Posts
Many rulers, from the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt to the Czars of Russia, were seen as almost infallible leaders - divinely selected and empowered to lead their people. To question their wisdom, strength or decisions was often an offence that could be punished by imprisonment or death.
Most modern states are more lenient, however governments still place a high value on being seen to be authoritative, knowledgeable and, on occasion, infallible.
So what is the impact of new media on a government's aura of infallibility?
For a long time traditional media has been keeping governments honest. However it has relied on a relative few number of reporters providing information through an even smaller number of distribution channels. Commercial interests, limited access to information and various other restrictions have, on occasion, left many government decisions and policies with little scrutiny.
Now, with Web 2.0, almost every citizen is also a journalist and publisher. This makes it possible for almost the entire population of a modern state to keep its government under constant 24-hour scrutiny and analysis, covering almost every decision and policy.
How have governments responded to this?
Some have taken a censorship and imprisonment route, attempting to limit debate and scrutiny by imprisoning, or worse, the most vocal citizen critics.
However this isn't a route that many democratic states could (or would) choose.
Instead democratically elected governments can choose to embrace public scrutiny and, rather than attempting to maintain an illusion of infallibility, become learning organisations who acknowledge that they can continually improve their performance.
This is a huge mindset change for those in governments used to the limited scrutiny of traditional media. The change can take some time to embrace.
At the moment while some governments and their agencies have embraced scrutiny as an opportunity to improve their service delivery, policy and operations, others are still conflicted. There are still situations where some individuals in various governments attempt to control and close down public discussions or limit internal transparency through self-censorship and restricted internal communications channels.
These conflicted agencies are, in many cases, doing more harm to themselves than good. When it is publicly visible that the Emperor has no clothes, that a particular topic is of community interest or facts about a situation (potentially including videos, financial analysis and/or expert opinions) are freely distributed online, attempts to limit statements to an agency line can backfire.
In other words, attempts to protect an agency or Minister through controlling information can, instead, create greater risks to them. This activity can damage reputations, expose them as out-of-step or, in extreme cases, result in rolling heads.
Government agencies increasingly need to resist the need to control all flows of information and focus on ensuring that accurate information is available wherever people are having a discussion. They need to ensure that the community has access to the facts - both when government is right and when they are wrong.
This limits the damage of false claims and myths - when government has indeed made the most correct decisions. Equally it limits the damage and distress when government has made mistakes. This approach allows government to retain the respect and trust of the community, particularly when errors are quickly detected and corrected.
Possibly the greatest challenge for public servants related to this shift to open disclosure and less massaging of messages is that it is happening right now.
The Australian Government's Freedom of Information reform law was passed on 13 May this year, Victoria has begun adopting Creative Commons licensing in a proactive disclosure approach for public sector data and NSW's government recently appointed an Information Commissioner and the NSW Premier has directed Ministers and Departments to set "an example of unprecedented openness".
This makes it imperative for agencies to recognise that their environment has changed and adjust their internal processes as quickly as possible.
Monday, May 24, 2010
Infallability, government and Web 2.0 | Tweet |
Saturday, May 22, 2010
App My State a major Victorian Gov 2.0 success | Tweet |
Victoria's App My State competition has now closed to entries, and has already been an enormous success for the Gov 2.0 efforts in that state.
The competition attracted 171 entries, 75 applications and 96 ideas, over 12 weeks.
Judging has now commenced - with the public able to vote for the 'popular choice' award and other awards now being considered by judges, with winners announced on 7 June.
The Premier has personally tweeted his thanks, showing a level of high-level engagement with the competition,
@vicpremier: Well done to all the @appmystate applicants. Top quality entries. Looking forward to giving out the awards. JB
Regardless who wins the competition, the event has already proven to be a highly cost-effective method to gather useful ideas and generate meaningful approaches to using public sector data.
Is this a once-off success? The evidence argues otherwise.
NSW is in the process of holding a similar competition with a similar level of prizes. While the competition didn't include an ideas category (EDIT 24/5/10: the competition did include an ideas category, which received 64 submissions) and occurred during a changeover in Premiers and with significantly less online promotional support, it still attracted 55 app entries over a 14 week period.
App competitions in the UK and US have also generated significant returns for governments - in particular the first Apps for Democracy competition in Washington D.C. estimated that the value of the apps produced was over US$2.2 million, for less than US$100,000 in prize value.
There is even a set of guidelines on how to run an apps competition to support agencies and states produced by Apps for Democracy.
Below I've included a video where Victorian political leadership introduce the App My State competition. Below that is a list of some of the other App competitions that have been run worldwide.
Apps competitions
Involving public sector data - there are many other examples in commercial spaces.
- MashUpAustralia (Australia)
- App My State (Victoria, Australia)
- Apps4NSW (NSW, Australia)
- Apps for Democracy (United States)
- Apps for America (United States)
- Apps for Army (United States)
- INCA – the Innovative and Creative Application Contest (Belgium)
- Apps competitions in Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Netherlands and Spain
- Apps for New York (United States)
- Show Us A Better Way competition (Great Britain)
- Apps for Climate Change (British Columbia, Canada)
- Apps for Development (World Bank)
Friday, May 21, 2010
Register now! Gov 2.0 Canberra lunch - 31 May | Tweet |
After some interruptions I've now organised the next Gov 2.0 Canberra lunch, featuring two fantastic speakers, Senator Kate Lundy and Kate Carruthers.
Being held at the Parliament House Members' Guest Dining Room on 31 May, Senator Lundy will be speaking on the Gov 2.0 Expo she's attending in Washington - giving a round-up of the event, what is happening in the US Gov 2.0 scene and providing an international perspective on the Government 2.0 trend.
Also speaking will be Kate Carruthers, one of Australia's foremost online strategists. Kate's talk will cover some of the social media learnings from the corporate sector - what government can learn and build on to create more successful Government 2.0 initiatives.
If you wish to attend, please register at http://egovaugov20lunch0510.eventbrite.com/
Monday, May 17, 2010
Australian Gov 2.0 showcase launched | Tweet |
If you've not on Twitter, or regularly visiting AGIMO's new Govspace blog, you may not yet be aware of the Australian Gov 2.0 showcase.
The showcase has been established as a place for the Australian Government to publicly share case studies, videos and information about various Government 2.0 initiatives taking place.
The first goal of the showcase is to allow the Australians attending and speaking at the Gov 2.0 Expo in Washington on 25 May to demonstrate what is happening in Australia in the area.
If your department has any public Gov 2.0 initiatives, you should consider listing them in this showcase, to increase awareness of what your Department is doing, to support other Australian Government Agencies in understanding and planning their own initiatives and to help highlight the successes Australia has achieved on the global stage.
Friday, May 14, 2010
Nudge your public sector colleagues about Government 2.0 - today! | Tweet |
Contrary to some media and public perceptions, most public servants are hard working and dedicated to their jobs.
This makes us busy people - sometimes too busy to keep an eye on what is going on at the peripheries of our professions.
That's why it is important for those of us who understand and follow what is happening in the Government 2.0 scene to occasionally nudge our colleagues. This is so they don't miss out on the opportunity to understand what is going on and figure it into their strategic and tactical planning.
This week - despite being enormously busy - I've found a few minutes to nudge three groups of my colleagues about ground-breaking Australian Gov 2.0 initiatives that will impact on their areas.
This including advising one group about a new research paper that used Australian blogs and forums in its literary review, concluding that these forms of citizen media offered enormous potential to build a more sophisticated and nuanced understanding of community issues than could be derived from quantitative research alone. That's important for good policy.
It involved bringing to the attention of another group the release of the Australian Government budget under Creative Commons licensing, and of the Government's other statements about copyright and FOI. These policies will influence how we release public information into the future. That's important for good organisational strategic planning.
Finally it involved flagging a set of blogs and social media discussions which demonstrated how the public was using new media to talk about government services. This led to some healthy follow-up discussion on whether potentially defamatory and/or negative comments by individuals online should be given 'oxygen' by government or media. Regardless of the substance of posts it highlighted that people were very actively using online media to publicly share their thoughts and opinions about Government in ways that could influence others' views, rightly or wrongly. That's an important tool for Government communicators, policy and service delivery staff to monitor customer sentiment and address misconceptions or service issues.
Which of your colleagues have you nudged about Government 2.0 this week?
Why not nudge some of them today!
