Communication with citizens is key to shaping public policy, and with the advent of the Internet, the options for sharing information with taxpayers have grown substantially.
But are the Web 2.0 options out there right for government? According to Jeff Kempiners, chief technology officer of Avanade – a software developer and consulting firm – the use of collaborative editing tools can be of benefit in a number of ways. “Web 2.0 is not a new networking protocol or a different browser, it’s just an opportunity for people reading the pages to update them,” Kempiners explained.
The Web 2.0 concept could be a way to share information internally in an effective manner, as well as a way to give citizens a route to share their own input. For example, a webpage with confusing information about garbage pickups could be updated by a citizen with less confusing input, Kempiners noted. Reporting issues anonymously, suggesting new ideas, and other types of feedback would be beneficial as well.
Sharing knowledge is another area that could benefit from collaborative editing, he added. “If you look at the aging workforce, there’s an opportunity here to preserve this generational knowledge... as people retire, you’re reducing the risk of people walking out the door with that intellectual property in their heads,” he said.
While it’s challenging to track the cost benefits of using Web 2.0 services, there are productivity improvements and greater information flow to be considered. “How do we make it easier for people to talk to one another? These tools are designed to make that a more seamless interaction,” Kempiners asserted. “Any time someone is teaching or learning, let’s take advantage of that so other people can take advantage of it.”
But are the Web 2.0 options out there right for government? According to Jeff Kempiners, chief technology officer of Avanade – a software developer and consulting firm – the use of collaborative editing tools can be of benefit in a number of ways. “Web 2.0 is not a new networking protocol or a different browser, it’s just an opportunity for people reading the pages to update them,” Kempiners explained.
The Web 2.0 concept could be a way to share information internally in an effective manner, as well as a way to give citizens a route to share their own input. For example, a webpage with confusing information about garbage pickups could be updated by a citizen with less confusing input, Kempiners noted. Reporting issues anonymously, suggesting new ideas, and other types of feedback would be beneficial as well.
Sharing knowledge is another area that could benefit from collaborative editing, he added. “If you look at the aging workforce, there’s an opportunity here to preserve this generational knowledge... as people retire, you’re reducing the risk of people walking out the door with that intellectual property in their heads,” he said.
While it’s challenging to track the cost benefits of using Web 2.0 services, there are productivity improvements and greater information flow to be considered. “How do we make it easier for people to talk to one another? These tools are designed to make that a more seamless interaction,” Kempiners asserted. “Any time someone is teaching or learning, let’s take advantage of that so other people can take advantage of it.”
