Last week NRCan gave a presentation to the Conference Board of Canada on the role of social media in risk management. The presentation took the usual form: we discussed our experiences in managing the risk of social media implementation, focused on how to address quality of content on wikis, and how to guide and inform employees on the acceptable use of new and open technologies.

What was different about this particular presentation was the inclusion of a few slides on how social media could be used to contribute to – and in fact reinforce – risk management activities. We had an audience interested in all aspects of risk management, and as good presenters we looked at our own NRCan Wiki, our blogs and other tools to find good examples to illustrate how social media could help reduce risks – or at least serve as a way to identify risks earlier.

Joe the security guy
Take one of our IT security guys for example – let’s call him Joe . He’s a well-respected and knowledgeable NRCan employee, whose work concerns protecting corporate systems and ensuring that we’re kept well informed on any potential risks. Joe wrote a blog entry about the dangers of Twitter. It was a good, well thought out entry that generated a discussion amongst employees. Some employees were concerned that this attention to potential risk could slow things down, and the issue was discussed from a diverse variety of perspectives.

How does this support better risk management? The first thing to note is that Joe posted his blog entry voluntarily – not because he was asked or because there had been a problem, but because he saw something on the horizon and took the initiative to address it by starting a discussion with his fellow employees. This discussion took place before the Department had officially identified Twitter as a tool being used by employees, and long before it had indentified the need to provide relevant policies and guidelines.

Now that the need has arisen, the policy does not need to start from square one. There is already a base of research and opinion to be found in the discussion sparked by Joe’s blog entry. Joe has created a living repository for information and knowledge that could play a valuable role in building a risk management approach, a repository fuelled by the experiences of NRCan employees. Now policies can be built not only on theoretical implementation plans, but also on how real employees have chosen to make use of social media tools.

This is the power of social media: to build on the wisdom of crowds. In the social media forum, the latest concepts are discussed by people that have an interest in the topic, no matter whether they have an official role in the file or not. With social media, a body of valuable knowledge and experience can grow organically, fuelled by the passion and interest of real people, including those who may not have been reached through traditional lines of communication.

We must not only recognize the value but also make use of the discussions and analyses that are generated through the knowledge skunkworks of social media. Taking this inclusive and proactive approach will help us anticipate new trends and build corporate knowledge, not only for managing risk but also for any other subject matter or mandate.

Online conversations are transforming the relationship between people and organizations. Are government bodies listening? By David Jacobson, PricewaterhouseCoopers Canada LLP

With blended or multimedia search results at our fingertips (including video, images, blog posts, and personalization searches), leisure and business are rapidly and dramatically changing and converging. Welcome to the age of the “selfsumer”. In this new era, Canadians use discussion forums, blogs, email, text messages and a variety of social networking tools to share what, when and how they buy. The way they communicate has changed the rules of business. If government and the public sector wish to participate, they cannot continue using only traditional approaches to connect with their staff and the public.

My experience as an emerging technologies director with PwC Canada indicates that selfsumers are a growing number of consumers and employees who search for, discover and create information on products, services and companies via multiple sources on the web. They collaborate online using various social media to find and make purchase decisions. This is a new type of consumer that is less reliant on hard sell commercials and more reliant on discovering products and brands using the internet and social networking.

With one voice that can morph into a community in minutes, selfsumers’ online influence has begun to alter the relationship between businesses and the public. This shift has challenged business leaders to think more creatively when developing new products, promotional content and e-commerce channels. Public sector leaders can do the same to increase their level of engagement with Canadians.

Analyzing selfsumers’ digital behaviour can help government organizations refine their ability to capture consumer intelligence, gain insight into their changing needs and build connectivity. It can also help cash-strapped agencies save money because targeted campaigns are supported by a deeper understanding of consumers which removes guesswork and decreases the likelihood of wasted time and financial resources.

Government executives must rely on their CIOs to translate selfsumers’ ideas into a business and IT strategy. To be fully effective, the IT centre will need different approaches to read digital behaviour and meet strategic goals.

To stay agile with changing digital conversations, CIOs need to be more creative when strategizing with the executive team. For example, they can deliver new types of lucrative business applications, uncover ways for departments and data servers to share information and knowledge, and improve data-warehousing to keep pace with growing amounts of information exchanged between Canadians on blogs and message boards. This creativity, agility and innovation will become more beneficial as selfsumers’ tastes and skills continue to influence more business applications and practices.

According to PwC’s study How the Consumer Conversation Will Transform Business, the number of online discussions about a customer-facing organization – its brand and reputation – can reach thousands or even millions per day. Aggregating and analyzing these online conversations will require increasingly sophisticated technology and a commitment to continually improve strategies to listen, process and quickly respond. Government agencies that embrace these methods demonstrate their commitment to helping Canadians.

For more information on the dialogue with consumers, read PwC Canada’s 2009 Report on Emerging Canadian Software Companies: A CEO Perspective and Navigating the Era of the Empowered Consumer.

Getting people to use Web 2.0 takes more than just having a great new tool – the buzz around social media is key to its success. And while access to GCpedia may be limited to public servants, discussion of it certainly is not. Most of the buzz around GCpedia is positive, but more importantly, a slice of the discussion offers TBS and users some very concrete ways to improve the Wiki in terms of what went right and what needs to change in the deployment of future Web 2.0 tools. That’s why the public service needs to pay attention to what people are saying about GCpedia – especially outside of its walls.

Here are the top 5 things to know about how GCpedia is discussed on the web:

1- Wikipedia’s take on its GC cousin – Oddly enough, the Wikipedia article on GCpedia is an orphan, as “few or no articles link to it.” It is also tagged as a stub – there isn’t much about GCpedia on its closest public analogue. As is Wikipedia’s aim, the language about GCpedia is neutral – so, one has to wonder why TBS hasn’t taken advantage of what is potentially a good, and at least a cheap and easy opportunity to tout the goals of GCpedia. (Who cares about GCpedia outside of the public service? Taxpayers, quite possibly,)

2 – GCpedia will save the public service!  – David Eaves makes the point that GCpedia is an excellent way to capture all of the tacit knowledge that will walk out the door when senior management  retires in droves. Used properly, GCpedia could serve as a wealth of go-to information for those who will advance to mid-level and senior positions. Government departments and agencies need to be willing to endure the temporary pain of dedicating staff to interviewing almost-retirees and posting the findings to GCpedia, to avoid a longer term consequence: losing the collective intelligence getting ready to exit the public service.

3 – GCpedia remains the domain of GCgeeks? – Peter Smith is worried about how well GCpedia lends itself to use by newbies. The level of technical knowledge necessary to using GCpedia is one of the reasons Eaves cites for why soon-to-be-retirees aren’t likely to post what they know themselves. Smith is right – the interface is confusing, and could easily intimidate anyone with techno-trepidation. What is the solution? One is likely more training than what is largely available thus far, especially if TBS is sold on the MediaWiki platform.

4 – Lots of talk on Twitter – Interestingly enough, many public servants have turned to Twitter to talk about GCpedia. This isn’t surprising, just important. Remember that Twitter may well be the easiest real-time resource for anyone who wants to take the pulse of the Web-2.0-crowd’s feeling about GCpedia.

5 – Mostly love, but some concerns, too – Overall, the talk about GCpedia is overwhelmingly positive. And where challenges are discussed on the Web, so are solutions, which gives GCpedia’s owners and users an opportunity to engage in in-depth and strategic discussions about the role of this communication channel. That discussion is vital if GCpedia is going to live up to its potential.

I read an interesting post on measuring the value of social media by Nick Charney at his blog CPS Renewal. I found his post thought provoking as usual and, as usual, I loved that Nick issued a challenge to readers (mostly government employees I am assuming) to send him stories about social media experiences in government.

Nick presents his conundrum as follows:

“The more time I spend examining the use of social media within government, the more I think that measuring the value it brings is a near impossible task.”

I don’t agree that the task is impossible at all. At NRCan – and I appreciate the fact that our SM experience is going into its third year – we celebrated SM “successes” at every opportunity. By “successes” I mean, the innovative and sustainable ways employees are using tools like the Wiki, blogs, NRTube, Delicious, RSS Feeds, etc. to improve collaboration and knowledge sharing across lines of business and to change the way they worked. We go to great lengths to profile the “value” that this new way of working brings to the department.

Nick goes on to state:

“…the more I reflect on the situation the more I realize that we can’t quantify the value because we still rely heavily on traditional empirical standards. Don’t get me wrong I am not advocating doing away with empirical approaches but rather simply stating that social media is still so new to government that it would be premature to expect to accurately capture its value in a spreadsheet.

Perhaps the spreadsheet is the wrong vehicle. I don’t think it’s premature at all to quantify the value of SM in government. But why would you want to? The SM tools speak for themselves - not through quantitative stats like page views and hits but as they are used to replace “traditional” approaches in the way we manage information. For the first time ever (well, certainly during my six years at NRCan) employees are truly in control of the information they create and share. I believe this is due mostly to the availability and ease of use of SM tools.

I suppose you could count the number of emails with Wiki links vs the number of emails with documents attached. You could count the number of videos viewed on NRTube. You could probably even count the number of NRCan employees with active Twitter accounts. But to what end?

If you are looking at this from a GC renewal perspective, then I suggest you look at the big picture. In my opinion, SM helps distribute decision-making and leadership amongst all users. I agree that this is probably easier to measure from a qualitative perspective. But if SM is contributing to GC renewal – it most certainly is at NRCan – then is that not measurement enough?

Nonetheless, count me in on your scheme Nick, I have a few NRCan SM stories to share.

Over the past several months we have used this space to share our thoughts on Gov 2.0 either by profiling the many initiatives NRCan is involved in or by taking you along on a personal rant just to make a point - which some might argue is the sole purpose of blogging.  In the spirit of collaboration, “we” (representing corporate) extended an invitation to a few business leaders at NRCan who are actively using collaborative technologies to engage and interact within their communities.

The following blog posting by Jennifer Hollington, a Director General in the Canadian Forest Service (CFS) and one of NRCan’s most prolific bloggers, elegantly demonstrates how she champions Gov 2.0 at NRCan.  This post first appeared in Café Jen (an NRCan blog) in February 2009.

A few months back, our ADM mentioned an idea for tapping into the knowledge of retired employees. He called it “Friends of the CFS”. It would be a network of retired staff, particularly scientists, whom current staff could contact with questions.

This brought to mind a passage from Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything:

[I]f you’re a retired, unemployed, or aspiring chemist, Procter & Gamble needs your help. The pace of innovation has doubled in its industry in the past five years alone, and now its army of 7,500 researchers is no longer enough to sustain its lead. Rather than hire more researchers, CEO A.G. Lafley instructed business unit leaders to source 50 percent of their new product and service ideas from outside the company. Now you can work for P&G without being on their payroll. Just register on the InnoCentive network where you and ninety thousand other scientists around the world can help solve tough R&D problems for a cash reward. InnoCentive is only one of many revolutionary marketplaces for ideas, inventions, and uniquely qualified minds that can unlock new value in their markets.

Even if government contracting rules got in the way of the full implementation of P&G’s crowd sourcing approach in the public service, the idea of being able to take advantage of the skills, knowledge and experience of retired scientists and professionals is appealing.

So, as I sat typing up this post, I wondered whether I could find examples of how the GC is reaching out beyond its borders to engage bright minds in addressing their challenges. I’m not talking public opinion research, in which the government seeks input on a particular topic for a certain period of time. I’m talking about an ongoing relationship with the general public or a particular constituency for the purpose of collaboration.

I found quite a few examples of how various government departments and agencies are using Web 2.0 technologies, such as Twitter, RSS feeds, Facebook, YouTube and Flickr. You can find a list of them at the Government 2.0 Best Practices Wiki, started by consultant Mike Kujawaski. Though the technologies are new and their application in the Canadian government even newer, this wasn’t what I was looking for. I wanted to find stories where government was interacting with people outside their organization.

The most impressive example I found of citizen engagement was Governor General Michaëlle Jean’s Citizen Voices Web site, featuring a blog (bloGG), including video installments (videobloGGs), and a forum.  Some blog entries carry her by-line while others are written by staff in her Office. On her September 3, 2008 post A New Season on Citizen Voices; she ends with this statement:

“To understand, we must listen. To act, we must include.”
The first comment to this post was made on September 30. The next one came almost 2 months later, on December 1 and began:

“This may not be the most appropriate means by which to contact you about our current parliamentary debacle. However, it is a means of contact - I apologize if it is totally inappropriate.”

What follows is quite amazing: more than 100 comments in the span of one week, centered on the political issues of proroguing Parliament.

Equally amazing is the Forums section of the site, enabling citizens to launch their own debates, rather than comment in response to an official post. Within a category called the Citizens Forum on the political situation, one person started a post entitled: “Devastated by your decision”, saying: “I had faith in our Governor General to see the wider view of these political matters. I am devastated by the decision to suspend parliament.” You have to admire the Governor General for embracing true citizen engagement, even when that engagement involves public criticism of her on her own site.

The Privacy Commissioner of Canada has a public blog, written by a group of staffers in the Office of the Privacy Commissioner. The blog’s mission is to increase contact between the Office and Canadians interested in privacy issues. Readers can make comments on blogs posts, which — based on my quick review of the site — generates responses from the staffers or other readers.

The Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety, a GC crown corporation, set up Workscape, a discussion board on occupational health and safety. To date, almost 450 members have created just over 200 posts.

Some sites to support discussions among public servants are unofficial, residing outside the GC domain. One such site is Common Look and Feel .ca. Its stated purpose is “a community space where those who work for and on GC Web projects can come together to share, learn and create.” The site is designed to help members learn how to incorporate new technologies and social media into their sites, while complying with GC Web standards.

But after several hours of searching, I couldn’t find much more than this. Which leads me to my question: are you aware of examples within the GC where departments have reached out to former employees or the public to tap into their knowledge?

“There is something in the air, and it is nothing less than the digital artefacts of over one billion people and computers networked together collectively producing over 2,000 gigabytes of new information per second. While most of our classrooms were built under the assumption that information is scarce and hard to find, nearly the entire body of human knowledge now flows through and around these rooms in one form or another, ready to be accessed by laptops, cellphones, and iPods. Classrooms built to re-enforce the top-down authoritative knowledge of the teacher are now enveloped by a cloud of ubiquitous digital information where knowledge is made, not found, and authority is continuously negotiated through discussion and participation.”

Michael Wesch, “A Vision of Students Today (and what Teachers Must Do),” Encyclopedia Britannica blog, Oct. 21, 2008

If this is the state of university classrooms today, imagine what the workplace will look like tomorrow?

I came across Michael Wesch on YouTube about 2 years ago while I was researching collaborative technologies online for a presentation I was preparing. It was shortly after we revised our policy on acceptable use of electronic networks at NRCan. The debate about blocking employee access to social media tools like YouTube, FaceBook, Second Life and others was a heated one and pretty much divided right down the centre. I can’t recall what tipped the scales, but suffice it to say, the “nays” squeaked by and NRCan employees were not denied their right to learn, research, collaborate, investigate and network social networking tools. Phew! Without access at work who knows how many hours we’d be spending at home tracking users trends, collecting stats and finding cool videos and images online to embed in presentations or share with each other to fuel innovative thinking.

Many of my colleagues across all levels of government bemoan the fact that they are restricted access to social media tools altogether. In certain management circles I hear terms such as “disruptive”, “time-wasting” and a misuse of government resources – both people time and bandwidth” – used to describe these tools. Since when is learning on the job a waste of time?

I am attending a meeting this week with a community of my GC colleagues to share ideas on how government can effectively use YouTube for public outreach. Only problem is, YouTube cannot be accessed by the host department so we’ll be swapping our video stories via DVDs and memory sticks. Seems to me, universal access to a common platform like YouTube would make meetings like this more efficient and productive.

Are social media tools disrupting the classrooms and workplaces of the nation? According to Wikipedia, a disruptive technology is an innovation that improves a product or service in ways that the market does not expect, typically by being lower priced or designed for a different set of consumers.

In fact, Web 2.0 technologies become disruptive when they are forced into existing infrastructures. It is not until we integrate them into our processes and normalize their use will they truly transform the workplace. The students of Mr. Wesch’s class understand this concept. These students routinely mobilize entire communities in 140 characters or less (thanks to Twitter) while in the class room. They are improving their corners of the world in unexpected ways through innovation and collective decision making.

Is this behaviour too disruptive for government? Do we really want to discourage broad knowledge sharing and community development? Is it too soon for government to open up dialogues, relinquish some control and have a little more faith?

From someone who remembers the early days of the internet and the needless paranoia that ensued in the workplace – I say, open it up. Trust employees. They are already abiding by a code of conduct and working within the confines of policies and guidelines designed to protect them and the information they create.

And those students in Michael Wesch’s class? They are rapidly joining the workforce, and expect to have these tools at their disposal. They are not in the minority. All students graduating this year are not only fluent in these tools but have fully integrated these tools into their lives. They don’t know how to work any other way and the public service needs to be ready for them.

Some of the most interesting challenges facing the Federal Public Service can be found in the growing communities of public servants using external social media tools. You don’t have to look too far to see that public servants are actively using Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter – and not just as private citizens. If you look at any one of these tools, you will find broad and vibrant communities of public servants: citizens debating, discussing and meeting to talk about things they are passionate about – and often it is their work.

On the surface, this social phenomenon offers significant opportunities for government institutions struggling with public service renewal. What better way to harness the passion and inventiveness of employees than to give them the tools and the freedom to engage outside the bureaucratic firewall? And it takes only a small step further to see the deeper benefits, the potential to engage with stakeholders and citizens. Imagine the creation of policies and the design of programs in a world where employees are able to discuss, debate, and capture ideas from thousands or even hundreds of thousands of citizens.

The traditional approach is often unidirectional: good communications plans are designed simply to get the message out. Interaction and input from citizens is limited to the channels of surveys, focus groups or portal Web sites. Focusing on official and unidirectional channels is still effective in many contexts, but how long will this remain the case? In short, will traditional methods be sufficient to engage citizens of the next generation, when already they are furiously debating and discussing issues they care about, on their own terms and using their own tools?

Asking these communities to come to us to provide their input is like asking loud and boisterous partygoers to leave their party and come over to your house for tea. Reception will be much better if you just go over and listen – and ask important questions. The idea of an open government bureaucracy that engages citizens at all levels has some very obvious challenges, such as the impact on traditional decision making, privacy, and accountability. I think that the most important challenge can be found in how the core values of the public servant (neutrality, anonymity, fairness and most importantly supporting elected officials) interact with the values engendered in social media (openness, equality, and community). At one time, the political affiliations and opinions of a public servant were only discussed privately. But in today’s world of YouTube and Twitter, where what was once private is increasingly – and willingly – made public, the idea of anonymity goes out the window.

The bottom line is that public servants are a part of an increasingly interconnected, open and accountable world. And frankly, governments need to develop guidance for them, because public servants have already been using social media for quite some time, trying to make Canada a better place. And we must support them.

Afterthought 

You might be wondering why I am treating the broad use of these tools as a fait accompli. We could simply build internal systems or mandate that public servants don’t use external tools except through very controlled channels. We are already setting up internal tools, and they will have an impact. But I don’t believe they can replace the true value of external systems. Also, employees have great latitude to discuss their work interests as private citizens. In doing so, they are generating a wealth of information and knowledge that could be lost to the organization, if the split between private and public servant personas is institutionalized. Accepting the use of external social media tools embraces a public servant as a whole person, and embraces all they have the power to contribute.

(Thx 2 blog pixies)

A bright sunny day last week, and like every sun-starved Canadian in the spring, I could not resist an unscheduled walk at lunch time to enjoy the fresh air and rejuvenating warmth. But… I’m one of those pale, freckled types… who burns and never tans. As I navigated the gravel in the office parking lot, I was glad that as part of a regular morning ritual I had put sunscreen on before makeup.

What does this have to do with Government 2.0 or Collaboration, one might ask?

It struck me on that walk that preventive protective measures made great sense – especially to mitigate that risk that comes early in the season, before any tolerance to the sun has had a chance to build up over the summer. Isn’t this preventive layer needed for our departments and public sector employees making that first enthusiastic venture out into the bright light of world of Social Media?

A few months ago on my regular blog, “Candy and Aspirin”, I drew the analogy of The Sun, The Cave and the “a-ha” Moment to describe that moment of understanding and clarity one gets when the potential and possibilities of 2.0 technologies and practices are first grasped. Using the allegory of Plato’s “Cave”, the sun represents that bright light of true knowledge – that sense of truth and enlightenment that comes with discovery of the reality outside of our narrow inward-focused perspectives.

But the realization made on that walk last week was about the potential for a new and energized person or department to ‘get burned’ in the excitement of those first days engaging in social media or online collaboration. The opportunity to be open, engaged with peers or constituents, brings with it tremendous rewards – but also the risks: risks of being too exposed, of getting a little burned, of regretting the rush into openness.
Government departments looking to become more externally engaged need to be diligent and look closely at education and awareness for the individual public sector employees tasked with this outbound social networking or collaborative web communication. Very clear guidelines, boundaries and appropriate use policies are absolutely essential as the first building block to a social media strategy. Nothing can be more detrimental and bring a shadow over a move towards transparency than repercussions over inaccurate disclosure, inappropriate commentary or poor representation of the department’s mandate.

Policies and guidelines need not be perceived as barriers to transparency or a hindrance to better engagement. Think of them as your department’s Digital Sunscreen. Don’t let your valued and trusted internal experts get burned.

Want to learn more about the Plato’s Allegory of the Cave and how it relates to the world of 2.0 in just 2 minutes? Click this YouTube link and find out.

It’s great to be back on the GTEC.CA blog as we ramp up for the main event in October 2009. What a year it has been for the world of Government 2.0 and enterprise collaboration.  Use of social media and online communities for citizen engagement are now routinely front page news. “Enterprise 2.0” has moved from the fringe of public sector priorities into the mainstream, and early adopter departments and agencies worldwide are showing tangible and measurable success.

But what are organizations really trying to accomplish with a 2.0 strategy? Why is a renewed emphasis on collaboration important to the departmental mission?  Beyond the hype, beyond the fluff – what the real objective?  Ultimately success in the knowledge economy –whether public or private sector – rests on connecting the three fundamental elements of business: People, Processes and Content.  Balancing these three elements is not as easy as it seems. As public sector workplaces became automated in the 1980s and ‘90s, this world of “1.0” meant focus on process and content – the rapid rise of email, of shared network drives, of workflow tools endlessly routing items into inbox task lists: transactional content was pushed and pulled from eyeball to eyeball.  Process and Content? Yep! Got it covered.  People? Err… not so much.

Public sector employees personify contributors to the knowledge economy:  program development, delivery of citizen services, protection of infrastructure and populace, regulation and monitoring to ensure high quality of life for residents.  Information is the lifeblood of public sector activity - and this content comes from people.

When we talk about this new generation of collaboration -  inspired by the tools and practices of the 2.0 phenomenon -  we often hear the term “social”:  social networking, social media, social computing.  Social in this context does not mean leisure, or fun and games, it means people. It means bringing the human voice back into the wired world of the electronic workplace.  Organizations wanting to adopt a 2.0 strategy are seeking a more Social Workplace.  The “Social Workplace” is an ideal expression of Web 2.0 technologies to connect people with their peers and with critical content and information. Culturally, it helps break down hierarchical and administrative barriers to innovation and idea exchange among rank and file employees. Technologically, it introduces simpler content creation and communication tools and uses the Web to bridge geographical and generational gaps.

As Web-based collaboration becomes energized by the introduction of social and rich media, sharing and maintaining quality content can accelerate employee productivity. Where individual knowledge was previously hidden, successful teams are seeing shared information and experiences becoming part of broader organizational culture. Employees who actively share their knowledge emerge as experts, and departments that encourage employees to share their knowledge build stronger peer-to-peer and community networks, accelerating internal productivity gains. Providing a variety of simple, interactive, personalized community tools accessible over the Web or smart phones can achieve measurable positive results in this Social Workplace.  In Part 2 of this discussion, we’ll explore the essential scenarios best served by the Social Workplace:

• Attraction, retention, and better use of talent as part of human capital management
• More transparency in corporate governance and communication
• Enablement of front line staff to respond and serve
• Support for a more virtual enterprise
• Respect and protection of institutional memory

Stay tuned…