Service & Program people can I buy you a coffee?

Teacup_clipartThis post is directed to those of you that identify as a service or program person working in government.

Not too long ago I moved from Open Government Engagement to take on the role of Lead for Learning in Policy Community Partnership Office.  PCPO defines its community as anyone in a value chain that stretches from research through to service delivery and evaluation.

I realized recently that my network of policy folks is healthy, but I am not sure who I know with a mature understanding of the service delivery and program side of things.

If you are one of those people I would like to buy you a coffee.

It can be real coffee or tea or a walk if you are in the vicinity of 90 Elgin. Alternatively, we can talk on the phone, have a WebEx or Zoom or Google Hangout meeting. Whatever works.

I would like to learn about how you view this thing called policy and what you think about the policy/program/service spectrum that is sometimes talked about. I would like to learn more about your world and what we need to learn together to make it better.

If you are interested please drop me a line at my GC email and we’ll set something up. I look forward to meeting you.

Thom

 

 

GSRM for Digital Service Delivery?

Public Service Reference Model

Public Service Reference Model circa 2006 (original image by Neil Levette).

This is a quick post to share some work that was done by the Enterprise Architecture Division of the Chief Information Branch of the Government of Canada back in 2006. I became aware of it at a conference entitled Transforming Government – better outcomes for citizens, and in a way, it is directly responsible for my interest in working for the feds.

This is no longer really my space but chatting with some folks I realized that if you are involved in the current wave of digital service transformation you should at least be aware of it –  building on what came before, avoiding reinventing things, and all that.

The thing is called GSRM (Government Service Reference Model) and at it’simplest the idea is that all of Federal Government services can be distilled into one of 17 or so basic service types. For each service type, there can be a library of patterns covering variations. All services are described and architected using a common lexicon.

Now I don’t know about you, but the Enterprise Nerd in me gets pretty excited when I think about the implications of such a thing. Common service architecture would presumably enable better data management, security, evaluation and potentially even my current fantasy of intelligent policy that evolves based on data. Sorry, I digress.

To be clear, I had nothing to do with the development of any of this. I became involved with the GoC originally to try and sell the idea to departments and agencies because I wanted an efficient, responsive government. At the time there was a team of very smart people who are now mostly retired working on GSRM as part of a bigger project called BTEP (Business Transformation Enablement Program).  Unfortunately, in 2007-10, through a series of unfortunate events the Federal Government never really managed to adopt the standards. But others across Canada did, in fact, if your city offers 311 services it probably has its origins in the municipal version of this idea.

The upside of the failure to adopt the standard was that we pursued the idea of using a wiki for a collaborative architecture library which morphed into GCpedia which evolved into the GCTools and the first government-wide collaboration platform.

Ok, back to GSRM and the purpose of this post. I rummaged through my old files and put a few documents in this google drive.

GSRM

The quick note will give you an overview while the service types document outlines the 17 service patterns. The other two folders contain some related material if you want to dig deeper, including a foray into applying GSRM to knowledge policy.

There is likely more documentation hiding somewhere on the internet. Let me know if you find any of this useful or if you already have something better.

Happy Transformations!

Thom

 

 

 

 

The sausage and the salad

Over the last few years I have been trying to understand how open government can save democracy and help us deal with the big challenges in society today. Recently I have turned my attention to the policy making process as a big part of what government does.

Policy, according to Wikipedia is “a deliberate system of principles to guide decisions and achieve rational outcomes”.  Government does a lot of policy.  It creates laws, regulations and a whole series of policy instruments.  You could argue that government really only exists to create policy, and implement policy via services.  So policy is important.

Traditional government policy is like making sausage

Wikipedia 1200px-Kielbasa7.jpg
Various types of government policy produced in the traditional way.

To make sausage you grind up some meat, add some spices and maybe some filler. You stuff it in a tube of something using a special machine and package it up for cooking and consumption.  Once the sausage is made, it is pretty much impossible to change the recipe.

To make policy we grind up some knowledge, add some words and maybe some regulation. We get it approved by the department, the cabinet or the legislature in a process that takes years. Once approved, it is pretty difficult to change. Lessons from implementation are frequently lost as the policy does not get renewed for years.

The thing about sausage is that even though it might taste good, you never really know what goes into it.  Also too much of it is probably not good for your health.

Open policy making is like making a salad

Modern open policy produced with collective input and open to iterative improvement.

On the other hand, let’s think of a salad. Not only is it more colorful and diverse, you can instantly see all the ingredients. You can tell by looking at it whether it is fresh or not. Salads are versatile and easily changed. In fact, if you really want to you can still toss in some tasty sausage at the last minute.

Open policy making lets you know what went into the creation of government direction, you can easily see and examine the ingredients in the end product. In open policy making you can even offer up your own ingredients.  And salads are generally good for your health.

The world is changing and we need to adapt

We have spent centuries in government perfecting a convoluted sausage policy making process that depends heavily on expert advice and a bureaucratic understanding of the

Declining meat consumption in Canada as a metaphor for the changing policy landscape and rising demand for open policy making. 

public good.    But the world is changing. Meat consumption has been declining for decades and for government to stay relevant it must adapt.

I think we need more salads in our policy diet, what do you think?

Links and credits:

No one cares about open government

Open government is one of those terms that has different meanings depending upon your perspective.You might feel it is mostly about open data, or making information freely available, or you might think it is about engaging with constituents.

In 2014 and 2016 I had the opportunity to ask a lot of folks (mostly academics, civil society and public servants) why they thought open government was important. No one talked about open government as something inherently good, they talked about:

  • solving complex problems and creating social opportunity
  • fairness, objective knowledge and opportunity for positive change
  • understanding measuring, and connecting government
  • learning from the past and financial transparency
  • growing a healthy democracy
  • improving government
  • economic opportunity
  • citizen empowerment

They do care about Open Government they just don’t call it that.

p.s. For me, that healthy democracy item is flashing in my mind these days.

A visit from the open data bunny

Easter bunny crop 600p

Can you find any easter eggs?

In 2014 I had the privilege of traveling across Canada in a jet plane, as well as on the internet, to listen to what some Canadians had to say about Canada’s Action Plan on Open Government.

The purpose of this post is to introduce you to one of the outputs of that exercise; the release of all the consultation comments collected as open data. Some of this data might be relevant to the conversation on principles for engagement between governments and citizens. Part of that conversation is taking place at the Canadian Open Dialogue Forum next week in Ottawa.

This dataset is the same one I used to perform some high level qualitative analysis that informed the development of the action plan for 2014-16. That analysis is described in the what we heard report. My thinking is that the data may contain some undiscovered insights, some easter eggs if you will. Easter eggs you might be able to find.

The data contains the actual text of comments collected, as well as metadata and the codes we applied during the analysis. One of these is the “core code” (data, info, or dialogue). Filter the comments by the dialogue core code and you end up with 322 comments that might be fun to analyze in the context of the conversation around principles. These comments have location, theme, subthemes and other metadata to play with.

Here is a link to the data and release notes on the open.canada web site.  If you are up for a little easter egg hunt, please explore.

Be sure to share your discoveries using the hashtags #CODF16 and #OpenGovCan, or leave a comment here.

Hoppy easter everybody!

Thom

 

Why open government is important to me.

DCIM100SPORT

This post is the second in a two part series about what motivates people to get involved in Open Government.It originally appeared in the GTEC2104 Blog.

Open Government impacts our economy, political system, social stability, quality of life, beliefs, and ultimately the heart of democracy. It’s big and that makes it important, but I think for something to motivate you, it needs to be personal, so this is my story.

If you know me, you may also know that I am part of a little pack that includes two golden retrievers. These dogs have webbed feet and love to swim. The image above was taken at an off leash dog park near my home. Several years ago I inadvertently became president of the dog walkers association and last year we formally adopted the park.

Because I love my dogs and enjoy being outside with them I care about water quality and development issues.

In this case the jurisdictions involved include the City who owns and operates the park, the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority which maintains the coastline (the park is on an Island), Parks Canada who is responsible for the waterway itself (which is a UNESCO World Heritage Site), the province of Ontario, and any number of Federal and Provincial regulatory bodies.

Truly Open Government (across all jurisdictions) would help me because I could get a holistic picture that would help me judge if and when it was safe to let the dogs swim in the river and, if I wanted to join them.

In my ideal world it would also make it easy for me to get timely notifications of changes to issues I care about, to learn about those changes and take part in the decision-making. For instance: zoning changes that allow new development in the area, or new regulations around pesticide use, or invasive species such as the Ash Borer (the park has at least 260 Ash trees).

This is just one example from my life, but it could just as easily be about caring for a loved one, getting across the border in a timely fashion, knowing if that person knocking on my door really is from a charity, or something as simple as when to fly the flag outside the legion at half mast.

What about you, why is Open Government important to you?

Thom
@ThomKearney

 

Why is Open Government important?  

Battle of the saints crop

This post is the first in a two-part series about what motivates people to get involved in Open Government. One thing I know from my days in the advertising business is that people are mostly motivated by what they feel is important.  As Simon Sinek describes so well in his video,  “why?” is the most important question. Watch the Golden Circle of Why.

Of course before you can ask the question, you need to have some working definition of what we mean by Open Government, in this case I am using two reference points for my understanding:

My research consists of asking the question “Why is Open Government important to you”, to dozens of folks on social media and in real life, I watched videos, and consumed the Open Government Partnership Web Site.  I have done a little heuristic analysis  that has led to this incomplete and entirely subjective result.

When I ask the question, I get answers that (in my mind at least), fall into four groups: Building a better society, Fairness, Hope, and Self direction. One could argue that Building a better society is really part of hope, but one could argue anything, so I am not going there.

Building a Better Society

  • Services can sometimes be better and more efficient if co-delivered
  • Transparency, open communication, and visibility to fair process is the foundation for civic engagement
  • Open Government allows for greater participation, dialogue, innovation and smarter more connected communities
  • Citizen engagement leads to reduced risk and better decisions
  • If Government is more open maybe it will be also more effective, and efficient

Fairness

  • Government should be accountable to those who elected it
  • Strengthening democracy, fighting corruption, empowering citizens,
  • Dollars well spent, good information should be shared with those who want it
  • We paid for that data, so give it up

Hope

  • We need to work together to solve the wicked problems facing society
  • Open Government is a global platform for citizens and governments to work together for a better future
  • Maybe Open Government can restore trust between Government and Citizens
  • Maybe it a sign that the culture of secrecy and entitlement is changing

Self Direction

  • Allow me to see the raw data without political spin or rhetoric and make informed decisions based on my own conclusions
  • Helps me trust the source, keep myself informed, feel engaged.
  • Data is the new currency, lets profit from it.

These are all great reasons and they resonate with the logical part of my brain, I know they are important, some of them deeply so, and yet they fail to motivate me to take action. Open Government impacts our economy, political system, social stability, quality of life, beliefs, and ultimately the heart of democracy. It’s big. Maybe too big. So asked myself again, why, and came up with an answer was far more personal. I will tell you that story in my next post.

Image Credit: Battle of the Saints, Thomas Whitcombe [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

 This post originally appeared as part of the GTEC blog 2014

Three truths to help you change the culture of the Public Service

This is one of two posts for the GTEC 2013 blog series where we are exploring what it means to be an Agile, Open, Collaborative and Mobile Government. My focus will be on the Cultural, Organizational and Policy Infrastructure that provides the foundation for public service culture. This is a great time to be discussing these topics as the Clerk has recently announced the Blueprint 2020 initiative with a call to action for all Public Servants to participate in shaping the vision for the Public Service of the future.

Recently I was deep into an analysis of how Governments could realize the potential of collaboration and social technologies. As I was mulling over how to synthesise all of the data into a sound bite that could be easily consumed by a busy executive, I was also thinking about how it connected with what I had learned from working in advertising and teaching consumer behaviour. In a rare moment of clarity while waiting for a red light I scribbled down three truths that seem to me to be both obvious and profound.

1. Sharing is good

Sharing is the activity that fuels successful collaboration, knowledge management and communication, which in turn are fundamental to a “capable and high performing” organization. By sharing we become authentic to those around us, sharing preserves hard earned knowledge and makes us more productive, telling stories makes us real, and helps to build the common purpose which is so important to successful change.

Most of the major research firms agree that the biggest challenge organizations face in implementation of social technologies within the enterprise is creating a culture that supports information sharing. Having been involved with over a dozen enterprise collaboration efforts I can say that my personal experience supports those findings. Culture as the saying goes eats strategy for breakfast, apparently it also eats technology.

Right now, in the Public Service many people don’t share because they are afraid of making a Career Limiting Move (CLM), while others, (kudos if you are one), consider sharing part of their responsibility. Unfortunately too many seem to equate sharing with a CLM, and ultimately we need to institutionalize ways of rewarding sharing and punishing information hoarding. That kind of change will probably take decades, so maybe in the meantime maybe there is a need for some responsible anonymous input to Blueprint 2020? What do you say, should we throw a Blueprint 2020 Chatham House Party…err… Workshop?

2. Ego gets in the way

By ego I mean an unhealthy focus on self, we have all come across individuals that try and withhold information and manipulate those around them for personal gain or promotion. When combined with a lack of emotional intelligence I believe this is one of the most destructive forces in the public service today. We need to get our self-worth from something other than the size of our empire, we need to get emotional and career points for collaborating. We need to recognize the common purpose, (serving Canadians anyone?) as more important than our personal gain. Not only is the, “I only do what it good for me” attitude, bad for the organization, its beginning to look like it may be bad for your career as well.

I have worked on enough horizontal files to have come across this issue more than once. No matter how you structure a collaboration the people involved can always sabotage it. While researching the horizontal governance issue a few years ago I came across an Auditor General’s report examining the lack of progress on the climate change file. Without much reading between the lines it was obvious that the real problem was that the primary departments involved could not find a way to collaborate. Now I am not pointing fingers at the senior ranks, you see this kind of behaviour at all levels. I suppose we should not be surprised, given the competitive individualistic socialization most of us have grown up with, but human’s greatest capacity is to learn, and we can learn to work together and set aside personal differences if we set aside our ego once in a while in favour of the common goal.

3. You can’t communicate too much

“You can’t communicate too much”. I posted this comment on twitter during one of the conferences I attended recently and it quickly became one of the most re-tweeted updates, so it seems the sentiment hit a nerve.

Back in my advertising days we used to spend a lot of money on media buys and printing, and one of the worst things that could happen was for a print run or advertisement be published with a mistake. When it did happen it was an expensive and embarrassing lesson. After the first time we began to repeat instructions, in different languages if necessary, we would draw pictures, leave notes on the artwork, call the publisher, even attend press runs to make sure all was understood. Later in my career I worked with a Product Line Manager at a major telecom who told we that for an idea to get traction you had to say the same thing over and over again in as many different ways as you could think of —you can’t communicate too much.

In today’s information intense and dynamic workplace trying to get the attention of the information inundated executive ranks will take more than a little repetition. Going the other way, management can’t communicate too much with staff, especially during times of change. The mushroom school of management (keep them in the dark, and feed them sh*t), simply has no place in an agile and high performing organization.

In dynamic times, perfection is the enemy of communication, waiting for a complete and crafted message simply leads to speculation and fear, while communicating often and openly, even admitting you don’t know everything, leads to trust and understanding. Having a clear and common purpose is more important than knowing the details of how you are going to get there.

Conclusion

Changing the culture of something as big as the Public Service is a daunting task, I applaud the sentiment behind Blueprint 2020 and encourage everyone to get involved. But it is also important to remember that an organization is people, and an organization’s people are who make the culture. The three lessons that I have shared can and should be applied from the top down, but more importantly they can be applied by individuals regardless of rank, when you think about that, it this means you have the power to change culture.

A final note:

I am writing this on Father’s day, 2013 and as it happens this date is also the anniversary of my father’s passing at the age of 89. A child of the depression and a jet setter of the 60’s he lived his life with an ethos of “doing the best you can, with what you have”. In these uncertain times it is easy to blame others for inaction, but I say, do what you can, with what you have.

What do you say?

Image Source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Triskele-Symbol-spiral-five-thirds-turns.png