Stefaan Verhulst

Startup lessons from the Knight News Challenge: Make damn sure you fill a market need

Curated on September 2, 2014August 3, 2018 by Stefaan Verhulst

Mathew Ingram at GigaOm: “The Knight Foundation looked at the 28 media-focused startups it funded as part of its News Challenge competition in 2010 and 2011 and came up with some useful lessons for those who might want to follow in their footsteps
Media startups are a lot like any other startup, in the sense that they are a risky bet on an idea or vision — but what makes them even harder is that they are aimed at an industry that is undergoing unprecedented upheaval, filled with potential customers who are struggling to keep their heads above water. What does success look like in that kind of environment? The Knight Foundation knows better than most, since it has funded dozens of startup ventures over the years through its News Challenge, and it has come out with a report that looks at what it has learned.
The report considered the progress of 28 projects that applied for and won funding as part of the 2010-2011 Knight News Challenge competitions, and includes a profile of each — from the Front Porch Forum, a Vermont-based community-building service that started up in the aftermath of Hurricane Irene, to a winner called FrontlineSMS, which uses mobile technology to serve the information needs of small communities that don’t have reliable internet access.
Among the lessons that Knight drew from this roster of winners is one that will sound familiar to any technology startup or venture capital partner: namely, make sure your idea serves a market need, as opposed to just being a cool technical solution. This is especially important in an industry like media, the report says:

Selling innovations to news organizations is extremely difficult because they may lack the money and time to spend on innovative projects or the technical capacity to take full advantage of new tools. The innovation may also be entering a market guarded by institutions that may be resistant to change. Fundamentally, unless an innovation addresses a pressing need, journalists and news organizations will not adopt it.”

The Behavioral Change Matrix – A Tool for Evidence-Based Policy Making

Curated on September 2, 2014October 30, 2018 by Stefaan Verhulst

FehrAdvice (Switzerland):” Der im “Behavioral Economics Guide 2014″ erschienene Beitrag von FehrAdvice zur Behavioral Change Matrix steht Ihnen nun auch als Einzeldokument zum Download zur Verfügung”. Download (PDF, 487KB) (English)

Secrecy in the Sunshine Era – The Promise and Failures of U.S. Open Government Laws

Curated on August 28, 2014August 15, 2018 by Stefaan Verhulst

book cover image New book by Jason Ross Arnold: “A series of laws passed in the 1970s promised the nation unprecedented transparency in government, a veritable “sunshine era.” Though citizens enjoyed a new arsenal of secrecy-busting tools, officials developed a handy set of workarounds, from overclassification to concealment, shredding, and burning. It is this dark side of the sunshine era that Jason Ross Arnold explores in the first comprehensive, comparative history of presidential resistance to the new legal regime, from Reagan-Bush to the first term of Obama-Biden.
After examining what makes a necessary and unnecessary secret, Arnold considers the causes of excessive secrecy, and why we observe variation across administrations. While some administrations deserve the scorn of critics for exceptional secrecy, the book shows excessive secrecy was a persistent problem well before 9/11, during Democratic and Republican administrations alike. Regardless of party, administrations have consistently worked to weaken the system’s legal foundations.
The book reveals episode after episode of evasive maneuvers, rule bending, clever rhetorical gambits, and downright defiance; an army of secrecy workers in a dizzying array of institutions labels all manner of documents “top secret,” while other government workers and agencies manage to suppress information with a “sensitive but unclassified” designation. For example, the health effects of Agent Orange and antibiotic-resistant bacteria leaking out of Midwestern hog farms are considered too “sensitive” for public consumption. These examples and many more document how vast the secrecy system has grown during the sunshine era.
Rife with stories of vital scientific evidence withheld, justice eluded, legalities circumvented, and the public interest flouted, Secrecy in the Sunshine Era reveals how our information society has been kept in the dark in too many ways and for too long.”

In democracy and disaster, emerging world embraces 'open data'

Curated on August 28, 2014August 3, 2018 by Stefaan Verhulst

Jeremy Wagstaff’ at Reuters: “Open data’ – the trove of data-sets made publicly available by governments, organizations and businesses – isn’t normally linked to high-wire politics, but just may have saved last month’s Indonesian presidential elections from chaos.
Data is considered open when it’s released for anyone to use and in a format that’s easy for computers to read. The uses are largely commercial, such as the GPS data from U.S.-owned satellites, but data can range from budget numbers and climate and health statistics to bus and rail timetables.
It’s a revolution that’s swept the developed world in recent years as governments and agencies like the World Bank have freed up hundreds of thousands of data-sets for use by anyone who sees a use for them. Data.gov, a U.S. site, lists more than 100,000 data-sets, from food calories to magnetic fields in space.
Consultants McKinsey reckon open data could add up to $3 trillion worth of economic activity a year – from performance ratings that help parents find the best schools to governments saving money by releasing budget data and asking citizens to come up with cost-cutting ideas. All the apps, services and equipment that tap the GPS satellites, for example, generate $96 billion of economic activity each year in the United States alone, according to a 2011 study.
But so far open data has had a limited impact in the developing world, where officials are wary of giving away too much information, and where there’s the issue of just how useful it might be: for most people in emerging countries, property prices and bus schedules aren’t top priorities.
But last month’s election in Indonesia – a contentious face-off between a disgraced general and a furniture-exporter turned reformist – highlighted how powerful open data can be in tandem with a handful of tech-smart programmers, social media savvy and crowdsourcing.
“Open data may well have saved this election,” said Paul Rowland, a Jakarta-based consultant on democracy and governance…”

Values at Play in Digital Games

Curated on August 28, 2014October 30, 2018 by Stefaan Verhulst

New book by Mary Flanagan and Helen Nissenbaum: “All games express and embody human values, providing a compelling arena in which we play out beliefs and ideas. “Big ideas” such as justice, equity, honesty, and cooperation—as well as other kinds of ideas, including violence, exploitation, and greed—may emerge in games whether designers intend them or not. In this book, Mary Flanagan and Helen Nissenbaum present Values at Play, a theoretical and practical framework for identifying socially recognized moral and political values in digital games. Values at Play can also serve as a guide to designers who seek to implement values in the conception and design of their games.
After developing a theoretical foundation for their proposal, Flanagan and Nissenbaum provide detailed examinations of selected games, demonstrating the many ways in which values are embedded in them. They introduce the Values at Play heuristic, a systematic approach for incorporating values into the game design process. Interspersed among the book’s chapters are texts by designers who have put Values at Play into practice by accepting values as a design constraint like any other, offering a real-world perspective on the design challenges involved.”

Riding the Second Wave of Civic Innovation

Curated on August 28, 2014July 18, 2019 by Stefaan Verhulst

Jeremy Goldberg at Governing: “Innovation and entrepreneurship in local government increasingly require mobilizing talent from many sectors and skill sets. Fortunately, the opportunities for nurturing cross-pollination between the public and private sectors have never been greater, thanks in large part to the growing role of organizations such as Bayes Impact, Code for America, Data Science for Social Good and Fuse Corps.
Indeed, there’s reason to believe that we might be entering an even more exciting period of public-private collaboration. As one local-government leader recently put it to me when talking about the critical mass of pro-bono civic-innovation efforts taking place across the San Francisco Bay area, “We’re now riding the second wave of civic pro-bono and civic innovation.”
As an alumni of Fuse Corps’ executive fellows program, I’m convinced that the opportunities initiated by it and similar organizations are integral to civic innovation. Fuse Corps brings civic entrepreneurs with experience across the public, private and nonprofit sectors to work closely with government employees to help them negotiate project design, facilitation and management hurdles. The organization’s leadership training emphasizes “smallifying” — building innovation capacity by breaking big challenges down into smaller tasks in a shorter timeframe — and making “little bets” — low-risk actions aimed at developing and testing an idea.
Since 2012, I have managed programs and cross-sector networks for the Silicon Valley Talent Partnership. I’ve witnessed a groundswell of civic entrepreneurs from across the region stepping up to participate in discussions and launch rapid-prototyping labs focused on civic innovation.
Cities across the nation are creating new roles and programs to engage these civic start-ups. They’re learning that what makes these projects, and specifically civic pro-bono programs, work best is a process of designing, building, operationalizing and bringing them to scale. If you’re setting out to create such a program, here’s a short list of best practices:
• Assets: Explore existing internal resources and knowledge to understand the history, departmental relationships and overall functions of the relevant agencies or departments. Develop a compendium of current service/volunteer programs.
• City policies/legal framework: Determine what the city charter, city attorney’s office or employee-relations rules and policies say about procurement, collective bargaining and public-private partnerships.
• Leadership: The support of the city’s top leadership is especially important during the formative stages of a civic-innovation program, so it’s important to understand how the city’s form of government will impact the program. For example, in a “strong mayor” government the ability to make definitive decisions on a public-private collaboration may be unlikely to face the same scrutiny as it might under a “council/mayor” government.
• Cross-departmental collaboration: This is essential. Without the support of city staff across departments, innovation projects are unlikely to take off. Convening a “tiger team” of individuals who are early adopters of such initiatives is important step. Ultimately, city staffers best understand the needs and demands of their departments or agencies.
• Partners from corporations and philanthropy: Leveraging existing partnerships will help to bring together an advisory group of cross-sector leaders and executives to participate in the early stages of program development.
• Business and member associations: For the Silicon Valley Talent Partnership, the Silicon Valley Leadership Group has been instrumental in advocating for pro-bono volunteerism with the cities of Fremont, San Jose and Santa Clara….”

The Changing Nature of Privacy Practice

Curated on August 28, 2014August 15, 2018 by Stefaan Verhulst

Cameron F. Kerry at TechTank (Brookings): “…Numerous commenters have observed that Facebook, among many marketers (including political campaigns like U.S. President Barack Obama’s), regularly conducts A-B tests and other research to measure how consumers respond to different products, messages and messengers. So what makes the Facebook-Cornell study different from what goes on all the time in an increasingly data-driven world? After all, the ability to conduct such testing continuously on a large scale is considered one of the special features of big data.
The answer calls for broader judgments than parsing the language of privacy policies or managing compliance with privacy laws and regulations. Existing legal tools such as notice-and-choice and use limitations are simply too narrow to address the array of issues presented and inform the judgment needed. Deciding whether Facebook ought to participate in research like its newsfeed study is not really about what the company can do but what it should do.
As Omer Tene and Jules Polonetsky, CIPP/US, point out in an article on Facebook’s research study, “Increasingly, corporate officers find themselves struggling to decipher subtle social norms and make ethical choices that are more befitting of philosophers than business managers or lawyers.” They add, “Going forward, companies will need to create new processes, deploying a toolbox of innovative solutions to engender trust and mitigate normative friction.” Tene and Polonetsky themselves have proposed a number of such tools. In recent comments on Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights legislation filed with the Commerce Department, the Future of Privacy Forum (FPF) endorsed the use of internal review boards along the lines of those used in academia for human-subject research. The FPF also submitted an initial framework for benefit-risk analysis in the big data context “to understand whether assuming the risk is ethical, fair, legitimate and cost-effective.” Increasingly, companies and other institutions are bringing to bear more holistic review of privacy issues. Conferences and panels on big data research ethics are proliferating.
The expanding variety and complexity of data uses also call for a broader public policy approach. The Obama administration’s Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights (of which I was an architect) adapted existing Fair Information Practice Principles to a principles-based approach that is intended not as a formalistic checklist but as a set of principles that work holistically in ways that are “flexible” and “dynamic.” In turn, much of the commentary submitted to the Commerce Department on the Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights addressed the question of the relationship between these principles and a “responsible use framework” as discussed in the White House Big Data Report….”

Enchanted Objects

Curated on August 28, 2014October 10, 2018 by Stefaan Verhulst

Book by David Rose: “Some believe the future will look like more of the same—more smartphones, tablets, screens embedded in every conceivable surface. David Rose has a different vision: technology that atomizes, combining itself with the objects that make up the very fabric of daily living. Such technology will be woven into the background of our environment, enhancing human relationships and channeling desires for omniscience, long life, and creative expression. The enchanted objects of fairy tales and science fiction will enter real life.
Groundbreaking, timely, and provocative, Enchanted Objects is a blueprint for a better future, where efficient solutions come hand in hand with technology that delights our senses. It is essential reading for designers, technologists, entrepreneurs, business leaders, and anyone who wishes to understand the future and stay relevant in the Internet of Things. Download the prologue here.”

CrowdCriMa – a complete Next Generation Crowsourced Crisis Management Platform

Curated on August 28, 2014August 3, 2018 by Stefaan Verhulst

Pitch at ClimateCoLab: “The proposed #CrowdCriMa would be a disaster management platform based on an innovative, interactive and accountable Digital Governance Framework– in which common people, crisis response or disaster response workers, health workers, decision makers would participate actively. This application would be available for mobile phones and other smart devices.
Crowdsourcing Unheard Voices
The main function would be to help collecting voice messages of disaster victims in the forms of phone call, recorded voice, SMS, E-mail and Fax to seek urgent help from the authority and spread those voices via online media, social media, SMS and etc to inform the world about the situation. As still in developing countries, Fax communication is more powerful than SMS or email, we have also included FAX as one of the reporting tools.
People will be able to record their observations, potential crisis, seek helps and appeals for funds for disaster response works, different environment related activities (e.g. project for pollution free environment and etc). To have all functions in the #CrowdCriMa platform, an IVR system, FrontlineSMS-type software will be developed / integrated in the proposed platform.
A cloud-based information management system would be used to sustain the flow of information. This would help not to lose any information if communications infrastructures are not functioning properly during and after the disaster.
Crowdfunding:
Another function of this #CrowdCriMa platform would be the crowdfunding function. When individual donor logs in, they find the list of issues / crisis where fund is needed. An innovative and sustainable approach would be taken to meet the financial need in crisis / disaster and post-crisis financial empowerment work for victims.
Some services are available differently but innovative parts of this proposal is several services to deal disaster would be in platform so people do not need to use different platforms for disaster management work. ..”