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.

Open innovation ISDT 2011


Published on

Slides from talk given at International School on Digital Transformation, Porto, Portugal, July 18, 2011

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Open innovation ISDT 2011

  1. 1. Derek Lackaff, Ph. D.<br />Elon University<br />Gary Chapman International School on Digital Transformation<br />Porto, Portugal, July 18, 2011<br />Open Innovation as Digital Democracy<br />Emerging approaches to collaborative governance<br />@lackaff #isdt2011<br />
  2. 2. In most contemporary democracies ... the representative relationship is in chronic disrepair. There is a pervasive sense that politicians and the people they represent inhabit different worlds, speak mutually incomprehensible languages and fail to respect one another (Coleman & Blumler, 2009)<br />
  3. 3. Key Issues<br />Need to pursue emerging opportunities<br />Multiple modes of online civic engagement<br />Experiments and case studies<br />Challenges are socio-political and socio-technical<br />
  4. 4. Agenda<br />Critique of online deliberative democracy<br />Overview of open online political innovation<br />Challenges and opportunities<br />Preliminary recommendations<br />
  5. 5. The gold standard?<br />Deliberative Democracy<br />
  6. 6. Democratic Deliberation<br />“process of directed communication whereby people discuss concerns in a reasonable, conscientious, and open manner, with intent of arriving at a decision” (Schuler, 2010)<br />Structured and (more or less) formal<br />Ideal outcomes?<br />
  7. 7. “The Timidity of Deliberative Democracy”<br />“..practices designed to present finished work of institutional professionals, spark public opinion, and keep peace among neighbors” – not to improve decision making<br />“… the reality of deliberation is that it is toothless.”<br />(Novek, 2009)<br />
  8. 8. Mediated deliberation<br />Most citizens are political “lurkers” who monitor government but are not actively involved<br />Mediated deliberative democracy potentially crosses boundaries of time, distance, and social scale – diversity of viewpoints is key<br />Online deliberation platforms increase engagement. i.e. turn lurkers into participants?<br />
  9. 9. Online Deliberation Challenges<br />Time-consuming<br />Formal / confusing<br />“Payoffs” less than effort expended<br />Limited support from governments<br />(Schuler, 2010)<br />Deliberation systems demand diversity, but often unable to engage across digital divides<br />
  10. 10. Noveck’s Proposal: Open and Collaborative Democracy<br />Collaboration is crucial, but not yet well-understood<br />Medium / platform matters<br />Egalitarian<br />(Noveck, 2009)<br />
  11. 11. Collaboration<br />Participation is more than voting or attending town hall meetings<br />New tools enable collaboration, in the sense of open source<br />Deliberation and collaboration are different forms of participatory practice<br />Collaboration is ad hoc, emergent, and user-driven<br />
  12. 12. Medium Matters<br />Online social interaction has technical and design components<br />Platforms need to reflect groups work back to itself<br />Identify appropriate practice and embed in the code<br />Ratings, reputations, etc.<br />Open experimentation and sharing<br />
  13. 13. Egalitarian<br />Mass participation: voting<br />Need to provide multiple types of participation opportunities<br />Recognize different types of interest and expertise<br />Egalitarian mass participation: Wikipedia<br />
  14. 14. Web User Practice<br />With a few exceptions, social web participation is open, user-directed, and granular<br />Click<br />Consume<br />Produce<br />Formal deliberative rhetoric vs. multimodal, citizen directed participation<br />What are the ways in which online civic participation can meet citizens where they are?<br />How do we make online civic participation banal?<br />
  15. 15. Crowds aren’t wise, but networked individuals are effective.<br />Open Innovation<br />
  16. 16. Open innovation<br />Emerging approach to online civic engagement<br />Focus is on idea generation, rather than consensus building<br />Worth examination as an engagement and participation approach in itself<br />In practice, many benefits of deliberation (more informed opinions, etc) can be realized through open innovation processes<br />
  17. 17. Definitional issues<br />Wisdom of crowds<br />Crowdsourcing<br />Open innovation<br />
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
  20. 20.
  21. 21. Open Innovation Platforms<br />
  22. 22. Open Innovation in Practice<br />Integrates well with everyday citizen behavior<br />Allows for emergent agendas<br />
  23. 23. Critiques, challenges, opportunities<br />
  24. 24. Critiques and challenges overview<br />Socio-political<br />Policy interfaces / interconnects<br />Socio-technical<br />Identity<br />Cascade effects<br />
  25. 25. “Participation Theater”<br />To what extent is the online process connected to action?<br />Not just an “online” problem, but citizen participation is often a sham<br />“Earn badges” or influence policy?<br />
  26. 26. Technical Challenges<br />User identity management<br />Cascade effects in voting<br />Duplication of ideas<br />Others?<br />
  27. 27. Open Government Directive Dialogue<br />Summer 2009, public invited to engage with Obama’s transparency memo,<br />
  28. 28. #FAIL?<br />4,000 users, 1,100 ideas<br />Trolled by WorldNetDaily<br />Top ideas about America’s drug prohibitions (rather than open government)<br />Savvy early participants left site after first week<br />Brought new participants into policy discussions<br />
  29. 29. America Speaking Out<br />May 2010<br />
  30. 30. #FAIL<br />
  31. 31. #EPICFAIL<br />“Last week, the top five entries in the "Liberty and Freedom" category were: ban handguns, "drop the idea that we're a 'Christian' country," declare abortion "none of the government's business," allow gays to serve openly in the military and legalize marijuana.<br />Republican leaders mentioned none of these when they began highlighting proposals from the project. Instead, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., called for numerous spending cuts, including canceling unspent stimulus dollars and freezing government pay raises.”<br />"It's not a 'top vote gets in’ deal.”<br />HuffPo, 6/20/10<br />
  32. 32. Open Innovation as Digital Governance: Manor, TX<br />
  33. 33. Manor Labs<br />October 2009<br />Partnership with Spigit, PeaceDot<br />42 ideas and 2 implementations 1st month<br />3,700 participants, 91 ideas, 780 posts<br />10 ideas to final stage, 6 implemented<br />Auto-billing, more online city resources, etc.<br />More complex ideas aborted or unfinished<br />
  34. 34. Open Innovation as Collaborative Democracy: Icelandic Skugga-sites<br />nothing<br />
  35. 35. Best Party campaign<br />January 2010<br />
  36. 36. Skuggaborg<br />Invited policy proposals via an open innovation website<br />Each party given a “branded” section of the site<br />~1,200 users registered, mostly to participate In the Best Party section<br />
  37. 37. Better Reykjavik<br />After winning the election, Best Party asked for new section of site to inform coalition negotiations<br />5,000 participants, 800 priorities debated<br />Best Party took top priorities and added them to their platform, e.g.<br />Send siblings to the same schools<br />Make swimming pools more accessible for families<br />Improvements to parks and green spaces<br />Create website for citizens to submit neighborhood repair notices<br />Reykjavik now has commissioned new site (tentatively “New and Better Reykjavik”)<br />
  38. 38. Recommendations<br />
  39. 39. Citizen Self Interest<br />Open political innovation platforms work best when participation is self-interested<br />Collaboration based on multiple strengths<br />Ex: SeeClickFix<br />
  40. 40. Appropriate Scale<br />Consider the size and type of population you want to reach<br />What scales of participation are reasonable and necessary to achieve goals?<br />Design to engage broader publics<br />
  41. 41. Consider policy interfaces<br />Top-down approach vs. bottom up<br />Legitimacy via attention<br />
  42. 42. Success Metrics<br />Participation numbers?<br />Policy implementations?<br />Ultimate goal: normalize online civic participation?<br />
  43. 43. Coming up: hands-on experimenting<br />Questions?<br />
  44. 44. Workshop Discussion<br />
  45. 45.<br />What are the priorities of ISDT 2011?<br />Short term?<br />Longer term?<br />What questionsdigital transformationneed further attention?<br />How can the social and technical challenges of open innovation processes be addressed?<br />How can interfaces between grassroots open innovation activism and official policy-making be developed?<br />