While I rarely like to use my blog as a dumping ground of PDF’s, this one I really wanted to share with you. It was written by Toby Fyfe and Paul Crookall on behalf of The Institute of Public Administration of Canada (IPAC). The title of the report  is “Social Media and Public Sector Policy Dilemmas“. This is by far the most comprehensive and well written report on the subject this year. If you work for the Government, especially the Government of Canada, you need to read this.

The report was developed based on consultations with numerous stakeholders across the country and abroad. It covers among other things, access to information, security, leadership, records retention, privacy, and the need for a culture of trust. It talks a great deal about the biggest impediment to government use of social media, which I have mentioned numerous times in this blog, i.e. the “clay layer” of middle management and the hierarchical public service culture. The report also quite accurately segments public servants into zealots, collaborators and resisters (from a social media engagement perspective), which is exactly in-line with what I have experienced as a consultant for government. Most importantly however, it cites the numerous strategic and successful initiatives being launched across the country, which are now feeding into a growing list of best practices. This document should be on every senior leader’s desk.

Even though some of you may think that pointing out risks and dilemmas only slows things down, I am a firm believer that public sector organizations need to start looking at how the digital space affects the entire organization from a strategic perspective. Part of this process is risk-mitigation and understanding the cost-benefit analysis.  This is the only way we will move beyond merely playing with “shiny objects” and one-off pilot projects and actually start thinking about how the entire organization can benefit in the era of government 2.0.

I have stumbled across this RSA Animate video on a few occasions now, most recently on Kneale Mann’s thought-provoking blog, YouIntegrate. It’s an adaptation of Dan Pink’s talk at an RSA event. This video illustrates the hidden truths behind what really motivates us at home and in the workplace. I wanted to share it with you in light of what the Government of Canada is currently doing regarding innovation incentives.

The premise of the video is quite simple, but controversial nonetheless:

• For simple, rudimentary tasks, a monetary reward works as an incentive.
• For tasks that require conceptual and/or creative thinking,a monetary reward leads to poor performance.

What is the ultimate motivator in the workplace?

Autonomy, mastery, and sense of purpose.

Please don’t miss the very important point that this only applies once the issue of money is placed off of the table. In other words, your employees must first feel that they are being compensated fairly for their jobs.

It’s interesting to see that the Government of Canada is basically taking the opposite approach of what is recommended in this video by offering $10,000 cash bonuses for innovation.

I can’t wait to see the results.

I love open data initiatives; Especially when they are Canadian (my home turf). I wrote about the premise behind the Apps for Climate Change contest back in April, and now that we have submissions, I want to remind you to vote. The total number of submissions that met all requirements is 16, a huge success in my opinion given the infancy of apps contests in Canada. You can see demos and vote for your favourite apps here.

My vote went to the Etho App. An iphone application that “provides shoppers with relevant health, social & environmental facts on the spot to aid them in making ethical purchases”. I’m already addicted to apps like RedLaser, which allow you to scan bar codes for price information, so this would be a natural evolution of that by overlaying environmental data.

Which one did you vote for? Deadline is August 29th.

Earlier this summer, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada posted up their Twitter Policy. While a few other departments were already on it (such as the Get Prepared – PSC – Twitter Policy), this is the first one that is publicly posted in full detail rather than just in summary form [Correction 24/08/2010: Public Safety does indeed have its full Twitter policy posted here.] This is good news for all of you still stuck trying to convince the “clay-layer” of middle-management that Twitter can be used for significantly more strategic purposes than finding out what Justin Bieber is up to.

Why is this good news for government organizations? The majority of decision makers in government like to follow not lead.

By far, the hottest trend I am picking up right now as a consultant in this field is the need for guidelines/policies surrounding digital engagement. At the end of the day, these are merely reminders of existing policies and guidelines that employees are already supposed to be adhering to in day-to-day interactions with other people.  They are just updated and simplified to reflect the real-time digital information environment that we currently live in. Various proactive organizations have already begun creating these (or issuing RFP’s), while the reactive ones are waiting for something to come top-down (at a significant cost in terms of missed opportunities).

Want to create guidelines on your own? Browse the Social Media Governance Database and derive ideas from an existing template.

Those of you that know me personally, know that I like to be blunt, no beating around the bush. This isn’t always easy when dealing with clients, but is often necessary nonetheless. One issue I have run into on a few occasions now is organizations thinking that social media engagement is the be-it-end-all solution to all of their marketing problems. Usually the mentality behind this is that social media engagement will allow them to drastically increase awareness of their product/service at very little cost and have more people using it as a result.

Here’s a little wake-up call folks: “If your service and/or product sucks to begin with, engagement on the web is only going to amplify this”.

There are 4 P’s in strategic marketing: Product, Price, Place, and Promotion. All of which should be based on solid research and should be relevant to your target audience, especially your product/service. In many cases, public sector and non-profit organizations have a service or product that is simply not based on anything other than a mandate. For more on this you may want to read a post I wrote a while back entitled,  “How social media can bring strategic thinking back into government“.

Along comes the new and exciting world of social media and suddenly people think that everyone will want to talk about their offering if only they practice 2-way engagement. While I am a huge proponent of digital engagement, keep in mind that I also actively preach a strategic approach to it, not a “jump in the fire and see what happens” approach. Part of this approach includes understanding audience needs and modifying your 4P’s accordingly if need be. If you do decide to engage right a way, then instead of intercepting your audience with information about your service/product, try asking them what they think, and whether or not they have suggestions for improvement. Otherwise, key influencers in your audience may see your engagement as an opportunity to vent.

That being said, if jumping in the fire is the approach you are currently taking, don’t be surprised if you get backlash, instead embrace it with all your might. This could be the best piece of business intelligence that you will get for a long time (especially given what’s happening with the Census).

What do I usually suggest as a first step to organizations in a position to strategically approach social media?

Conduct a social media audit and gauge the tone and level of conversation surrounding your brand, product/service and your industry. You should then use this business intelligence to improve your 4P’s, especially your product/service.