<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why isn&#8217;t Government adopting social software?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/</link>
	<description>Conversation. Collaboration. Community.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 02:35:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Man with no Blog &#187; Government 2.0</title>
		<link>http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/comment-page-1/#comment-16380</link>
		<dc:creator>Man with no Blog &#187; Government 2.0</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 05:28:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/#comment-16380</guid>
		<description>[...] really an old chestnut this one others in the field like Laurel Papworth, Stephen Collins and Matthew Hodgson have all commented at length. However the other day I ran smack bang into the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] really an old chestnut this one others in the field like Laurel Papworth, Stephen Collins and Matthew Hodgson have all commented at length. However the other day I ran smack bang into the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Man with no blog &#187; Gov 2.0 or circa 1980</title>
		<link>http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/comment-page-1/#comment-10219</link>
		<dc:creator>Man with no blog &#187; Gov 2.0 or circa 1980</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 14:39:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/#comment-10219</guid>
		<description>[...] of talk of late on Government 2.0, good friend Nick Cowie has a blog searching for examples of it, Stephen Collins is trying to rile it up, Matthew Hodgson muses over it and John Allsopp wonders if the future is [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] of talk of late on Government 2.0, good friend Nick Cowie has a blog searching for examples of it, Stephen Collins is trying to rile it up, Matthew Hodgson muses over it and John Allsopp wonders if the future is [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/comment-page-1/#comment-3697</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jan 2008 06:25:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/#comment-3697</guid>
		<description>After reading Mark Moore&#039;s wonderful book, &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_value&quot; title=&quot;public value&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Creating Public Value&lt;/a&gt;, I have come round to the view that &#8211; despite the rhetorical aversion &#8211; siloed structures are not in themselves the problem. 

Learning how to work within those (power) structures, and being able to act strategically and create public value via, eg., social software, is the real challenge &#8212; otherwise we are just talking about &lt;em&gt;technology&lt;/em&gt;.

My experience in NZ govt is that if the conversation is framed around the correct business objectives and presented as part of a well thought out comms strategy, senior management are quite open to the idea of social media &#8212; but it has to be articulated in business outcomes (and that doesn&#039;t necessarily mean &lt;acronym title=&quot;return on investment&quot;&gt;ROI&lt;/acronym&gt;, they are prepared to take risks if those risks are documented and mitigations drawn up).

The only hurdle that I see our agencies consistently stumble over is the obvious one: the technology is &lt;em&gt;so easy&lt;/em&gt; to set up (either with or without the assistance/consent of IT) that the planning &#8211; or worse, the &lt;em&gt;cultural&lt;/em&gt; aspects &#8211;  of the programme are overlooked or poorly managed.

So, to arrive belatedly at a conclusion: I don&#039;t see the same virtue in flatter organizations; indeed, hierarchies are important for governance and accountability. I do think that we can do a much better job of selling the benefits of new strategic approaches to an agency&#039;s business which may, coincidentally, involve social software or other technologies. But perhaps I am just becoming &lt;em&gt;one of them&lt;/em&gt;...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After reading Mark Moore&#8217;s wonderful book, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_value" title="public value" rel="nofollow">Creating Public Value</a>, I have come round to the view that &ndash; despite the rhetorical aversion &ndash; siloed structures are not in themselves the problem. </p>
<p>Learning how to work within those (power) structures, and being able to act strategically and create public value via, eg., social software, is the real challenge &mdash; otherwise we are just talking about <em>technology</em>.</p>
<p>My experience in NZ govt is that if the conversation is framed around the correct business objectives and presented as part of a well thought out comms strategy, senior management are quite open to the idea of social media &mdash; but it has to be articulated in business outcomes (and that doesn&#8217;t necessarily mean <acronym title="return on investment">ROI</acronym>, they are prepared to take risks if those risks are documented and mitigations drawn up).</p>
<p>The only hurdle that I see our agencies consistently stumble over is the obvious one: the technology is <em>so easy</em> to set up (either with or without the assistance/consent of IT) that the planning &ndash; or worse, the <em>cultural</em> aspects &ndash;  of the programme are overlooked or poorly managed.</p>
<p>So, to arrive belatedly at a conclusion: I don&#8217;t see the same virtue in flatter organizations; indeed, hierarchies are important for governance and accountability. I do think that we can do a much better job of selling the benefits of new strategic approaches to an agency&#8217;s business which may, coincidentally, involve social software or other technologies. But perhaps I am just becoming <em>one of them</em>&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NathanaelB</title>
		<link>http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/comment-page-1/#comment-3690</link>
		<dc:creator>NathanaelB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 07:17:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/#comment-3690</guid>
		<description>Make me the CIO already!! Hopefully that&#039;s high enough up to influence change :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Make me the CIO already!! Hopefully that&#8217;s high enough up to influence change <img src='http://www.acidlabs.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Collins</title>
		<link>http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/comment-page-1/#comment-3683</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Collins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 02:36:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/#comment-3683</guid>
		<description>Nathanael, your last paragraph says it all - corporate culture is the blocker.  Bureaucracy. Command and control. Power. Silos.

These are the things that need to be broken down in order to encourage not only social tool adoption, but better and more efficient sharing of knowledge across large organisations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nathanael, your last paragraph says it all &#8211; corporate culture is the blocker.  Bureaucracy. Command and control. Power. Silos.</p>
<p>These are the things that need to be broken down in order to encourage not only social tool adoption, but better and more efficient sharing of knowledge across large organisations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Collins</title>
		<link>http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/comment-page-1/#comment-3682</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Collins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 02:33:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/#comment-3682</guid>
		<description>Matthew, I understand and agree about the Power Distance and organisational culture issues.  It&#039;s my argument, as much as it&#039;s a David and Goliath issue, that what needs changing &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; corporate culture in large buraucracies to a flatter, more open and inclusive one.  If it can work for organisations like Semco, where Ricardo Semler is seen as something of a pioneer and maverick in creating almost totally flat structures, I see no reason it couldn&#039;t work for other organisations.

That said it&#039;s a big ask and not likely to take place soon.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Matthew, I understand and agree about the Power Distance and organisational culture issues.  It&#8217;s my argument, as much as it&#8217;s a David and Goliath issue, that what needs changing <em>is</em> corporate culture in large buraucracies to a flatter, more open and inclusive one.  If it can work for organisations like Semco, where Ricardo Semler is seen as something of a pioneer and maverick in creating almost totally flat structures, I see no reason it couldn&#8217;t work for other organisations.</p>
<p>That said it&#8217;s a big ask and not likely to take place soon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NathanaelB</title>
		<link>http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/comment-page-1/#comment-3681</link>
		<dc:creator>NathanaelB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 02:31:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/#comment-3681</guid>
		<description>Technology is only part of it - because only the IT section of a government department is really going to care about the security risks, compatibility and going outside the Standard Operating Environment (SOE).

For example, it took us months to get Firefox installed on our computers - but so far we&#039;ve been unsuccessful in getting the Web Developers Toolbar and other extensions installed because there&#039;s no precedent for add-ons for Firefox within the Department, and apparently they are being evaluated by IT.

Some of my work I&#039;ve had to do from home because I know there&#039;s zero chance of me getting a PHP/MySQL development environment setup here.

Luckily for many of my requirements, the IT section and the technology is the ONLY blocker or inhibitor and there are options.

However when it comes to social networking tools, that goes higher and wider than just IT. There is concern from people about ROI, performance, distractions, communication, release of classified or controlled information, managing public relations etc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Technology is only part of it &#8211; because only the IT section of a government department is really going to care about the security risks, compatibility and going outside the Standard Operating Environment (SOE).</p>
<p>For example, it took us months to get Firefox installed on our computers &#8211; but so far we&#8217;ve been unsuccessful in getting the Web Developers Toolbar and other extensions installed because there&#8217;s no precedent for add-ons for Firefox within the Department, and apparently they are being evaluated by IT.</p>
<p>Some of my work I&#8217;ve had to do from home because I know there&#8217;s zero chance of me getting a PHP/MySQL development environment setup here.</p>
<p>Luckily for many of my requirements, the IT section and the technology is the ONLY blocker or inhibitor and there are options.</p>
<p>However when it comes to social networking tools, that goes higher and wider than just IT. There is concern from people about ROI, performance, distractions, communication, release of classified or controlled information, managing public relations etc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Hodgson</title>
		<link>http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/comment-page-1/#comment-3680</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Hodgson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 02:21:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/01/11/why-isnt-government-adopting-social-software/#comment-3680</guid>
		<description>The level of the buracracy itself is reflective of the organisational culture and can be measured by Power Distance. 

The consequence implied would be that you need to actually change the whole culture in order to affect change to adopt social computing tools, or at least to ensure that they work effectively.

M</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The level of the buracracy itself is reflective of the organisational culture and can be measured by Power Distance. </p>
<p>The consequence implied would be that you need to actually change the whole culture in order to affect change to adopt social computing tools, or at least to ensure that they work effectively.</p>
<p>M</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
