future of work

Designing Successful Governance Groups

Curated on August 11, 2015August 3, 2018 by Stefaan Verhulst

“The Berkman Center for Internet & Society, together with the Global Network of Internet and Society Research Centers (NoC), is pleased to announce the release of a new publication, “Designing Successful Governance Groups: Lessons for Leaders from Real-World Examples,” authored by Ryan Budish, Sarah Myers West, and Urs Gasser.

Solutions to many of the world’s most pressing governance challenges, ranging from natural resource management to the governance of the Internet, require leaders to engage in multistakeholder processes. Yet, relatively little is known how to successfully lead such processes. This paper outlines a set of useful, actionable steps for policymakers and other stakeholders charged with creating, convening, and leading governance groups. The tools for success described in this document are distilled from research published earlier this year by Berkman and the NoC, a comprehensive report entitled “Multistakeholder as Governance Groups: Observations From Case Studies,” which closely examines 12 examples of real-world governance structures from around the globe and draws new conclusions about how to successfully form and operate governance groups.

This new publication, “Designing Successful Governance Groups,” focuses on the operational recommendations drawn from the earlier case studies and their accompanying synthesis paper. It provides an actionable starting place for those interested in understanding some of the critical ingredients for successful multistakeholder governance.

At the core of this paper are three steps that have helped conveners of successful governance groups:

Establish clear success criteria
Set the initial framework conditions for the group
Continually adjust steps 1 and 2 based on evolving contextual factors

The paper explores these three steps in greater detail and explains how they help implement one central idea: Governance groups work best when they are flexible and adaptive to new circumstances and needs and have conveners who understand how their decisions will affect the inclusiveness, transparency, accountability, and effectiveness of the group….(More)”

100 parliaments as open data, ready for you to use

Curated on August 10, 2015July 18, 2019 by Stefaan Verhulst

Myfanwy Nixon at mySociety’s blog and OpeningParliament: “If you need data on the people who make up your parliament, another country’s parliament, or indeed all parliaments, you may be in luck.

Every Politician, the latest Poplus project, aims to collect, store and share information about every parliament in the world, past and present—and it already contains 100 of them.

What’s more, it’s all provided as Open Data to anyone who would like to use it to power a civic tech project. We’re thinking parliamentary monitoring organisations, journalists, groups who run access-to-democracy sites like our own WriteToThem, and especially researchers who want to do analysis across multiple countries.

But isn’t that data already available?

Yes and no. There’s no doubt that you can find details of most parliaments online, either on official government websites, on Wikipedia, or on a variety of other places online.

But, as you might expect from data that’s coming from hundreds of different sources, it’s in a multitude of different formats. That makes it very hard to work with in any kind of consistent fashion.

Every Politician standardises all of its data into the Popolo standard and then provides it in two simple downloadable formats:

csv, which contains basic data that’s easy to work with on spreadsheets
JSON which contains richer data on each person, and is ideal for developers

This standardisation means that it should now be a lot easier to work on projects across multiple countries, or to compare one country’s data with another. It also means that data works well with other Poplus Components….(More)”

Why transparency can be a dirty word

Curated on August 10, 2015August 3, 2018 by Stefaan Verhulst

Francis Fukuyama in the Financial Times: “It is hard to think of a political good that is more universally praised than government transparency. Whereas secrecy shelters corruption, abuse of power, undue influence and a host of other evils, transparency allows citizens to keep their rulers accountable. Or that is the theory.

It is clear that there are vast areas in which modern governments should reveal more. Edward Snowden’s revelations of eavesdropping by the National Security Agency has encouraged belief that the US government has been not nearly transparent enough. But is it possible to have too much transparency? The answer is clearly yes: demands for certain kinds of transparency have hurt government effectiveness, particularly with regard to its ability to deliberate.

The US has a number of statutes mandating transparency passed decades ago in response to perceived government abuses, and motivated by perfectly reasonable expectations that the government should operate under greater scrutiny. Yet they have had a number of unfortunate consequences.

The Federal Advisory Committee Act, for example, places onerous requirements on any public agency seeking to consult a group outside the government, requiring that they are formally approved and meet various criteria for political balance. Meetings must be held in public. The Government in the Sunshine Act stipulates that, with certain exceptions, “every portion of every meeting of an agency shall be open to public observation”.

These obligations put a serious damper on informal consultations with citizens, and even make it difficult for officials to talk to one another. Deliberation, whether in the context of a family or a federal agency, require people to pose hypotheticals and, when trying to reach agreement, make concessions.

When the process itself is open to public scrutiny, officials fear being hounded for a word taken out of context. They resort to cumbersome methods of circumventing the regulations, such as having one-on-one discussions so as not to trigger a group rule, or having subordinates do all the serious work.

The problem with the Freedom of Information Act is different. It was meant to serve investigative journalists looking into abuses of power. But today a large number of FOIA requests are filed by corporate sleuths trying to ferret out secrets for competitive advantage, or simply by individuals curious to find out what the government knows about them. The FOIA can be “weaponised”, as when the activist group Judicial Watch used it to obtain email documents on the Obama administration’s response to the 2012 attack on the US compound in Benghazi…..

National security aside, the federal government’s executive branch is probably one of the most transparent organisations on earth — no corporation, labour union, lobbying group or non-profit organisation is subject to such scrutiny. The real problem, as Professor John DiIulio of Pennsylvania university has pointed out, is that most of the work of government has been outsourced to contractors who face none of the transparency requirements of the government itself. It is an impossible task even to establish the number of such contractors in a single American city, much less how they are performing their jobs.

In Europe, where there is no equivalent to the FACA or the Sunshine Act, governments can consult citizens’ groups more flexibly. There is, of course, a large and growing distrust of European institutions by citizens. But America’s experience suggests that greater transparency requirements do not necessarily lead to more trust in government….(More)”

ENGAGE: Building and Harnessing Networks for Social Impact

Curated on August 7, 2015May 29, 2019 by Stefaan Verhulst

Faizal Karmali and Claudia Juech at the Rockefeller Foundation: “Have you heard of ‘X’ organization? They’re doing interesting work that you should know about. You might even want to work together.”

Words like these abound between individuals at conferences, at industry events, in email, and, all too often, trapped in the minds of those who see the potential in connecting the dots. Bridging individuals, organizations, or ideas is fulfilling because these connections often result in value for everyone, sometimes immediately, but often over the long term. While many of us can think of that extraordinary network connector in our personal or professional circles, if asked to identify an organization that plays a similar role at scale, across multiple sectors, we may be hard-pressed to name more than a few—let alone understand how they do it well….

In an effort to capture and codify the growing breadth of knowledge and experience around leveraging networks for social impact, the Monitor Institute, a part of Deloitte Consulting, with support from The Rockefeller Foundation, have produced ENGAGE: How Funders Can Support and Leverage Networks for Social Impact— an online guide which offers a series of frameworks, tools, insights, and stories to help funders explore the critical questions around using networks as part of their grantmaking strategy—particularly as a means to accelerating impact….

ENGAGE draws on the experience and knowledge of over 40 leaders and practitioners in the field who are using networks to create change; digs into the deep pool of writing on the topic; and mines the significant experience in working with networks that is resident in both Monitor Institute and The Rockefeller Foundation. The result is an aggregation and synthesis of some of the leading thinking in both the theory and practice of engaging with networks as a grantmaker.

Compelling examples on how the Foundation leverages the power of networks can be seen in the creation of formal network institutions like the Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN) and the Joint Learning Network for Universal Health Coverage, but also through more targeted and time-bound network engagement activities, such as enabling greater connectivity among grantees and unleashing the power of technology to surface innovation from loosely curated crowds.

Building and harnessing networks is more an art than a science. It is our hope that ENGAGE will enable grantmakers and other network practitioners to be more deliberate and thoughtful about how and when a network can help accelerate their work…. (More)“

Print Wikipedia

Curated on August 5, 2015August 3, 2018 by Stefaan Verhulst

“Print Wikipedia is a both a utilitarian visualization of the largest accumulation of human knowledge and a poetic gesture towards the futility of the scale of big data. Michael Mandiberg has written software that parses the entirety of the English-language Wikipedia database and programmatically lays out 7600 volumes, complete with covers, and then uploads them to Lulu.com. In addition, he has compiled a Wikipedia Table of Contents, and a Wikipedia Contributor Appendix…..

Michael Mandiberg is an interdisciplinary artist, scholar, and educator living in Brooklyn, New York. He received his M.F.A. from the California Institute of the Arts and his B.A. from Brown University. His work traces the lines of political and symbolic power online, working on the Internet in order to comment on and intercede in the real flows of information. His work lives at Mandiberg.com.

Print Wikipedia by Michael Mandiberg from Lulu.com on Vimeo.”

The Data Divide: What We Want and What We Can Get

Curated on August 5, 2015August 3, 2018 by Stefaan Verhulst

Craig Adelman and Erin Austin at Living Cities (Read Blog 1): “There is no shortage of data. At every level–federal, state, county, city and even within our own organizations–we are collecting and trying to make use of data. Data is a catch-all term that suggests universal access and easy use. The problem? In reality, data is often expensive, difficult to access, created for a single purpose, quickly changing and difficult to weave together. To aid and inform future data-dependent research initiatives, we’ve outlined the common barriers that community development faces when working with data and identified three ways to overcome them.

Common barriers include:

Data often comes at a hefty price. …
Data can come with restrictions and regulations. …
Data is built for a specific purpose, meaning information isn’t always in the same place. …
Data can actually be too big. ….
Data gaps exist. …
Data can be too old. ….

As you can tell, there can be many complications when it comes to working with data, but there is still great value to using and having it. We’ve found a few way to overcome these barriers when scoping a research project:

1) Prepare to have to move to “Plan B” when trying to get answers that aren’t readily available in the data. It is incredibly important to be able to react to unexpected data conditions and to use proxy datasets when necessary in order to efficiently answer the core research question.

2) Building a data budget for your work is also advisable, as you shouldn’t anticipate that public entities or private firms will give you free data (nor that community development partners will be able to share datasets used for previous studies).

3) Identifying partners—including local governments, brokers, and community development or CDFI partners—is crucial to collecting the information you’ll need….(More)

Four things policy-makers need to know about social media data and real time analytics.

Curated on August 5, 2015May 29, 2019 by Stefaan Verhulst

Ella McPherson at LSE’s Impact Blog: “I recently gave evidence to the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee. This was based on written evidence co-authored with my colleague, Anne Alexander, and submitted to their ongoing inquiry into social media data and real time analytics. Both Anne and I research the use of social media during contested times; Anne looks at its use by political activists and labour movement organisers in the Arab world, and I look at its use in human rights reporting. In both cases, the need to establish facticity is high, as is the potential for the deliberate or inadvertent falsification of information. Similarly to the case that Carruthers makes about war reporting, we believe that the political-economic, methodological, and ethical issues raised by media dynamics in the context of crisis are bellwethers for the dynamics in more peaceful and mundane contexts.

From our work we have learned four crucial lessons that policy-makers considering this issue should understand:

1. Social media information is vulnerable to a variety of distortions – some typical of all information, and others more specific to the characteristics of social media communications….

2. If social media information is used to establish events, it must be verified; while technology can hasten this process, it is unlikely to ever occur real time due to the subjective, human element of judgment required….

3. Verifying social media information may require identifying its source, which has ethical implications related to informed consent and anonymisation….

4. Another way to think about social media information is as what Hermida calls an ‘awareness system,’ which reduces the need to collect source identities; under this approach, researchers look at volume rather than veracity to recognise information of interest… (More)“

Disrupting development with digital technologies

Curated on August 4, 2015October 10, 2018 by Stefaan Verhulst

Kemal Derviş at Brookings: “The emergence of a new digital economy is changing the ways in which businesses and development organizations engage in emerging and developing countries. Transaction costs have been radically driven down, enabling greater inclusion. And technology is driving efficiency improvements, and permitting rapid scaling-up and transformational change.

Three trends in particular have the potential to redefine how global development occurs and how efforts will support it over the next 10 years: (1) the growing adoption of digital payments serving people everywhere with near-frictionless transactions; (2) the spread of Internet connectivity and digital literacy; and (3) the harnessing of data to better serve the poor and to generate new knowledge….. Brookings commissioned six essays …present some of the most current information and thinking on what might be termed “digital disruption,” we are making them publicly available to stimulate wider discussion. The six essays and their authors are:

Will the digital revolution deliver for the world’s poor, Irving Wladawsky-Berger, Vice President Emeritus, IBM; Visiting Lecturer, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Ending poverty with electronic payments, Michael Faye, Co-Founder and CEO, Segovia Technology; Paul Niehaus, President, GiveDirectly
Networking the world for global opportunity, Alec Ross, Senior Fellow, School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University
Will the spread of digital technologies spell the end of the knowledge divide, Deepak Mishra, Lead Economist, World Bank; Co-director, 2016 World Development Report on Internet and Development
The future of work in the developing world, Marco Annunziata, Chief Economist, General Electric
Foreign assistance in the digital age, Ann Mei Chang, Executive Director, U.S. Global Development Lab, U.S. Agency for International Development…(More)”

Transform Government From The Outside In

Curated on August 4, 2015August 3, 2018 by Stefaan Verhulst

Review by GCN of a new report by Forrester: “Agencies struggles to match the customer experience available from the private sector, and that causes citizens to become dissatisfied with government. In fact, seven of the 10 worst organizations in the Forrester’s U.S. Customer Experience Index are federal agencies, and only a third of Americans say their experience with the government meets expectations.

FINDINGS: To keep up with public expectations, Forrester found governments must embrace mobile, turn big data into actionable insights, improve the customer experience and accelerate digital government. Among the recommendations:

Agencies must shift their thinking to make mobile the primary platform for connection between citizens and government. Government staff should also have mobile access to the tools and resources needed to complete tasks in the field. Agencies should learn what mobile methods work best for citizens, ensure all citizen services are mobile-friendly and use the mobile platform for sharing information with the public and gathering incident reports and sentiments. By building mobile-friendly infrastructure and processes, like municipal Wi-Fi hotspots, the government (and its services) can be constantly connected to its citizens and businesses.

Governments must find ways to integrate, share and use the large amounts of data and analytics it collects. By aggregating citizen-driven data from precinct-level or agency-specific databases and data collected by systems already in place, the government can increase responsiveness, target areas in need and make better short-term decisions and long-term plans. Opening data to researchers, the private sector and citizens can also spark innovation across industries.

Better customer experience has a ripple effect through government, improving the efficacy of legislation, compliance, engagement and the effectiveness of government offices. This means making processes such as applying for healthcare, registering a car or paying taxes easier and available with highly functioning user-friendly websites. Such improvements in communication and digital customer service, will save citizens’ time, increase the use of government services and reduce agencies’ workloads….(More)”