what government information they would like to access via a web or mobile front-end.
Thus far the eight suggestions focus heavily on public transport information - knowing when and where buses, trains and ferries may be found.
You can add your own ideas here.
However I'd like to ask a broader question.
Out of all the data that Australian governments collect or may hold, what would you like to see available online in a machine-readable format under an open license supporting reuse?
And how would you use it?
If you're short on ideas, why not check out the results of the iOpendataday & the International Hackathon, where thousands of people in over 73 cities across 5 continents participated in creating applications using open government data.
In fact it took place pretty much everywhere except Australia - bringing me in mind of Chris Moore's quote...
Here's a list of some of the applications created.
Tuesday, December 07, 2010
What should be included in a Gov 2.0/Web 2.0 university subject? | Tweet |
Tom Worthington, a well-known lecturer at the ANU, is revamping the COMP7420: Electronic Data Management summer session course to integrate more Gov 2.0 and Web 2.0 features.
Tom has invited input from those in government with experience in the Gov 2.0 field.
For more information, and to provide feedback, visit Tom's blog Net Traveller.
Is it really a lack of trust, or a fear of connecting that leads to discouragement of social media in workplaces? | Tweet |
I hear a great deal of discussion by colleagues (and have engaged in it myself) about the lack of trust within organisations.
- "There's all this process because our senior leadership doesn't trust its own staff."
- "If they'd just trust the [Communications/Web/IT/Finance/Procurement/Program/Policy] team - we know what we are doing and have some very talented people here"
- "If you want to influence managers, get in a consultant - bosses trust them more because they are not staff."
- "What does someone with twenty years experience and a successful track record have to do to be trusted around here?"
What if it is not really about trust? What if fears of senior management about use of social media in the office, while expressed or viewed as trust issues, are really just about preserving professional distance.
Managers often find there is a need to stay slightly separate from their staff. They may be advised not to go out and party like a team member, or to get too close to the personal lives of younger people (particularly of the opposite gender) in the organisation.
This separation is to 'keep the relationship professional', to avoid forming personal connections which might interfere with professional responsibilities, to avoid perceptions (or actual) favouritism or bias and to preserve a sense of authority. This allows difficult business decisions to be made more objectively - people disciplined or let go, changes that are painful to individuals but better for an organisation to be made, critical information to be kept secret when needed.
Thinking about the situation in this way, it isn't that senior managers distrust their staff - in most cases they probably hold them in high regard - it is that they have been trained to maintain distance.
If so those endeavouring to introduce social tools into organisations might find a different tact works best. Managers can use social media in different ways to staff - just as they can use email and phones differently.
Sure, allow teams to socialise - humans are social creatures, we perform better and more productively when we know enough about our colleagues to work with them well.
However managers can still use them with professional distance - communicating facts and announcements teams need to know, seeking and providing feedback on work, mentoring, instructing - even chastising.
Perhaps that's some food for thought next time your senior managers appear to block a social media channel. It's not that they distrust their staff. It could be that they fear connecting too closely.
