Innovate or Evaporate -- GovMaker 2014

 

 

Today I attended the second day of the first annual GovMaker Conference in Fredericton, presented by The New Brunswick Social Policy Research Network (NBSPRN). The goal of the conference (organized in partnership with GNB and Toronto-based MaRS Solutions lab) was to connect innovators from government with open government champions outside of government…hackers, academics and other creative types…all with the goal of shaping the future of governance in NB.

Open data = structured data that is machine readable, freely shared, used and built on without restrictions

The benefits of open data:

1. creating jobs using open data and its commercial potential
2. improved service efficiency through linked data
3. new knowledge from combined data sources

Deputy Premier Stephen Horseman gave a great introduction, citing the new provincial government’s commitment to innovation. He talked about the idea of “innovate or evaporate” and how we can’t keep doing the same thing and expect different results (definition of insanity). He also talked about his government's commitment to “smarter government” which includes seeking solutions from the outside.

René Boudreau, ED at the NB Research and Innovation Council gave a bit of a synopsis of yesterday’s topics and spoke about the solutions that we are all looking for for our province and how they aren’t necessarily within government or corporations, but in the shared spaces. Apparently yesterday privacy was a big topic (ironically, as I was driving home tonight I heard about a security breach at Revenue Canada – I’m sure this is the kind of thing that makes people suspicious of open data, but really, to me it sounds as though we need to have much better privacy protocols in place…very little information at Revenue Canada should be made public…that is not the kind of information that open data is about). René also talked about how to be digitally literate and creating spaces where people play. And finally, he talked about not forcing people to use a particular system and how government should not waste money creating big, perfect systems…never rely on “pie in the sky” solutions. Gaining strong political will and creating a legal infrastructure are vital.

 

And then, the highlight of the day for me: Beth Noveck. Beth was the United States deputy chief technology officer for open government and led President Obama's Open Government Initiative, but she now directs The Governance Lab which strives to improve people’s lives by changing how we govern (and she speaks impeccable French (even though her bilingual 4-year-old refuses to speak French with her…I can relate to that!) – Jody Carr was there and told her that he loved her and thought she should be a honorary New Brunswicker!).

 Beth spoke of the Obama social media campaign and how powerful it was…and then how it all stopped on January 21, 2009…because of Windows 2000 and over zealous security that blocked all social media (and didn’t allow ANY open source software in the White House). She talked about the free speech concerns and the concerns around “forward leaning” – tipping bureaucrats’ and politicians’ hats on new policies – this was seen as provocative (basically, even though everyone talked about wanting to consult the public, this was not allowed – the public was only consulted when everything was finished. Suddenly, after this amazing social media campaign that helped get Obama elected, they went back to George W. Bush’s idea of open government (a YouTube video of the White House Christmas tree seen from the vantage point of Barney, the White House dog!).

 She talked about the fact that basically within the US government there is no meaningful transparency – it is still the “professionals” who work behind closed doors and public consultation only takes place after everything is basically done…the idea of “conversational bureaucracy” doesn’t exist.

 Beth then switched to English only (I loved that she spoke both languages – the repetition helped me a lot because she is a FAST talker!) and spoke about the idea that everyone is an expert at something and that government doesn’t have all the answers and needs citizen expertise (there have been one million volunteers on open street map since 2004 also see https://www.zooniverse.org/ ).

 Here are Beth’s 7 steps to change:

1. Vision – Change needs to be embraced at the highest level. This can be a lofty articulation (i.e., the U.K. has just said that all citizens will have electronic medical records in 2 years – no one knows how this will come about, but without a vision of what can be, nothing happens).


2. Transform the vision – This involves the legal frameworks, the policies the standards for open data. Laws that make it easier for government and corporations to work together. The idea, from a procurement perspective (one of the bigger hurdles) of writing an RFP to find the most innovative suppliers, not necessarily the one with the lowest price. This is also where the specific directions for implementation of the vision come in.


3. Platforms – All the information in open data must be findable. (She told the story that the IRS allows citizens to e-file their income tax, but then the forms are printed out, re-scanned, and then put on a CD…honestly!). She spoke about the need for tools to visualize (i.e., maps showing flood risks, where workplace safety issues are high, overfishing). As well, the idea of “liquid feedback” for government to work with citizens in new ways (not really sure what this means…anyone?). This is also where the focus on which data sets to incorporate comes in.


4. Community – Governments can’t re-engineer themselves without citizens. It is vital to bring new tech talent to the inside and to encourage citizens to collaborate with government, not just complaining about government. Openness by itself does nothing.  www.opengov.hub.com


5. Training & Learning – The need to create and breed innovators through all levels of government. The innovation must come from the bottom up, peer to peer. The need for public labs and innovation labs.


6. Evidence – This can’t be forgotten. Measurement is vital, as is collaboration with universities. Have to be able to show measurably better results (as a politician, I sure like this!). Also, she talked about how the FDR set up a new platform (expert networking software) to find people on the inside with the proper expertise to do the necessary research with clinical trials, etc. (I know, this seems self-evident, but apparently not…)


7. Faith – Belief, as much as evidence, is vital. Belief that a better government is possible, one that serves all citizens.
   She then spoke a bit about the fact that there is a lot of frustration at all levels – government, community and corporations, but that participatory bureaucracy is possible. Citizen engagement is easier in a smaller place (like Moncton or NB). Also, the fact that not all citizens will participate on-line is NOT a reason not to engage on-line. There needs to be a cultural shift…we tend to dis-equate citizens and professionals, and yet citizens need to be consulted on what they know (not just on their opinions and feelings). People are smart and we need to give them more ways to engage, so that they can help solve these big problems. (I know I get amazing feedback and ideas from citizens all the time.)
   David Alston was up next (Chief Innovation Officer at Introhive, Startup Advisor and Code Kids Advocate & Alternative Energy backer). David thinks NB’s size is a great advantage (our entire province is the 49^th largest city in North America). Small is good in this business because we can be agile and quick to make decisions. He thinks we should start thinking about citizens as the experts. But, what is the change that is needed? Unless we know where we are going, it is hard…so we need a big, hairy, audacious goal. His audacious goal? Make NB the greatest importer of millennials in the world. He talked a bit about millennials and how they want to do things that they like, they want to make a difference, they are passionate about change and they are digital natives. However, they also believe that they can do everything on their own (50% expect to create their own jobs…they have seen the state of the job market – they are an entrepreneurial-oriented generation) and don’t feel that they need government…they have kind of left government behind. However, they are also very interested in taking their talents and applying them in some way to solving the big problems (but it really doesn’t occur to them to involve government). They are the generation that will lead us out of our problems, but they will need to work with government…rebuilding this bridge is vital. (Personally, I think that lowering the voting age to 16 and having on-line voting is key here.) David spoke about the start-up culture that has a business model that involves breaking it and starting over if it isn’t working and a culture that embraces mistakes (just be transparent about them). It is all about trust and re-building the trust. It is also about empowering citizens to bring their skills to the table.
   One 27-year-old man spoke about growing up, always considering himself to be part of a global community, always concerned about the bigger global problems and less concerned about local problems. He would like NB to focus on solutions for humanity – millennials will react positively to trying to find solutions to things like catastrophic global warming, food security or moving from fossil fuels to renewables.
   I guess one of the big learnings for me today was to see in action the break-down of silos…and how vital that is, bringing many players across many sectors together. We’ve become very good at putting up boundaries “not my problem”. Unfortunately, this is a really bad practice and in some ways may have led to some of our problems getting so “big and hairy”.  It is so important to bring people together to have these conversations…people of different ages, aptitudes, risk tolerances, etc. And, I believe, it can be the informal networks that drive change.
   I think some good connections were made today, but I have to admit that I was a bit disappointed to see the average age (high) of those in attendance and the seeming scarcity of the “hackers and other creative types”. But at the same time, the message was delivered to the government decision-makers, and that’s important too. Bringing people together for this kind of discussion is a vital first step to change. Congratulations to all of the organizers that I know worked extremely hard to pull this off (I think I must have received at least 10 separate invitations...and of course, ice cream at break time, you simply can't go wrong with that!).
   The rest of the day was led by Jerry Koh, Innovation Manager and Foresight for Social Change at MaRS Solutions Lab. We did a number of interesting exercises in groups to generate ideas (but it’s late now and I need to go to sleep!). Let me know if you have specific questions (and any inaccuracies I've made...didn't have much time to do this!). Actually, I should be asking you: what can you do to help move the open government agenda forward in our city and province?
   
   
   Here is a fun video about open government.