However there are still many regulations and governance practices that must be reviewed, reinterpreted or adjusted to allow the process-driven public service effectively approach Gov 2.0 in a timely (rapid) and cost-effective manner. To make engagement successful, there ia the need to streamline approvals for things such as public responses and moderation of public comments (where moderation is used at all) in order to allow conversations to begin and communities to form.

Also for public servants – and politicians – for whom the concept of ‘letting go’ and allowing authentic online engagement to occur is a new and scary concept, unlike their previous experience or the directives they have received in the past. I hope we will see substantial change management support and training to help these groups normalize Gov 2.0 within their worldviews.

Otherwise it will remain a long and rocky road towards the widespread embedded use of Hov 2.0 within government agencies. Change had to occur in the heart as well as the head to be lasting.

Cheers

Craig

Knowing a little about the way that web policy gets passed around Canberra, I think the response is right on the money.

We talk a lot about cultural change and so it is good to always bear in mind the culture we are talking about.

Broadly, and from my observation, the APS is quite agile when it comes to taking on web stuff from on high. Agencies generally are looking for direction from AGIMO on the web space. It’s not secret that pre-gov 2.0, I thought AGIMO was way off the mark.

The gov 2.0 thing has almost given me whiplash. From being off the mark, AGIMO is now spot on.

So, back to the culture thing. I believe it is relatively simple. We need to get the message to the agencies that this gov 2.0 thing is a green light. Perhaps we can ask Kate to tour the agencies over the next 12 months and present alongside the agency boss. Honestly, something along those lines would probably get us a long way down the track.

The first cab off the rank is the high-level statement. My thoughts are that it needs to be very clear on where the line is. This might be best communicated by detailing what is the ‘closed’ and ‘not allowed’ side of the line. Then agencies can use common sense and official policy to engage on any issue.

Mostly, the road ahead is about talking through and communicating what “engage” really means. I am sure that the discussions will be going on beyond our lifetimes. So, let us all revel at being here, right at the start of the discussion.

All in all, a big thumbs up to the gov. A bigger thumbs up for the TF and AGIMO. Of course, the normal thumbs up to Kate. Where would we be without our champion.

cheers

jimi bostock
PUSH agency

And of course, there needs to be a push to get the states doing something as well, but that will be even harder.

There is the possibility of change bubbling up, as distinct from being pressured down, so to speak. The value of a Government commitment to a policy that embraces and encourages a “Gov 2.0″ culture and related procedures is that it gives every public servant, including the most junior in the pecking order, a government-endorsed frame of reference. If “the way things are done” can be shown often enough to be out of whack with stated government policy, then there is internal pressure to bring about change.

I’m not arguing for no pressure – or at least no regular nagging – being applied, especially to the more recalcitrant of agencies. I’m saying it’s not, and should not be, the only way.

Actually if you start to cultivate the “social” cultural style which I see as implicit in the Gov 2.0 approach, then it just may be that what bubbles up and out may be a greater force for evolving the culture and the practices and processes than periodic pressure from “on high”.

More seriously, if you only rely on pressure from above, my hunch is that the kind and extent of change a lot of us hope for may be a very long time coming.

I love the US approach, explicit directives with timeframes and very public league tables.

Cheers,
Pia

ICT Policy Advisor to Senator Lundy