Category: All Posts

April 20, 2011

On fearless advice and loyal implementation

I traveled across British Columbia last month, visiting a series of three Employment Insurance (EI) processing plants, to deliver talks about engagement and career development. I met a lot of dedicated public servants, made new friends, and learned more about front-line service delivery than many Ottawa-based policy wonks do this early in their career.

I’ve been thinking a lot about the sessions and the conversations that emerged at the three different sites and here is where my mind has settled …

Regardless of what you were hired to do – be it providing traditional policy advice in the National Capital Region, or “crushing” EI claims for Canadians in a processing plant in Kamloops – your role as a public servant is to deliver “fearless advice and loyal implementation”. What I’ve found is that there is a divide, real or imagined, between those of us in Ottawa who were hired to deliver “fearless advice” and those of us in the regions who are expected to “loyally implement”. This isn’t ubiquitous, but was my general impression. It is an impression that was hammered home when someone asked me why Ottawa couldn’t just fix the culture in the regional office, as if some sort of Deputy decree could change their specific working conditions. What struck me most about the comment wasn’t the idea that culture could somehow be made by decree, but rather the underlying sense of helplessness, as if culture couldn’t be affected by those who are actually mired in it.

I think the problem is that we have collectively misinterpreted the significance and underestimated the opportunities we have to effect our work culture and sub-cultures, regardless of where we work or what we work on. We mistakenly think of fearless advice as something that only the people at the very top of the organization do; something that is reserved for private meetings between Deputies and their Ministers. In fact, I think that speaking truth to power (fearless advice and loyal implementation) more often means pushing against the small “p” office politics and the small “c” culture of the bureaucracy. In other words, fearless advice isn’t reserved for ministerial briefings, but rather happens in the hallways, over cubicle walls, and in the lunch rooms among peers.

Think of it in terms of the long tail:

Let me end by saying this: regardless of where you work, or what your role is, your responsibility is to articulate an argument, back it up with the facts, infuse it with passion, and deliver it with non-partisan conviction, wherever you see the opportunity to do so.

April 5, 2011

With Honesty and Open Government for All

Since falling head over stilettos with Twitter, it’s a known fact I strongly advocate open government and increasing government transparency (especially via social media).

But tweets, Facebook posts, and Youtube videos alone obviously aren’t enough. Government transparency begins with the most simple of principles: always tell the truth. Sometimes the truth isn’t always the prettiest thing in the room, but it takes someone with integrity and a strong moral compass to do the right thing.

Over the last two years, I’ve observed several politicians and candidates across this state and across this nation in regard to their stand on open government. Some are pretty disappointing… but with West Virginia’s 2011 special gubernatorial election, one candidate stands out from the pack with a strong record on increasing government transparency: Jeff Kessler.

March 31, 2011

Is it practical for government agencies to block web-based mail?

The Australian National Audit Office has just released a report ‘The Protection and Security of Electronic Information Held by Australian Government Agencies‘ based on a review of the approaches to information security by four agencies, the Office of Financial Management, ComSuper, Medicare Australia, and the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

Amongst other recommendations was one which has been much discussed on Twitter this morning, “emails using public Web-based email services should be blocked on agency ICT systems, as these can provide an easily accessible point of entry for an external attack and subject the agency to the potential for intended or unintended information disclosure.”

This reflects the recommendation in the Defense Signal Directorate’s Information Security Manual, the ‘bible’ for Australian Government agencies when it comes to ICT security, which states on page 100 that:

Agencies should not allow personnel to send and receive emails using public web-based email services.

The concerns are very clear and relevant – web-based email systems can easily be used, inadvertently or deliberately, to distribute large quantities of citizen’s personal information, or an agency’s In Confidence or other classified information rapidly and to large numbers of people, making it impossible to contain the spread of the information.

Web-based email is also a potential source of attacks against an agency, through viruses, worms and trojans in email attachments (which may not be able to be scanned at the same level as Departmental email can be) and through web-links in emails to compromised websites.

I don’t dispute these real concerns. They are concerns for corporations as well.

However, I do ask – what is ‘web-based email’?

March 30, 2011

GoC Web 2.0 wish list for 2011 (Part 1)

This is part 1 of a 3-part series.

A year and a half ago I posted “GoC Web 2.0 wish list“. The responses from the post were awesome, especially responses I received in person. Although I’m reluctant to look at that list again, fearing many of the wishes hadn’t come true, I think it’s still a very relevant post. I’m happy that some of the items did come true (DFAIT is on Twitter!), others half-true (Privy Council Office is starting to come around on Web 2.0), while others remain still a wish (Natural Resources Canada lost their pioneering collaborating Deputy Minister Cassie Doyle and the Canada School of Public Service still doesn’t offer Web 2.0 courses).

Part 1: Departments at the center

#1: Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS): make a choice: either Control OR Measure.

As the Government of Canada’s program reviewer and accountability guard of government departments, it plays both roles as coach and judge. If departments are playing hockey, TBS sets the rules and policies on the very ice that they themselves created (through the Management Accountability Frameworks). But the world of public administration is a complex one, and the game continually changes. While TBS can change the rules and adjust the boundaries, they’re also keeping track of the score. Unfortunately they are left with narrower options to both pull departments into compliance and push them into accountability. The usual options are rejecting proposals, reducing options, lowering budgets and limiting discretionary decision-making authority, evident with TBS’ attempts to both control and measure Web 2.0/Social media adoption by departments.

Government departments face tough choices to make on Web 2.0: adopt it and face consequences, or [continue] to wait for policies (and blessings) from TBS, all the while facing ever-increasing criticisms from the cynical populace and hits from TBS on program implementation. TBS both controls and measures departments, and departments either push the barriers, abide and wait, or take risks, venture forth and face the consequences.This pattern risks repeating itself with the next wave of change facing the public service.

What’s the solution? For TBS to make a strategic choice, between control or measurement of departments.

If the choice is to control, then they need to walk quietly but carry a big stick, as the long administrative arm of the Privy Council Office. Penalise non-compliance, reward compliance. Departments didn’t understand the rules? Ask for clarification. Unsure? Ask for clarification. Can’t comply? Ask for permission. Don’t comply? Program is under review next year. Not much different.

If the choice is measure (a better choice, in my opinion), then promote understanding of the policies, promote departments to organically organise to discuss policies, adopt those that are common among the departments, and always encourage collaboration among the departments. Understand that measurement is not a means of control, but a verification of the effectiveness of the policy (under the agreeable presumption that the department seeks to abide by the policies- a much larger discussion). Beyond that, the sky’s the limit, and departments can aspire to do what they can to achieve their mandate for the benefit of the government as a whole and for the Canadian citizens they serve.

Another benefit includes line departments directors in being less stressed when they get a call from TBS.

March 6, 2011

Ten Principles for Designing Open Government Institutions

The below tweets are @ThomKearney‘s attempt to share part of @BethNoveck‘s testimony to Cdn Parliament http://ow.ly/48GeM #w2p #goc on March 2nd, 2011

1. Go Open – Government should work in the open. contracts, grants, legislation, regulation and policies should be transparent #w2p #goc

2. Open Gov Includes Open Access – After the public has paid once, it shouldn’t have to pay again. #w2p #goc

3. Make Open Gov Productive Not Adversarial –Gov”t shld invest in providing the data that people really want and will use. #w2p #goc

4. Be Collaborative – Rulemaking should be open to public early to allow for constructive alternative proposals. #w2p #goc

5. Love Data – Design policies informed by real-time data. Release data for economic benefit. See http://ow.ly/48Ga7 for more #w2p #goc

6. Be Nimble – Forcing organizations to act quickly discourages bureaucracy and encourages creative brainstorming and innovation. #goc #w2p

7. Do More, Spend Less – Design solutions that do more with less. Instead of cutting… ask if there is another way…#w2p #goc

8. Invest in Platforms – … Focus on going forward practices of creating raw data and real engagement. #w2p #goc

9. Invest in People – Changing the culture of government will not happen through statements of policy alone…. #w2p #goc

10. Design for Democracy..ask if legislation enables engagement that uses people’s abilities and enthusiasm for the collective. #w2p #goc

Ten Principles from Beth Noveck @BethNoveck related via Twitter by @ThomKearney

March 2, 2011

What is muting Australian public servants online?

Over the last two years we’ve seen a concerted effort by governments across Australia to increase the level of online engagement, debate and discussion involving public agencies.

In 2009 the Government 2.0 Taskforce, commissioned by then Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner and chaired by Dr Nicholas Gruen, conducted a six month process of engaging public servants via online channels, pioneering the use of blogs, Twitter and Facebook to demonstrate how it was possible for the public service to effectively communicate, engage, consult and be consulted online.

Late in the same year the Australian Public Service Commission replaced its Interim Protocols for Online Media Engagement (originally released in late 2008, with the updated Circular 2009/6: Protocols for online media participation.

Early in 2010 the Australian Government released its response to the Government 2.0 Taskforce’s final report, agreeing with all except one of its recommendations (and simply deferring the remaining recommendation to after another related review was completed).

Since then we’ve seen the MAC innovation report, Empowering change: Fostering innovation in the Australian Public and the Ahead of the Game report from the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, outlining steps to reform the public service.

There’s been the Declaration of Open Government, the initiation of the Government 2.0 Steering Committee, the launch of GovSpace (a blogging platform operated by the Government and open to all agencies to use).

We’ve seen more than 260 government agencies and councils join Twitter, wide ranging activity on Facebook and a proliferation of social media policies at local, state and Commonwealth level.

Agencies in Australia are using social media in ways that would have been unacceptable and unachievable even two years ago, some demonstrating world class engagement online. Some states have comprehensive action plans in place and official usage of social media by agencies in some places is approaching one hundred percent.

I don’t have the same level of information about Commonwealth agencies (there is no central register of activity or survey results, as there are for some states), however most have established some form of social media beachhead in support of campaign or corporate needs.

With all this official usage you might expect to see vibrant and active online communities of public servants discussing shared issues and best practice, or to see public servants listening to and contributing actively to online policy discussions.

Many groups set up for public servants seem to have reasonable memberships – several hundred people at least – however most of these members are silent, with at most 10% carrying on a halting conversation.

February 4, 2011

Future Imperfect

When we look at the effects of technology on the future of our militaries we should remember that the past has shown that early adopters and pop media pundits will suffer from optimism bias and exaggerated both the pace and pervasiveness of changes in our society. For our part, our perceptions of the future will be shaped by military cultural and our risk adverse hierarchical environment. History has also shown there are no revolutionary technological changes, just the rapid evolution of those that exist.

The interface between man and machine will improve, allowing us to interact and assimilate information faster than ever. Culturally we will become knowledge nomads, global networkers and sifters of social media, taking threads of news, information and entertainment from the web and weaving it into our own personal data stream. These evolutionary jumps in technological will be fuelled by the symbioses of technology and culture and the paradox that the more technology affects culture the more it will be shaped by our expectations. With each technological advance we need to define and understand the social and ethical implications of using new technologies and their effects on military culture and ethos.

January 19, 2011

The Collaborator’s Dilemma

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about collaboration and Game Theory. More specifically I’ve been examining and re-examining the Prisoner’s Dilemma in hopes of learning more about how transparency affects collaboration, and I think I may be on to something.

Primer

Game theory attempts to mathematically capture behaviour in strategic situations (games). The prisoner’s dilemma is a fundamental problem in game theory and demonstrates why two people might not cooperate even if it is in their best interest to do so.

From Wikipedia:

Two suspects are arrested by the police. The police have insufficient evidence for a conviction, and, having separated the prisoners, visit each of them to offer the same deal. If one testifies for the prosecution against the other (defects) and the other remains silent (cooperates), the defector goes free and the silent accomplice receives the full 10-year sentence. If both remain silent, both prisoners are sentenced to only six months in jail for a minor charge. If each betrays the other, each receives a five-year sentence. Each prisoner must choose to betray the other or to remain silent. Each one is assured that the other would not know about the betrayal before the end of the investigation. How should the prisoners act?

January 19, 2011

Great service in government is a science

We hear a lot about great customer service and how important it is becoming again, especially in today’s economy. Last week I attended the San Diego Business Journal’s annual conference on economic trends. One of the speakers stated in no uncertain terms that a key driver of the economic recovery will be the customer experience. The companies that “get it” will thrive while others will continue their downward spirals.

We know that customer service in government is critical too, but not always for the same reasons. Some of what we are here to do (protect the environment, public health, and safety) is enforcement or regulatory in nature, and are not always looking for repeat customers. Then again, some of us are – consider parks, recreation, libraries, and educational programs to name a few. We want people to come back!