The Push for Gov 2.0 Technologies is Transparent

One buzzword that will forever be linked to 2009 is "Transparency." The topic has been associated with corporate governance for years, thanks in part to Enron and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. In government, advocacy groups have long been proponents for transparency, and recently organizations like the Sunlight Foundation have taken up the cause by advocating for the Internet as a means for mass transparency.

Most recently, the Obama administration has put openness in the forefront by issuing a formal memorandum on Transparency and Open Government. Sites like Recovery.gov and the upcoming Data.gov are examples of how the administration envisions using technology to provide open access to Government information. The memo concludes with a general call: "The independent agencies should comply with the Open Government Directive."

As Federal agencies wait in anticipation for the official Open Government Directive, there is much buzz around the use of 2.0 technologies as the answer. On the one hand, it’s impressive to see how the level of awareness about Web 2.0 has increased in government. Just two years ago I was trying to find a speaker in the Federal sector that could present a case study on using blogs and wikis. At that point a lot of folks couldn’t even tell you what a wiki was. Fast forward a couple of years and DC is all a twitter (pardon the pun) about Web 2.0. Now on GovLoop, a social network for government folks, “Government 2.0” is the most popular group with 3x more members than any other group in the network.

In light of the pending Open Government Directive, there is a palatable excitement among 2.0 devotees that this will be the event to spur government-wide transition to online collaboration. You can't go to a Web conference or attend a Web meeting without someone promising that Twitter and YouTube are the keys to transparency.

But, before we all jump on the 2.0 bandwagon, Web managers should stop and consider how these technologies ought to be used to reach transparency goals.  Web 2.0 does not automatically translate to openness. For example, creating a YouTube channel is one possible way to share information and solicit feedback. However, it may be the case that your particular audience hasn’t yet adopted You Tube (or Facebook or wikis or…) in which case a dedicated YouTube channel may not be worth the investment. Technologies like Twitter, blogs and wikis enable open dialog, but like most tools, it is the strategy behind the implementation that makes them effective. Web managers should first define the guiding principles for the Web then explore all the ways to meet those objectives.

Be leery of those promising immediate transparency by implementing the latest 2.0 bell or whistle. Over-indulgence in new technologies could potentially backfire. Too much information or poorly executed technology can be distracting making it even more difficult for citizens to find what they need.

As a best practice, Web managers should dedicate resources to continuously explore and test new technologies then roll them out in a way that is befitting the Web strategy.

Overall, this is an exciting time for government. The Executive branch has embraced openness and transparency and, at least so far, is putting the promise into action. We look forward to the coming changes and urge agencies to take this opportunity to re-think their Web strategy then define the best use of 2.0 tactics.