In response to Andrew Lewin (this should be a rap battle)

Andrew Lewin has written a superb post about what has happened recently in government 2.0 (I am doing it on purpose now) and the questions this raises with regard to innovation vs transformation. Do go and read it, I just wanted to address a couple of points, (and my comment on his blog became an essay so I deleted it and am writing it here instead!). Here’s the bit I want to talk about:

Maybe it’s time for Transformational Government to come up with its own version 2.0 to take into account how it should be working to promote open source, small inspirational and novel microsites? Behind the scenes it already is – coming up with ways of using the semantic web to deliver services while retaining the core commitment to Directgov, Businesslink and a small number of central websites and forbidding any new ones. But the evidence suggests this core line might be breaking in 2009 and that it needs to have a more fundamental root-and-branch rethink or risk becoming the sort of block to responsive, user-centred design of government services that it was created to promote and achieve.

I believe it already is. When you Google ‘transformational government’, which I have to do every time I am looking for that strategy document as I can never remember the CIO url, or even that it sits on the CIO website (:)), the first link you get is indeed the right one (hooray) and takes you straight to this:

Follow the first link about Open Source, Open Standard and Re-use and  you get this, with a link to the PDF for the detail (wince) and a natty netvibes page for following the conversation. OK so this is not about website rationalisation, which is the bit in the Transformational Government policy to which I think you refer, but it is definitely a 2.0 thing, no?

To my mind, most people think that transformational government is just website rationalisation: it’s not, it’s just that that bit has had quite a bit of Press. Here is an explanation of all the areas covered by the TG agenda.

Yes there is the bit about reducing lots of websites and utilising Directgov and businesslink.gov.uk, but there is also the following:

• empowering individuals to influence their services, with greater opportunities and direct involvement to influence the way they are designed and delivered

I say that this, alongside the opensource, open data commitment is the backbone to what you are proposing happens: without it being done in a brand new announcement that includes the words 2.0 🙂 Of course, this could be interpreted many different ways, but I would like to think that everything that has happened, has actually ALL been a part of transformational government: it is far bigger than website rationalisation (that did need to happen).

Steph Gray points out on Andrew’s blog that perhaps the measurement of website convergence success should not be urls, enabling WordPress sites to be thrown up wherever and whenever. I am not sure… I don’t know that rapid response to customer need, and engaging with people where they are already conversing necessitates MORE websites. The one site being pointed to is the much heralded Real Help Now: I think that this should have been done in Directgov, all it does in any case for the actual advice bit is deep link to Directgov and businesslink.gov.uk information; it should have been a Directgov campaign and I see no reason for it to have been otherwise under the TG rules. I don’t buy the argument that DG cannot do it because of tech, it can do maps and it can deep link… I think that in this case it was a Political decision.

Going back to the report by David Varney: Service transformation, a better service for citizens and business, a better deal for the tax payer (flipping difficult to find, but readily available as a PDF, prob because it is sold by TSO for £18!) upon which the TG strategy is based: it does look dated now.

Update: and would you take a look at this?! http://blog.helpfultechnology.com/2009/02/consultationxml-goes-open-source/ Now that’s exciting… and great

Follow up to Stephen and Steph’s stuff, plus some interesting posts from Mitch Sava

Stephen has written again, a follow up to his post on options for digital engagement for the London Summit: Please do go and have a read.

In addition to this, Steph Gray has posted the results of his experiment into social media blockers in the public sector.

Now, Mitch Sava has posted twice today over on his blog; one on building an OpenGov index and another on the appointment of a director of citizen participation in the Obama regime. Both brilliant and worth a read.

Steph Gray reaches for the big guns

During my ridiculous January, nearly over now hurrah, I missed some important stuff – too much for me to list here, and possibly not overly interesting for you all, but THIS, this has to be shared.

Steph Gray, the community manager at DIUS, has decided to start fighting corporate decisions to close down access to social media by creating this social media test suite. Here is his blurb:

So let’s try and build a picture of access to social media tools from the workplace. Please run my social media test suite survey from your workplace machine and let’s see who the blockers are. I’m happy to publish here, or in the survey results you can see when you complete the survey, any appropriate explanations or justifications from IT providers. I know there can be good reasons for limiting access, and we should separate those from the bad ones.

This is a great thing to do, and especially apt for departments where in recent weeks all access to social media has been inexplicably turned off without rhyme or reason.

People will understand if there is a problem that is being solved by switching off access to certain sites, but this blanket bigotry is ill-informed and often not based on solving a proven problem.

V-Logs from the online consultation meeting

Hermione Way, newspepper.com, interviewed some of the participants after the meeting on the 4th December. Whilst we set up collaborative areas for all of you to continue to add/develop some of the ideas that came from the day, I thought that is might be interesting for you to see what people said as soon as released from the room.

HUGE thank you to Hermione for doing this, and for highlighting what we are doing in this week’s (episode 3) techfluff.tv. She came in for the second half of the meeting and joined in on the discussion around social media and policy development. You may notice that I am not interviewed, this is because I am RUBBISH at being in front of a camera, much better at writing. Anyway, everyone else said it so much better than I could.

Steph Gray Department for Innovation, University and Skills (DIUS)

Mark O’Neill Department for Culture, Media and Sport

Mitch Sava Polywonk and David Wilcox Social Reporter

Matthew Cain Newscounter (Note the hesitation in the middle and the twitter conversation at end… diamond)

Alan Moore SMLXL

Euan Semple

Emma the apologist

After having written about the tool kit we are preparing, I have gone horribly quiet, whilst many of you have been being deliciously helpful in the comments here.

Do not fret, I have not vanished off the face of the earth, I am making sure that I do not screw up the next step.

I will update this blog as I inch forward, but what has become clear is how much is being done by Steph Gray in DIUS – and I need to assimilate this, rather than dupe effort. (Proving harder to achieve in real life than you would think!) Steph and I run around each other in ever decreasing circles, so hopefully next week I will be at stage two.

Two things that bring me comfort:

1. Looking at where we are now and where we want to get to in departmental communication online; is the ‘stuff’ I am doing going to get us to where we want to be? Yes. (Phew)

2. The first step to take in collaborating in the social media space, is to listen. Oli Barrett showed me easily the simplest listening tool I have found to date: addictomatic. The only downside being that you can only listen to one ‘keyword’ at a time – good way to filter what you are really trying to achieve. So, you can either have many people listening, or you use a multiple listening tool like Pageflakes. Pageflakes requires a teensy amount of technical knowledge (to make it look good mainly) and I can recommend Dave Briggs as a good person to set one up for you in about… er half a day 🙂

So, I am getting there. It is complicated – by the day job as well as the wealth of information available.

Even better news is that Beth Kanter and I have touched base… I will keep you updated.

Next week I will also update my roll call, as I have recently received several formal complaints (sorry!)

Update sinning: sorry I do know the rules, but I have just realised that I posted without checking my reader first. Jeremy Gould has talked about both things I have mentioned here on his Whitehall Webby blog – h/t