Build egovernment trust, not privacy

Government Computer News reports that in Singapore government departments share the personal information of their customers in order to provide better egovernment services.

As reported in the article, Singaporese put a lot into passwords,

Singapore’s citizens are accustomed to the government knowing who they are when they access e-government services. With a mandatory password system named SingPass, in place since 2003, government forms download — after authentication — with personal data prepopulated into the fields.

Since the early 1990s, the government has used standardized, cross-agency data-naming conventions for elements such as names and addresses. It also has standardized data elements in the business and land registry domains. SingPass is also a reusable component for agencies building e-services.

In Australia data sharing across government departments is often perceived as a bad thing. Singapore's egovernment approach would be considered as reducing citizen privacy.

However within Singapore the approach is seen as a privacy enhancement.

What's the difference? Trust

As it states in the article (bolding is mine),

Citizens don’t welcome Big Brother surveillance, said Prashent Dhami, a senior consultant at the Singapore branch of consulting firm Frost and Sullivan. But most Singaporese tend to trust their government, Dhami said. Plus, technology infuses the lives of citizens from a young age. “You use technology so much, you start to understand it, you start to trust it. People have seen very few failed attempts at technology,” he added. SingTel, the largest local telecommunications provider, even sends text advertisements to mobile phone subscribers based on their current location.

Perhaps in Australia we need to invest more in raising the level of trust citizens place in government rather than investing more in technical systems to mitigate concerns over privacy.

In the long-run this could result in improved and more accessible egovernment services and a better relationship between citizens and government.

Read full post...

View summary...

The value of engaging staff with your intranet

No matter how well designed, structured and written, an intranet has little value if it isn't top of mind for your staff.

One of my primary goals in managing my agency's intranet is to ensure it remains well used - high on the list of resources used by staff when they require information or need to complete a task.

What's the value?
My top-of-mind values for the use of the intranet include,

• Strategic alignment
  Supports the organisation in communicating and reinforcing its strategic goals, thereby helping staff act in support of the organisation's aims in a consistent manner
  

• Consistent levels of quality service delivery
  The intranet, as a single current navigable source of processes, information and tools, can influence the consistency and quality of services delivered from diverse locations more effectively than managers, training or printed documentation.
  

• Organisational knowledge creation, retention and dissemination
  As a well-structured and searchable repository, an intranet can both help capture and disseminate organisational knowledge, as well as facilitate expert networks and collaboration. Note this doesn't make an intranet an information management system in the traditional definition, but it does make the intranet a primary interface to this system.
  
  
• Internal communication and collaboration improvements
  An appropriately constructed internet facilitates communication and collaboration across both remote and nearby staff and management, reducing the tendency to silo and enhancing the quality of decision-making processes.
  

• Cost savings
  Intranet delivery of information is cheaper than extensive travel or the maintenance of paper records for all but the smallest organisations. It is also more effective than email blasts at delivering large quantities of information in digestible and referable chunks.
  
  

Achieving staff engagement with your intranet
To improve engagement with my agency's intranet, my team focuses on improving four areas:

• Usefulness
  Ensuring that the intranet contains the tools and current information required by staff. Outdated or missing content quickly reduces staff engagement with any medium.
  

• Awareness
  Raising the profile of the intranet and what it contains across the organisation. This means frequently communicating how our intranet can assist people in their roles and highlighting new features and developments.

• Convenience
  Continually improving the usability and accessibility of our intranet, particularly around search and navigation, to make it easy and quick to use. The less thought and time staff need to commit when using our intranet, the more they will use it over alternatives.

• Inclusion
  I have positioned the my team as an leadership group to support staff in succeeding in their goals via the intranet, rather than as an expert black box team that interposes itself between the broader organisation and the intranet.
  This means that we share knowledge openly across our author network and encourage other staff to take ownership of their intranet sections, with my team acting in an advisory fashion to help improve the quality of what and how they communicate.
  

At the end of the day our agency's intranet is there to empower and support staff in achieving the strategic aims of the agency.

As the intranet team our goal is to support this rather than control it.

Read full post...

View summary...

Transforming government via communities

Every generation seems to live through some kind of transformational national or global experience, be it the Great War, the Great Depression, World War II, the Cold War, the 60s, the Space Race, the Personal Computer revolution, the fall of Communist, or the rise of the internet.

A lot of people see the growth of social networks as the next great transformational event for the world - and with some reason. We've seen a billion people become 'internet citizens', with access to global communities on a scale never before possible in human history.

This, in turn, is causing change throughout society. Our choice of entertainment, our approach to philanthropy, to education and to social engagement are all adapting to the new tools available.

It is inevitable that social changes transform governments. For every transformational event in world history there has been equally significant changes in politics and in public institutions.

Governments have had to change along with their citizens, their employees and their peers in order to remain relevant, to ensure their nations remain competitive and to address changing social norms.

There has already been significant government change due to the growth of the internet reflecting changes in how citizens wish to interact with government.

Ten years ago there were few government services online and websites were primitive 'brochureware'. Today the egovernment agenda is a leading driver for government reform.

What we are only just now seeing the start of are changes in how society interacts with government in determining policy and community engagement.

In the UK we're seeing Lords blogging and civil servants encouraged to participate in public discussion forums. In the US we're seeing political leaders broadcasting their voting intentions and facilitating online communities. In New Zealand we're seeing legislation created by the community.

Around the world citizens are asking if their governments will embrace this change, or resist it for as long as possible.

Little of this style of activity is, as yet, occurring at a national level in Australia, but it will.

The question for those of us within Australian government is how can we begin working with communities within the framework of the legislation, policies, processes and perceptions of today's public service - or how do we go about reshaping the business of government to enable the level of participation that our citizens now expect.

This presentation from Deloittes and Beeline Labs, the 2008 Tribalization Of Business Study, offers some insights into what we should expect along the journey.

2008 Tribalization Of Business Study

view presentation (tags: metrics measurement beelinelabs deloitte)

Read full post...

View summary...

Should all public housing come with cheap broadband internet access?

ScobleizerTV ( by Robert Scoble) has released a very interesting video interview with David Kralik, Newt Gingrich's internet strategist on egovernment improvement in the US.

It discusses areas such as,

• the provision of cheap broadband access in public housing to help reduce the digital divide and provide lower income people with an economic window
• the practical difficulties in introducing laptops into schools due to the poor ratio in education of IT workers to computers and the limited PC skills of teachers, and
• government transparency via internet tools,
  

It's very thought provoking, if a little grainy.

Read full post...

View summary...

Is your agency monitoring or pre-empting online impersonators?

With the vast array of online social media tools now out there, it's inevitable that a few individuals will use them in a malicious way to discredit organisations.

Where organisations are not keeping an eye on these online channels, there is the possibility that the impact of comments - made in public to large groups of participants - could be substantial.

A current case in point is the fake Exxon Mobil tweeter. Someone, purporting to be a representative of Exxon, has been using Twitter, a very popular micro-blogging application, to make comments about the organisation's activities.

In this case, however, the comments are positive - although not representative.

As reported in The Houston Chronicle, Exxon Mobil says it's not behind its' Twitter account,

To many, Exxon Mobil is the picture of control, a disciplined corporation that stays on message in a simple, staid manner through oil booms and busts.

That's why a new participant on the social networking site Twitter.com earlier this week was a bit of a surprise.

According to the online bio, "Janet" at ExxonMobilCorp in Irving was "Taking on the world's toughest energy challenges."

In the brief, 140-character snippets Twitter allows, she points out the oil giant's philanthropic efforts, answers questions about the company's policies and even laments a shortage of caramel apple sugar babies at one Exxon retail outlet.

This foray into the new media frontier for one of corporate America's blue chip companies might seem ground-breaking if it wasn't for one thing:

"That's not us," said Alan Jeffers, spokesman for Exxon Mobil.

"Janet" isn't part of Exxon's public relations machinery — the company said it has no idea who she is and wasn't aware of her until the Chronicle called to ask.

In this case Exxon was unaware until the media contacted the company and presumably was not monitoring online social media to see what was being said about, or purportedly on behalf of the organisation.

I expect they will be reviewing this position for the future.

Note that I am not advocating that organisations take a censorship approach. It is impossible to prevent people from talking about organisations, whether in the pub, in the home or online.

However it is possible to become part of this conversation - and ensure that the messages being conveyed appropriately reflect the actual views of the organisation.

Read full post...

View summary...