Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Young.kwak

16,331 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Sex in your area is here: ❤❤❤ http://bit.ly/39mQKz3 ❤❤❤
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Follow the link, new dating source: ❤❤❤ http://bit.ly/39mQKz3 ❤❤❤
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

Young.kwak

  1. 1.   Open Government Maturity Model: Harnessing Social Media for Increased Public Engagement Young Hoon Kwak, Ph.D. Associate Professor School of Business The George Washington University February 23, 2011
  2. 2. The U.S. Open Government Imperative <ul><li>Open Government Directive (December 2009) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Transparency, participation, collaboration </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Federal agencies’ open government plans (April 2010) </li></ul><ul><li>Social media and Web 2.0 </li></ul><ul><li>Gen Y (The Millennials) </li></ul><ul><li>22 out of 24 major federal agencies have a presence on Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube (July 2010) </li></ul><ul><li>Data.gov </li></ul><ul><li>Open innovation paradigm (Chesbrough 2006) </li></ul>
  3. 3. NASA Open Government Initiative http://www.nasa.gov/open <ul><li>http://www.nasa.gov/open/plan </li></ul>
  4. 4. Two Types of Social Media (Source: Kotler et al., 2010) Expressive Social Media Collaborative Social Media
  5. 5. Problems and Issues <ul><li>Launching too many initiatives and projects in a short period of time </li></ul><ul><li>Limited resources and infrastructure capabilities </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of understanding and knowledge about social media and Web 2.0 </li></ul>
  6. 6. <ul><li>Government budget cut </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of human resources, experience </li></ul><ul><li>Government culture </li></ul><ul><li>Government ICT infrastructure </li></ul><ul><li>Ambitious time frame </li></ul><ul><li>Anecdotes of failures, problems, trial and errors </li></ul><ul><li>How can government achieve the vision of open government effectively? </li></ul>Problems and Issues (cont’d)
  7. 7. Research Questions <ul><li>How can U.S. government agencies effectively implement Open Government initiatives? </li></ul><ul><li>Challenges, risks, benefits, best practices, metrics? </li></ul>
  8. 8. Research Methods <ul><li>Case studies (from February 2010 to January 2011) </li></ul><ul><li>Field interviews </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Federal government executives, managers, and contractors. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Each interview was semi-structured with guiding questions and lasted 1.5 hours. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Interviewees spoke about their agency’s open government plans, current status, challenges, risks, potential and realized benefits, best practices, and metrics. </li></ul></ul></ul>
  9. 9. <ul><li>Focus group discussion </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Discussed open government and social media implementation issues in terms of organizational culture, organizational structure, skill sets, training, career development, incentive mechanisms, and budget. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Analysis of secondary data sources </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Reviewed and analyzed a wide range of government memorandums, strategic plans, reports, white papers, websites, blogs, and government-run social media sites. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Agency’s open government plans, current status of open government initiatives, challenges, risks, benefits, best practices, metrics, etc. </li></ul></ul></ul>Research Methods (cont’d)
  10. 10. <ul><li>Interviews and focus group discussion were transcribed for data analysis. Follow-up email and phone communication was exchanged to clarify some key issues. </li></ul><ul><li>Content analysis was conducted </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Identified recurring themes and patterns </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Extracted useful insights </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Model validation: additional interviews and a focus group discussion with social media specialists and managers </li></ul>Research Methods (cont’d)
  11. 11. <ul><li>Field interviews: federal government executives, managers, and contractors. </li></ul><ul><li>The agency’s open government plans, current status of open government initiatives, challenges, risks, benefits, best practices, metrics, etc. </li></ul><ul><li>Document analysis: government memorandums, strategic plans, reports, white papers, websites, blogs, and government-run social media sites. </li></ul><ul><li>Model validation: additional interviews and a focus group discussion with social media specialists and managers </li></ul>Research Methods (cont’d)
  12. 12. Open Government Maturity Model (OGMM) <ul><li>A logical sequence among data transparency, open participation, and open collaboration </li></ul><ul><li>Initial state </li></ul><ul><li>Ultimate state </li></ul><ul><li>A common, shared framework </li></ul><ul><li>Assessment, benchmarking </li></ul><ul><li>Effective implementation </li></ul>Initial Transparency Open Participation Open Collaboration Total Public Engagement Open government maturity Public engagement Value/benefits Technical/managerial complexity Challenges/risks 1 2 3 4 5
  13. 13. Open Government Maturity Model (OGMM) Source: Gwanhoo Lee & Younghoon Kwak, 2010 Initial Conditions Data Transparency Open Participation Open Collaboration Ubiquitous Engagement Open government maturity Public engagement Value/benefits Technical/managerial complexity Challenges/risks 1 2 3 4 5
  14. 14. OGMM Level 1: Initial Conditions Focus Capabilities/Processes Outcomes Information broadcasting <ul><li>One-way, static communication </li></ul><ul><li>No or little interactive online capabilities </li></ul><ul><li>Very limited data is made available online </li></ul><ul><li>No or few metrics are used </li></ul><ul><li>No or little social media is being used. </li></ul><ul><li>No or few open government capabilities </li></ul><ul><li>It lacks interactive capabilities such as social media and Web 2.0 tools </li></ul><ul><li>Government websites are not frequently visited by the public </li></ul><ul><li>No or little public engagement </li></ul><ul><li>The public takes a passive role </li></ul><ul><li>Government is viewed as a black box </li></ul>Initial Conditions 1
  15. 15. OGMM Level 2: Data Transparency Focus Capabilities/Processes Outcomes <ul><li>Transparency of government processes and performance </li></ul><ul><li>Data accessibility and quality </li></ul><ul><li>Government data is published and shared online </li></ul><ul><li>Government process and policy information is published and shared online </li></ul><ul><li>High-value, high-impact data such as cost and performance </li></ul><ul><li>Data quality improvement: accuracy, consistency, and timeliness </li></ul><ul><li>Feedback from the public on the usefulness and quality of data </li></ul><ul><li>Limited use of social media for keeping the public informed </li></ul><ul><li>Process/quantity-centric metrics are used </li></ul><ul><li>Increased public awareness and knowledge of government data, process, and policy </li></ul><ul><li>Increased government accountability </li></ul><ul><li>Improved data quality: accuracy, consistency, and timeliness </li></ul><ul><li>Reduction of FOIA requests </li></ul><ul><li>Reduced processing time for FOIA requests </li></ul><ul><li>Foundation for performance improvement </li></ul><ul><li>Foundation for value-added online services </li></ul><ul><li>Cultural shift to openness begins </li></ul><ul><li>The public is engaged through data </li></ul>Data Transparency 2
  16. 16. OGMM Level 3: Open Participation Focus Capabilities/Processes Outcomes <ul><li>Public feedback, conversation, and ideation </li></ul><ul><li>Interactive communications </li></ul><ul><li>Crowd-sourcing </li></ul><ul><li>Expressive social media </li></ul><ul><li>Pervasive use of social media for interactive, on-going conversations, story-telling, and communications between the public and government </li></ul><ul><li>Voting, polling, feedback, ideation capabilities </li></ul><ul><li>Timely/consistent response to feedback </li></ul><ul><li>Crowdsourcing to tap into experiences and ideas of the public </li></ul><ul><li>User created contents are shared </li></ul><ul><li>Focus on mainstream social media channels such as Facebook and Twitter, </li></ul><ul><li>Process/quantity-centric are used </li></ul><ul><li>Real-time, instant, diverse feedback from the public </li></ul><ul><li>On-going, community-based conversation and discussion about the business of government </li></ul><ul><li>Reduced cost and time for innovation </li></ul><ul><li>More innovation </li></ul><ul><li>Increased sense of community centered around government </li></ul><ul><li>Cultural shift to openness gets momentum </li></ul><ul><li>The public is engaged through conversation </li></ul>Open Participation 3
  17. 17. OGMM Level 4: Open Collaboration Focus Capabilities/Processes Outcomes <ul><li>Interagency collaboration </li></ul><ul><li>Open collaboration with the public </li></ul><ul><li>Co-creating value-added services </li></ul><ul><li>Collaborative social media </li></ul><ul><li>Inter-agency collaboration on complex projects and decision-making </li></ul><ul><li>Open collaboration with the public to solve complex problems and issues </li></ul><ul><li>Collaboration between public and private sectors to create value-added services for the public </li></ul><ul><li>Open collaboration for policy-making and rule-making </li></ul><ul><li>Collaborative response to national emergencies and natural disasters </li></ul><ul><li>Use of c ollaborative social media such as Google Docs, Wiki, and Jive </li></ul><ul><li>Open collaboration process is embedded and implemented online </li></ul><ul><li>Process/quantity-centric are used </li></ul><ul><li>Synergistic effect of interagency collaboration: time/cost savings and higher quality outputs </li></ul><ul><li>Time/cost savings and innovations through open innovation </li></ul><ul><li>The public benefits from high quality, innovative services developed by the private sector </li></ul><ul><li>New policies and rules are made through open collaboration process </li></ul><ul><li>Effective responses to national emergencies and natural disasters </li></ul><ul><li>Openness is widely accepted in government </li></ul><ul><li>The public is engaged through projects/tasks </li></ul>Open Collaboration 4
  18. 18. OGMM: Level 5: Ubiquitous Engagement Focus Capabilities/Processes Outcomes <ul><li>Increased transparency, participation, and collaboration </li></ul><ul><li>Ubiquitous and continuous engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Integrated engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Expanding the scope and depth of transparency, participation, and collaboration capabilities </li></ul><ul><li>Integrated and seamless deployment of multiple channels of social media within and across agencies </li></ul><ul><li>Use of mobile, ubiquitous computing platforms for total engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Integrated ecosystem for public engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Integrated governance structure and process for public engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Outcome/impact-centric metrics + process/quantity-centric metrics </li></ul><ul><li>The public engages extensively through multiple channels of social media </li></ul><ul><li>The public engages continuously and seamlessly in various government activities and programs </li></ul><ul><li>Engagement through lifetime </li></ul><ul><li>Virtuous cycles for sustaining and improving public engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Openness becomes a norm for government culture </li></ul><ul><li>Benefits of open government are fully realized </li></ul>Ubiquitous Engagement 5
  19. 19. Open Government Maturity Model Focus Capabilities/Processes Outcomes Level 1 Broadcasting One-way, static communication No or little public engagement Level 2 Data accessibility and quality Government data is published and shared online High-value, high-impact data Increased public awareness and knowledge of government data, process, and policy Increased government accountability Level 3 Public feedback, conversation, and ideation Pervasive use of social media for interactive, on-going conversations, story-telling, and communications Voting, polling, feedback, ideation Real-time, instant, diverse feedback from the public On-going, community-based conversation Level 4 Co-creating value-added services Inter-agency/public collaboration on complex projects and decision-making The public is engaged through complex projects/tasks Level 5 Ubiquitous, continuous, integrated engagement Expanding the scope and depth of engagement Integrated ecosystem for public engagement Virtuous cycles for sustaining and improving public engagement
  20. 20. Level 2: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Dashboard Capabilities Outcomes/opportunities Challenges/issues <ul><li>Visualizing Medicare spending </li></ul><ul><li>Comparing Medicare inpatient spending by state, Diagnosis-Related Groups, hospitals, and public policy goals </li></ul><ul><li>Data is published within three months </li></ul><ul><li>No user customization capabilities </li></ul><ul><li>Increased visibility, transparency </li></ul><ul><li>Positive feedback and compliments from the public </li></ul><ul><li>The public makes informed decisions </li></ul><ul><li>No “tangible” benefit has been reported yet </li></ul><ul><li>Budgetary issues </li></ul><ul><li>Data accuracy </li></ul><ul><li>Timely update of data </li></ul><ul><li>No dedicated staffer </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of flexibility in data format </li></ul>
  21. 21. Level 2: FDA Transparency Initiatives Capabilities Outcomes/opportunities Challenges/issues <ul><li>Broadcasting basic information with very limited feedback capabilities </li></ul><ul><li>RSS and email updates </li></ul><ul><li>Proactive disclosure of information (video, webinar) </li></ul><ul><li>Providing industry with real-time answers to their daily challenges </li></ul><ul><li>Use of multiple communication media and channels </li></ul><ul><li>Increased public awareness and knowledge </li></ul><ul><li>The public is better educated about what FDA does and how the work gets done </li></ul><ul><li>Increased transparency to regulated industry </li></ul><ul><li>Early public reactions have been positive </li></ul><ul><li>Accidental disclosure of confidential, private information </li></ul><ul><li>Deciding what information to share </li></ul><ul><li>Data quality </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of resources for maintaining services </li></ul>
  22. 22. Level 3: HHS Open Government Portal Capabilities Outcomes/opportunities Challenges/issues <ul><li>A portal to all HHS open government applications, capabilities, and data </li></ul><ul><li>Blogs by CTO </li></ul><ul><li>Hyperlinks to HHS’ Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, Blogs, and Flickr sites </li></ul><ul><li>Widgets and RSS tools </li></ul><ul><li>Sharing the HHS OG Plan and getting public feedback and comments </li></ul><ul><li>Publishing record management procedures and policy </li></ul><ul><li>One-stop portal service </li></ul><ul><li>Increased public awareness and engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Increased visibility, transparency </li></ul><ul><li>Feedback from the public on the HHS OG plan and blogs </li></ul><ul><li>No quantitative results have been reported yet </li></ul><ul><li>Creating and sustaining public interest and participation </li></ul><ul><li>Timely and consistent responses to public comments </li></ul><ul><li>Striking a balance between control and autonomy </li></ul><ul><li>Level of time commitment from top executives </li></ul>
  23. 23. Level 4: Community Health Data Initiative Capabilities Outcomes/opportunities Challenges/issues <ul><li>A public-private effort to help Americans understand health care performance in their communities </li></ul><ul><li>Sparks and facilitates action to improve performance </li></ul><ul><li>Interactive health maps, social networking applications, idea contests, online games for public education. </li></ul><ul><li>Creating a network of health data suppliers and “data appliers” </li></ul><ul><li>Create applications to (1) raise awareness of community health performance, (2) increase pressure on decision-makers to improve performance, and (3) facilitate performance improvement </li></ul><ul><li>Sharing best practices </li></ul><ul><li>Creating and sustaining public engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Attracting a critical mass of data/applications suppliers and consumers </li></ul><ul><li>Creating effective public-private working relations </li></ul>
  24. 24. Cases of Open Government Initiatives in Public Healthcare Administration Initiative Capabilities/Outcomes Issues CMS Dashboard (Level 2) Visualizing Medicare spending by state, by Diagnosis-Related Groups (DRG), by hospitals, and by public policy goals Increased visibility, transparency Budgeting issues Data accuracy Timely update of data No dedicated staffer HHS OG Portal (Level 3) A portal to all HHS open government applications, capabilities, and data Blogs by CTO, widgets and RSS tools Public feedback and comments on the HHS OG plan and CTO blogs Timely and consistent responses to public comments Time commitment from top executives to posting blogs and responding to public comments Community Health Data Initiative (Level 4) A public-private effort that helps Americans understand health care performance in their communities Spark and facilitate action Interactive health maps, social networking, idea contests, games Sharing best practices Attracting a critical mass of data/applications suppliers and consumers Creating effective public-private working relations
  25. 25. Challenges in Implementing Open Government Initiatives Level Challenges 2-5 <ul><li>Timely budgeting , acquiring staffers and resources </li></ul><ul><li>Inadequate network bandwidth , lack of scalability </li></ul><ul><li>Government’s hierarchical culture , agency silos </li></ul><ul><li>Protecting information security and privacy </li></ul><ul><li>Legal, contractual, and policy issues </li></ul>2 <ul><li>Data accuracy, consistency, and timeliness, usability and usefulness </li></ul><ul><li>Putting formal processes to govern the lifecycle of data collecting and sharing </li></ul>3 <ul><li>Monitoring and responding to public feedback and comments </li></ul><ul><li>Keeping a balance between agency control and public autonomy </li></ul><ul><li>Possibility of public conversations getting out of control </li></ul><ul><li>Linking public input/feedback to policy/rule making </li></ul>4 <ul><li>Lack of accountability and responsibility, increased complexity </li></ul><ul><li>Facilitating and coordinating productive collaboration </li></ul><ul><li>Integrating with internal government processes </li></ul>5 <ul><li>Inter-agency integration of various OG processes and services </li></ul><ul><li>A seamless, continuous experience for public participation and collaboration </li></ul><ul><li>Creating a virtuous cycle and a sustainable ecosystem </li></ul>
  26. 26. Best Practice for Implementing Open Government Initiatives Level Best Practices 2-5 <ul><li>Aligning OG initiatives with the agency goals and priorities </li></ul><ul><li>Establishing effective OG governance, securing top management support </li></ul><ul><li>Revise policies/rules that are hurdles </li></ul><ul><li>Knowledge/best practice sharing and learning </li></ul><ul><li>Establishing a New Media Center </li></ul>2 <ul><li>Establish governance principles and processes for data sharing </li></ul><ul><li>Centralized government data portals such as Data.gov </li></ul><ul><li>Post high-value, high-impact data sets and tools first </li></ul>3 <ul><li>Creating social media based communities </li></ul><ul><li>Using ideation platforms to crowd-source diverse and innovative ideas </li></ul><ul><li>Public contests for the best applications utilizing government data </li></ul><ul><li>Processes and dedicated personnel to handle public feedback and comments </li></ul>4 <ul><li>Participation and Collaboration Resource Menu for government employees </li></ul><ul><li>Use of Wikis to develop and share collective knowledge and intelligence </li></ul><ul><li>Open source software development and sharing (e.g., HHS, NASA) </li></ul>5 <ul><li>Apps for smart phones and tablets </li></ul><ul><li>Integrating multiple public engagement platforms </li></ul>
  27. 27. Metrics for Open Government Initiatives Level Metrics 2-5 <ul><li>Public awareness of OG initiatives and services </li></ul><ul><li>Public perception of government openness </li></ul><ul><li>Public satisfaction with interacting with government </li></ul>2 <ul><li>Number of data sets published, analysis tools, downloads, and visitors </li></ul><ul><li>Data accuracy, consistency, timeliness </li></ul><ul><li>Reduction in FOIA requests, backlog, and response time </li></ul>3 <ul><li>Number of comments and ideas posted by the public </li></ul><ul><li>Frequency of voting and polling </li></ul><ul><li>Number of out-of-control incidents </li></ul><ul><li>Usefulness and quality of public comments and ideas </li></ul>4 <ul><li>Number and diversity of external partners </li></ul><ul><li>Number of new value-added services </li></ul><ul><li>Time and cost savings </li></ul><ul><li>Quality and innovativeness </li></ul>5 <ul><li>Number of mobile users, mobile platforms, applications, and services </li></ul><ul><li>Level of integration of OG processes and services </li></ul><ul><li>Net impact on productivity and innovation </li></ul>
  28. 28. Lessons Learned and Recommendations for OG Implementation <ul><li>Use a Phased Implementation Approach </li></ul><ul><li>Do Proof of Concept Pilots </li></ul><ul><li>Use a Democratic, Bottom-Up Approach </li></ul><ul><li>Secure Resources </li></ul><ul><li>Establish Center for Excellence </li></ul><ul><li>Align Open Government Initiatives with the Agency’s Goals </li></ul><ul><li>Establish Governance Mechanisms for Data Sharin g </li></ul><ul><li>Establish Enterprise Architecture Early On </li></ul><ul><li>Integrate Public Engagement Applications </li></ul>
  29. 29. Lessons Learned and Recommendations for OG Implementation (cont’d) <ul><li>Develop Communities of Practice </li></ul><ul><li>Expand Metrics over Time </li></ul><ul><li>Develop and Communicate a Government-wide Strategy </li></ul><ul><li>Overcome Cultural Barriers </li></ul><ul><li>Make Public Engagement Everyday Routine </li></ul><ul><li>Institutionalize Incentives </li></ul><ul><li>Establish Sustained Commitment of Senior Leaders </li></ul>
  30. 30. Important Issues to Address <ul><li>Reconciling orderly implementation and immediate demands </li></ul><ul><li>If we build it, will they come? </li></ul><ul><li>Maintaining on-going engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Integration </li></ul><ul><li>Governance </li></ul><ul><li>Cultural shift </li></ul><ul><li>Balancing control and self-organizing </li></ul><ul><li>Balancing agility and discipline </li></ul><ul><li>Identifying effective metrics </li></ul>
  31. 31. <ul><li>Lee, G. and Kwak, Y.H. (2011) </li></ul><ul><li>“ An Open Government Implementation Model: Moving to Increased Public Engagement ” </li></ul><ul><li>IBM Center for the Business of Government . 35 pages. </li></ul>For More Information
  32. 32. Questions or Comments? Thank you!

×