<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Public sector wikis</title>
	<atom:link href="http://psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/</link>
	<description>The public affairs practice in New Zealand</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 11:15:58 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mike Riversdale</title>
		<link>http://psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-327</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Riversdale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 03:14:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-327</guid>
		<description>I almost agree with Che's &lt;em&gt;If the tool becomes obsolete it will be because it’s not useful, not because it is neglected.&lt;/em&gt; - I would substitute the word "information" for "tool". As we know most people will struggle through a bad tool to get at available, findable and useful info ... if there is none of that "in it" then it'll wither and die.

And again, I would almost agree with Jason's &lt;em&gt;I am more the ‘trial it internally and then soft launch a beta version’ sort of person.&lt;/em&gt; - the trial is probably not (just) the chosen tool but the new approach, the new way of looking at this interaction with the public and being comfortable with the new "pointy bits" it may present to both the public and the agency.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I almost agree with Che&#8217;s <em>If the tool becomes obsolete it will be because it’s not useful, not because it is neglected.</em> - I would substitute the word &#8220;information&#8221; for &#8220;tool&#8221;. As we know most people will struggle through a bad tool to get at available, findable and useful info &#8230; if there is none of that &#8220;in it&#8221; then it&#8217;ll wither and die.</p>
<p>And again, I would almost agree with Jason&#8217;s <em>I am more the ‘trial it internally and then soft launch a beta version’ sort of person.</em> - the trial is probably not (just) the chosen tool but the new approach, the new way of looking at this interaction with the public and being comfortable with the new &#8220;pointy bits&#8221; it may present to both the public and the agency.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Ryan</title>
		<link>http://psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-320</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 06:49:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-320</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;A couple of obvious ones, from my perspective:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ol&gt;
&lt;li&gt;don't promote the site to mainstream media too early, or before you have built up a community of 'chaperones.'&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;be prepared to cede a degree of the editorial control to the community to foster those chaperones&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;think carefully about what volume of participation you can reasonably deal with, and manage people's expectations around that &lt;em&gt;in advance&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ol&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Like I said, we will get better at this. Launching straight into engaging with the public over a (potentially) contentious issue is probably a more courageous approach than I would advocate. I am more the 'trial it internally and then soft launch a beta version' sort of person.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A couple of obvious ones, from my perspective:</p>
<ol>
<li>don&#8217;t promote the site to mainstream media too early, or before you have built up a community of &#8216;chaperones.&#8217;</li>
<li>be prepared to cede a degree of the editorial control to the community to foster those chaperones</li>
<li>think carefully about what volume of participation you can reasonably deal with, and manage people&#8217;s expectations around that <em>in advance</em></li>
</ol>
<p>Like I said, we will get better at this. Launching straight into engaging with the public over a (potentially) contentious issue is probably a more courageous approach than I would advocate. I am more the &#8216;trial it internally and then soft launch a beta version&#8217; sort of person.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Jones</title>
		<link>http://psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-324</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Jones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 05:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-324</guid>
		<description>Thanks for these examples, Jason. I see from your post &lt;a href="http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2007/10/07/cost-of-social-media" title="The (real) cost of social media" rel="nofollow"&gt;The (real) cost of social media&lt;/a&gt; that

"The Police Act Review wiki ... was very quickly overwhelmed by the volume of contributions, resulting in it being shut down only days after it was launched."

What lesson have been drawn (or could be drawn) from this experience, for future such projects?

Regards
Tim</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for these examples, Jason. I see from your post <a href="http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2007/10/07/cost-of-social-media" title="The (real) cost of social media" rel="nofollow">The (real) cost of social media</a> that</p>
<p>&#8220;The Police Act Review wiki &#8230; was very quickly overwhelmed by the volume of contributions, resulting in it being shut down only days after it was launched.&#8221;</p>
<p>What lesson have been drawn (or could be drawn) from this experience, for future such projects?</p>
<p>Regards<br />
Tim</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Ryan</title>
		<link>http://psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-321</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2008 07:14:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-321</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks Tim. The &lt;a href="http://webstandards.govt.nz/index.php/Home_page" title="NZ Govt Web Standards Wiki" rel="nofollow"&gt;Web Standards Wiki&lt;/a&gt; is a good example of a public sector wiki that is open to contributors outside government. And I posted last year about the &lt;a href="http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2007/09/26/social-media-govt-consultation/" title="Post on govt consultation using social media" rel="nofollow"&gt;Police Act Review wiki&lt;/a&gt; that generated headlines around the globe when it invited the public to comment on changes to the Act.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;These examples prove that government here is not too risk averse to deploy these tools and would also suggest that our use of them will only improve in terms of both breadth of application and sophistication.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Tim. The <a href="http://webstandards.govt.nz/index.php/Home_page" title="NZ Govt Web Standards Wiki" rel="nofollow">Web Standards Wiki</a> is a good example of a public sector wiki that is open to contributors outside government. And I posted last year about the <a href="http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2007/09/26/social-media-govt-consultation/" title="Post on govt consultation using social media" rel="nofollow">Police Act Review wiki</a> that generated headlines around the globe when it invited the public to comment on changes to the Act.</p>
<p>These examples prove that government here is not too risk averse to deploy these tools and would also suggest that our use of them will only improve in terms of both breadth of application and sophistication.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Jones</title>
		<link>http://psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-322</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Jones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2008 01:31:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-322</guid>
		<description>What really interests me about public sector wikis is whether their users - and in particular, those users who can update content - need to be confined to the public sector. I can see a lot of value in wikis on topics such as sustainability, energy, and climate change which are hosted within the public sector, but have input from users on both sides of the public sector fence. They could even be used as a more open way of managing public consultation on policy papers - albeit with safeguards - but would such wikis fall foul of public sector risk management and/or the Public Records Act?

I'd be interested in your comment on this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What really interests me about public sector wikis is whether their users - and in particular, those users who can update content - need to be confined to the public sector. I can see a lot of value in wikis on topics such as sustainability, energy, and climate change which are hosted within the public sector, but have input from users on both sides of the public sector fence. They could even be used as a more open way of managing public consultation on policy papers - albeit with safeguards - but would such wikis fall foul of public sector risk management and/or the Public Records Act?</p>
<p>I&#8217;d be interested in your comment on this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fergus Hogarth</title>
		<link>http://psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-326</link>
		<dc:creator>Fergus Hogarth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 23:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-326</guid>
		<description>Good points. I have been pondering a number of uses for a wiki in my agency, mostly for discreete projects involving 5-50 people rather than enterprise wide. If anyone has an info to share about their experiences it would be great to hear from you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good points. I have been pondering a number of uses for a wiki in my agency, mostly for discreete projects involving 5-50 people rather than enterprise wide. If anyone has an info to share about their experiences it would be great to hear from you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Ryan</title>
		<link>http://psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-325</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 21:06:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-325</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks Che. Sounds like a good opportunity for a case study.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Che. Sounds like a good opportunity for a case study.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Che Tibby</title>
		<link>http://psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-323</link>
		<dc:creator>Che Tibby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:17:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2008/03/02/public-sector-wikis/#comment-323</guid>
		<description>In regard to resourcing, we are currently setting up a wiki with a very specific purpose. It's not there just for "information management", or as a "warehouse", but because it will become a vehicle to achieve an objective.

The idea is to mitigate entrophy by ensuring that a dedicated research team (the 1%ers you mention), are &lt;i&gt;required&lt;/i&gt; to use/maintain it. If the tool becomes obsolete it will be because it's not useful, not because it is neglected.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In regard to resourcing, we are currently setting up a wiki with a very specific purpose. It&#8217;s not there just for &#8220;information management&#8221;, or as a &#8220;warehouse&#8221;, but because it will become a vehicle to achieve an objective.</p>
<p>The idea is to mitigate entrophy by ensuring that a dedicated research team (the 1%ers you mention), are <i>required</i> to use/maintain it. If the tool becomes obsolete it will be because it&#8217;s not useful, not because it is neglected.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
