Posts
Andrew Krzmarzick has posted an interesting article on his Generation Shift blog regarding a method to measure the level of government 2.0 services included in a government site.
Developed by the Brookings Institute, the approach involves scoring agencies against a set of criteria and tracking them over time. The Institute has analysed over 1,500 US state and federal government sites against the criteria, providing a large sample for comparison purposes.
The Brookings Institute has produced a report on the topic, State and Federal Electronic Government in the United States, 2008 (PDF).
It is a very interesting read and might provide a useful benchmarking tool for Australian government agencies to measure their own sites.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
A method to measure the level of government 2.0 in a government site - egovernment index | Tweet |
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
BarCamp Canberra next weekend - 28 March | Tweet |
In case you've not seen the buzz around mailing lists, the second Canberra BarCamp is on next weekend, 28 March, at the Australian National University.
What's a BarCamp?
Think of it as an impromptu conference featuring talented designers, developers and other online professionals. They gather to share their knowledge and expertise in a series of 20 minute presentations.
Anyone can present at the event on a topic of their choice.
It is a great opportunity to share experiences and network within the Canberra online community.
More details on the BarCamp concept is available from the official site.
Register at the official BarCamp Canberra site or at the Facebook group.
Podcasts of previous presentations are also available online at http://barcampcanberra.org/blog/podcasts/
British vote 'yes' to egovernment | Tweet |
A study of 4,000 UK adults has found that 42 percent had used the internet to access information about government or local council services, or completed a government form or process online in the last year.
This shot up to 55 percent amongst adults with home internet access.
The study, conducted by OfCom also indicated that,
More than 70 per cent of those we surveyed online (and 60 per cent of the general population) said the web had made it easier to engage in citizen participation activities, such as contacting an MP or signing a petition.
But despite an increase in web-based activities, many people still want to keep traditional methods of contact.
For example, 33 per cent of those we surveyed online would rather deal with someone face to face, such as when contacting their MP.
However in areas of 'multiple deprivation', where people are more likely to be experiencing poverty, low employment, high crime, poor health and less access to services,
More than 70 per cent in those areas were also unaware of online citizen participation opportunities, almost half did not sufficiently trust the internet for these activities and 40 per cent said they lacked confidence to participate in citizen activities online.
In other people, poor and less educated people (who presumably also have less access to the internet) are less likely to realise the benefits they can receive from egovernment, trust the internet or be confident online participants.
These findings suggest that alongside education and employment access improvements, improving access to internet services can improve participation in egovernment - which makes sense to me.
They also suggest, in my view, that the internet is a great supplement and mechanism for expanding participation, but doesn't replace the need for face-to-face and phone services.
Finally the findings also suggested to me that, at least in the UK, the digital divide may still be a very wide one indeed, hence their initiative to roll out 100Mb broadband as a basic service alongside electricity, sewage and water supply.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Judging the personal risk to privacy when participating in social networking | Tweet |
A group of students from Penn State University have developed a methodology for assessing the personal risk to privacy when participating in online social media.
It's an interesting attempt to quantify objectively the risks for individuals and could be a useful starting point for government departments to help their staff understand the impacts of their choices.
You'll find the system, termed SNAPR (Social Networking Action & Privacy Risk Methodology) online here.
US Business.gov launches small business community | Tweet |
The US business.gov website has launched an online community for small business owners, providing a place where they can discuss business-related issues across a range of topics.
While there is a slant towards topics related to business engagement with government - from registration processes through to how to successfully do business with government, the topics are far broader as US small businesses discuss the current business environment, their planning processes and procurement strategies.
I see this as a very valuable public good for a government to provide for small businesses. A government can provide a fair and effectively moderated environment, without commercial bias. This supports smaller businesses in expanding their network of contacts, building their knowledge and sharing experiences to reinforce the individual commitments of owners to success.
Besides the benefits in helping small business to grow, thereby employing more people and expanding the economic basis of a country, there are benefits to a government in having a close finger on the pulse of one of the largest contributors to national economic growth.
Rather than relying on business 'interest groups' and peak bodies, who may on occasion not fully represent the diverse interests of their members, a government can form a broader view of the outlook of businesses, gauging sentiment and identifying blockers to growth which could be addressed in legislation or policy.
It also provides access to a group able to critique proposed policies and initiatives, to help fine-tune them to deliver greater value - therefore greater return on investments from the public purse.
The benefits above to business (or communities) and to governments is not limited to this particular segment of the community.
Online communities form around interests - from child care to transport - and can be tapped into or facilitated by government to inform and support policy creation, service delivery, communications and consultations. Effectively they are 'aggregators' which can be used to both build discussion and to improve awareness of services.
They can also provide a 'blackberry' for politicians to keep touch with their constituents where otherwise they may become isolated from market concerns due to workload and minding.
Note that it is not easy to build a community from scratch and often government is best served in participating with existing communities rather than trying to create its own, however there are circumstances where government is best placed as the facilitator rather than simply as an involved party.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
