Engaging Citizens through Social Networking

The rise of social networking tools on the Internet is changing the relationship between citizens and governments. Governments that fail to adapt risk a disconnect with their constituents and younger employees, and a rise in social unrest. Governments adopting social tools will engage their constituents in a more productive dialogue.

David Shaw © 2009

Social Networks

The rise of Web 2.0 social networking tools on the Internet is changing the relationship between citizens and governments. While the outcome is unknown, social tools may eventually facilitate the General Assembly of the world’s citizens. Already they provide a means for governments and other organizations to engage their constituents in a more productive community dialogue.

The shift has been so rapid and pervasive that it is hard to remember a world in which we were dependent on librarians and bricks and mortar reference libraries. Today, led by Generation Y, the NetGen, we use:

• Google for answers
• Wikipedia for information
• FaceBook for socializing
• MySpace for artistic communities
• LinkedIn for business networking
• Instant messaging for networking
• Blackberry or iPhone for always on communications
• Other ways of networking online

Depending on the authority, the NetGen was born 1981-1996 or 1977-1996 (6.5 million in Canada). Generally, baby boomers are defined as born in 1943-1960; and GenX in 1960-1980. The existence of these three demographic cohorts in the workplace creates a tension that should be understood not just by the HR department but also by managers and technologists seeking to adopt the collaborative web.

In particular the NetGen values speed, freedom, openness, innovation, mobility, authenticity and playfulness. Having grown up with open social applications they expect the same in the workplace.

Similarly citizens are adopting these tools to interact on a massive scale. Previously, governments only had to attend to special interests and lobbyists. Ordinary citizens could write letters, or organize a protest, and then be forgotten. Today, they can organize quickly on a national and international scale.

But without supporting governance frameworks, practices and guidelines it is hard for traditional organizations to achieve significant change. Fortunately, as Amazon shows, the technology can also be architected to resonate automagically around desired outcomes.

Still, in most cases NetGen will have to show the way in the workplace.

Web 2.0

Web 2.0, coined by Tim O’ Reilly in 2005, is an eclectic mix of technologies, social ideas and applications. Concepts such as Government 2.0 and Enterprise 2.0 use Web 2.0 components in real-world collaborative applications.

Web 1.0 was largely static and proprietary. Organizations developed, revised, reviewed, approved and published content in mostly flat web pages.

O’Reilly’s map of Web 2.0

Web 2.0 is participatory, interactive, collaborative, and features a rich user experience. It is the collective commons. Typical components (mostly open source) for building collaborative applications are:

• Wikis
• Blogs
• Forums
• Messaging (chat, SMS text, etc.)

First Generation

The first generation of Web 2.0 applications embraced collaboration and connections in a limited way. For example, deploying wikis here and there will not drive volume in the desired outcomes.

Adopting wikis in an an organization in a static way

Wikipedia, while being an enormously successful collaborative platform, does not leverage social connections in any significant degree. Even FaceBook fails to capitalize fully on social connections. FaceBook is just a large address book.

FaceBook makes connections mainly between friends. If A knows B and B knows C, then it suggests A and C should be friends. FaceBook collects user profiles on books, movies, TV, groups, interests and so forth, but it doesn’t use these to build and match people on this type of synthetic profile.

Only 10.5 % of Wikipedia’s users are active

Second Generation

The second generation is typified by market leaders like Amazon and Google. Both are always exploiting your connections in the long tail to present you with new choices. As you make new selections, your connections morph and you are given a new list of choices. Amazon, for example, makes connections between books viewed, purchases, rankings, reviews, discounts and more.

All automagically.

These techniques are starting to be applied in issues-based wikis such as President Obama’s changegov.org and WhiteHouse.gov, and the Globe & Mail’s Public Policy Wiki.

Simple wiki framework that converts issues into an agenda

Driving Automagically

The challenge today is to integrate social tools using open APIs and semantic web techniques with fit-to-purpose social graphs. The goal is to drive volume in some desired outcome. The outcome could be sales, problems solved, reports written or whatever. To achieve this, the objects have to have properties, connections and a context.

Every object has properties, connections and context

But how do we amplify the signal above the noise threshold? One obvious way is to leverage existing connections. This drives word-of-mouth which begins to resonate amongst the connections. But it is impossible for even the largest organizations to attract and build resonate networks on the scale of Amazon, FaceBook, Google, or MySpace.

Connect supply to demand by amplifying word of mouth

There is no sense in trying to turn your public-facing application into an alternative social destination. It is much more effective to leverage existing networks. A variety of open standards makes it easy to rapidly develop complex social applications that interface with FaceBook, Google, LinkedIn, MySpace, etc.

Portal framework interfacing with FaceBook

After you’ve identified the desired outcomes, it is feasible to start to make connections that drive success automagically.

Social graphs resonate to drive new connections

Collaboration

Peering works well when the product is information or culture, and when tasks can be bite-sized chunks. People are motivated to participate by feeling good or by self-interest.

Personality types that feel good are those that like to solve problems, and/or build things. Those that are motivated by self-interest want to gain experience, exposure and acknowledgement, and connections.

Whatever the motivation, social networks in government quickly become a place to:

• Share solutions about problems
• Vent about experiences
• Learn from each other
• Solve problems

Critical success factors in achieving this are:

• Leadership
• Meritocratic principles of organization
• Can’t be controlled but can be steered
• Mix of hierarchy and self-organization
• Narrow subject focus, charter
• Promote self-organization
• Voluntary participation in shared outcome
• Mechanism for weeding out weak contributors
• Openness – don’t protect all of the intellectual property
• Roles & guidelines

Best Practices

Some best practices that have been derived in social applications are:

• Solve real world tasks
• Enable self expression
• Embrace self-organization
• Expose friend and associate activity
• Drive communication
• Browse the social graph
• Build communities
• Don’t restrict choice
• Drive the head and the tail