Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
  • Like
Technology and Diplomacy - Introduction to E-diplomacy
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Now you can save presentations on your phone or tablet

Available for both IPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Technology and Diplomacy - Introduction to E-diplomacy

  • 1,251 views
Published

Presented

Presented

Published in Technology , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,251
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
35
Comments
0
Likes
1

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmwwrGV_aiE
  • DiploFoundation ( Diplo ) is a non-profit organisation created in November 2002 by the governments of Malta and Switzerland. Diplo developed out of a project to introduce information and communication technologies into the practice of diplomacy, initiated in 1992 at the Mediterranean Academy of Diplomatic Studies in Malta.   Diplo works to address the gap between the limited capacities and the growing needs of small and developing states, as well as marginalised groups, for meaningful participation in global policy processes. It offers online courses in diplomacy , and capacity development programmes which combine high quality online courses and in situ workshops, seminars, policy research, and policy immersion (e.g. internships) in real contexts. Diplo also develops online tools for distance learning, knowledge sharing, and e-participation. Diplo has received wide recognition for its work, including consultative status with the United Nations, the World E-democracy award 2009 and hosting the 2010 annual meeting of the International Forum on Diplomatic Training (the forum of directors of diplomatic academies and institutes). In 2012 Diplo was selected as one of the top 100 non-governmental organisations in the world.  Dr Jovan Kurbalija is the founding director of DiploFoundation. He is a former diplomat with a professional and academic background in international law, diplomacy and information technology. In 1992 he established the Unit for IT and Diplomacy at the Mediterranean Academy of Diplomatic Studies in Malta. In 2002, after 10 years of success in education, research, and publishing, the unit evolved into DiploFoundation. Dr Kurbalija currently directs online learning courses on IG, ICT, and diplomacy and lectures in academic and training institutions in Switzerland, the United States, Austria, Belgium the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Malta. His main areas of research are diplomacy, Internet governance, e-diplomacy, online negotiations, and diplomatic law.
  • This is reported to have been the reaction of Lord Palmerston when he received the first telegraph message in the 1860’s. Every major new technological development has promoted a reaction similar to Lord Palmerston’s: the radio, the telephone, the Internet,…
  • Every new technological and social development eventually brings new political, legal, and economic issues that need to be addressed either at the national or the international level, or both. The telegraph, the telephone, radio, the satellite, and the Internet followed, more or less, a similar pattern in becoming a “topic on the diplomatic agenda.”
  • source: wikipedia graphic outline of internet connections
  • Cyberwarfare: Estonia, Iran Sony and private data ACTA Arab spring/HR Economy and investments
  • The first is the changing environment for diplomatic activities, which includes ICT--‐driven changes in the modern economy, sovereignty, and the concept of power. Who – actors, where – various institutions, how – various formats (summits, forums, conferences, online), when - instantly After the end of the Cold War, more non-state actors are involved in IR. From multilateral settings, international meetings become increasingly multistakeholder settings. Non-state actors are coming from corporate and civil society sectors; formally internal actors, become now international actors. Businesses and civil society are communicating internationally between and among each other. Globalization process had put into question national borders; state, corporate sector and civil society are all engaged in cross boarder activities, cooperation, exchange, managing projects collaboratively. Globalization has also put into question distinction between foreign and domestic policy; State and non-State actors (corporate sector and civil society) are active within national economy as well as on a international scene. This is often referred to as ‘deep integration of national economies’ and rising influence of the non-state actors on diplomacy. Often, in order to have a credibility at home, civil society actors would engage internationally and work collaboratively on a global scale. Thus, through involvement of non-state actors on international scale, domestic affairs became increasingly inter-connected and inter-dependent across the globe.
  • Direct contact among each others and with citizens The fact that political leaders know each other well as well as the volume, ease and speed of communication in the age of information technology have resulted in a situation where communication between governments usually takes place without the intervention and often even the knowledge of the embassies.
  • Ex: Arab spring, ACTA Govs can use IT to censor, or tweak or spin information – but t he wisest states might be those that recognise the power of dialogue and inclusiveness, and use the ICT to build trust and confidence in its services Whether the role of states and their representatives will wax or wane will, therefore, depend on their readiness to become early-adopters of ICT applications and the vantages they bring. It is, nevertheless, becoming inevitable that in diplomacy of the digital age the state representatives will have to network and partner with the empowered citizenry and their various representatives that seek for the value the diplomatic service can bring to their concerns. “This requires the MFA to track a wide range of non-political, low diplomacy issues, and to leverage its embassy network to work out the cross-linkages and potential leverages that help these varied actors” (Rana, 2007, p. 23) on their agendas.
  • Academics and practitioners do not look at the same issue from the same perspective; they are using different lenses while talking on the same issue. While academics are looking to ‘explain’ the issue, practitioners ‘deal’ with the issue focusing to achieve the best possible outcome. Though the communicational gap between professional cultures cannot be abolished, it can be ‘bridged’ with mutual understanding of each other professional culture.
  • My story moves to the third sequence, which could be labeled 'lost in translation'. It is frequent to encounter specialised negotiations such as telecommunication, climate change, and health, among other topics. This was summarised nicely by Professor Faure: 'On each side of the table, national culture and organisational culture unite while professional cultures divide. Across the table, the situation is the opposite: national culture and organisational culture divide whereas professional culture may facilitate communication and agreement' (Faure, 1999). Different professional cultures frame policy issues differently. Here are a few main characteristics of the professional cultures involved in Internet governance: DIPLOMATS – process/national interest IT PEOPLE – respect facts, difference between assumption and knowledge, solution-oriented ACADEMICS – comprehensive, explaining CIVIL SOCIETY – flexible, expert, lack of understanding of multilateral communication context   Here is a dialogue that we use in our contextual exercises illustrating tacit aspects of different professional cultures:     EXPERT: All that's left is to formulate an agreement based on our technical analysis. We have a solution!! DIPLOMAT: Yes. We are almost there. It will take some thought. EXPERT: It's just a matter of accepting these two paragraphs. DIPLOMAT: Yes, it provides us with a very solid background. Perhaps we can take a break now. EXPERT: A break? We just had one. This really shouldn't take very long. And then we're finished. DIPLOMAT: Yes. Very easy. Maybe just a short break. EXPERT: OK. But let's make it quick.
  • Unlike state representatives, non-state actors and especially civil society, which favour bottom-up approaches, are bonded strongly to Internet from its early days and are feeling comfortable with – if not dependant of – utilising it for contacts, communications and collaboration. To be able to communicate with new partners in contemporary diplomacy, professional diplomats need to become skilful using same services. Changes in ways diplomats communicate with others do not only refer to adopting new technologies but rather to a paradigm shift caused by them: acknowledging citizenry as an actor, thus maintaining two-way communication and interaction, such as individual e-mails and personal blog posts with comments enabled, to complement traditional public statements; exchanging great number of condensed and clear messages with partners to complement traditional exchange of notes; careful sounding of, but also active participation in discussions led by non-state actors, such as online discussion forums, to complement traditional sounding through media and diplomatic channels only; raising awareness of the global feature of all communications and information shared, with much less space for ‘deniability’; accustoming to highly increased frequency of communications and information flow with diversity of actors on number of parallel threads.   In a vibrant world of Internet where millions of e-mails, forum posts and tweets are exchanged daily following up on variety of events worldwide, a diplomat is required to provide fast response with solid knowledge in diversity of thematic areas. While no wise respond can be made without proper thinking – and thinking still asks for time in spite of technology revolution – collecting and analysing related info, discussing it internally and making decisions on the proper reaction can be accelerated by using ICT.
  • Sub-header page
  • Remember that smart use of smart tools saves time & enables effective diplomacy 24 hours day 8 pieces of information in working memory maintain 148 stable social contacts (Dunbar’s number)
  • Gartner’s model describes how new technology is adopted by society. We provided initial data on web-tools (green dots) and diplomatic practice (blue dots) based on a quick survey among Diplo-staff. The survey shows two biases. The first is a general one, seeing e-diplomacy through the media coverage of e-diplomacy in the US State Department, the most advanced in this field.  For example, the use of Twitter is beyond hype-point, while many other countries and international organisations are in the very early phase of adopting Twitter. The second bias is more specific for Diplo, coloured by our involvement in, for example, online diplomatic training (the last 15 years) and e-participation (the last 6 years). In both areas we have reached the phase of re-evaluating and are trying to move to the ‘plateau of productivity’.  The level of e-learning and e-participation varies worldwide. For example, e-participation is in an early phase, perceived predominantely as the web-broadcasting of international events short of using interactive e-tools. Before you start commenting on the map, let me provide a short explanation of the e-diplomacy hype cycle illustration. The cycle starts with a technology trigger and moves quickly to the peak of inflated expectations.   This is the moment of high techno-excitement.  The cycle then turns downwards towards the phase of disillusionment. . In this phase we start asking questions: Are these tools really as efficient as we thought? Are they really going to change social reality? Twitter is being re-evaluated in this way at the moment by diplomats.In the disillusionment phase, the survey puts the impact of Internet tools on public diplomacy, diplomatic training, and consular service. This re-evaluation sets the stage for  the slope of enlightenment , and ultimately, what Gartner calls the 'plateau of productivity'  or real and full use of new technology in diplomatic activities.  According to the survey, the use of webinar tools and MFA blogs is approaching maturity, as they are increasingly integrated into everyday diplomatic activities. Some activities could not fit easily in the model. One of them is negotiations. I disagreed with the ‘collective wisdom’ of Diplo (expressed in the survey) that negotiations is at the beginning of the cycle. Although there is very little techno-hype around negotiations, the Internet and computers have already had a rather invisible, but profound,  impact on negotiations. Some simple tools such as editing with track changes in MS Word or e-mail exchange in the preparations of face-to-face negotiations have already impacted negotiation dynamics substantially. Please let us know your views on the first version of the e-diplomacy hype cycle based on input from Diplo’s community. Is anything missing? Are the different tools and diplomatic activities properly placed?
  • Developing social media 'credentials' (engaging, relevant content) while preserving diplomatic credentials (avoid unnecessary controversies and reduce risk)
  • “ paradox of plenty” – “situation in which an information glut results in a scarcity of attention” (Scott, 2006); winning the attention of the constituencies and then their trust is a much needed skills of today
  • An example from a Diplo staff member of curation, gathering links and source into a Netvibes page to share with colleagues and students
  • Example of search engine bias against Southern sources: there are many strong research and policy institutions in Africa and elsewhere in the global South but the algorithms used by Google favour Northern insitutions. And there is more, as this video clip shows
  • Here on the left is the original tweet about the ambassadors official vehicle. It included the Canadian regulations dealing with the purchase of official details. This went viral on weibo, because it touched the hot issue of government use of public funds. In the first week of December canadaweibo had a tweet go viral and gain widespread national media attention in China. In advance of the Ambassador’s webchat and interviews we had been saving up some “supertweets” which we thought might generate interest in the HOM’s webchat. One of them took off to a degree beyond our expectations. In this tweet, the Ambassador introduced his car – a modest hybrid – and outlined the GoC rules for purchase of official vehicles. While this sounds innocuous to Canadians, it predictably touched a nerve in China, where misuse of public funds is an exceptionally hot issue. Within one day the tweet had 900 comments and 2 thousand retweets. The majority of comments were complaints about Chinese government spending and the priviledges of cadres. A minority of followers suggested that this was interference in Chinese affairs, or that Canadians were just cheap (which I suppose we are). Many made more substantive remarks about transparency and governance. The Ambassador entered the discussion, responding to critics that our fans like to know how the Embassy and the Canadian government function, and we are telling them. Gratifyingly, some Chinese government officials posted positive comments about our operating procedures. The story was widely covered by Chinese media and the discussion itself became news , which was widely reported on by online and traditional news sources. The tone of coverage was surprisingly positive. Even Global Times, who have in the past been generally tough on Canada, focussed on the issue of governance and how Canada was making a contribution. Quoting a member of the National People’s Congress, the paper noted: "Government vehicle issue in China is a mess, and our government is the most unwilling in the world to talk about it," said Ye Qing, a deputy known for his studies into the matter “I really appreciate the ambassador's attitude and their government's transparency," Earlier this year, a new Chinese policy on official car purchases was announced. Im not sure that we are responsible for that, but we certainly catalyzed a debate, or at least made a contribution to it that we probably couldn’t have done via demarches. I would like to note that the proportion of these “serious” or “sensitive” tweets to all other news on Canadweibo has to be kept low to avoid getting a reputation for being preachy, rather than helpful, transparent, and informative.
  • There is experimentation everywhere: we are only at the beginning
  • 30 embassies have sites in Sina Weibo, canada second, 250,000 followers; 424 Million members; illustreates, that as with Orkut in Brazil 5-1- years ago, the social network becomes the media infrastructure, the first place many people engage with the Interweb
  • Open (and linked) data coming up the inside track like an express train – are you ready to be mashed up, and questioned wherever you are
  • There is a myriad of new tools, and they are all changing… so best to get away from a tool focus
  • E-tools and procedures cannot be imposed. They need to grow bottom-up from diplomats. Sometimes they come from diplomats with an interest in the Internet. With a technologically savvy young generation, this is becoming more common. Sometimes, technologists should nudge diplomats to start using certain tools. The old quote from Einstein applies: If you can't explain it to a six-year-old, you don't understand it yourself.  Simplicity paves the way for acceptance of new tools. The attention span of users is limited. Money rarely solves the problems that e-diplomacy has to address: changes in professional cultures and new approaches. On the contrary, a lot of money can trigger grand projects and lead towards ultimate failure. You can get great graphs, hire many expensive consultants, and give exciting presentations. But change does not happen this way. The corporate sector and governments are full of grand e-projects which failed. It is easy to slip into an attempt to create strategy. As soon as we see a new tool emerging, we tend to put it in a strategic framework. The tolerance of failure is the main field of tension between diplomacy and social media cultures. Diplomacy is a risk-avoidance profession. Social media projects have an in-built possibility for failure. Many social initiatives fail. Diplomatic services are rich with expertise and knowledge. These resources are usually underutilised because of organisation and professional structure. Diplomatic services have to move from the traditional need-to-know principle to a need to share. Most of the current e-diplomacy coverage focuses on public diplomacy: twiplomacy, president and ministers tweeting, etc. It is just the tip of iceberg. Much more of e-diplomacy happens in thousands of diplomatic negotiations, policy initiatives, and mediation happening every day worldwide. They are less visible than public diplomacy, but not less important. They involve, among others,  e-participation in international meetings, inclusive drafting of political documents, and foreign policy coordination in diplomatic services and national governments. Traditionally, diplomatic services tended to control the interpretation of the message by domestic and foreign public (selection of media, reducing ambiguity). In the social media space, it is almost impossible to control the interpretation of message. Diplomatic services should be aware of this risk. E-diplomacy innovation needs support from the top leadership. This is particularly important in the early days of innovation.  One of the success factors of the State Department’s E-diplomacy project was personal support from the State Secretary Clinton.
  • E-tools and procedures cannot be imposed. They need to grow bottom-up from diplomats. Sometimes they come from diplomats with an interest in the Internet. With a technologically savvy young generation, this is becoming more common. Sometimes, technologists should nudge diplomats to start using certain tools. The old quote from Einstein applies: If you can't explain it to a six-year-old, you don't understand it yourself.  Simplicity paves the way for acceptance of new tools. The attention span of users is limited. Money rarely solves the problems that e-diplomacy has to address: changes in professional cultures and new approaches. On the contrary, a lot of money can trigger grand projects and lead towards ultimate failure. You can get great graphs, hire many expensive consultants, and give exciting presentations. But change does not happen this way. The corporate sector and governments are full of grand e-projects which failed. It is easy to slip into an attempt to create strategy. As soon as we see a new tool emerging, we tend to put it in a strategic framework. The tolerance of failure is the main field of tension between diplomacy and social media cultures. Diplomacy is a risk-avoidance profession. Social media projects have an in-built possibility for failure. Many social initiatives fail. Diplomatic services are rich with expertise and knowledge. These resources are usually underutilised because of organisation and professional structure. Diplomatic services have to move from the traditional need-to-know principle to a need to share. Most of the current e-diplomacy coverage focuses on public diplomacy: twiplomacy, president and ministers tweeting, etc. It is just the tip of iceberg. Much more of e-diplomacy happens in thousands of diplomatic negotiations, policy initiatives, and mediation happening every day worldwide. They are less visible than public diplomacy, but not less important. They involve, among others,  e-participation in international meetings, inclusive drafting of political documents, and foreign policy coordination in diplomatic services and national governments. Traditionally, diplomatic services tended to control the interpretation of the message by domestic and foreign public (selection of media, reducing ambiguity). In the social media space, it is almost impossible to control the interpretation of message. Diplomatic services should be aware of this risk. E-diplomacy innovation needs support from the top leadership. This is particularly important in the early days of innovation.  One of the success factors of the State Department’s E-diplomacy project was personal support from the State Secretary Clinton.

Transcript

  • 1. Technology and Diplomacy:Introduction to E-diplomacy/ Digital DiplomacyVladimir Radunovicvladar@diplomacy.edu@vradunovic
  • 2. http://www.diplomacy.edu/e-diplomacy
  • 3. Story of Continuity and Change“My God, this isthe end ofdiplomacy.”Reaction of Lord Palmerston when hereceived the first telegraph back in 1850sHowever…Lord Palmerston
  • 4. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013EVOLUTION of Modern Diplomacy Introduction of NEW TOPICS on diplomatic agendas Changes in the ENVIRONMENT for diplomaticactivities Introduction of NEW TOOLS for diplomatic activities
  • 5. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013WHAT?NEW TOPICS
  • 6. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013NEW TOPICS on Diplomatic Agendas• Climate Change• Global Health• Internet Governance• Energy• Bio-diversity• Migration• …..Multidisciplinary Nature of the New Topics
  • 7. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013DiploFoundationIG
  • 8. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Internet: Dependence
  • 9. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013
  • 10. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013
  • 11. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013WHERE?NEW ENVIRONMENT
  • 12. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Changing ENVIRONMENT for Diplomatic Activities Globalisation & Interdependence Disintermediation (“no need for the middle man”) Cable Geo-Strategy New Actors – Inclusiveness Space
  • 13. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Globalisation&Interdependence
  • 14. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013DisintermediationEmbassies? Citizens?
  • 15. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Cable Geo-Strategy
  • 16. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Cable Geo-Strategy
  • 17. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013New Actors- Facilitated by theInternet-basedcommunication- Beyond governmentsand political elites- Diplomats’ monopoly inforeign relations has beenundermined.- Need for dialogue withnew actors in diplomacy(broad enough – deepenough).
  • 18. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Inter-professional Communication
  • 19. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013DiploFoundation
  • 20. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013DiploFoundationPerceptions and Professional CulturesNational CultureOrganisational CultureProfessional Culture
  • 21. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Space
  • 22. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013HOW?NEW TOOLS
  • 23. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013NEW TOOLSWEB 1.0 (websites and e-mail)Huge amount of informationGoogle-based knowledgeHow to get relevant and reliable information?WEB 2.0 (wiki, blog, social networking)Centrality of the Text & DraftingInformal CommunicationImportance for Policy and Social NetworkingWeb 3.0. (Virtual Reality)Virtual EmbassyVirtual Negotiations
  • 24. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013DiploFoundation 2.4 billion users (2012) 800 million active Facebook users 2.7 billion “likes” per day 200 million active Twitter users 175 million tweets per day 6.7 billion of mobile subscriptions 1.1 billion of global smartphone subscribersInternet Stats
  • 25. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013DiploFoundationInternet Stats
  • 26. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Twiplomacy128 heads of states on Twitter250 accounts of world leaders
  • 27. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Approximately 140 MFAs have establishedan online presence.38% use Twitter37% use Facebook28% use YouTube6% have a blog (or blog roll) on their mainwebsite.(DiploFoundation study – ongoing)MFAs and social media
  • 28. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013E-tools forDiplomaticActivitiesVladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013
  • 29. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013What is the best timing to join e-diplomacy?
  • 30. essentiale-competenciesfor diplomats
  • 31. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013communicatecreatecollaborate curatecritiqueaudiencesFive Main Competences (5Cs)
  • 32. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Curate Find - Internet search, Wikipedia, Googlescholar, e-resources, image textbook, etc Filter - RSS feeds, Collate/collect: social and personalbookmarking, mind-mapping, onlinestorage
  • 33. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013eg. RSS – Netvibes: http://www.netvibes.com/diplosor
  • 34. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Beware offilter bubbles…Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013
  • 35. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Communicate Share /disseminate/ distribute - wiki,blog, discussion forum, email, Google+,twitter, online social networks Promote - twitter, blog, online socialnetworks, and email Engage, engage, engage Anticipate and react
  • 36. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Case study: Car of Canadian Embassy in Beijing3939
  • 37. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Collaborate Wikis Google tools Blogs Webinars Integrated portals (mobile accessiblewebsites) Social networks
  • 38. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013
  • 39. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013DiploFoundation
  • 40. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013§
  • 41. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013
  • 42. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Create Make digital content including audio,image, text, website, blog, video, wikis Protect content through copyright,privacy, digital footprint
  • 43. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013
  • 44. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Open data –are you ready?
  • 45. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Critique Monitor online media Assess the validity/authenticity ofsites/information Reflect on one’s own practice and that ofones peers - blogs, forums etc
  • 46. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013
  • 47. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013
  • 48. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013BrianSolis–Theconversationprismhttp://www.theconversationprism.com/
  • 49. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Some principles…to be augmented Put users, diplomats, particularly young officials in the driving seat. Make it as simple as possible. The higher the budget often  the lower the impact of e-diplomacyprojects. Avoid a grand e-diplomacy strategy. You cannot succeed without failure. Make sure that failures arecontained and cheap and that lessons are learned. The most valuable resource is in the huge knowledge andexperience in people around you. Make sure you utilise it. E-diplomacy is much more than public diplomacy. You cannot control the message in social media. Top leadership is innovation’s best friend.
  • 50. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Skills and knowledgeONE DAY – learn howto use e-toolstechnicallyONE MONTH – learnabout organisation andculture of e-tools, esp.social media spaceONE YEAR – use e-tools effectively
  • 51. Vladimir Radunovic, DiploFoundation 2013Good luckwith yourexams!
  • 52. DiploFoundationWeb:www.diplomacy.edu/e-diplomacyTwitter:@eDiplomatFacebook:https://www.facebook.com/ediplomac