Tackling exclusion deserves an engaging approach

The UK Government's recent report Inclusion through Innovation has been generally well received, not least because it contains interesting examples of the social uses of technology, is the result of extensive research, and makes some bold claims. It deserves widespread discussion as well as recognition, but unfortunately the authors aren't offering us the chance to engage with them. I think that's particularly important in such a complex area.

Government Minister Jim Fitzpatrick says in his foreword that the report sets out to show "how ICT can be an enormously powerful tool for transforming not just the lives of the mainstream, but also of those who are on the margins of society." It's a claim we've heard a few times over the past decade, and hopefully we have learned from what actually happens that transformation isn't a technical fix.
While the report itself does say that "personal development and active inclusion in employment, social groups, and community participation can all be helped by technology" the action plan is mainly about ways in which local councils can extend e-government. It's generally about how government can get wider take-up of online services rather than how technology may, as it claims, transform people's lives. What it says about e-government services may be excellent - but it is only half the story. I think there's insufficient recognition that technology alone won't deliver transformation unless systems are designed with closer regard for those we aim to benefit, and the organisational changes necessary to bring changes into effect. It's pretty difficult to get that mix right through the research, consultation, analysis and presentation exercise indicated in the diagram, however well done. It needs working through with those trying to get it right on the ground. It needs continuing conversations as well as targets and tick boxes.
A few years back a report like this would have been discussed online by practitioners in forums like conet, once run by Communities Online. That forum has now disappeared - perhaps because one-time evangelists for community technology are now working within charities or as circuit riders grappling with the day-to-day problems of making the technology work. A good thing that is too.
In their place has arisen Citizens Online, which has been very successful in working with the technology industry and government in producing reports, running awards programmes, and developing projects like EverybodyOnline. I really admire what they are doing and their aim "to explore the social and cultural impact of the Internet on society". However in this case they appear to take the Government's rather narrow focus, and simply offer a ringing endorsement. John Fisher, chief executive, is quoted in the press release:

We very much welcome the Inclusion through Innovation report. It is an incisive document and there has been novel research, along with a useful capturing of in-depth issues and effective projects. We are pleased to see that Government has recognised the importance of the digital inclusion agenda. It must now grasp the opportunities presented in this report to ensure that the crucial joined-up work happens to make this a reality.

Both the report and the way it is being promoted feel a bit top-down and rather at odds with the subject matter. There's clearly room for debate here. I may have missed some crucial nuances in the report, misinterpreted the action plan - and misunderstood the whole thing. John may well be saying "good report - but we'll be watching to see if you can really deliver the social benefits". Unfortunately neither the SEU nor Citizens Online run a blog or forum where we - or any online citizens - can engage with them. It's presented as a done deal - now let's move on.
There is a proposal in the report for a new independent digital inclusion organisation "providing and stimulating leadership on delivery of good practice, and stimulating communities of users and leaders to promote discussion and understanding." Why not start that discussion now?
Disclosure: I was involved in starting Communities Online a decade or so back, so could be suffering from a touch of the 'good old days'. I'm about to start some work with Government departments on how civil servants can better engage with the public, so feeling more than usually evangelical on that front. I hope I can continue writing about public engagement while working with public servants, and encourage them to do the same. If Robert Scoble can blog across the boundary in Microsoft, it should be possible in the Whitehall village.
Comments welcome below, of course.

Comments

[Andy]

Interesting article

[Alan Moore]

Its interesting that you mention several organisations here that though community based offer no mechanism for feedback or debate. I thought that was what it was all about?

And Jonathan Schwartz COO of sun microsystems believes
blogging is not an appendage to Sun’s marketing communications strategy, it is central to it. He believes that the 1000 Sun bloggers contribution hasn’t just moved the needle for the company, “they’ve moved the whole damned compass. The perception of Sun as a faithful and authentic tech company is now very strong. What blogs have done has authenticated the Sun brand more than a billion dollar ad campaign could have done. I care more about the ink you get from developer community than any other coverage. Sun has experienced a sea change in their perception of us and that has come from blogs. Everyone blogging at Sun is verifying that we possess a culture of tenacity and authenticity.

Surely some lessons for whitehall there