Posts
Reading up on one of my favourite eGov blogs, In the Eye of the Storm, I found this post from February with some great slides and commentary on how far e-government has gone, but how little has changed in the last few years, e-government 3.0.
Edited 16/06: This article is further reinforced by this article in ITWeek, UK e-government fails to make the grade
Is this the same experience as we have in Australia?
It's now common to get information from government online, it's also common to transact with government online. However, can we interact with government online yet?
As in the UK, in Australia government appears to have been very slow about taking the next step - to actually converse with our customers online.
I'm happy to say that my agency is taking baby steps into interacting on forums, and we've talked about providing web-based text or voice chat to interact with customers, but are still some big steps away from this.
If the name of the game is customer service, and customers want to interact with government online (as AGIMO's latest eGovernment Satisfaction report is telling us) - why are we holding back?
Monday, June 16, 2008
Has eGovernment stalled at the half-way point? | Tweet |
Sunday, June 15, 2008
An intranet isn't an information management system, but it has a role to play | Tweet |
A dilemma we're dealing with in my agency is that many projects have placed their documentation within the intranet and, over time, this has become the authoritative source of the most current copy of some documents.
This means that the owners of the content are very sensitive towards any changes to the intranet's structure which might reduce access to their pages - despite having only small audiences - because if there's an ANAO audit the intranet is the repository of the master documents.
I discourage the use of the intranet in this manner as it does not (in its current version) meet the records management requirements of the National Archives. We don't have appropriate version control, documents cannot be locked, ownership is flexible and archiving, while appropriate for an intranet, isn't up to information management standards.
However our Knowledge Management strategy does features the intranet as a major plank as it is an important tool for storing information, and a primary tool for people to communicate information.
I have seen attempts in the past to co-opt an organisation's intranet and turn it into an information management system. In these cases the intranet was developed according to the standards for digital record keeping.
This worked very well - as an information management tool. However it was lousy at communicating information to staff and lost significant credibility (and usage) - essentially nullifying one of the most important communication tools in the organisation.
The last I heard the organisation has hived off the information management parts and is seeking to regrow a conventional intranet.
I can understand why an organisation might attempt to turn an intranet into an information management system.
Good intranets are used frequently by the majority of staff, they store records (pages and files) and they are in many cases relatively easy to author and edit.
Whereas many information management systems are developed like old-style terminal systems, use strange processes to collect metadata, require enormous amounts of time to add records and are not very good at making information easy to find - unless you know precisely what you are looking for.
I've used several in the past and their usability, accessibility, design, search tool and general processes did not impress me alongside the intranet content management systems available at the time.
I can only think of one good reason why this difference exists - because information management systems have to meet lots of information storage standards - an intranet system can ignore them and make things easier for authors and users.
So should your intranet be an information management system?
My view is that it shouldn't - it should focus on what intranets do best, communicate information relevant to staff, facilitate collaboration and support staff in performing job-related tasks through being a central gateway / repository of tools and services.
If possible your intranet should also have a social aspect to help build (an appropriate) organisational culture and build staff loyalty and commitment by helping them feel like family - all work and no play makes Jack/Jill look elsewhere for an enjoyable work experience.
However intranets do have their part to play within an information management strategy.
An intranet is one of the mediums in which information is stored, and is a great tool for spreading information to those who need it within an organisation.
It is also a gateway to tools - such as an information management system - and tight integration between the two helps ensure that teams more effectively collaborate and manage their information.
I recommend that organisations consider their intranet as a 'primer' to help their staff get into the practice of information management.
First get enough of your staff using your intranet to create, store and share information through making the intranet easy to access, easier to author and full of appropriate content and tools.
Then once your staff have gotten the hang of putting content and files into an online system, introduce them to the 'real' information management system, which (in an ideal situation) integrates with the intranet and is almost as easy to use.
This way you'll not only ensure that your intranet is doing its job, but that your information management system is as well.
Presentation Zen in Sydney 4 July! | Tweet |
James Robertson from Step Two Designs has organised for Garr Reynolds, presentation guru and writer of the Presentation Zen blog (and now book) to give one public event in Sydney while he's in Australia.
It's not free, but it's well worth investigating: http://www.steptwo.com.au/columntwo/index.html
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Intranet pruning | Tweet |
My team, in association with our web of content editors, recently completed a major review of the content within our intranet.
This has dramatically improved the currency of information throughout the site, with over 90% of the content having been reviewed and updated within the last year, up from slightly over 60% before I took over the intranet.
The oldest content in the site now is less than two years old, and generally these are navigational pages where the links remain current and there's no content to update.
A complaint I've heard regularly in other organisations I've worked for is that the intranet was no use as the content was old and was never updated.
This, along with search issues, appear to the two of the largest complaints about most intranets (and as was pointed out at a recent conference I attended, if you improve them but don't promote the changes staff will not change their perceptions).
The content review, considering our intranet is now around 3,000 pages in size - took around six months in total as a background task for two people alongside other work.
We were helped enormously by the content owners across the agency, who understand the importance of our intranet to the agency's day-to-day functioning. My team has also put considerable effort into building this understanding, which helps underpin the intranet's value.
There were some pages which had lost their owners due to normal organisational attrition, and when we could not identify other owners with the help of business areas we took a 'slash and burn' approach - we gave the agency's business areas a month's notice and then removing unowned pages from the live intranet to see if anyone complained.
This worked fantastically well - where pages were important there were rapid complaints and a content owner stepped forward. Given that it only takes a few seconds to restore a page, there were no long-term impacts and we now know who owns all the content in the intranet for ongoing review.
This approach may not work for all organisations, however given the large changes we're implementing at the moment, it made sense to create a little pain to avoid much greater pain in the future.
Our ongoing reviews will now be substantially smaller and the approach has also been useful in further building the credibility of our intranet as we've promoted the updating widely within the organisation.
I'd be very interested in the experiences of other managers in maintaining information currency in their online properties.
Flash in the pan - rich media use in government | Tweet |
My agency, due to various factors outside direct control, has long had a reluctance to consider the use of Adobe Flash (previously Macromedia Flash) in our intranet or websites.
I can understand this - there are network and security considerations that need resolution, and Flash has only been around since 1996 (well OK I don't consider that a good reason - even government uses desktop applications and operating systems less than 12 years old).
Also Flash as a rich media application is, well, flashy. It is often overused or used incorrectly and requires skills that not all web designers or developers possess.
There are also a number of myths about Flash which cloud the issue.
Having used Flash and Adobe Director (formerly Macromedia Director) since 1996 in several hundred multimedia and web projects, I've had many experiences - mostly good but also some bad with the product.
Here's some of the lessons I have learnt - and myths busted.
Think visual not verbal
Web is still primarily a text medium, in that messages are largely conveyed via text on the screen. Also more web people seem to come out of print media than visual media. The text mindset is not appropriate for Flash and similar rich medias, which are primarily visual.
Therefore it is important to think visually, using techniques such as storyboarding rather than scripting and deliver 90% of the message via visuals and short takes rather than long written descriptions.
Use Flash sparingly - keep the purpose in mind
Flash is best used to create an effect or convey a visual message. Therefore my view is that when you need to provide navigation or blocks of content it is better to use HTML rather than Flash.
There's several reasons supporting this.
- Flash is optimal for visual not text delivery
- Flash tends to be more expensive to develop and maintain than HTML
- Flash has a longer development cycle, making it slower to update Flash websites than HTML ones - note that there are ways to separate the content from the presentation layer to make content updates easy, however changing the look still requires dedicated time
- Flash is not accepted in all environments. What happens if your customers block Flash via their firewalls? (I've encountered this direct situation in my agency - at one point we could not see the website of one of the advertising agencies pitching to us as their website was entirely constructed in Flash)
- Flash can be less accessible to people using screen readers - note the can. It is possible to make Flash accessible, but the effort required is greater.
Flash is best used in an interactive way
Think carefully before using Flash for animations that are simply for people to watch.
Online is an interactive experience and people rapidly grow bored with animations that they can only watch. For any animation consider using animated gifs instead, although they may not be as small or as smooth as a Flash alternative.
Flash is best used for interactive experiences where the user can effect changes within the Flash application by selecting alternative options.
Apply application development standards
All the normal rules of application development apply when developing interactive Flash applications.
Use a consistent interface, provide contextual help, make the user's choices clear and unambiguous, ensure there is appropriate feedback when the user selects a choice through and do not display any unnecessary choices - every choice should advance the application.
Make sure it is properly usability tested on paper or digital wireframes beforehand and iteratively tested throughout development.
Game experience makes Flash designers better
This is very much my opinion. People involved with PC, console or mobile gaming have a clearer understanding of how to create interactive applications that are also fun to use.
A Flash application that is not engaging or fun will not see much use, so adding that element in the 'gameplay' is critical to ensuring use.
Those with game experience have a different take on interface design. Whereas business applications are gray, square and non-imaginative, the best Flash applications are colourful, curvy, and dynamic.
This is because they serve different purposes and people use them at a different frequency level.
Qualifier: Note that I have been a game designer, so my view is biased. I am sure there are talented Flash designers out there who do not have experience in game design (and one day I'll meet one!)
Myths busted
- Flash is inaccessible
This is a myth I've heard repeated many times. It's untrue - Flash is not inaccessible, it simply requires a little additional effort in the approach (as all accessibility does) and that where necessary appropriately accessible alternatives be provided, such as a HTML versions. Adobe Macromedia has a great paper on the topic of Flash accessibility. - Flash files are very large
Granted, the average Flash application is indeed larger than the average HTML web page - however Flash does so much more!
Flash was developed specifically for online delivery, as such it copes well with slower connections. It provides options for streaming, background downloading or segmenting code which work very well to reduce the amount of data required before someone can begin using a Flash application.
I've recently seen an instance where an eLearning application offered animated lessons via DHTML (Dynamic HTML) or via Flash. The DHTML versions were 10x the size of the Flash versions and placed a much greater load on the network. - Flash applications cannot be indexed by search engines
This may be true for some of the older (and less used) search engines. However the leaders, particularly Google, have been able to index and search within Flash files since 2003. Adobe Macromedia also provide an SDK for website/intranet search so you can find Flash apps within your website or intranet as well! - Not many people have Flash on their PCs
It is true that Nepal and Bangladesh have low penetration rates for Flash. If you are in a country with low internet penetration or restrictive government policies it's quite likely there will not be many Flash users around.
However across the developed Western and Eastern worlds, Flash penetration exceeds 98%. - Flash doesn't separate the content, presentation and business rules layers
Actually this is an issue with inexperienced Flash designers, not Flash itself. It's very possible (and I've delivered projects in this manner) to separate these layers using XML. All of the Flash applications I produced whilst at ActewAGL used XML to feed content into the Flash presentation engine - making it simple to update text.
Boasts
Here's a couple of the Flash applications I've produced/directed in the past.
These were for edutainment purposes, but also served to support the organisation's branding and build awareness amongst future customers.
Note I'm NOT a Flash designer - these were designed by specialists, I was responsible for concept and ongoing direction.
- Power up a rock concert - taught children about the need to use different energy sources to replace coal power.
- Energy saving fun house - used at several major events to show children different ways to save energy and water in their homes
- Utilities timeline - a historical timeline of the development of utilities such as telecommunications, water and power
