Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Innovative HRSDC program Working in Canada has added another online point of presence – an embeddable widget.

Example of the Working in Canada widget in action

In addition to their social media presences, the Working in Canada team has now developed a code snippet that can be dropped on to any web page to allow access to the Working in Canada site. It’s a great way to spread awareness and distribute access points to the Working in Canada tool across the web.

It’s not fully self-serve (yet?) — if you want to add the widget to your site, you will need  to contact the program by email to request it.

The program appears to be doing some blogger outreach as well. I was contacted earlier this week by an analyst from the program alerting me to the launch of this latest feature. He pointed me to two examples of where the widget has already been deployed: www.peterboroughcareers.com and www.immigrationpeel.ca.

Social Networking at Work. Source: Unkown

I came across this infographic behind the GoC firewall. It’s timely given the recent discussions that have been occurring around the future of GCconnex, the GoC’s pilot social networking project.

So not sure of the graphic’s source, but it gives a pretty good breakdown of how social networking has value in the work environment (nitpickers: call it professional networking if you must).

So let’s walk through the chart, starting with the “seekers” side of the equation. With a socnet’s search capacity, I can solve the awareness problem much more quickly than by the usual freind of a friend approach of sending a “do you know of anyone…?” type email to friends and colleagues. And then, by checking out that person’s profile, I can get a sense of their competence before even contacting them. Similarly, by looking at their activity stream, I can see if they are the helpful, sharing type. And then I can contact them directly, or move on to the next prospect.

To me, the key difference here is one of degree — a social workplace lets me get to the answers I am seeking that much quicker and more easily. And the more open a social network is, the more broadly I can broadcast my need, again speeding up getting answers. Problem solved, on to the next one. Productivity win.

Looking at “contributors” column,  it goes both ways. By participating in a workplace socnet , I am opening up myself to the same kind of scrutiny as I apply to others when seeking. Which I think encourages professionalism and responsiveness — I know other socnet members will be evaluating my usefulness to them also, so there’s more impulse to reciprocate and participate.

Actually, I’d say this graphic looks too focused on the individual’s situation in the contributing column. It doesn’t get at the value to the organization very well. Social networking is not simply a means for civil servants to get ahead in their careers.  Rather, the wins on this side of the equation are more reputational — not merely personal rep either, but more significantly that of my team, my organization, and my community. All my actions reflect on the org I work for and the professional community I belong to, and that’s equally (especially)  true in the socnet context. So in terms of contributors, social networking is a great way to strengthen branding at multiple levels.

So two great selling points for GCconnex: making productivity gains and enhancing the public service brand.

New study from Ipsos pegs home Internet access among Canadians at 82%, a 6% increase from the second quarter of 2008. Frankly I am surprised that it is that low, given the importance of being able to get online. The digital divide lives. I wonder how this compares internationally?

Anyhow, here’s an interesting tidbit on the ways we use to access the Internet:

Dial-up access is in the last stages of use as only 8% of Internet-enabled Canadians access the Internet through this method, while about eight in ten are using some form of high speed access. Interestingly, there has also been a rise in the last 18 months of an ‘other’ category – widely suspected to be Mobile Broadband Sticks, Netbooks and Smartphone users.

via Internet Access in Canada Reaches All Time High.

So if dial-up is at 8% and broadband use at about 80%, this means that access via smartphone/netbook/Internet stick must be over 10%. In Canada, it looks like mobile internet access has surpassed dial-up.

Test Post

Just checking something out. Ignore pls.

Jakob Neilsen recently published research on usability evaluations of social networks and RSS feeds. Summary:

As the satisfaction ratings indicate, we have a long way to go to improve the usability of social network messaging and RSS feeds.

The problems start with something as simple as the choice of username. For example, the United States Department of Education’s Twitter ID was “usedgov,” which sounded to users like “used government” and was off-putting. Logos were often bad as well, particularly in the small rendering that some services offer. Users depend on the ability to scan down a stream to pick out logos and user names, but this basic need was often thwarted.

The shorter the message, the more important the writing. Don’t simply repurpose the first N characters of a longer piece of content. Too many corporate feeds didn’t bother writing for the medium and suffered accordingly, as users didn’t know whether to click the links (and therefore didn’t).

The good news is that we can only go up. Users do want these messages. In moderation. If they’re good.

“Usedgov” – Ha ha, Love it. If the feed in question was simply about repurposing existing content without re-working it, then in one sense, it is “used govt.” – Announcing our Twitter account: get yr slightly used govt content here folks!

Seriously though, looks like this study covers good practical issues to keep in mind when setting up our own social network presences.

Posted via web from Peter Smith’s Posterous

On 29th April Professor John Naughton, the first of our ‘Big Thinkers’, presented his view on the growth of internet and its implications for comms. He made 7 key points:

1. We need to see the ongoing changes in our digital ecosystem in some kind of long-term perspective. In that sense, what happened with print is probably the best historical analogy we have.

2. Most people still don’t understand the Internet. Firstly they tend to regard the Web and the Internet as synonomous. They’re not. The Net is the infrastructure on what everything else runs and is much bigger and more important. Because of its open and permissive architecture, it’s an enabler of disruptive innovation. Disruption is a feature of the Net, not (as politicians, content industries and governments believe) a bug.

3. Ecology provides a better analytical framework than economics for thinking about what’s going on.

4.The emerging digital ecosystem is immeasurably more complex than the one it’s replacing. Only those who can handle that complexity will thrive in it.

5. The Web isn’t static. On the contrary, it’s constantly evolving before our eyes. Examples: the amount of javascript programs that now run inside a single web page; mash-ups; RSS.

6. The network — not the PC — is now the computer in many contexts.

7. We need paradigms (mindsets, mental frameworks) in order to operate effectively. But paradigms also blind-side us. Thus to broadcasters the idea of “user-generated content” is an oxymoron. It can’t happen in their paradigm. So they didn’t see YouTube, Flickr etc. until it was too late. Ditto for newspapers and blogging.”

Just stumbled across the UK government’s Big Thinkers blog and this post caught my eye. Good summary of the big picture. i.e. what’s going on with the shift to digital.

BTW John Naughton is a perfesser type in the UK with a fancy title – “Public Understanding of Technology.”

He blogs at http://memex.naughtons.org/

Posted via web from Peter Smith’s Posterous

A bit late on blogging this, but anyhow.

Last week there were a couple of stories in the Ottawa Citizen (on Thursday and Friday) that touched on impartiality in the federal public service.

From the Friday story, titled Internet age a challenge to impartial public service:

The commission [ie, the PSC] concluded the young PCO analyst who posted his support for the Liberal party had crossed the line with “improper political activity,” but found no evidence that this affected his ability to do his job.

The employee wasn’t disciplined for his Facebook entry other than receiving a letter from the commission warning against “political activities” that could undermine his ability to do his job impartially — or leave that impression.

The unnamed bureaucrat wasn’t a senior executive but he did work for PCO, which has a more politically sensitive mandate than other departments.

Some thoughts:

1. Tempting to write this off as a PCO thing, since life is different at “the centre.” But that would be a mistake — especially for people working in communications and marketing, as we routinely bump up against the political/administrative divide in government. Impartiality is important throughout the bureaucracy.

2. Nor is it an age thing — leaving aside the fact that “young PCO analyst” is pretty ambigous, it is clear that social networking is increasingly popular among all workplace demographics.

3. In one sense, nothing has changed. Listing your political affiliation on a social networking site is analogous to wearing a party badge or political button on your coat. If you want to be seen as impartial, don’t do it.

4. Social networks like make it all too easy for this kind of thing to happen. When I signed up for Facebook, I remember that the “political affiliation” question was part of the registration process. Incredibly easy for an inattentive user to pick something that they will later regret since their focus is on getting signed up.

5. Yes social networking is redrawing the line between public/private. My rule of thumb – err on the side of caution and treat online participation as more public than private. I assume that how I present yourself online always has a an impact on my personal reputation and the reputation of my employer. (Writing this, it occurs to me that it’s probably no different in the private sector.) By the by, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner has been doing great work on privacy issues around social networking.

6. As cases like these start to pile up, it will be tempting to simply block off the social web in government workplaces. This would be a mistake, as not only would business value be lost, but it would just drive the activity “underground.” People will find a way regardless — so better to encourage responsible use than to make people do it behind your back. The recently reanimated StopBlocking.org has great info on why it’s better to allow your people access.

7. On policy: I don’t feel that new rules need to be invented. There’s enough policy out there already. I am in favour of education and guidance though — to help us navigate through this new and unfamiliar terrain. Whether in terms of reminding employees of their responsibilities as public servants or by having early adopters and leaders showing us how it’s done. Or creating a touchstone of some sort that interprets existing rules in the light of new realities presented by the social web (for this last one, I’m looking at you TBS).

Last week, the Government of Canada’s new “Language Portal of Canada” website popped up. It’s a site aimed at providing Canadians with “free access to the language tools that will enable them to use and understand both official languages more easily.”

What’s most interesting about this is that Termium Plus, the government’s gigantic translation dataset, is now freely accessible. Termium has long been a resource for public servants who couldn’t remember the official translations for program, agency or committee names, or who needed to know the other-language equivalents for technical terminology, or wanted to find out what obscure bureaucratic acronyms stood for.

How huge is this resource? Four million terms in English, French and, more recently, Spanish — that’s a gigantic pile of info. And it’s constantly being updated, with 50,000 modifications to the database annually.

Until last week, if you weren’t a GoC employee, you could only access Termium via an annual subscription that (if memory serves) was in the hundreds of dollars. This pretty much limited it’s use to professional translators and editors who could write it off as an expense. But now, anyone can get at it for free.

And if you’ve already paid your subscription for this year? You’ll get a refund:

Have you paid a subscription fee for TERMIUM Plus® this year?
If so, read this message.

If you paid to subscribe to TERMIUM Plus® and are eligible for a refund, you will receive a cheque in the mail by December 31, 2009. You do not need to contact the Translation Bureau: we know how to get in touch with you.

Thank you for your loyalty throughout the years.

So it’s great that such a huge government resource is now freely accessible to everyone. But why not take it further?

Here’s some ideas for future development:

  • offer up access to the database in machine-readable form so that third party developers can build interesting and possibly useful things from the dataset.
  • allow public contributions to the data set, so that it can be expanded and improved in an efficient way.
  • loosen licensing restrictions to maximize how far and wide the data can be reproduced and re-used.

(h/t David Eaves, who’s three laws of open data provide a convenient framework for thinking about how to develop government databases like Termium.)

Aside: Termium records are presented in a rather highly evolved interface, with URLs that are full of parameters. I wonder if the records can be spidered or indexed by search enginges?

Finally, some more info on Termium from around the web:

  • The press release, from October 8th.
  • Blog post from technical writer Diane Harms, pointing out that this also means that The Canadian Style is now freely available in searchable form.
  • Quickie story from ITBusiness.ca. Dunno about that $1.1B dollar figure, seems more than a tad high — I’ll bet that amount is for some larger pot of money out of which came the funding for this project.
  • Item on Digg.com from earlier this morning.
long been a key resource for public servants who needed to know definitions and other-language equivalents for technical terms, wanted to find out what government acronyms stood for, and couldn’t remember the official translations for program, committee or organizational names.

Older Posts »