5 Government Services to be Thankful For

I crusade for better online government service because I have seen what we can do, when we put our minds (and common sense) to it. Here are 5 examples of really great citizen services available right now.

1. Airport status and delays: I use this tool every time someone I know is flying. At a glance, you can see where airports are running behind, so you can adjust your expectations accordingly. Sometimes this service is more effective in predicting flight delays than the airlines’ own “flight status” tools.
2. Hold my mail: Most of us leave home on business trips or vacations, at some time. This convenient little service lets you take care of holding your mail – and releasing the hold – in seconds. I love its simplicity!
3. Find sex offenders living in your neighborhood: OK – this is a little clunky. You have to agree to the terms before you get to the form. Then the default search option is to search by a specific name. You have to figure out how to search by zip code, which – to me – should be the default. But all-in-all, it is easy to use; and the results are helpful. Good service for house-hunters, parents, and neighborhood watch groups.
4. Ask an expert about food safety: This is a pretty simple service that offers multiple ways to find out if the foods you are eating – or want to eat – are safe. It gives you options to call 24-hour, 7-day hotlines; type in a question and see if the FAQ database can help; or, within fairly tight time limits, chat online with an expert. You also can find out about food recalls and sign up for alerts. Turkey day…I’m thinking this might be a good URL to keep handy!
5. Real-time chat on USA.gov: I am a huge fan of real-time chat services. It lets citizens talk to a human being, when they can’t – or don’t want to - wade through all the printed material. It really makes you feel as though your government cares about you, personally. I’ve used the USA.gov chat a couple of times, and I found it pretty satisfying. I didn’t have to wait long in line. The reps were able to understand my questions fairly quickly. And they were able to point me in the right direction for answers, even if they couldn’t provide the answers themselves. Hours are weekdays only; but they do go until 8 pm ET, so people can still use the service after they get home from work. I wish every agency provided this service. And I wish it were available 24-7.

What do these services have in common? They have a simple purpose, and they’re easy to use (if not always easy to find). The people who wrote these web pages understand what citizens want and know how to provide it in ways that make sense to them.

‘Tis the season of thanksgiving – so I truly am thankful for these smart, effective, citizen-oriented services. And now, my Christmas list:  let’s see more!

Do the Service - Earn the Image

Two recent articles jumped out at me this week. The first is an article in Government Executive Magazine summarizing the results of a recent Gallup poll on citizens’ satisfaction with their government. They aren’t. The second was a blog piece by Alex Hawkinson on Social Media Today: “Why Customer Service Is the New Marketing.” OK. Let’s connect the dots.

Citizens aren’t happy with their government. Why? “The poll found that the most important factor in the public's satisfaction is an agency's ability to resolve problems reasonably. Other categories included, ‘Willing to work with me,’ and ‘Delivers on promises.’" In other words, the public wants better customer service. Though the article didn’t go on to define what that means, I’m guessing they want to find government services easily. They want straight answers when they ask questions. They want government to listen to them and react to what they’re saying in a personal way. They want to understand what the government says back, so they can use it to fix their problems. They want government to follow through – in a timely way. They want the government to be reasonable. That means reasonable from a citizen’s point of view – not government’s point of view.

So government has a bad image with the public, at least according to this poll. Hopefully, it wants to improve that image. How do you do that? Hawkinson nails it. If you want to promote yourself, then provide great customer service. You start with the great customer service. You earn the image. You don’t earn the image by trumpeting how great you are. You earn it by being great. Period.

Oh – by the way…according to the Gallup poll (and this is in line with what other polls have found), the number one way citizens interact with government is through the internet. That would be a good place to start.

One day, this will sink in. One day, some one or some group at a high enough level in government to make it happen is going to say, “OK – we get it, we care, and we’re going to do something about it.”

Please, oh please - do!

Related posts:
It’s Time for a Citizen Services Summit
Reality Bites
News Flash! Government Websites Are Not Newspapers!

Plain Language: the Key to Serving Citizens

I was an English major in college. My mom was an English teacher. All my life, I’ve valued words; and I always have believed that you communicate only when you choose the right words and put them in the right order. So from the day I became HUD’s web manager, my number one personal goal was to improve the way government talks to citizens. Make it easy. Make it conversational. Make it useful. Use the words citizens use.

When I met Annetta Cheek, from the Center for Plain Language, I found a soul mate and a cause that I could really get behind. Plain language – using words your audience understands – seems like such an obvious objective for government. If we don’t communicate effectively, we don’t serve effectively. And yet, we just don’t invest the time and energy to write plainly, especially on our websites.

In a recent survey sponsored by the General Services Administration (GSA), respondents were asked to choose 3 things that we could do to improve government websites. Number one answer (chosen by 62%)? Write in plain language.

Thursday, November 12, is World Usability Day. “Usability” is a simple concept: make things easy to use. And this year, “plain language” is the focus of World Usability Day. GSA is coordinating some wonderful FREE opportunities to learn more about usability and plain language. Take advantage of them!

Tomorrow - on World Usability Day - stop, take a look at your website, pick a page, and re-write it in plain language. Don’t think about it – do it. Challenge the other web managers and web contributors in your organization to do the same thing. At the end of the day, post those pages. And next week, pick a day and do it again. Make a commitment to rewriting at least the top pages and most-used pages of your website within the next 6 months. It’s the very best thing you can do for your audience. It’s the key to serving citizens.

Related Links
Plain Language Is a Win-Win-Win
Usability.gov
Plainlanguage.gov

It’s Time for a Citizen Services Summit

Last week, I published my assessment of what’s happened in the past year to implement the Federal Web Manager Council’s White Paper: Putting Citizens First – Transforming Online Government. Since then, I’ve been thinking about what could kick-start real progress in implementing the vision of this paper…and a broader government-wide commitment to Citizen Services. So here it is: I think it’s time to have a Citizen Services Summit. Bring together the best and brightest to tackle these challenges and get things moving.

What?

Pull together a few (no more than 50) top citizen services managers, advocates, and experts from within and outside of government for a one-day summit. Use the White Paper as the starting point – no point reinventing the wheel. And since data shows that citizens are accessing the government via the internet more than any other way, it makes sense to start by looking at services that are (or should be) delivered online. But pay special attention to that Recommendation 12 that calls for making sure citizens get the same answer no matter how they interact with government.

Rather than a gab-fest about what could be, make this a product-driven day, resulting in a plan – with specific follow-up actions. Keep the focus on improving citizen services, and discuss technology only within that construct. Hire a professional facilitator – one who can keep the group on course, with no personal agenda.

Who Should Be There?

Well, of course, representatives of the Federal Web Managers Council and some of the folks at GSA who are responsible for government-wide Citizen Services (Martha Dorris, Teresa Nasif, Bev Godwin, etc.). Representatives from OMB who deal with accountability and productivity. Representatives from the White House communications team (especially the New Media group). Representatives of the government Public Affairs Officers. Vivek Kundra and/or representatives of the CIO Council. People inside government who can make the outcomes happen.

And just as many people from outside government…because they can bring a fresh perspective and additional knowledge to the table. People like Gerry McGovern (international expert on web customer service), one or more established usability/user-centered design experts (Jakob Nielson, Jared Spool, Kath Straub, or others), web communication experts (like Ginny Reddish and Annetta Cheek, from the plain language movement), someone from Pew’s Internet and American Life project, someone from the American Customer Satisfaction Index, and key government advocates who are willing to get involved in action (like Craig Newmark). Make it a politically balanced group by including people like David Almacy, former Bush White House internet director. Maybe include some think tank folks who are studying how government serves citizens through the internet. Maybe a representative or two from other nations (like the UK or Canada) who are making real strides in improving citizen services online.

What Would They Do?

Start by looking at the evidence – what do we know about what citizens want from their government, online? Examine usability data and customer satisfaction data and other evidence. Then look at the current status – what’s working and what isn’t? But don’t spend too much time on this – it’s not rocket science. We don’t need more debate – we need action. Give participants some (or all) of this background before the summit and tell them it’s “homework.” Use the in-person time to craft strategy and plans.

Establish some ground rules, like “check political agendas and sales pitches at the door” and “data and evidence about what citizens want and need will trump what we THINK they want or need” and “great service is job one – period.”

Go through the White Paper, identifying exactly what needs to happen to implement each recommendation (e.g., issue a memo or train staff) and, as important, who needs to act to make it happen. If you hit a contentious issue, table it for the time being; and come back to it later. Make this a positive, results-oriented, collegial gathering.

At the end of the day, recap the actions planned, make sure everyone knows what he/she has agreed to do to help, and put the plan in writing. Share it widely and publicly. Track completion.

How Do We Set This In Motion?

I’m thinking GSA, with its government-wide “citizen services” mission, is the logical organizer/convener. The Web Managers Council has to be involved in all aspects, from identifying invitees to developing the background data and information to articulating the status and barriers to implementation of the White Paper. Web Managers have a huge amount of knowledge to share. Advocates outside government can help by endorsing the idea in blogs and Tweets and talking to their friends inside government, to encourage action. And raising their hands to join in.

The White Paper laid out a vision that we all should support – a vision that requires a real cross-government (and, in some cases, maybe beyond government) commitment to working together to fix problems, break down barriers, and do what needs to be done to make U.S. government websites the most citizen-friendly service outlets in the world.

Let’s not just talk about it – let’s do it!

Web Manager Council’s White Paper – Is There Progress A Year Later?

About a year ago, the Federal Web Managers Council published a terrific White Paper entitled: Putting Citizens First – Transforming Online Government. Their analysis and recommendations were based on the many years of experience and observations of this highly-skilled, highly-committed cadre of public servants. The White Paper was presented to the Obama transition team in November 2008 and published on Webcontent.gov. It received high praise from key players, open government advocates, and web experts, both inside and outside government. The government web manager community was optimistic that real change was on the way. So, I wondered…has anything changed in the past year to make government websites more citizen-focused?

To recap, the White Paper envisioned that when the American people use government websites, they would find:

• Easily identifiable, relevant, accurate, and up-to-date information;
• Well-written content that they understand the first time they read it;
• Common easy-to-use tasks that many of them seek;
• The same answer whether they use the web, phone, email, live chat, read a brochure, or visit in-person;
• Feedback on their ideas, including what the government will do with them; and
• Critical information, accessible to them if they have a disability or aren’t proficient in English.

It went on to make 14 critical recommendations, to achieve that vision. Let's see how they're doing on each.

Recommendation 1: Fund “virtual” office space as part of agencies’ infrastructure. Until the Obama administration has an opportunity to complete a budget cycle, we won’t know the result of some recommendations – like this one. We’ll pass for now.

Recommendation 2: Appoint an editor-in-chief for every government website, and make sure prime space on government websites is dedicated to information the public wants and needs. I hear there is a list of .gov domains (though the public can’t access it). I also heard that the transition team collected some data about websites, last spring, though I don’t know what’s been done with it. As far as I know, there still is no comprehensive, reliable list of all government websites (including .edu’s, .com’s, .org’s, and any others), so there’s no way of knowing if each official site has a designated editor-in-chief. This recommendation should be a top priority because without highly skilled web editors-in-chief at the helm, working together across agencies, it’s pretty tough to implement other important changes to improve government websites.

On the second part, I fear we’re losing ground. A number of government websites are using “prime real estate” (usability experts say that is the top left-hand quadrant of the computer screen) to publish news about the initiatives of the agency/administration – not to help the public find the services or complete the tasks they want and need. In some cases, we’ve even seen agencies move top citizen tasks out of prime real estate down to less-viewed areas. Score: minus 1.

Recommendation 3: Develop job descriptions and training requirements for web content and new media jobs. To my knowledge, there has been no movement to create standard job descriptions for web managers. Several years ago, the Web Managers Forum developed a draft job description, so there’s a starting point. This action probably is not a top priority, but it certainly is an important step toward improving web governance. We’ve had government websites for 15 years now. It’s hard to believe there’s no official web content manager job description. GSA and the staff at Web Manager University are working on core training requirements, so that’s positive action. Score: ½ point

Recommendation 4: Identify core customer tasks, and develop performance standards for those tasks. This has been the goal of the web manager community for several years. Regrettably, I haven’t seen much progress (Homeland Security’s recent commendable home page update excepted). This is a high priority, and all it really takes to get it going is political will. Score: minus 1.

Recommendation 5: Use social media to create transparency and help people accomplish their tasks. Lots of good news here. Many agencies are using social media/web 2.0 to market their wares, and GSA has done a terrific job spearheading an effort to develop terms of service agreements with social media site owners to facilitate that progress. Kudos! The Web Managers Council established a sub-council to build best practices, sample policies, and strategies. All good. Score: a big plus 1. I’m looking forward to seeing these tools used for real, substantial two-way collaboration.

Recommendation 6: Develop guidelines for disseminating content in universally accessible formats. Vivek Kundra seems to be pushing the envelope on offering data in accessible formats, at least in terms of the data provided through data.gov. It’s the tip of the iceberg, but it’s a good start. Score: plus 1.

Recommendation 7 – Set stricter standards for approving new, or renewing existing, government websites; and designate a lead agency to coordinate content common to multiple agencies. Team Obama quickly “got it” that 24,000+ government websites is a ridiculous waste, not to mention confusing to citizens. But since many new sites have sprouted in the past few months, with no apparent commensurate weeding out, the massive mess of government websites continues to grow. Not good. We need better controls. More websites do not make better government. Serious slippage – not progress – on this one. Score: minus 1.

Recommendation 8: Conduct regular reviews to ensure web content is accurate, relevant, mission-related, and written in plain language. Archive content that isn’t used frequently. Do some/many/most agencies have formal review processes? I don’t know (I doubt it). But spend a few minutes on most any government website, and you’ll see that there’s been little progress in writing in plain language. Plain language specialists tell us when your primary audience is the general public, you should write at an elementary reading level. Look at a few pages on a government website. Is the writing clear? Is it written at the appropriate level? If you don’t communicate well, you don’t serve well.

A couple of agencies are working on - or considering -archives for outdated or less-used content (HUD recently introduced the long-planned archives.hud.gov), but that’s not a groundswell.

Improving the quality of government web content is a big deal, and it should be a priority. There are plain language trainers in the government and many great web writer-editors. A mandate would help, but web managers and web contributors don’t need to wait to be told to do this. Score: minus 1.

Recommendation 9: Follow the best practices in web search. Web Manager University offers courses Search Engine Optimization. But, again, good writing practices (especially using key words) is a huge part of SEO. And – back to Recommendation 8…not seeing improvement there.

Recommendation 10: Solicit public opinion and analyze customers’ preferences. Do user testing before releasing major improvements to any current website or launching a new website. Several agencies are using customer satisfaction surveys, and some agencies have found ways to seek public comments about their websites and/or services. Nothing new there.

But user testing clearly is not happening (or if it is, you aren’t listening). Many of us have been surprised to see obvious usability problems on some of the new and radically revised governmentwide sites. With all the usability help available (GSA has a usability specialist on staff, HHS has a usability testing lab, usability.gov has a ton of information and resources, and Web Manager University has faculty who are usability specialists), there really is no excuse for creating government websites that are anything less than state-of-the-art in terms of usability. This should be a no-brainer. U.S. Government websites should be the most easy-to-use websites in the world. They’re not. Score: a big minus 1!

Recommendation 11: Publish a summary of common customer comments and explain resulting actions. The White House has done a good job posting public comments on their specific public participation initiatives – they should be applauded. Score: plus 1. I haven’t seen much of that on agency sites. Much more work to do on this.

Recommendation 12: Provide multiple ways for people to contact government, and ensure information is consistent across all channels. While nearly all agencies advertise multiple ways to “contact us,” I don’t know of any efforts to ensure that the answer you get is the same, no matter how you ask the question. It would be interesting to do a little testing (and maybe I will).

Recommendation 13: Establish standards and guidelines and fund staff for multilingual websites. This is largely a funding issue, so I’ll withhold judgment on that one for a few months. We’ll see what happens once all the agencies receive their FY 2010 full appropriations.

Recommendation 14: Make government websites fully accessible to people with disabilities. Government web managers and CIOs have been keyed to this issue for many years and are trying mightily. The whole social media/web 2.0 initiative presents a new wrinkle. Need to keep working on this.

Bottom Line

Good progress in a few areas. Painful slippage in others. The jury’s still out where recommendations required funding. So what needs to happen next? Three things.

1. Web managers should move out on those things they can make happen themselves, like starting to re-write the most critical content in plain language and doing usability testing. Neither of those things needs to cost anything more than a shift in priorities and time. Resources are available within government to help. Many of you have taken my course – use that simple writing quality review exercise to get you underway. Step into the void, web managers!
2. The Web Managers Council needs to look at the White Paper again and nudge action. What needs to happen to implement each recommendation? What needs to be done first? Think about whom, in the higher echelons, can make the decisions to implement these recommendations. In some cases, it could be GSA. In others, it might be someone at OMB or the White House. You know who the players are now, so help them know what you need them to do. If someone needs to issue a memo, draft it. If someone needs to meet, try to set it up. Get the data the transition team collected – maybe that will help you form your strategy. Let your bosses and advocates know what’s going on so we can help.
3. Those who thought this White Paper was good in the beginning should act. If you’re inside the government, do what you can to help web managers cause these changes. If you’re outside the government, blog, talk to your high-level friends, and stir the pot to get these critical issues resolved.

This White Paper was darned good. The Federal Web Managers Council worked hard to think this through and get it right. These are changes that, if adopted across government, truly can improve citizens’ experience with their government. Lots of people agreed on that, months ago. Let's not let this drop.

PS – if progress is occurring that I’m not aware of, I hope you will leave a comment!

Reality Bites

Once in awhile, I come across a real life story that serves as a perfect reminder that the federal government still has much work to do to make citizen services easy to use. A good friend passed along this recent experience, when he tried to go online to make a tax payment. Maryland made it very easy for him to complete the task. The IRS…well, not so much. But I’ll just let him tell the story in his own words.

For Maryland, I logged into www.marylandtaxes.com. In something like 4 or 5 clicks, I found the right place to pay the taxes online. A quick check for bank routing numbers and a calculation of how much we should pay, and we were all done. No muss, no fuss…took me all of maybe 15-20 minutes.

So now, on to Federal.

I began by going to irs.gov. I forget how long it took me to find the payment links. I just know it took me a while--a long while. (It's actually on the front page, but how anyone would know you want EFTPS, I have no clue.) I then go to the EFTPS website, which is the “Electronic Federal Tax Paying System.” Oh, but I'm not actually there. It's a page talking about EFTPS. I have to click on the link and then on the other link saying I acknowledge I'm leaving the IRS site (to go to another IRS site!)

I get to www.eftps.gov and click on the link to make a payment. But, I need to login. Ok, so I have to "Enroll" to get a login. (Um, you know this is for a single payment, right? But, never mind...). So, I click the link to enroll (buried at the bottom of the page), then the link acknowledging the privacy act, then realize I’m on the page for “businesses.” I back out and notice at the top of the first page that there's a radio button I have to change to “individual.” Ok…so click the radio button, go to the bottom of the page, click the next button, acknowledge the privacy act again, and just that easily I get to the form to fill out to enroll.

Are you still with me?

Ok, at that top of the form is the statement that it takes up to 15 days to enroll. I can't make a payment yet. They have to enroll me and it could take up to 15 days. So, I fill out the form and hope for the best. A few weeks later, I get a notice that I'm enrolled and here's my PIN. Great, I'll go pay our taxes!

Umm, no. I go back to the EFTPS site to try to make a payment, but I have to sign in. It asks me for my SSN... check, I know that one. Then my PIN... check, got that in the mail. Then my "Internet Password." Password? I never set a password. So, I click the link for "Need Internet Password." It gives me a phone number for a voice mail system that tells me to call this other number for a different voice mail system to be issued my internet password. I dial the other number, key in my SSN, my PIN, and my Tracing number and they give me a temporary password.

Remember, how this all took me about 15 minutes to do with the State of Maryland?

So, I go back to the EFTPS site again, type in my SSN, my pin, and my temporary password and am successful. Well, successful in getting to the page to set my permanent password. Which, of course, has to be between 8 and 12 characters, contain at least one capitalized letter and one lower case letter, numbers and a special character (but only certain special characters). After two tries I finally get it to accept a password, and then I'm logged in. Great... I think. Now, to pay those taxes!

First I have to pick which form to use, put in my information, tax year, "effective date" (?) and hit submit. Voila! Taxes paid.

Can you guess which government entity I'd prefer to pay my taxes with electronically? The only reason I'd use the federal online system again is I can't imagine how complicated this would be if I had to deal with offices and people.

If you’ve read my other blog posts, you know I’m adamant that government agencies need to focus like a laser on making their top citizen tasks easy to find and easy to use. That’s how you earn public trust. That’s how you make citizens proud of their government and satisfied that they’re getting their money’s worth, when they pay those taxes. If you had any doubt that I’m telling the truth, go back and read my friend’s story again. That’s reality, folks.

How Do We Measure Success?

One of the smartest government web managers I know, Gwynne Kostin, published an interesting blog piece yesterday, pointing out how numbers may not measure what you think they do. The ever-astute Sarah Bourne,a government web manager at the state level, added a comment to Gwynne’s post, echoing those concerns and adding that measuring what really counts – achieving a task – is tough to do. It got me thinking: how do we measure the success of government websites?

Seems important to start by understanding what government websites are supposed to do.

• Provide services to the public. We’re talking about the services that taxpayers pay for and that are the mission of government agencies.
• Offer opportunities for citizen engagement and collaboration. This is the whole Gov 2.0 frontier that web 2.0/social media has opened.
• Help make government transparent by publishing the most critical information, decisions, and data that the public wants and needs.

So…how do you measure a website’s effectiveness at carrying out those objectives? Here are some ideas.

Objective: Provide services to the public

Measure 1: How long does it take to complete (successfully) the most critical tasks/services?

As a reminder, most people who come to government websites come for a purpose – to do something, to complete a task, to use a service. They have busy lives; so they want to get in, get it done, and move on as fast as possible. Government’s job is to make those services easy to find and easy to use. So measure how long it takes an average person to use those services and then see if you can make it easier, faster.

Some of you will recognize this as usability testing. Pick your 3-5 top services/tasks, and run routine scenario tests of a half dozen (or more) typical users.

“You want to buy a home and don’t know how. We’re going to watch you find the answer on HUD’s website. We aren’t testing you – we’re testing our website. Tell us what you’re thinking as you go through the process.”

How many wrong turns did they take? What words didn’t they understand? Can you cut steps? Can you organize it better? Can you use other words to help them find the right path, get to the right result, faster? Measure how long it took them to complete the task. Then make improvements and see if you can trim that time.

Objective: Citizen engagement/collaboration

Measure 2: Percent of ideas considered and adopted.

Citizen engagement isn't just asking for input. It's doing something with it. Does it matter if a million people contributed ideas, if you don’t accept any of them? Does that make citizens feel part of their government? Does that increase public trust? On the other hand, if only 10 people contributed ideas, but you adopted 6 of them, isn’t that what collaboration is all about? Isn’t it about working together to make government better?

I know. Sometimes we get ideas from the public that just seem silly or are obviously (to us) unworkable. I wonder - is that their fault or is it partly our fault for not really collaborating…for not giving them enough background and guidance so that they can submit ideas that are possible and useful…for not giving them enough opportunities to discuss ideas – go back and forth – so the outcome can be a legitimate option?

It seems to me that the goal of engagement and collaboration is to come up with – together – positive outcomes. So I’d measure success by the percent of ideas accepted. And I’d make it my goal to improve the collaborative process so that percentage of positive outcomes increases over time.

Objective: Transparency

Measure 3: Percentage of data systems available to the public.

Yes, I know that transparency isn’t only about data. It’s about decisions and ideas under discussion, too. But I don’t know how to measure those. I do know that every agency is supposed to have (and publish) an inventory of all its data systems. So what percent of those systems (or the data from those systems) is available to the public?

And A Fourth Measure

My friend, Jeffrey Levy, at EPA ran an interesting little contest a couple of weeks ago. He asked us to guess what percentage of the EPA website is viewed at least 100 times a month. The answer? 3%. Does that number seem stunning to you? Probably not, if you’re a government web manager who routinely reviews his/her stats.

And there’s the flipside…what percentage of the website isn’t viewed EVEN ONCE during a month? I’ll bet it’s higher than you think.

Maybe one of our goals should be to improve that ratio. Increase the percentage of the website that is used often, and decrease the percentage that isn't used at all. Focus our resources on making the most-used content truly great. And stop wasting resources maintaining content that is never used. Make that content available upon request. I think citizens would view that as a good value and responsible government. So…

Measure 4: Percent of the website used by at least 100 people every month compared with percent of the website not used at all.

Why do we care about numbers? For bragging rights? To compare ourselves to others? Or to help us make our websites better? I’m going with that last one. Gwynne is right. Numbers can be deceiving. Let’s use numbers that really measure our success in doing the things that matter.

News Flash: Government Websites Are Not Newspapers!

Last week, I was talking to a friend who is a private sector usability specialist. I asked her if, like me, she is noticing that some agency websites seem to be slipping backwards, featuring agency news rather than top citizen tasks on their home pages. She said that, indeed, she and her colleagues are observing the same thing. It appears that agency public affairs staffs are really getting into websites (and web management) – which is a good thing – but they haven’t yet learned this truth: the public comes to government websites to do things – perform tasks - not read the news. They go to newspaper sites for that.

I can appreciate the learning curve. I also can appreciate that Public Affairs folks have a different mandate than agency Web Managers. Public Affairs is responsible for marketing. Their clients are the agency chiefs. Web Managers are responsible for making sure websites serve the public. Their clients are the audiences. So the disconnect is understandable.

But here’s the thing: turning government agency websites into newspapers is not what the public wants or expects. As important, it is the antithesis of what President Obama has urged of all government: participation, collaboration, responsiveness to/trust in the citizens who ARE the owners of government.

Putting news and press releases as the featured items at the top of government websites shouts, “me, me, me” – not “you, you, you.” It is not furthering transparency – it’s obscuring service and engagement. In several cases, I’ve seen agency news (including photos of agency officials) crowding out and pushing down links to what the public really wants – top tasks..those services that they pay taxes for. This is a step backward.

There's no blame game here. People are just trying to do their jobs with all the tools available. The point is that you need to recognize the trend (because we who are looking at you certainly see it) and stop it in its tracks before it gets worse. Maybe you Web Managers invite Public Affairs Officers to some briefings on the facts that you have…the data and evidence (site traffic statistics, usability data, customer satisfaction data, performance measures, emails from the public) that shows conclusively what the public wants from their government websites. If you are a Public Affairs officer, maybe you ask for such a briefing. Maybe you bring in some noted authorities on the subject of government websites and usability research and let them present their findings to the Public Affairs Officers and agency chiefs and Web Managers, together, so there can be a good discussion about how government websites should be used to serve and engage the public and achieve the President's goals.

Successful websites are audience-centered. That’s not an opinion – that’s a fact. So please…let’s get our government websites back on track. Let’s use them for service and engagement and collaboration – not as surrogate newspapers. Let’s make them shout “you, you, you.” It’s the right thing for the President’s objectives. It’s the right thing for the American public.

Related Links
What Is the Role of Government on the Web? (3 parts)
Government website survey: from organization-centric to citizen-centric

Holding Out for a Hero

Remember that song from “Footloose” – “Holding Out for a Hero?” I’ve been humming that song all day. Maybe that’s all the government web manager community really needs: a hero.

In the very early days of web management at HUD, I had a pivotal meeting with then Deputy Secretary Dwight Robinson to decide where the Web Team should live, organizationally. The web team had come-to-be in a small special projects staff in the Office of the Secretary, but we thought it was time to find a more permanent home. At that meeting, Dwight decided he didn’t want to put the web team either in the CIO’s office or in Public Affairs. He liked the way we were “entrepreneurial” (his word) – working across the agency, organizing and fostering collaboration to create our “one HUD” website - and thought that was the best way for us to stay. So he decided we would report directly to him. And then – as I sat there with him – he picked up the phone and called each Assistant Secretary, telling them exactly what he expected them to do to support the agency web team. After that, he left us pretty much alone. When we hit a real snag – one we just couldn’t solve on our own – we could go to him, and he’d pick up the phone and solve it. Beyond that, he let us do our jobs.

Dwight was my hero. He understood the value of our grassroots operation. He also understood the need for a hero.

Web Managers are much like Community Organizers. We're out there beating on doors, trying to stir up new ideas for using the internet to serve citizens. We’re breaching silos…getting people to work together across organizations and across government to create good, consolidated audience-centered web content. The most successful among us are those who stay loose, working directly with managers and staff as needed, respectful of - but not mired in - pecking order. In fact, it’s when we get locked into a hierarchy (silo) that we get stymied. Armed with our passion to improve service to citizens, we've caused governmentwide change - not through delegated management authority, but through critical mass.

It actually works pretty well - except when some higher up who fails to appreciate the body of knowledge that goes into good web management and/or the fact that government websites should be citizen-focused wants to do something harebrained. Then, we have no advocate or authority to counter that. That's where our grassroots structure fails. That’s when we need a hero.

Here's the thing. Government doesn't know what to do with a grassroots operating structure. I think that's why, after nearly 15 years, we still have no official "web manager" job classification in the federal government or a standard web governance structure. What other function can you think of that has knocked around government that long without a handbook on how it will be done? But how does government condone that kind of management? How does government live with that kind of ambiguity?

So, you may wonder, what about all that talk in my earlier posts about needing a Chief Web Officer at OMB? Have I changed my mind? Maybe. Still pondering. What I do believe is that our grassroots operation has worked pretty well up to now. Maybe we should be glad there’s no official line manager at OMB (or anywhere else) that pigeon-holes us in a hierarchy. Look how much we’ve accomplished just by banding together and building critical mass. Maybe all we really need to do is look for that hero.

My Web Design Pet Peeves

Normally, I try to make these blog posts pretty positive. But today - I’m grumpy. I just finished going through more than 50 government websites (at all levels of government), to prep for a couple of web management courses I’m teaching soon; and way too many of them have some really bad design habits that frustrate the heck out of me. So - in hope that some web manager will read this, recognize one of these offenses, and fix it - here they are, friends…my current top three web design pet peeves:

1. Large photos or graphics billboards in the top left/middle of the home page that cycle through 3-5 different views. Why in the world has this trend caught on? Why in the world would web designers think that a web audience wants to sit there for 10, 15, 30 seconds or more, waiting for these things to cycle through? Honestly, I just want to scream when I see one of these images (and they seem to be all the rage these days).
   Have you ever actually talked to people who are trying to use your website to find out if we like this practice? Yes – a picture often can be worth a thousand words. But why do you waste important front page space – space that could be used to get me to what I really want – to show me pretty pictures or tell me cute little stories or show me what YOU think should be important to me? It makes me think you don’t know (or care about) what I want to do on your website. Enough. Use Amazon or Google or Craigslist as your model – be utilitarian. Pretty pictures do not make me like you better. Efficiency – helping me get to what I want – makes me like you better. (Oh - and PS...I made this same design mistake several years ago when I managed the HUD website. And I got the same feedback I'm giving you now).
2. Photos of government agency officials. I thought we’d dealt with this problem long ago, but – no – they’re still all over the place. So here’s the thing, agency heads. You don’t own that agency. We - the people - own it. It isn’t your agency. It’s our agency. If we want to know who’s currently serving us as head of our agency, then we’ll go to the “about this agency” page. Please don’t use our websites for personal publicity. It’s incredibly annoying.
3. Welcome messages. So passé. We don’t want or need to be “welcomed” to your website. Do you think your welcome will make us stay longer? No. All it does is waste space and give us more words to wade through, trying to find what we came for. Please – spare us.

I beg of you, government web managers (and/or those who tell government web managers what to do)…do some usability testing. I’m pretty sure you’ll find out that most of us don’t want this junk cluttering up our government websites. Fast, efficient, effective service – that’s what we want. Amen

Creating An Agency Web Strategy – How You Do It Is As Important As What You Do

About 10 years ago – toward the end of the Clinton administration – I got a memo from HUD’s Deputy Secretary directing me to lead an agency-wide Web Management Task Force to develop a comprehensive web strategy for HUD. I was totally surprised and deflated! Had he lost confidence in me as HUD’s Departmental Web Manager? Was he questioning my leadership and policy recommendations? But once I got over my initial shock, I realized that this was a brilliant idea! What better way to get agency-wide buy-in to a single web strategy than involving managers and key staff from across the agency? What better way to make the case for our budget needs than to have an agency-wide task force say, “This is what we need, as an agency?”

The Deputy Secretary gave me 4 weeks to complete our work and make our recommendations. I assembled key SES and GS 15 managers and high level staff from every program area, the CIO and other key support offices, and the field – in all 14 people. We involved 22 other staff, many of them organization web managers or web coordinators, to help us collect information and do our analysis. We split into teams, interviewing every one of HUD’s 100 existing web managers, a number of program managers, and web directors at 5 “best practice” federal agencies and 5 private “best practice” organizations (e.g., Washington Post online).

The task force identified 4 major issues impacting HUD’s ability to use the web efficiently and effectively, to implement the agency’s mission and the administration's goals:

• Issue 1: Implementing "electronic government" at HUD will require a cultural change, from the top on down.
• Issue 2: Staffing is inadequate to accomplish web management responsibilities.
• Issue 3: Training for Web Managers is inadequate.
• Issue 4: HUD lacks leadership in managing the technical web infrastructure to ensure that it is adequate to support the demands of electronic government.

Under each of those issues, we made 3 strategic recommendations. We briefed the Deputy Secretary, and he adopted every single one of our recommendations.

Further, even though administrations (and parties) changed within months, the plan survived. Why? Well, for one thing, it wasn’t a political effort. It was a task force entirely of career employees who were considered leaders in the agency. Second, the task force had developed sound strategic recommendations based on good research and analysis. And third (and most important), because career employees – who don’t change with administrations – were involved in creating the plan, they had a stake in advocating for it and making it work.

And what did I learn from all this? That how you do something can be as important as what you do. Getting key managers and staff across the agency together, doing good research, arguing out the pros and cons of our ideas, and presenting it (and getting credit for it) as a single unit bought HUD’s web team more good will, more support, and more agency pride than anything I could have done on my own.

OK – that’s nice. What’s that got to do with today?

Well, despite the fact that we’ve come a long, long way in creating cross-government web policies and strategies, despite the fact that we now have an active and effective federal Web Managers Council, despite the fact that web managers are enjoying much-deserved praise and support from high level administration executives and industry leaders, there remains a void at the agency level. The number one complaint I still hear from my web colleagues is: “I can’t get my bosses to support me. I can’t get my agency to listen and go along. I want to implement these improvements, I want to try social media, I want to feature our top tasks, but I can’t get my bosses to agree.” It’s the major stumbling block for real progress in web management across government: getting that agency-level support and buy-in for a good solid web management strategy.

So here’s a thought. What if the Director of OMB challenged every agency to establish an agency-wide task force, modeled on HUD’s? The goal would be to develop a long-term, agency-wide strategic plan for web management at that agency, incorporating both agency-specific needs and goals and governmentwide goals and directives.

Direct the agencies to comprise those Task Forces primarily of career managers and staff. Take politics out of it. Make sure the agency web managers are part of the effort – after all, they know most about the day-to-day challenges. But include program staff and field staff, CIOs, Public Affairs, key managers and top staff.

Provide an advisory council - with thought leaders like Vint Cerf and Craig Newmark and Micah Sifry and web content and plain language specialists like Gerry McGovern and Annetta Cheek and Thom Haller - to serve as a resource to these agency efforts.

Require each agency task force to review and consider documents like the Web Managers Council white papers, recommendations from the CIO council, and recommendations from Macon Phillips and Vivek Kundra and Beth Noveck and other key administration officials with a stake in how government uses the web.

Use the Web Managers Council to monitor progress and results and to publish best practices.

What better time than at the beginning of an administration - when every part of every agency is scurrying to develop plans and goals that will rely in some way on the web - to come up with a single agency-wide strategy for web management? And what better way for agency web managers to present their challenges and get that buy-in and support they so need to move forward?

Having a strategic plan is obvious. But remember: how you do it is as important as what you do, if you want to make sure that plan works.

Anticipate While You Innovate

Last week, two events reminded me how important it is to think ahead and anticipate issues, even as you’re being innovative with social media.

First, I posted a blog piece that mentioned the Department of Homeland Security’s Facebook page. Later that same day, my friend, Gwynne Kostin (who manages Homeland Security’s web presence) posted a comment on that blog piece, correcting me. She said that the Department does not have an official Facebook page. So I went back to the DHS Facebook page I had seen. Yes, it is called “Department of Homeland Security.” Yes, it has the DHS seal. Yes, it shows the Department’s website as the point of contact. Yes, it includes the Department’s mission statement. And the discussion items look like official announcements (one mentions the Secretary). At first glance, it appears to be an official website, even to this experienced former web manager. The only clues that it’s not official are these:

1. The intro says: "This Group is dedicated to the Department of Homeland Security, and all of its supporters and affiliates." As I read it again, I realize this probably is not the kind of language a government agency would use to introduce its page – even on a social networking site.
2. The page administrator is in Cheyenne Wyoming. Not Washington, DC. That’s probably the best clue that this isn’t an official government page. Normally, federal government web content is managed from Washington.

Why does should this concern us? There are more than 1,600 members of this Facebook page. I wonder how many of them joined, believing they were becoming part of an official government discussion group. I wonder how many of them think that the comments they post in the discussion room are going to government officials and being considered in official policy-making. Will it impact public trust if they find that they’re being ignored?

Look-alike government pages on social networks are tough to deal with because you don’t control the website. But maybe some agreement across government to use common branding (e.g., always use an official seal and always use the words: this is an official site of the U.S. government) would help. If it appears that fraud is involved (someone is purposefully trying to impersonate a government agency to deliver misleading information), you can and should notify your legal department. Probably the most effective thing to do, for now, is to monitor social media sites to keep track of any sites that look like government sites. At least know who’s out there. Watch the discussions and jump in to let folks know where they can find the official web page.

The second event that got me thinking about the perils of innovation occurred at the end of an audio course for federal, state, and local governments that I taught last week. A participant asked me if I had any recommendations on ways to port their web content to their social network page. I responded that, not only am I unaware of any porting software, I don’t think they should be reposting official government web content on a social networking site. We have so much duplication on government websites as it is…I’d hate to see more. The person who asked this question is just trying to do what her bosses want her to do. And there’s another aspect of this issue…bosses who decide they need to be part of the social media wave, without having a “why.”

As with all innovation, you can stumble into those pitfalls if you don’t think ahead.

Social networking sites could be a good supplement to official government websites…maybe a good way to recruit employees and raise awareness of important public issues. Maybe a good way to do Q&A with the public. Maybe a way to have discussions. Note that I used the word “maybe.” Because the only way you should take on any new work is if your agency has the staff to manage it (write it, post it, monitor it, follow up on comments/discussions, update it). Most government agencies don’t have the staff to manage the content they already have posted, so be sure to give ample thought to how you’re going to juggle all this new content. That’s true for words, videos, audio files…anything you post anywhere. It’s all official content that has to be managed.

Web managers are starting to craft policies for, and best practices in, using social media. They will serve as important guidance and are much needed. But you don’t need to wait to be told what to do. There is enough experience now – just look around. Take the time to identify and address those potential pitfalls. Anticipate while you innovate.

Confession: I Don’t Want to Be “Friends” With the Government

I’m a Facebook junkie. It’s the first thing I look at in the morning and the last thing I look at before I go to bed. I visit it several times during the day. Why? Because I love the day-to-day updates from my friends and family. It helps me keep in touch with them. It’s a place where I know I’m going to be with people I know (at least a little) and like. So last night, I finally admitted to myself that – though I support government’s foray into social media - I just don’t want government agency updates mixed in with all my friends' and family's. I don’t want them in my “social network.” And I turned them all off. I don’t want to be “friends” with government agencies.

Early on, I was eager to see what government agencies were doing on social networking sites, and I “friended” or “fanned” (new verbs?) several. A couple – specifically EPA and USA.gov – have done a nice job with their Facebook presences. They get it that these are social networks – places where people are informal; and what they post and the words they use reflect that awareness. That is not true of some other agencies. In fact, some (and I won’t embarrass them here) just use Facebook to post their press releases. Not seeing too many “likes” on those announcements. Duh. Press releases are not friendly. And most people I know don’t like to be bombarded by propaganda in their social settings (harsh, but true).

Unfortunately, over time, even the friendly agency status updates started to annoy me. They seemed intrusive in a place where my friends and family and I are hanging out. So I gonged them.

It looks to me as though interest is (and I’m being charitable) modest at this point for government presence in social networking sites. EPA’s Facebook page has 2,200 fans, as does USA.gov. Department of Homeland Security’s Facebook page has 1,600 members. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has 163 “fans.” Considering that Facebook has some 75 million users in the U.S. alone, not sure that government is doing a resounding business in that realm.

Would I search out government agencies on Facebook or My Space to find government information? Hmm – I don’t think so. I’d go to USA.gov or the agency website. Or I’d just do a search on the web.

Do I still think government has a place in social media? You bet. Twitter (and other microblogs). Feeds (web, email, and mobile phone). Huge potential! In fact, a must. YouTube…at least for agencies with an education mission (Smithsonian, NASA, etc.). I’m not convinced yet that people go to YouTube to be informed. I do know they go because they’re curious. So that might be a reason to be there…if you have the right content. Again – forget that press stuff. Boring.

I follow my local government on Twitter, and I’m grateful for their helpful and responsible Tweets on weather alerts, traffic snarls, and community issues. I subscribe to both email and mobile phone feeds from my local/county governments’ “alerts” page. As long as they Tweet/feed useful, practical information that I want and need (and don’t over-do it!), I think this is a great way for government to use social media/web 2.0. If they start sending me press releases or bombarding me with Tweets every 10 minutes, I’ll gong them, too.

I think it’s fine to do some experimenting – see what sticks. But at some point, I think it’s best to put your investment where data shows a real payoff. I don’t think government has to be (or even should be) everywhere, to benefit from social media.

Are my opinions and actions an aberration or a trend? Time will tell. So what do you think?

Now the Real Innovation Begins

The Obama administration unleashed a tidal wave of innovation, and no where is that more apparent than in the web world. My former colleagues are finally emerging as heroes of innovation, freed from obscurity by fellow innovators in and outside of government. It’s been gratifying to watch people like famed web pioneer Craig Newmark discover and champion the web manager community…a community that has labored behind the scenes for so many years, trying to turn a federal government that considered itself “wholesale - not retail” into a citizen-centered services provider. The spirit of innovation has permeated camps and conferences and blogs and email discussions and social networking spaces for the past 6 months; and I don’t think there is a government web manager out there who isn’t floating in a sea of new ideas, stirred by the passion to serve. This is a very good thing.

But at some point, innovation in government always hits that brick wall of reality: the responsibility not only to serve citizens but also to respect and protect their rights and needs. Citizens count on government to do the right thing. Security and privacy and accessibility and open competition and fairness are important to citizens and the reality that government faces. These responsibilities can hobble innovation, and some innovators try to suppress or ignore these responsibilities - seldom a successful strategy. But I don’t think that’s going to happen this time.

I think these innovators will use their creativity and passion and “crowd-sourcing” to look at constraints and problems in the ways responsibilities have been managed in the past and find new ways to do the right thing for the American people. In most cases, it’s the processes that are the problem - not the principle involved. I think these innovators have what it takes to make the processes better. Heck, we all know it’s usually harder to fix what is than to do something entirely new. But I think these folks are up to that challenge. So let the real innovation begin!

Three interesting blog pieces caught my attention recently. The first is a very well done piece by Gwynne Kostin, who manages web operations at Homeland Security and is on the Federal Web Managers Council. It’s entitled, “What Is the Most Important Thing;“ and in it, Gwynne ponders how government can move forward with the promise of social media and other possibilities, while confronting the realities of existing legislation and policies. She likens it to an intersection, where innovation and responsibility to the public cross paths. How can we all get to our destinations?

The second, “Mixed Feelings About OGI Conference,“ by Jaime Maynard (portions repeated in Gwynne’s blog and posted originally on Govloop - a social networking site that is a wonderful innovation in itself) expressed the frustration that some (many?) government web managers are feeling as they go to camp after camp, conference after conference, and hear all the exciting things going on at other agencies - particularly in the area of social media - when they can’t break through the red tape or reticence of their own agencies to begin similar innovations.

The third piece is a reality check done by Tanya Gupta called, “Why Do Governments Keep Getting Technology Wrong?” Tanya reminds us that citizens still can’t find what they want on government websites and don’t understand why it’s so hard for government agencies to get that right.

Gwynne’s piece comes from an optimistic innovator who has experienced success and is frustrated by - but realistic about - the responsibilities that are hindering progress. She wants to address the issues at the intersection of innovation and responsibility and find some peaceful resolution so everyone can move forward. No doubt in my mind that Gwynne will be a leader in that effort.

Jaime is just plain frustrated. She probably represents a sizable portion of the web manager community who feels powerless to try new things. And then there’s Tanya, who reminds us of that elephant in the room - the one that some would rather circumvent than fix - those enormous government websites that need to be rewritten, reorganized, and reduced. Web managers know what Tanya wants. They’re just tired of trying to fix these out-of-control websites with no support. Hello - innovators?

We have skilled, passionate innovators in all the right places who can turn on their creative juices and find ground-breaking ways to carry out government’s responsibilities better. I think they’ll find ways to get rid of outdated processes and mandates and replace them with new, improved ways to achieve the same objectives. I think they’ll deal with the obstacles to making government websites really useful to citizens (don’t give up hope, Tanya!). They get it. And I think these energizer bunnies can do it!

As for you innovative web managers in agencies not yet caught up in the innovation cyclone... don't despair. You can still be innovative. Maybe you can’t move out on social media yet, but maybe you can come up with innovative approaches to fix those websites that so disappoint Tanya and other citizens. You can be ready with ideas for that time when your agencies do get onboard this change train. You can seek out innovators in and outside of your agencies and build alliances - start your own crowd-sourcing. You can get involved in the web manager community’s efforts to develop new initiatives. To paraphrase that old serenity saying: change what you can, accept what you can‘t change, and be smart enough to know the difference. There are always opportunities to be innovative.

Exciting times. Lots of new energy. Lots of pent-up energy being released. Social media, data.gov, public-private collaboration - all the new stuff is good. But I’m just as pleased to see these innovators turn their collective energy and talents to fixing the old stuff - helping government carry out its responsibilities better. That’s a huge - and difficult - challenge. Now the real innovation begins!

A National “Communicating” Strategy

Periodically, I review my older blog posts to see if I’ve changed my mind on something or if I want to jaw on a pet issue again. Today, I went back to a post from January 2008 where I laid out my fantasy strategy for improving the way government communicates with its citizens. That post was a follow-up to a white paper I had written and sent to every member of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, which was evaluating the reauthorization of the E-Gov Act. Well, I never heard boo from a single member of that Committee – you win some, and you lose some. But as I went through the post, I thought, “this is still good stuff.” The only thing I’d change is the title. Instead of calling it, “What’s Missing From E-Gov? The Mandate to Communicate,” I’d call it, “What We Need Is a National Communicating Strategy.”

Government’s communication problems aren’t limited to the way it provides services online. It’s more pervasive. Citizens often just can’t understand what government is saying…in publications, on the phone, on the internet. If the public can’t understand our services because we don’t explain them well or if the public can’t use our services because they’re too complicated or if the public doesn’t know about our services because we haven’t gone to them to tell them, then we aren’t serving effectively. If we don’t communicate effectively, we don’t serve effectively. Those concepts are inextricably linked.

Too often, government focuses on process – not results. We can tweak and tune our communication processes all we want; but if we aren’t communicating effectively with our audiences, it’s all for naught.

How to fix it? Government needs a comprehensive “communicating” strategy…a strategy that improves communication processes within the context of improving results. Are we getting the job done? Does the public understand what we say the first time we say it? Were they able to learn or do, based on what they read or heard? Are they able to use our services easily, without help? Are there citizens who walk away from, or avoid, our services because they just don’t understand them? Are we using the right delivery mechanisms (websites, print, phone, new media, etc.) to reach the intended audiences? Are we reaching out in the right ways to the right audiences?

I’d like to see Government work with Pew and/or other researchers to find out how we’re doing – are citizens able to understand what we say? - and how we could do better. Based on those outcomes, I’d like to see agencies consolidate and coordinate communication efforts within and across government, based on what the public wants and needs, cost effectiveness, and common sense. I’d like to see them prune and sharpen and restructure accordingly. Test the changes before implementing them permanently, and keep testing and re-testing to make sure they’re still achieving the results we want.

I’d like to see communications professionals and citizen service experts (web content managers and experts, new media directors, public affairs officers, experts in public engagement, plain language experts, writers, audience analysts), both inside and outside government, brought in/put in charge of getting this right. If that includes public/private ventures and/or partnerships with other levels of government (federal, state, local), that’s all the better.

I’d like to see government establish performance measures in terms of results:

• How many more citizens did we serve because we are communicating better and because we improved our outreach?
• Did we reduce the time it took them to get the service?
• Were they able to understand/use it on the first try?
• Could they get help quickly if they couldn’t use it on the first try?
• Did we keep looking for breakdowns, and – when we found them – did we fix them quickly?

And, of course and absolutely – I’d like to see government involve the public in this strategic planning process. Heavily and routinely. Asking for both their experience and their ideas. And not just from your offices in Washington DC or through surveys. Get out of your offices and actually talk to the public, and listen to them. Communicating to improve communicating.

I think we need a national communicating strategy…a strategy that focuses on results. A strategy that shows that government cares that citizens can really use the services we provide. A strategy that addresses the question: are we really communicating?

Balancing Transparency With Volume and Accuracy

Transparency is a terrific concept. Heck, government web managers were trying to make our agencies “transparent” from the get-go. Oh, we didn’t call it that back in 1995. We muttered the mantra: if it can be public, then it should be public. But it was the same concept. We worked hard, scouring the nooks and crannies of our agencies to shine the light on everything that had been said, published, decided, or discussed. We built up huge websites, full of everything imaginable. We ended every meeting or conversation with, “and let’s put this on the website.” Now, we have wonderful new ways to inform and serve citizens through the web – new ways to make our agencies even more transparent…blogs and Facebook pages and Twitter accounts and videos on YouTube and wikis and more. But I’m worried.

I worry about the fact that we couldn’t keep up with the web content we had 5 years ago. I worry that, despite noble goals, web managers have not been able to trim their bloated websites or take down websites that no longer are needed. I’m guessing way more new content has gone up than has come down, in the past 5 years. Who is monitoring all this content to make sure it’s current and accurate? How are web teams and program managers dealing with all that volume?

And now, with new content going up on sites not even belonging to the agency (e.g., Facebook, YouTube), who is monitoring that content to make sure it’s current and accurate? Who is making sure that those blog posts done by officials who have left the building are pulled down or moved to some archive area? How are you making sure that important information contained in those posts is maintained?

I worry about this. Why? Because public trust suffers when you publish content that is outdated or no longer accurate. What if someone uses that content to make a decision or take an action that turns out to be bad or wrong? What if your outdated content contradicts other official government content that is current? What does that do to public trust? How does it make your agency look?

Isn’t part of doing the right thing making sure that everything is right?

So what’s the answer? Well, I guess one strategy is to just do nothing and let nature take its course. If you hear about something that’s wrong, fix it. No news is good news. Maybe that strategy will work…for awhile… But I’m optimistic…I think you want to get this right. So here are a few management actions that could help:

• Certification: When we finally faced this problem at HUD, we started a quarterly content certification program. Every quarter, each top executive had to certify, in writing, to the Deputy Secretary that all his/her organization’s web content was current and accurate. The very first quarter we used this process, one sub-organization alone pulled down some 5,000 files that were obsolete. And every quarter thereafter, web managers scrambled to make hundreds of content corrections discovered in the review process. It’s not a perfect process, but it’s a good start. I’d like to see every agency adopt a similar review process.
• Archives: Five years ago, Sam Gallagher (at HUD) had the great idea to create a separate “archives” site…a website that would contain all those reports and memos and initiatives from former administrations, information about programs that had been killed or expired, old funding decisions, and other content that was no longer current, but that the public – especially researchers and historians – might want to use in the future. Every page would be clearly labeled “archive,” and the public would be warned that the content was no longer being reviewed. Even the URL for the content would include the term “archive.” Great idea. Every agency should consider it.
• Metadata: I’ve had mixed emotions about metadata. Is it really worth the effort? Well, I think it is IF you really use it to manage your content. If you do no more than use “creator” (listing the organization) and “date created,” you can sort out older content and know which organization to hold accountable for review. Put in a “last reviewed” date, and you can flag anything older than 3 months or 6 months and make sure it’s checked. The trick, of course, is to establish standard metadata across the agency and make sure all content contributors are entering it. Then you (the web manager) have to make the time to pull reports and use them to monitor and update content. It can be quite a process…but it also could really improve the quality of your content.
• Tagging: I hope your agency has policies and procedures that specify what you post and, more important, who can post content on outside websites, such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube. That will help control your content. In addition, some of these sites allow you to “tag” the content with generic terms that can help people who search on those terms find that content. Establish rules for tagging and use standard tags on any content your agency posts, and you should be able to search on those tags to find and review your content. Again, you need to do this regularly to make sure your content stays current and accurate.
• Spring cleaning: Let’s not forget the most obvious action: reduce the amount of content you have to manage. An annual “spring cleaning” initiative can work wonders. Challenge your web managers and contributors to go through their content and see where they can consolidate or edit or delete. Use your stats to identify those pages that are never used (come on – we all have them). Either make them worth visiting or just get rid of them.

Transparency is great! But in your quest to be open with the public, don’t lose sight of the importance of making sure all that content is correct. Maintaining public trust is worth the effort.

Oh Top Tasks, Where Art Thou?

For the past 5 years, the Federal Web Managers Council has had one priority: improve the efficiency and effectiveness of citizens’ top tasks and make it easy for citizens to find them. Why are “top tasks” so important? Typically, the public comes to a website to do something…I want to get a passport…I want to buy a home…I want to sign up for food stamps. They want to accomplish those tasks quickly - get in, get it done, get out, and move on to something else in their busy lives. If you want to satisfy your customers, you put those frequently-used tasks (think of them as the most popular tasks) where citizens can find them easily…you put them on the screen where the web user’s eye goes first.

So I got to wondering…how easy is it to find those popular tasks?

Nicole Burton – GSA’s Usability Specialist – uses this chart when she teaches courses on website usability. It’s based on user experience, showing how people scan a web screen. The red areas are the places their eyes go first; yellow areas second; and green areas third. If you want your web audience to pay attention to something, then, you should put it in the red area.

I went through several of the Cabinet-level agency websites, doing two things:

• Before I visited the site, I picked one or two “tasks” I thought a large number of citizens might want to complete and then I tried to find a path to those tasks on the home page; and
• Once I got to the site, I tried to identify that agency’s top tasks by the wording and placement on the home page.

My experience was mixed. I’ll give you a just a couple of examples.

On the EPA site, my pre-determined tasks were:

1. I want to know what environmental problems are in my neighborhood
2. I want to do something to protect the environment

Good news. I did find a path to the answers for both. In a section called “My Environment,” I can type my zip code and get maps and other information about the environment in my area. I can “Pick 5 for the environment” or click on “Protect the Environment” and get clear and specific ideas for things I can do to help the environment. So EPA gets an A for letting me achieve my top tasks. But placement should be better. “Pick 5…” and “Protect the Environment” are in the red quadrant – but just barely. “My Environment” is in the lower left corner of the screen – in the green area (and my screen is set at 1680 X 1050, so I see more content in a screen than others may see).

A large rotating billboard graphic at the top of the screen takes up a lot of space. Might be better to shrink (or get rid of) that (annoying) feature and move the top tasks up. Still, I think EPA does a pretty good job.

On the Department of Interior site, I looked for a list or a map showing the national parks. Surely that would be a top task. I thought I’d hit a “bingo” right off the bat. First thing I see in the navigation column on the left is: How Do I…” and the first item is “Get a National Parks Pass.” OK – it’s not exactly a listing of parks, but I figured this could be a path to that list. Wrong. I came to a very wordy and long press release.

I looked through the rest of the topics in the left…webcams, For Teachers, For DOI Employees…I don’t see anything there for me. In fact, I don’t see anything in the first screen about national parks. So I started scrolling down. In the lower right of the second screen (and this home page is way too long - over 4 screens), I found a link to the National Park Service website. When I clicked on it, it went to an (annoying) pop-up that, indeed, did have a link to a map of parks. So I was eventually able to complete my task – but it took a lot of work. Further, I really wasn’t sure what Interior’s top tasks are, based on my review of the home page.

Oh top tasks, where art thou?

I’ve come to 3 conclusions.

• Top tasks probably are there – somewhere - on most agency level sites…but they can be very hard to find. Often they’re mixed in with more esoteric items or links. Often they are articulated using terms that the general public wouldn’t recognize or use. So the best practice here is to separate the top tasks from other links and to use terms that the public uses to describe the task. Action words (e.g., apply for passports, learn how to buy a home) really help.
• There’s no consistency across government about where to place top tasks on the home page. Something as simple as agreement across government to put the top tasks on the left side of the home page, in that top “red” quadrant could make it easier for the public to find and use top tasks across government.
• There’s no consistency across government about how to label top tasks. Again, something as simple as agreement across government to put the links to top tasks under a header, “Do you want to…” or “Most Requested” or “Most Popular” could make the public’s experience so much better.

One thing more…and it’s important. How you organize your website says a lot about your priorities. Many of the cabinet agency sites I reviewed use much of the “red zone” space on narrative, topics, or links that promote the agency or the administration, when most of the public comes to government websites looking for narrative, topics, or links that get them to the tasks they want to complete. Frankly, it’s annoying to have to wade through that organization-centric content when I just want to do what I want to do. I'll think better of you if you put my needs first.

Oh top tasks, where art thou?

Related Links

Top Task Management For Websites (Gerry McGovern)

It’s Time for Chief Web Communications Officers

So many exciting things going on in the government web world…so many opportunities. The Chief CIO is out there with a great agenda. The White House Director of New Media is turning government as we knew it upside down. The advocates for transparency and citizen engagement are getting action. But I still don’t see any movement to address the huge void in the way the government manages the content of its websites. So – once again (because I’ve been yipping about this for years) – I say: it’s time for Chief Web Communications Officers!

There’s no need to restate the case for the critical role government websites play in delivering government services to citizens, offering a platform for transparency and engagement, and communicating government news. Who isn’t already convinced? So let’s get down to the point…these huge communications devices need real top-level leadership.

The Federal Web Managers Council is fighting mightily to get attention on critical problems, convene the various players to try to get consensus on major policy issues, and muster the advocates to bring focus to the plight of government websites. But they don’t sit at the Office of Management and Budget, where policy is made. They need someone who does. Most of them (as agency Web Managers) don’t even sit in the executive management meetings where agency management decisions that involve using the websites are made. The quality and potential of government websites cannot advance as it should until someone with substantial knowledge and experience with managing government websites is sitting at those tables where key policy and management decisions are made.

The Director of OMB should designate a Chief Web Communications Officer (CWCO) for the government and should direct each agency head to designate a Chief Web Communications Officer for the agency. The CWCOs should have the same stature in the agency as the CIOs and Public Affairs Directors/New Media Directors, with whom they must work. That would give the agency a powerful triumvirate for implementing the President’s directive for transparency and engagement and for ensuring that the public gets the high quality of service that their taxes pay for.

OK – some of you are still scratching your heads. What exactly does the CWCO do? Three major roles:

1. Serve as editor-in-chief/publisher of the agency’s website(s). Make sure editorial guidelines and standards are in place and enforced to ensure the quality of website content…make sure that content really communicates. Work with the CIO and Public Affairs Director/New Media Director to take advantage of new technologies to improve the quality and delivery of content. Work with agency managers to produce and maintain quality content to carry out the agency mission. Ensure that content is created once and delivered many ways.
2. Serve as director of citizen services. Assess and monitor citizens’ wants and needs and work with agency managers to address those needs. Establish and enforce customer service standards. Measure customer satisfaction and work with top management to improve customer service.
3. Work with other CWCOs, CIOs, and Public Affairs/New Media Directors across government to create governmentwide strategies to improve web communications. Collaborate, consolidate, and coordinate web content and content delivery governmentwide. Work with the Office of Citizen Services at GSA to improve citizen service across government.

The Chief CWCO at OMB directs web content policy and strategy, with the Council of CWCOs. I can even tell you who’d be great in this job, By Golly (but I won’t…hmm…spell it out here because she’d probably clobber me!).

And what happens to the FWMC? Well, hopefully, many/most of those agency web managers will be elevated to CWCO status - the same way many IT Directors were elevated to CIO status 15 years ago. Many of those agency web managers have all the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed for that executive status. They’re ready to sit at the table – they just need an invitation.

Citizens depend on government websites for government information, services, data, and interaction. Agencies depend on government websites to carry out their programs. Many agencies couldn’t function anymore without websites to help them do their work. The people who run government websites need (and deserve) status to improve performance and impact. They need someone at OMB whose agenda is their agenda. Yes indeed…it’s time for Chief Web Communications Officers.

Related Posts

Three Pieces Make a Whole Better Online Government
Can’t We Have One Federal Government – At Least Online?
Worried About Too Many People In the Sandbox? Governance to the Rescue!
It’s Time for Governance

What Does the Public Want on Government Websites?

Last week, I wrote about how important it is for agency managers to listen to – and honor – what the public wants on government websites. So I got to thinking: I wonder what the public does want on government websites these days? I’ve always championed using government websites to provide services. But with the emphasis on transparency and engagement and a new administration at the helm, is that still what the public wants? I decided to run my own little unscientific survey to find out. Some of the results were a bit surprising.

OK – big disclaimer: there is nothing statistically valid about this survey. It was completely informal. I set up a short survey form on Survey Monkey and sent out an email to 110 family, friends, and acquaintances asking them to respond. I also asked them to forward it to their friends. I did not collect any identifying information, so I have absolutely no idea who took the survey. I can tell you that my mailing list included people diverse in age, race, geographic location, economic background, and political preference. I specifically excluded anyone who is a web manager or who is an advocate or consultant for government websites. I gave them 6 days to take the survey, and then I stopped responses. In all, 50 people took the survey.

The Results?

Question 1. In your opinion, what purpose(s) should federal government websites serve? You may choose more than one answer.

• To provide government services to citizens (42 of 50 chose this)
• To make government data available to citizens so they can use it as they see fit (35/50)
• To communicate the administration's policies, initiatives, and accomplishments (30/50)
• To engage citizens in their government so they can be part of the decision-making (27/50)

Question 2. In your opinion, what is the most important function of federal government websites? (choose one)

• To provide government services to citizens (40%)
• To make government data available to citizens so they can use it as they see fit (26%)
• To engage citizens in their government so they can be part of the decision-making (24%)
• To communicate the administration's policies, initiatives, and accomplishments (10%)

Question 3. In your opinion, what is the second most important function of federal government websites? (choose one)

• To make government data available to citizens so they can use it as they see fit (38%)
• To provide government services to citizens (22%)
• To engage citizens in their government so they can be part of the decision-making (22%)
• To communicate the administration's policies, initiatives, and accomplishments (18%)

Question 4. In your opinion, what is the third most important function of federal government websites? (choose one)

• To communicate the administration's policies, initiatives, and accomplishments (37%)
• To engage citizens in their government so they can be part of the decision-making (26.1%)
• To provide government services to citizens (23.9%)
• To make government data available to citizens so they can use it as they see fit (13%)
  * Note – only 46 responded to this question

I gave respondents an opportunity to explain their choices, and I found some of the answers quite interesting. Here are just a few examples:

• Websites are the primary way to access government services. It is extremely difficult to gain access to a real person in almost any agency
• No one needs any administration – Republican or Democrat – telling us their accomplishments. That’s unproductive advertising for a cause. Give the people the facts and let them tell the administration how effective they are at the ballot box.
• Informed engagement is an essential part of an “educated citizenry,” a cornerstone of our democracy…
• …The more open we are, the more honest a democracy we’ll have…
• Notification of existing or proposed policies and initiatives is essential for private and commercial planning and decision making.
• 80% of data manipulation is performed for selfish or wrong reasons, usually by amateurs…Let serious individuals (scholars, experts, investigative reporters) obtain data thru freedom of information laws.
• …In a democracy, the state is obligated to present neutral, nonpartisan information…
• …the average citizen needs to be able to express his/her opinions so government can base their decisions on what the REAL public wants and not what some for-profit activist THINKS we want
• Clear communication concerning government services is essential

What Did I Learn?

Well, first I learned that I’m not very good at choosing the words for surveys. I should have explained the first option – “to provide services to citizens.” A couple of people said they didn’t know what I meant by “services.” So FYI – by “services” I mean such things as “apply for a passport” or “learn how to buy a home” or “apply for student loans.”

The number one thing people (still) want on government websites is services. Confirms what I always heard when I was a government web manager. So keep featuring those “top tasks,” web managers!

I wasn’t surprised to see “data” come in second – transparency is of great interest these days. But I was very surprised to see “engagement” come in last! The more I thought about it, the more I realized this mirrors some conversations I’ve had with people who said they weren’t so interested in participating in government, through the web or any other way; but they definitely wanted government websites to provide services so they didn’t have to go to an office or try to get a human being on the phone to get them.

The biggest surprise to me was the third place: "communicating the administration’s policies, initiatives, and accomplishments" (aka “message”). I wonder if this came in third because we’re still in the early stages of a new administration and there’s a lot of interest in finding out what the new administration is doing. Would it remain in third place (instead of dropping to fourth place) if we were further along in this administration of if another President were in office? Not so sure.

What’s The Point?

The point is this: listening to the public is not a one-time thing. Government managers – both web managers and program managers – need to keep asking the public what they want on government websites and respect what they tell you…no matter how excited you are about what you think the public wants and needs. Do those reality checks. And when they tell you what they want, allocate your time, resources, and website space accordingly. Listen to them. Honor what they tell you.

If We Engage, Will You Listen?

Citizen engagement is a big ticket item in all parts of government these days. That’s wonderful – long overdue. But I wonder – will government leaders really listen?

Here’s something you may not know. Web managers have been “engaging” citizens since 1995 and – more important – listening to, and using, what we learned from the public. How?

• We got thousands and thousands of emails from the public, telling us what we were doing right and – more often – what we were doing wrong. We made changes based on what they said and asked.
• We did usability testing, where we literally watched the public use our websites and sort content into piles that made sense to them, and we made improvements based on their experience.
• We went out and talked to the public in focus groups and at public demonstrations of our websites, asking them what is most important to them. We adjusted our sites (both design and words) accordingly.
• We looked at the words they use when they search and then tried to incorporate those terms in our websites (OK – maybe that’s stretching “engagement” – but it is using their input to improve government).
• We analyzed our metrics – what pages do the public use most? What pages do the public use least? How can we clear the clutter so we can get them to what they want most?
• We posted customer satisfaction surveys and used “comments” forms to get feedback…and we changed our websites – both design and content - based on that feedback.
• We shared our best practices for listening to our audiences and encouraged our peers to use the same techniques, so all government websites would be what the public wants them to be.

For years, government web managers have operated from this basic truth: if you listen to your audience, they will tell you what to put on your website – and where to put it. Most government web managers know what their audiences want. The problem is this: too many times, agency leaders don’t listen to the public or don’t share the goal to feature what the public wants; and web managers are over-ruled.

Go to any of the Cabinet-level agency websites today. Look at the front (home) page. Can you tell what citizens want most from that agency? Imagine what you, as a citizen, might want from that agency – do you see it on the front page? If the public is the customer/partner, shouldn’t what we want most (or what most of us want) be front and center on that home page, so we can find it easily?

Here’s a fact – the public doesn’t care much about press releases. Yet if you look at just about any of those Cabinet agency websites, you’ll see prime real estate (the top left and center of the screen – the way the eye scans) devoted to news from and about the agency. I fold into that category those ubiquitous photos of agency heads that are featured prominently on home pages (does Google post photos of its executives on the home page?). In many cases, you have to look pretty hard to find that information or those online services that citizens want most. Agency leaders – are you listening?

I remain optimistic that this is a new day and that the voices – both inside and outside government – who are calling for citizen engagement and involvement in their government will cause agency leaders to really listen to the public – and act on what they hear. I’d like to think that if the public tells you that they care more about how to get a loan or how to apply for a passport or how to find a job than about your news announcements or speeches, you’ll listen to us and organize your websites accordingly.

Please – don’t ask us to engage if you won’t listen.

Related Post
USANews.gov?

Related Links
Best Practices for Home Pages (from the Federal Web Managers Council)
Press Releases Are Awful Web Content (Gerry McGovern)

Government Of, By, and FOR the People

I just read a little article quoting Congressman Mike Honda saying, "...Congress must take advantage of Web 2.0 technologies to transform the relationship between citizens and government. Instead of viewing the public as a customer for services, I believe that we should empower citizens to become our partners in shaping the future of our nation." I realize he was talking about Congress – not necessarily the Executive Branch. But my feeling is the same - this doesn’t have to be an either/or situation, folks. It should be both. It must be both!

Be clear. I’m all for citizen engagement. I’ve been advocating using the internet to involve citizens in their government longer than some of the current prominent advocates (see HUD’s State of the Web report that I wrote back in 2001). But Lincoln got it right, in my book. Government should be of, by, and FOR the people. So in our quest to start the “of” (transparency – because we own it) and “by” (engagement – because we should be part of it), let’s not forget the “for” (the services that government provides for its citizens, paid for by their taxes).

Believe it or not, some folks really don’t want to engage in their government. I’ve been surprised when I’ve talked to folks who have no interest. But they still want – and depend on – government services. Whether or not they become your partners, they always will be your customers.

So why did this article get my dander up? Because, Web Managers, I worry that – in your excitement to work on the “of” and “by” stuff right now – you might be neglecting the extensive work that still needs to be done on the “for.” I know that many of you have been chomping at the bit to move out on transparency and engagement for years. I know that there’s a lot of pressure/support both inside and outside government for you to move out on this. And, heck, it’s fun! But you’ve still got that elephant in the room – those way-too-many, morbidly obese, poorly written, poorly organized websites that citizens do (and often must) use to get government services.

When I look at some of the major government websites, I still see press releases and agency news where top services (tasks) should be featured, so the public can find them. When I look at some of those services, I still find convoluted organization that makes no sense to me and, more commonly, explanations and instructions (writing) that are – well – just plain bad. I haven’t come across one single government website recently that doesn’t need pruning and cleanup and improvements to make those services easier to find, more useful, and more usable.

I know fixing that “for” stuff isn’t glamorous. I know it can be slow-moving, thankless drudgery. I know you sometimes have trouble getting support for making the changes that turn worthless web junk into real online service. But I believe it’s the most important thing you do. If not you – then who?

So yes, absolutely facilitate engagement and transparency. Proselytize. Encourage policy makers to use the web to interact (both ways) with citizens. Design your website so that opportunities for engagement are obvious and usable. Encourage program managers to get their data out there and make government more transparent. Take advantage of the backing you have now to make government “of” and “by” the people. But don’t lose site of your obligation to finish (if that's possible) what you started – to improve the way government provides services FOR its citizens.

Government should be “of,” “by,” and “for” the people. We can – and should - have all three.

Related post:

To Everything There Is A Season

Super-sites: Let's Not Forget the Basics

Like many Americans who are interested in government transparency, I looked forward to seeing Data.gov, one of the new "super-sites" being developed to carry out and monitor the President's initiatives. Not much there, for now; but I know they have big plans. Kudos on that!

But wait a minute. As I looked closer, I noticed that some things were missing. For starters...who owns this site? It should be obvious, if not by branding on the page or a statement at the bottom of the page that tells you clearly that this site is an official site of the U.S. Government, at least by the information on the "about" page or the "contact" page. Not there. I finally, clicked on the FAQ link, and...skim, skim, skim...there it is! FAQ 6 tells me that GSA is managing the site on behalf of the federal CIO Council.

Intrigued, I wondered if other web content requirements and best practices were missing from Data.gov. So I pulled one of the convenient checklists that the Federal Web Managers Council has published on Webcontent.gov and did a spot check.

Well, I don't see a linking policy. Maybe they aren't using any links yet. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. Oh...but there's no "search" tool for the site. Yes, you can search the databases. But you also should be able to search the site. Or at least there should be a sitemap. And plain language. Hmm...not so sure about that.

OK - enough on Data.gov. What about some of the other new government super-sites that have debuted recently? Are they following the content requirements and best practices? I took a look at Recovery.gov. Better - but not perfect. Similar problems on the branding. I was able to learn that the site is owned by the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, under both the "about" and "content" tabs. But then I read the FAQs and learned that the Board isn't functioning yet and that an interim cross-agency council is doing the reporting. Wish I could have found that information in the "about" or "contact" sections. And I'm betting that someone (Treasury? GSA?) is actually managing the site on behalf of the council. But no mention of that. Also, no linking policy that I could find. Might be other issues - I stopped there.

Look folks. This isn't about nit-picking. This is about making every single federal government website - including super-sites - as useful, usable, and visitor-friendly as possible. The content requirements and best practices for government websites are readily available on Webcontent.gov. I can tell you - because I was part of the group that put them together - that those requirements and best practices aren't just some arbitrary bureaucratic nonsense. They come from laws, regulations, OMB policies, and other official documents aimed at aiding and protecting the public. They come from thorough research; extensive discussion and vetting among many, many government and non-government web content professionals; and current usability research. The purpose was - and is- to "make U.S. government websites the most citizen-focused and visitor-friendly in the world."

As my sainted grandmother told me repeatedly, "a job worth doing is worth doing right." I know there's great pressure to get these super-sites up quickly. But it just doesn't take that much extra time to get it right.

So...to the owners of these super-sites (both those that are out there now and those that are being developed): please, consult with the Federal Web Managers Council and use Webcontent.gov to make sure the content of your sites is as useful and uasble as it can be and that it complies with all the same requirements that agency websites must meet. In your sincere desire to move ahead, please don't forget the basics that make U.S. government websites the most citizen-focused and visitor-friendly in the world.

Three Pieces Make A Whole Better Online Government

Last week’s Government Web Manager Conference was historic in many ways. But one of the most significant outcomes is that Macon Phillips (the government’s New Media lead) and Vivek Kundra (the government’s head CIO) acknowledged the third distinct group of players at the table: Web Managers. Neither of them was there to assert authority over Web Managers or suggest that Web Managers should be subject to their oversight. They simply encouraged them to step up and do what Web Managers do best: deliver government online services to citizens so they are useful, usable, and effective. There are three distinct pieces to this puzzle of online government, and we citizens need all three to fit together seamlessly if we are to be served well.

So why is this significant? Well, let’s clear the air. It's no secret there have been some rubs between Web Managers and CIOs and Public Affairs Offices (where New Media Directors are emerging) over the years. If we can put those on the table, learn from them, and move on, citizens will be much better served.

Web Managers and Public Affairs Offices have grappled over “mission” versus “message” from the beginning. Web Managers are most interested in featuring top tasks – those government services that citizens want most. Public Affairs Offices are charged with promoting the agency’s and administration’s message. Where’s the rub? Sometimes there are issues over top billing, and sometimes that line between “mission” and “message” can be pretty thin.

I think the rub between Web Managers and CIOs goes back to the “E-Government” program. Congress, the President, and OMB gave the lead (and the money) for the E-Gov program to the CIOs and pretty much ignored Web Managers. In fact, you need both strong technology and strong audience knowledge and communication skills to serve the public online. So it was destined to be a problem from the get-go.

But all of that is history. The good thing about history is that you can learn from it and not make the same mistakes. Which brings me back to last week’s Web Manager Conference. Our current leaders put all of that behind us and said, basically, “we recognize that there are three pieces in this puzzle and we need all three if we’re going to create the best possible government.” Bravo! Onward and upward.

So what, specifically, should we look to each group to do?

New Media

Macon laid out three objectives for his team:

• Support the President's message,
• Use technology to introduce a new level of transparency, and
• Public participation: trying to understand how people can have an impact on their government, and how to better structure those things.

CIOs

Vivek has identified 5 major goals

• Open and transparent government
• Lowering the cost of government. Doing a better job defining requirements and making better choices about technology investments.
• Cyber-security.
• Participatory democracy. Creating meaningful ways for citizens to engage in government decision-making.
• Innovation. Finding new and less-costly ways to use technology for the benefit of all.

Web Managers

The Federal Web Managers Council – and the broader Government Web Manager Forum – has laid out this strategic plan:

“We believe the public should be able to:

• Accomplish their most top government tasks online quickly and easily
• Access government content online whenever and however they need it
• Have direct online interactions with their government
• Trust government web content to be accurate, timely, easy to understand, and coordinated across agencies

To achieve this vision, we’ve chosen one primary goal on which our community will focus: Improve how the public accomplishes their most top government tasks online.”

These are all great goals, and many of these goals are pretty distinct. But yes – there are a few areas of overlap…transparency and citizen engagement are the most obvious. Those overlaps will have to be discussed, and the groups will have to collaborate. Sure, there will still be rubs. But you know what? That’s healthy tension. Where they don’t have complete agreement (or autonomy), they’ll have to be innovative in finding ways to satisfy them all. And healthy tension normally produces the best possible results for citizens, in the end. I read a great quote recently: “Without resistance, we cannot fly!” Indeed.

So now what? Well, a good place to start would be for the leaders of those three puzzle parts to get together to agree on: what each will do, where they will coordinate, and how they will communicate regularly, so they can address any issues before they become debilitating.

What's past is past, and the future looks incredibly bright! These are the right three pieces, and – together – they can make a whole better government for you and me.

Courage, Web Managers!

Web management is not for the faint of heart – at least not in the government. You must have the courage of your convictions. You must show your passion to serve through your willingness to try – and fail. You have to bang your head against the wall over and over until you break through. You have to speak up until you are heard. No, you won’t always succeed. But you must never stop trying to do the right thing to serve the American people, including venturing into brand new territory. That takes courage.

Web management in the government has been a grassroots effort from the beginning. That mantra, “proceed until apprehended,” came legitimately. We were doing things our bosses had no knowledge of. We stepped up and took our chances, doing our best to make right guesses so no one would stop us. At first, our bosses left us alone because they really didn’t know how many people were out there seeing our websites. Eventually – and I believe this is true today – they had to rely on us because we knew more about web management than they did. You know what? There’s nothing wrong with that. But it is such a foreign concept in government where control is the culture. And not every boss is comfortable with the risks involved.

I’ve been reading the notes from the recent Government Web Managers Conference – oh, I am so happy for and proud of my former colleagues! – and two things jumped out at me.

• Though some web managers are still stymied by their bosses – and wish there would be top level endorsement/push, telling their bosses to listen to them and/or get onboard – most understand they have to take the lead and are willing to try, risk, proselytize, be fearless, and act on their passion to serve.
• Top experts, both within and outside of government, were consistent in their advice: try it; risk failure; do the right thing to serve the public. Don’t wait to be told what to do – just do it. Figure it out. Make it happen. Oh, I do so love this way of thinking! But it takes enormous courage for a government employee to act on this advice. This is NOT the way government works, normally.

One colleague recently told me that, indeed, he did proceed…but he was apprehended. That does happen, and I am not diminishing the impact of those roadblocks nor the honest fear they generate. Government lawyers can be formidable. But they also can be reasonable. Government bosses can make bad decisions – but they also can change their minds if they are convinced that it’s the right thing. Sometimes you have to table an idea and wait for more favorable conditions to try it again. Sometimes you have to wait out a boss or some other obstacle. But don’t give up. Look for the opportunities. Muster your courage. And squeak! You might be surprised who will show up with that can of oil.

Government web managers, as a whole, have enjoyed way more success than they have suffered setbacks, in large part due to their courage. That the Federal Web Managers Council published two White Papers and got those in the hands of the new administration is testimony to their courage. That this Government Web Managers Conference took place, with high level administration officials from the White House, OMB, and GSA wanting to be there, urging web managers to be innovative, respecting your enthusiasm and ideas, and applauding your moxie…oh my gosh…that’s a huge tribute to your courage.

So my message is this: if there ever was a time in government web management to step it up, it’s now. You have more high level support than you’ve ever had. If you hit that wall, start looking for the way around it. If you are certain that something is the right thing to do, find a way to do it. If you get scared or beat down or over-ruled, “pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and start all over again.” Use the web manager community to help you. Don’t let fear and isolation paralyze you and prevent you from moving forward. Your colleagues are a huge resource. Collaborate. Partner. Work together.

If you take risks to do the right thing, others will, too. So be brave. Show your courage. We citizens are counting on you to stand up for what’s right for us.

“A great leader's courage to fulfill his vision comes from passion, not position” - John Maxwell

“Do not let what you cannot do interfere with what you can do” - John Wooden

When Web Managers Gather, It's Good For You and Me

Note: I posted this blog piece just before the last annual government Web Managers Conference, in May 2008. That wonderful conference is being held again this week, and I think it’s worth it to voice these thoughts again and cheer on my former colleagues.

This week, some 500 government web managers from across the country will gather in Washington to hear new ideas from administration leaders, network, and build energy toward implementing the initiatives that come with a new President. This annual meeting of government web managers is a terrific use of their time, as far as the public is concerned, because – for a few hours – they are government web managers – not HUD web managers or State Department Web Managers or Indiana web managers or Chicago web managers. And when web managers start thinking and acting collectively, their power – and their results – increases exponentially.

For those couple of days, they raise their heads and look around at all that they have in common. They hear from thought leaders. They share ideas. They nod at common problems and common goals. They make notes about new ideas they want to try. They seek out one another at lunch or after a session to talk more about possibilities or get more “how to’s.” They form alliances and talk about working together to make all government websites better. They take time to think about those they serve: the public. They get re-charged…they get excited. That’s a good thing for you and me, fellow citizen.

If you’re one of those smart web managers going to the Web Managers Conference, have a great time! Soak it all up. Meet your colleagues. Seek collaboration. Get on board with top tasks and social media and all the other challenges and opportunities ahead. Go home inspired! And stay connected with your peers, after the conference. Strengthen those ties. You serve us best when you serve together.

Oh – and if you weren't able to attend this year (the conference is sold out!), be sure to sign up early next year. This is a “don’t miss” opportunity! It’s good for you. It’s good for those you serve.

Can’t We Have One Federal Government – At Least Online?

The public views the federal government as “one.” They say, “I pay my taxes to THE government”…not to “THE HUD” and “THE EPA” and “THE HHS.” Yes, I know…there are thousands of federal agencies and sub-agencies, and you are not accustomed to working together to present a united face to the public. But from a citizen’s point of view, you are THE federal government. So can’t you act like one, at least online?

Why should you act as one? Well, citizens don’t know which agency handles what; and frankly, we don’t care. We just want you to do it or fix it or answer it. We don’t like getting redundant or conflicting information, depending on which agencies we talk to. We want one answer – the right answer - and we want it fast. We don’t want to have to bounce from one agency to another to accomplish a task. We want seamless public service. We want you to tell us where to start and what to do next. We want you to connect the dots…don’t make us figure it out. You may be physically located all over the place, and you may report to different agency heads. But at least on the web, you should be one.

OK – you get it. So, what could the federal government do to look/act like “one,” at least online? Most of you have already figured this out. Do across government what many agencies already have done across the agency:

• Organize content by topics – not by organizational components
• Move to one common design
• Establish one style guide (publication rules) that covers all content

Consolidate content around topics

We who managed government websites in the early days learned very quickly that citizens want content by topic – not by organizational segment. Today, I couldn’t find a single major government website designed around organizational components. Yet citizens have to navigate through multiple federal agencies to get all there is to know from THE government, on a subject. And they have to do their own analysis of all that content to figure out what works for them, filtering out duplication and – sometimes - even conflicting information.

Government web managers have talked about consolidating content by topic for many years. In fact, there have been some preliminary efforts in this direction. Certainly, one of the main goals of USA.gov is to aggregate content across government, by topic. But USA.gov is a directory of links. It does not attempt to consolidate and prune “like” content or tell citizens which links are better than others or tell you where to start and where to go next. Pick just about any topic page on USA.gov, and you can see the problem. Way too much content…way too redundant…way too hard to figure out which is best for you.

Create cross-agency content groups on major topics (housing, food, health) convened by staff at USA.gov, to sort it out…eliminate duplication…put it in logical sequences. Post basic information about a topic right on USA.gov and then link to more specific or esoteric information on agency sites, organizing it in logical sections or sequences and using good link text to tell citizens exactly what they’ll find or what to look for when they get there.

Move to one common design

On this point, some of my colleagues are rolling their eyes and shaking their heads. In fact, this particular subject – adopting a common design across government - was so contentious when I was on the Federal Web Managers Council that we had to table discussion. But look what agencies are doing. They’re going to one common design. Even a huge agency like USDA has implemented a common design. Why? Well, it saves millions in designing and testing separate sites - money and time that could be used in much better ways…like making the writing more citizen-friendly and services more efficient. It makes the agency look like “one.” And – most of all – it makes it easier for the public to use all parts of the agency’s website(s). If it works across an agency, why shouldn’t it work across government?

In his report,” State and Federal Electronic Government in the United States, 2008,” Darrell West notes: “The most striking discovery while researching state and federal websites was the importance of consistency. States that had websites that were completely inconsistent from one agency to the next were harder to navigate, because each site seemed like an independent entity. Sites that were consistently formatted, however, were much easier to use because one knew where to find certain links with the prior knowledge of their relative locations on other state sites.”

Develop a common template. Do it through a partnership between the USA.gov staff and the Federal Web Managers Council. Let agency web managers have their say. Test it to death for usability - get it right. Then use it both for agency sites and USA.gov. Make it easy for citizens to use all government websites. Make the federal government look like “one” online.

Establish one style guide (publication rules) that covers all content

What am I talking about? A good style guide or set of publication rules would help bring consistency and quality to online content, across government. It will make you look like “one.”

A good style guide tells web writers and editors how to do everything from formatting telephone numbers (do we use dots to separate phone numbers or dashes? Do we use parens around area codes?) to using the conversational second person (“you”) in writing to using key words strategically to help search engines.

The Federal Web Managers Council already has begun developing best practices in publication procedures/style guides. Many agencies have developed more extensive guides that can serve as prototypes. Coming up with one standard style guide/publication rules shouldn’t be a big stretch. Mandating its use governmentwide might be harder. It should come from OMB or the White House Office of Communications or GSA's Office of Citizen Services and Communication, based on the recommendation of the Federal Web Managers Council.

Getting everyone under one set of content rules would be a huge step toward making the federal government look more like “one” online and making it easier for citizens to use all government websites.

Citizens think they have one federal government. It’s time to act like one – at least online. Come on, folks. Make it easier for citizens to interact with THE federal government.

The 5 “R’s” of Governance – Get It Right…Get It Done

Web governance has perplexed government web managers for years. Because web management has been – basically – a grassroots effort in the government (many government websites were born bottom-up…not top-down), web managers have struggled to get the attention of higher-ups to get the right pieces in place.

What are the right pieces? I think of it in terms of the 5 “R’s" of governance: Roles, Responsibilities, Relationships, Rules, and Review.

• Roles: who, by job, must be included in the governance structure so that websites are managed and coordinated properly? Web managers. Public Affairs Officers. CIOs. Program heads (responsible for content on their programs). Contracting Officers (to make sure contracts for websites or content that will go on the web comply with agency web policies). A top management official (who has authority to issue policies all parts of the agency must honor). And others.
• Responsibilities: what must each person do? What functions, related to web management, are they responsible for?
• Relationships: with whom must each person interact and when? For example, if the CIO is planning to do maintenance on the servers, he/she should coordinate with the Web Manager far enough in advance to warn the web audience of outages.
• Rules: what are the policies, procedures, and standards that keep web management moving along efficiently and effectively? How do you manage web content? How do you manage all the other activities that support the website?
• Review: how do you evaluate performance, of the website and of the people with the various responsibilities for the website, of web governance? How do you make sure all the roles, responsibilities, relationships, and rules are being used? How do you know where there are problems in the governance structure so you can fix them?

In Spring 2008, I did a very quick and dirty survey of 14 web managers at the Cabinet agencies and select independent agencies, asking questions about governance. I was preparing to teach a Web Governance course, and I wanted to get a feel for the problem areas. I learned that most agencies have a way to go to get good, solid governance in place. For example:

• 58% had not documented their governance structures. If the structure isn’t documented, how can you be sure that all the players know what they’re supposed to do (in fact, they may not even know they’re part of the governance structure!). Write down and communicate what you have – the roles, responsibilities, and relationships - even if it’s imperfect. Then make it better.
• Most agencies (83.3%) had documented web policies. But only about half had documented publication procedures and/or a style guide that describe the rules for managing content. Only about half had documented operating procedures…how you run other web functions like training and marketing and analytics and communications and all those other functions essential to good web management. You need to write down what you do and how you do it. Everybody needs to know the rules to play by.
• 70% had not documented management controls (though I suspect most have them). Management controls are a critical part of the rules. You have to protect the agency and the public from fraud, waste, abuse, mismanagement (see OMB Circular A-123). How do you make sure that only authorized people post to the website? How do you make sure that content is correct? Write down your controls, and make sure you’re using them.
• Most agencies measured customer satisfaction (81.8%) and site traffic (90.9%). But less than 2/3 did usability testing. Usability data is your best indicator of site effectiveness and top task efficiency…and one of your best justifications for improvements. Only about a third had performance measures that tie the website to mission achievement and/or public service. You need to have meaningful review processes to make sure your site is performing well.

The Federal Web Managers Council has encouraged agencies to work on web governance; and – hopefully - things have improved. Strong governance is a must, if you want to provide the best possible public service through the web. Governance needs to be reviewed periodically, to make sure all the right “R’s” are in place. That’s especially true as the new administration takes up the reins and new players (including New Media Directors, who should be part of governance) come onboard.

Take the time to get this right now – you’ll save yourselves a lot of grief later. And you'll serve the public better.

Related links
HUD's web governance structure and policies
HUD's web publication standards and style guide
HUD's web management operating procedures

Proceed Until Apprehended!

I had many lucky breaks in my career; but one of the luckiest occurred back in 1993, when George Latimer - former Mayor of St. Paul, Minnesota - came to HUD to help new Secretary Henry Cisneros unleash innovation. George had been a very successful innovator as Mayor (you’ll see his name mentioned several times in David Osborne’s book, Reinventing Government) and had a strong track record. He was in charge of the Secretary’s “Special Actions Office,” a small staff to the Secretary that served as an incubator for new ideas.

Lucky me…George plucked me from the rank and file to help him navigate the government bureaucracy and keep things organized. Like the obedient public servant I had been trained to be, I waited for George to tell me what he wanted me to do. And the very first lesson George taught me was this: don’t make your boss do all the thinking. Figure it out. Make it happen. If there’s something you need the boss to do, bring in the options – along with the memo to sign; and we’ll make it happen. But don’t sit around waiting to be told what to do. And while you’re at it, be a little gutsy. Remember: it’s often easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.

Whew! George’s philosophy opened a whole new world for me, as a public servant. What a terrific atmosphere for me to work in, as I became HUD’s first web manager and went through those first months of trial and error, growing a new form of service delivery. George taught me if you see a void that you think you can fill - in a right way - go for it. Proceed until apprehended!

I was reminded of George when I read a quote by White House New Media Director, Macon Phillips, at last week’s Government 2.0 Camp. When someone suggested to him that agencies will look to the White House for direction on innovation, he replied, “Go! Do it! Don’t wait for the White House to solve your problems. Learn, evangelize, and implement yourselves.” If George Latimer had been sitting in that audience, I can tell you he would have jumped to his feet and cheered loudly!

We who were the first government web managers learned quickly that, with no path to follow, you pretty much were on your own, figuring out what to do with government websites. As long as I based my actions on doing the right thing for the American people, I was OK. No one had a better answer, so I just proceeded (and I seldom was apprehended!). But now, government web managers often are shackled by bureaucracy that has become much more web-wise and cautious.

A new wind of innovation is blowing in government. But innovation only succeeds to the extent that people at all levels feel free to be innovative. That’s what George Latimer taught me, and that was Macon Phillips’ message. Figure it out. Make it happen. Involve the bosses when they’re needed to give an order or break down a barrier (and don’t forget to bring along that memo to sign!), but don’t wait for them to tell you what to do.

Whenever I speak to a group of government web managers, the last thing I say is, “Proceed until apprehended!” Thank you, George. Thank you, Macon.

Worried About Too Many People In the Sandbox? Governance to the Rescue!

This week, we learned that agencies are hiring “new media directors.”

As one who held a “web manager” job description for 10 years, I can tell you that I was a bit alarmed when I saw the new media directors’ duties that would include:

• “The overall technical performance, maintenance, and development of websites outreach platforms
• Interpreting and reporting various site statistics on a regular basis, and using these results to improve traffic and the effectiveness of the agency's content and outreach efforts”

Hey – those were MY duties! If I were still a web manager, I’d probably be more than a little concerned.

And then I heard that some CIOs are holding “social media” briefings in agencies. Hey, there’s a whole sub-group of the Federal Web Managers Council who thought they were the champions for social media! What’s the deal here?

Well, there’s good news: there’s plenty of room in this sandbox for everyone – web managers and new media specialists and CIOs. In fact, we need them all. But – and this is so critical – each of them needs to understand and respect what the others bring to the sandbox so they can work together, and not at odds. After all, we all want to build the same thing – an open, transparent government that delivers the services that its citizens want and need. We just need a governance structure to keep us organized.

So – let’s sort this out (and I’m writing this to web managers because…well heck, that’s what this blog is about). Web managers – new media directors will help you market the services you work so hard to provide through the web. They’ll open up new ways to carry the message that government has something for every citizen, help the public see what’s going on in their government (transparency), and help engage the public in the way their government works.

The CIOs will continue to evaluate and bring in new technologies to accomplish agency mission and management goals and to solve management problems. And the new emphasis for CIOs is to figure out how the often atrocious legacy data systems can be coaxed to spew out something that might be useful to the public, to use in ways they want to use it.

You need these folks. And they need you, web managers. They need you to do what you always have done so well: serve as editor-in-chief of websites that exist to deliver government services to citizens as effectively and efficiently as possible. You need to keep identifying “top tasks” – the cream of government services that citizens use most - and working with program managers to make those top tasks as easy to use as possible. You need to continue to look for content that is obsolete and redundant and little-used, so you can strip away clutter that makes top tasks hard to find and use. You need to make sure that the words on the website are words that citizens understand, and you need to organize content in sequences that are logical to citizens. You are the communication and service specialist. You make sure that government websites communicate effectively, so they serve citizens effectively.

Together, new media directors, CIOs, and web managers can be a powerful team. There’s plenty for everyone to do. But here’s the key: you need structure.

You need to figure out – right from the start – how you’re going to work together. Pin down those 5 “R’s” of governance I always talk about: Roles, Responsibilities, Relationships, Rules, and Review. Who does what? How/when will you relate and coordinate? Take a look at your rules (policies, publication procedures, and operating procedures) and see where they need to be adapted to incorporate new media, transparency, public engagement, and public access to data. Make sure everyone knows and understands them. And bosses – make sure you review performance and hold all the players accountable for doing what they’re supposed to do.

Beware: governance can’t be left to happenstance. It must be planned and communicated to all the players. In the absence of governance, you risk misunderstandings, inefficiency, and even chaos. Who has time for that? It won’t just “all work out.” When you have so many players, working for different bosses, you must have a governance structure.

Who should create this governance structure? Well, I have been a proponent of a top level Web Policy Council... But absent that Council, I’m thinking Macon Phillips, New Media Director at the White House; Vivek Kundra, Chief CIO at OMB; and – ut oh…there’s no one at that top level to represent the Web Managers. Hmm… Well, thank goodness - GSA’s Office of Citizen Services and Communication has stepped into that void. So GSA, with representatives of the Federal Web Managers Council, can front the web manager community.

This can be sorted out. It’s a big sandbox – everyone can fit. Get the governance in place, and we’re going to build an awesome open, transparent government that delivers the services that its citizens want and need (and pay for!).

Related post

It's Time for Governance

A Shout Out to Rachel Flagg – Headed to the Web Best Practices Team at GSA

If you’ve never met Rachel Flagg, you’ve missed something.

I’ll never forget the first time I saw her…we were doing a web clinic in Seattle, and Rachel was one of the Seattle staff who attended. She stood in the back of the room and beamed the entire time. After the session, I walked back to her and asked her why the big smiles. She said she was just so excited about what we were doing with the web. I liked her immediately.

Her rise in the web manager community has been earned. In 2001, Rachel became one of HUD’s first class of regional web managers (she manages web content for 5 HUD offices in 4 states); and she quickly proved herself to be a great leader and an outstanding web manager. She got involved in the work of the government Web Managers Forum, helping develop – among other things – a list of best practices in web management from other nations’ governments. In 2005, Rachel was chosen to be one of the first field representatives on the Federal Web Managers Council. In 2007, Rachel became Co-Chair of the Council, partnering with Sheila Campbell to lead this great group of government web managers in producing some excellent work, including the recent white papers on transforming online government and social media.

Now, Rachel is going on detail to GSA’s Office of Citizen Services and Communication to work with Sheila on Government Web Best Practices. There’s no doubt in my mind that Rachel will be a great asset to GSA. She’s a master strategist, a terrific writer, and a born leader. Her passion for serving citizens through the web is unmatched, and her enthusiasm is contagious. Now that she’s able to devote all her time to the web manager community, like Sheila, watch out! This dynamic duo will do even greater things.

If you don’t know Rachel Flagg yet – believe me, you will. And you’ll be as dazzled as I was!

Congratulations, Rachel (and Sheila)!

Reach Out to Web Managers in the Field

In the past month, I’ve taught two courses for government web managers. I learned something important from those courses: there are still government web managers working around the country who are operating in a vacuum. They don’t know about webcontent.gov or the government Web Managers Forum or all the requirements and best practices for government websites.

One class participant told me she doesn’t even know who else in her federal agency works on websites. Another one told me he gets no encouragement from his higher-ups to get together with other web managers and web contributors – even just in his own federal agency – to compare notes and collaborate. Web Managers Forum: you’ve got some outreach to do.

The Web Managers Forum has grown to more than 1,500 federal, state, and local government web managers from across the country. It truly is a community of practice success story and a tribute to the power of grassroots organization. This group, which is led by the Federal Web Managers Council, “meets” monthly on conference calls that often exceed 100 phone lines (with many people sitting in a room listening on one line) to discuss hot topics and best practices. They also communicate through a listserv and are moving to an online social networking site. This is all great news.

But think about it. If there are 24,000+ federal government websites out there, then there also must be a whole lot of people running those websites; and they’re not all sitting in Washington DC. There are many government “web managers” (including employees who may not have the title but still do that job) out in “the field" (the term used in Washington to describe everyone working for the government who is NOT in Washington). There are field web managers out there operating on their own, reinventing the wheel. You need to find a way to bring those web managers into your circle.

You need to get them up to speed with best practices and strategic plans and social media and other initiatives. You need to make sure their local perspective is integrated in the information and services you deliver to citizens. But most of all, you need to collaborate across government - and up and down, through the ranks - to improve the quality of all government websites and service to the public.

You need to advertise the Forum and webcontent.gov, through every federal agency, regularly. You need to get out of DC and organize training sessions and meetings in major cities across the country. It’s much cheaper to take a small training team out to local venues – places where field web managers can drive in for the day at almost no cost – than to bring them into DC.

You need to organize and nurture local and regional cross-agency web manager forums and groups, encouraging them to meet and compare notes regularly, in addition to becoming members of the larger Web Managers Forum. You need to identify and cultivate regional web leaders who can serve as conduits and local organizers. And – most of all – we need those at the highest levels (OMB, agency heads) to recognize and ensure that all government web managers (including those who work under other titles but who perform web manager functions) – at all locations – are properly trained and are encouraged to collaborate, both throughout their agencies and across government.

Reach out. Seek out your peers in the field. Bring them into the community. Government web managers serve the public best when they serve together. Inside and outside of Washington DC.

Related posts

When Web Managers Gather…
Bring Government Home

Kiosks - An Old Program That Still Has Potential

I’ll bet you didn’t know this. The federal government has a small, little-known, kiosk program that has produced great results serving citizens, particularly low-income citizens. Maybe – with a little TLC – it could do even more.

More than 10 years ago, HUD rolled out its first citizen “ATM,” – a touch-screen kiosk that provided basic information about HUD’s programs. It was then Secretary Andrew Cuomo’s baby. He wanted to harness technology to deliver information to citizens where they lived, worked, shopped, and played.

Eventually, HUD placed more than 100 kiosks around the country in locations specifically chosen because they are frequented by low-moderate income Americans – shopping malls, grocery stores, libraries, community centers, and street corners. Four years ago, EPA, Education, IRS, and Labor joined the effort, turning the “HUD Kiosks” into “Government Kiosks.” At a touch of the finger, citizens get simple, basic information – in English or Spanish - about buying a home, getting rental help in the local area (including a searchable list of government-subsidized rental units), retirement savings, free tutoring, student financial aid, poison prevention, and earned-income tax credits. And they can print it all out and take it home.

Because the kiosks are web-based, content can be updated quickly and easily. They’re not intended to be internet workstations – you can’t use the kiosks to surf the web. Content is light – about 100 pages – because they’re intended for quick service. Stop by, spend 5 minutes getting what you want, print, and move on. The ATM concept.

But what’s really terrific about the Government Kiosks is that they actually help citizens improve their lives. How do I know? Well, when the Bush administration came in, they commissioned a study of the program to decide if they should continue it. The answer? You bet! The study concluded that 74% of the 1,500+ kiosk users across the country who were observed and/or interviewed in the study acted on the information they found on the kiosks – from talking to a housing counselor to visiting a HUD office to returning to the kiosk for more information. Those are pretty impressive results.

But I also want to tell you about a personal observation. While I was working out of HUD’s Tucson Office, 4 years ago, I noticed a young man standing at the kiosk that was located right outside the office door. He seemed quite intent on copying something he’d seen on the screen, so I decided to watch for awhile. I walked across the street and checked my watch. 17 minutes later, he left. When I walked over to the kiosk to see what had interested him so much, I saw a list of local homeless shelters. If the kiosk helped him - or someone he knew - find a place to sleep...well, isn't that what public service is all about?

But, you say, pretty much everyone has access to the internet these days. Why do we need kiosks? Well, they serve a different purpose. They reach people who might not think to come to a government website for help. Or maybe a person has tried to use a government website but found it too complicated. Or maybe they just didn’t know the government had free tutoring programs, until they passed by a kiosk and saw it on the screen.

According to the February statistics (which you can find on the HUD website, for those of you who care about transparency), 31,000 visitors stopped by one of the 64 Government Kiosks currently operating.

I’d like to see the Obama team look into this program – see if it could/should be expanded…more kiosks in more cities with state-of-the-art equipment and publicity to let citizens know about them. Deliver government to more citizens. Maybe add real-time chat or other interactive citizen support services. Or don’t add anything. After all, it’s working.

Kiosks aren’t a new idea – but sometimes, old ideas deserve a fresh look.

Take a Deep Breath – We’ve Got to Be Patient

Mea culpa. Like my fellow Web Passionistas, I am guilty of being terribly impatient for the Obama team to make long-awaited changes in the way government does business through the web. I've read a good number of blogs and tweets, sounding the frustrations many of us share. A few weeks ago, I even sent a whiny email to Macon Phillips, complaining about the introduction of multiple new websites around the economic situation (recovery.gov, financialspending.gov, usaspending.gov, economicrecovery.gov). Sorry about that, Macon (at least I didn’t use all caps!). I know a lot of us are so eager to see change…we idealistically thought these folks would walk in the door, wave their magic wands, and – poof! – all better. Well, darn it…I think we’re going to have to be patient.

I'm sure the Obama team is as frustrated as we are. They came in with the same high expectations, only to face a dearth of office space, lengthy staffing processes, complex procurement requirements, and other laws and regulations that have been making government employees groan for years. For example, I know the privacy and accessibility laws and regs complicate jumping into some of the new technologies that most of us agree will help government interact with citizens. But it’s the right thing to do to protect the privacy of citizens who use government websites – citizens hold government to a higher standard on this issue. And we must make our web content accessible to all citizens (and if it’s not important enough to make it accessible, then – gee – maybe it shouldn’t be there at all).

It’s gonna take some time to get over these hurdles. They have to sort through the laws and regs and figure out which ones have to be preserved and which ones can be modified. I worked for the government for a long time; and one thing I learned is that you can accomplish most anything, if you just keep looking for options. I think this team is up to the task.

Now, if we haven’t seen progress a year from now, we can – and should - really yammer. And, sure, we should keep reminding them about the things that are really important to us – making top citizen tasks as prominent and easy-to-use as possible, transparency, engagement, and (my own personal pet peeve) downsizing the absurd number of government websites (each with its own look and feel) and unattended government web content.

But for now, let’s be patient, fellow Web Passionistas. If the past is prologue, it will be another 3-5 months before they get all the people in place. Macon and his team are working hard at the White House. Vivek Kundra just got his foot in the door at OMB; and while I know we all have high expectations of him, even Gandalf himself couldn’t bring about change as fast as we want it. Everything we’ve seen indicates these folks are on the right track. So let’s give them a chance.

Related Links
Barriers and Solutions to Implementing Social Media in Government

It's Time for Governance

I just returned from DC, where I taught another Web Manager University course. I always love teaching and seeing my former colleagues. But this trip was especially interesting because government web managers are truly excited about the connections they are making with the executive (read: political) level of government. And why is that so important? Because that strong connection has not existed in the past 14 years. Because that connection is absolutely essential if the issues that the Federal Web Managers Council spotlighted in their recent white papers are to be resolved. Because it’s time to create a true “governance” structure for government web management.

Lisa Welchman wrote a terrific blog post a couple of weeks ago about the progress our friends in the United Kingdom are making in consolidating and focusing their government websites, largely because they have strong web governance. She calls for similar top-level support and direction in the U.S. I couldn’t agree more that the top-level governance void needs to be filled. But – as always – how we do it is as important as what we do. It’s got to be the right players at each level, and there have to be the right, formal, connections between levels.

I think there are three key issues here.

1. First (and I do mean in this order), top government executives need to recognize and declare that government websites (at least those in the Executive branch) are major assets for mission achievement and public service – not just a jumble of massive bulletin boards for the plans and achievements of whatever administration is in power – and they must be managed that way.

Citizens are the primary audience for most government websites. Web managers know that. They also know that citizens come to government websites to get the information or services they want and need quickly and easily and get out. They don’t want to waste their time wading through photos of agency heads, press releases on agency actions, and way too many home page links to esoteric content, put there to appease the egos of agency managers who think what they do is so important that it warrants front-page feature.

The problem is that top political and career executives – at least in the past – either didn’t know or didn’t care that taxpayers see our websites as service centers that should be focused on their needs. So we need that top layer to get behind the notion that government websites are about serving citizens and that they must be run as the critical products that they are, with appropriate resources dedicated to their success.

2. Which brings me to issue two: government websites MUST be run by web managers who have appropriate knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs). Fourteen years ago, when U.S. government websites were born, we didn’t have a cadre of employees with the KSAs to manage these assets. Now, we do.

Web managers must have 7 basic KSAs: leadership skills, communication skills (both writing and speaking), organizational skills, analytical skills, entrepreneurial skills, basic knowledge of the agency and its programs, and basic knowledge of web technology. Top agency web managers need experience in government web management, as well. Agencies need to hire web managers with these skills and train upcoming web managers to build these KSAs. They also need to be sure they have adequate numbers of skilled web managers to manage their websites.

3. Finally, issue three: we need a formal governance structure at the top that supports the wonderful and successful grassroots structure that already has emerged in the Web Managers Forum and the Federal Web Managers Council. That structure needs to address and coordinate policy-making and strategic planning for web content operations, across government.

So what do I propose? It’s pretty simple, really.

1. Create a governmentwide Web Policy Council, comprised (at least) of the Director of Communications at the White House (or his/her designees which could/should include the Director of New Media), the Director of E-Government and Information Technology at OMB, the Chief Performance Officer at OMB (and that might be someone who holds one of these other titles), the Director of Information and Regulatory Affairs at OMB, and the Chief Technology Officer (again, those duties may be subsumed by one of these other officials).

The Director of the Office of Citizen Services at GSA (or his/her designee) and the Co-Chairs of the Federal Web Managers Council should be participants in all policy discussions, so they can bring practical issues to light and carry back the thinking of the Web Policy Council to the web manager community. If there were a Director of Communications Policy at OMB (I so wish and believe there should be), that officer also should sit on this Council.

Each of these policy managers has a strong stake in the efficiency and effectiveness of government websites. In addition, it will be important for each of these players to coordinate his/her requests of government web managers with the others. The Policy Council presents the opportunity to establish priorities.

2. Sanction the Federal Web Managers Council as the implementation coordinating body for web policies. They already are empowered to develop and distribute guidance and directions on implementing OMB policies and to identify and publicize best practices. They just need public (re)endorsement. Further, the Federal Web Managers Council can raise issues to the Policy Council that need higher level guidance and/or support or coordination.

3. Take care of outstanding business. The Web Policy Council should do 3 things, right off:

• Prepare a memo from the Director of OMB to all Agency Heads, informing them that web management policy and strategy will now be directed by this Web Policy Council and will apply to all agencies; that agency websites are to be viewed and used as public service centers, focusing on using the best available technologies to deliver services – especially “top tasks” - as efficiently and effectively as possible; and that they are to review and assign appropriate resources – including web managers with appropriate KSAs – to managing government websites. This memo also should sanction the Federal Web Managers Council.
• Act on the White Papers prepared by the Federal Web Managers Council.
• Develop and publicize strategic goals for web management for the coming year(s) to guide the Federal Web Managers Council and government web managers in all agencies. Everyone – top to bottom – must have the same vision and path, to accomplish all that must be accomplished.

It’s time to fill this void. We need a strong governmentwide, top-to-bottom governance system for managing government websites as the critical citizen service products they are.

Related Posts:

We Need A Communications Czar!
As You Plan Ahead, Think What You Want to Leave Behind

Great News, Web Managers…You Have a Place at the Table!

I’ve wanted to write a blog piece about Bev Godwin for a long time. But now, I have a terrific excuse. Bev just announced that she’s gone over to the White House, on a detail, as the Director of Online Resources and Interagency Development on the New Media Team. This is unbelievably good news, not only for my dear and deserving friend, Bev, but also for the government web manager community. Why? Because – finally – you have one of your own sitting at the policy table.

I met Bev about 13 years ago when she was chairing an interagency group tasked to create a website that would help state and local governments work with the federal government. Bev was on the Vice President’s Reinventing Government task force at that time, and this was one of the first efforts to develop an interagency website. As you can imagine – there were a lot of opinions and a good deal of stumbling. But finally, we got the job done, thanks to Bev’s leadership abilities and political finesse. When Bev got the assignment to create FirstGov.gov (thankfully renamed “USA.gov”) as THE federal government’s online “front door,” I knew she’d do a terrific job and that agency web managers could count on her to include them in the process. That’s just the way Bev works.

In late 2003, Bev called to ask me to work with her on a new assignment: recommending policies to OMB for implementing the E-Gov Act of 2002, Section 207. Well, you know how that turned out (and if you don’t, just take a look at the report). Once again, Bev used her leadership skills, her political acumen and her plain ol’ smarts to guide an effort that resulted in creation of interagency web governance (the federal Web Managers Council), the first training institution for government web managers (Web Manager University), and the first website targeting government web managers (Webcontent.gov). Powerful achievements.

And now our Bev is at the White House, working with Macon Phillips and others to lead change in the way government serves citizens via the web.

It’s fun to watch the organizational and personnel decisions the Obama administration is making and to imagine how they’ll impact government web management. In addition to the New Media Team at the White House, we anticipate the new E-Gov Director at OMB (TechPresident and others are speculating that DC CTO Vivek Kundra will be named to that job. Vivek has been a superstar in using technology to inform citizens in DC, so this surely would be good news). And though I’m still not exactly sure what the Chief Performance Officer will tackle, an office that’s looking at improving efficiency and effectiveness in government surely will want to extend those efficiencies through web applications and content (maybe an advocate for “top tasks?”). So that’s three high-level operations that could – and probably will - play a part in setting the agenda for government web management in the next few years. It will take good coordination to head off the “too many bosses” syndrome.

But now you’ve got one of your own at the policy table, web managers. Bev knows the web manager community and its challenges; and she will be in a position to raise those issues when it counts – as decisions are being made. And if I know Bev, she’ll make sure that your ideas and concerns are considered in the discussion phase, rather than after the fact. You couldn’t have a better, more savvy and more capable advocate. This is great news.

Congrats, Bev! We’re all cheering for you!

Related link
Defining Key Roles, Reducing Confusion

Start With the Problem - Not the Solution

I was quite taken with a recent interview with Vint Cerf, Vice President and Chief Internet Evangelist for Google, about what the new Chief Technology Officer might be asked to do. Instead of just being a super CIO, Cerf sees the CTO as a strategist, offering technology solutions to the range of government problems and challenges that the President has defined. It’s not technology for the sake of technology. It’s not solutions in search of problems. Just start with understanding the most critical management problems – the priorities - and then look at possible solutions, which probably will include technology in concert with other actions.

I’m a Facebook junky, a Twitter lurker, and – after all – I’m writing this for my blog. It’s very tempting to start looking around for management problems to solve with all the cool new things we can do with technology. But Vint Cerf has it right. We’ve got to keep the horse in front of the cart. Be strategic. Start with the management priorities. Then figure out the best solutions.

Related link
Ondotgov – Gwynne Kostin’s blog (Gwynne gets it! Read her purpose statement)

Oh My Gosh…They’re Getting It Right!

I’m literally doing a happy dance (and no, that’s not something you’d want to see)! I just read in Nancy Scola’s blog piece on TechPresident that Google's Katie Jacobs Stanton will be joining the White House as the new Director of Citizen Participation. Now that, in itself, is very good news…that the Obama administration values citizen participation is huge. That he made such an excellent choice for that post is terrific. But what’s really got me excited was this: “Stanton, sources say, will be part of the White House New Media Team headed up by Macon Phillips -- putting ‘citizen participation’ under the White House communications umbrella, it seems.” Oh my gosh…they’re getting it right!

Do you realize how powerful this could be for those of us who champion providing good citizen service via the web? To look at citizen participation and new media as part of government communications, at the highest level…well, that is exactly what needs to be done to make major improvements in government web management. I was optimistic about the changes these folks might bring about for our community, but this is the first hard proof that it’s happening. Sorry – but I just have to do this: Woo Hoo!!!

I’d started working on a very different blog piece…about some things that have been worrying me. I’m concerned about seeing new government websites spring up that seem to duplicate existing sites…recovery.gov (mandated by Congress – which is a whole other problem) sounds very similar to usaspending.gov, for example. The new college.gov seems to replicate – at least in part – studentaid.ed.gov. Are people just putting up new websites rather than fixing the old ones? Are we so worried about having clever URLs to promote that we lose sight of the fact that we’re possibly/probably creating yet more duplication?

Then there are the brainstorming “camps” that seem to be springing up everywhere. Don’t get me wrong – I think bringing feds and advocates and experts and citizens together to brainstorm is terrific. Long overdue. But do we really need 3 different workshops that will/should talk about the same problems/issues/solutions? How will the results be synthesized? Who will have the authority and resources to implement anything that comes out of these “camps?”

Well, maybe we have an answer for my concerns. Maybe it’s this new team at the White House.

Now if the Web Managers Council – and, by extension, the Government Web Managers Forum - can just get plugged into this White House team (and I suspect they will!), then maybe – together - they can address those threshold issues and make the changes that are needed to make U.S. government websites the citizen service and engagement centers they should be.

You go, Katie and Macon!

Related posts
What’s missing from e-gov? A mandate to communicate
Are we ready for e-democracy?
We need a communications czar
USA.gov shines the light on a big problem: redundancy

Related link
Putting Citizens First: Transforming Online Government

To Everything There Is a Season

I stumbled on an old memo, the other day. It was a July 2001 memo from the fledgling Web Content Managers Forum (with its 59 members) to Mark Foreman, President Bush’s first E-Gov czar. Though the Forum had formed only months before (October 2000), we hoped to get the attention of this new official, asking to engage in a discussion of web content management issues.

“We need to talk about content issues we are facing: how to assess what our customers want and need, how to generate and maintain content that is citizen-friendly, how to measure whether we’re delivering content in ways they find useful, how to promote and market our web sites, how to manage the ever-growing numbers of e-mails generated by our web sites, and how to overcome organizational cultures and values that inhibit our efforts to create e-government and e-governance.”

We hand-delivered that memo, but – alas – we never got a response.

Now, 8 years later, the Federal Web Managers Council – the leadership committee of the Web Content Managers Forum (now 1,500 strong!) has issued a White Paper that is getting top-level attention not only from the incoming Obama administration, but around the world. To everything there is a season.

The same month we sent that memo to Mark Foreman (July 2001), Sam Gallagher (HUD’s current Web Manager and my long-time associate) and I were asked to do a presentation for the annual E-Gov conference. We decided to end it with a “sky’s the limit” section, offering some of our ideas about the possibilities for the future. Honestly, I think most people thought we were nuts. The session wasn’t very well reviewed. Here’s what we projected:

"Possibility 1: One single government database; citizens go through one door; integration of all government levels; eliminates silos and layers

Possibility 2: Many/most government employees work from home or from cross-agency work centers; citizens want government services at all times - employees work non-traditional schedules to deliver; new job: “subject specialists” (knowledgeable about info from all levels of government) help guide citizens through options

Possibility 3: Online communities form and look for power; citizens find support from “virtual friends;” government will struggle with its role in these communities and the impact of these communities on bricks and mortar communities

Possibility 4: Citizens become government; citizens demand to be involved; virtual teams/work groups work together from legislation to implementation; government’s role: teacher/enabler (not parent/implementer)

Possibility 5: Nationwide access to internet; Federal internet centers in every community; public/private partnerships provide wireless access in remote areas; web access through TVs

Possibility 6: Consolidation of government programs; portals highlight overlaps/redundancies; public demands consolidation"

To everything there is a season.

Citizen Service – That’s What It’s All About

Wouldn’t it be great if the new administration made “citizen service” a real priority…treated it like one of the most important products of government? Wouldn’t it be wonderful if they issued a press release saying, “we’re going to embrace the 6 principles of citizen service identified by the Federal Web Managers Council in their white paper, 'Putting Citizens First: Transforming Online Government,' and make that our vision for citizen service in this country?”

When then interact with their government, every citizen should be able to:

1. “Easily find relevant, accurate, and up-to-date information;
2. Understand information the first time they read it;
3. Complete common tasks efficiently;
4. Get the same answer whether they use the web, phone, email, live chat, read a brochure, or visit in-person;
5. Provide feedback and ideas and hear what the government will do with them;
6. Access critical information if they have a disability or aren’t proficient in English.”

Wouldn’t it be great if they pulled service delivery functions (websites, call centers, publication centers, information centers) together, under one umbrella, making sure that citizen services are delivered as efficiently and effectively as possible? What a great message that would give the American people – to let them know that serving them really is what government is all about.

As You Plan Ahead, Think About What You Want to Leave Behind

I went through 4 Presidential transitions, as a federal employee; and there's one mistake that I've seen new administrations make too often: they fail to institutionalize their initiatives. They don’t create the infrastructure to make their good ideas permanent...to integrate them so well into everyday government operations that they can’t be undone (at least not easily). Thus, when the next administration comes to town, those changes can be wiped out with the stroke of a pen.

What does this have to do with web management? Everything. Government web managers are rejoicing that the Obama administration is not only web-savvy, but that it is listening to them. The transition teams have been spot on, asking the right questions about the use of the web in carrying out agency mission. They’ve been open and receptive to the ideas offered by government web managers, including the Web Managers Council White Paper. Hallelujah!

But here’s the caution: as you implement change, be sure you put in place the policies and organization and processes and people to make those changes last. In other words, as you plan ahead, think about what you want to leave behind.

So…specifics – right? Well, here are a few that come to mind.

1. Sanction the federal Web Managers Council as the official cross-government policy/procedure clearinghouse and coordinating body for web content (comparable to the CIO Council’s role in technology coordination), and (this is the really important part) establish policies and procedures to connect that body to the Chief Technology Officer and OMB. This group of federal web managers has done an exemplary job using grassroots organization and best practice to bring about improvement in all government websites. Give them the boost of official recognition and the ear of top executives, and watch out! They know what needs to be done – let them do it.
2. Designate GSA as the lead agency on web content management and give them both the mandate and the staffing to coordinate content management across government. That means staffing up the Office of Citizen Services with some agency web managers – either through hiring or extended details – to bring agency experience and enhanced credibility to the leadership effort. It also means hiring expertise in specific areas – like audience analysis – that agencies can tap into.
3. One of those areas of expertise needs to be plain language. Hire a plain language expert (I’d go after Annetta Cheek, who has been carrying that torch for a long time, but there are others) to the GSA staff (or as a consultant). Lead an effort to slim down and clean up the most used web content. Charge all Cabinet agencies, plus other agencies that interact with the public often, to pass governmentwide “plain language standards” (established by the Web Managers Council working with the plain language experts) for at least the 50 web pages most used by the public, within the next 6 months.
4. Charge all agencies to post a box with direct links to their 3-5 “top tasks” (those services that citizens want/need the most) on the front page of their websites. Have the Web Managers Council coordinate this effort. Come up with common language and common placement, so citizens will know exactly where to look, no matter which government website they visit. I personally like the “I Want to…” box on the USDA website, but there are other models. Where top tasks overlap agencies, establish links (or better yet, consolidate content…but that’s another blog post...). Publicize this achievement to the public so they know it’s there and so they know you care about their wants/needs. Once the public comes to expect this level of service, THEY won’t let it be wiped out with the stroke of a pen.
5. Establish a governmentwide web content review and certification process. Now. In 4 years, that will be just part of standard operating procedures. And it’s the right thing to do.

Change is good. Change is needed. The trick is to make it lasting. Make sure the good things you do will be there after you go. Institutionalize change, right from the start.

Related link: So Many Possibilities...But Where to Begin?

Dear Santa…Here’s My Christmas List…

Santa...I know you’re really busy trying to offset this worldwide economic crisis and all…but I’ve been a really good citizen this year, and I’ve trimmed my Christmas list to 5 items. Five is a good number, don’t you think? So here goes...

1. I want to go to USA.gov and type in my zip code and pick a couple of topics – housing and health – and find out everything the government (federal, state, and local, if possible, please) has to offer me. Then I want to click on a link and have an online real-time chat with a knowledgeable government employee who can answer my questions and give me objective advice about my options, even if that means giving me information from multiple agencies. And I’d like to be able to do that day or night, any day of the week.
2. I want to go to Facebook (because I spend time there every day) and - if I choose to be a “fan” – see “status” reports (NOT spin-ettes put out by Public Affairs) from agencies that interest me. Like “today we’re thinking about new public policies on student loans.” And I can choose to “comment.” Or not. Or enter an online discussion with agency experts, outside experts, and other citizens. If I do comment or offer an idea, I’d like to trust (that’s an important word) that a government employee actually will read it, consider it, and – hope springs eternal – take it into consideration. And if it’s not too much trouble, I’d like to know what happens to my comments and ideas.
3. I want to be able to call a government agency and get the same answer that I get from a government website...and I want to be confident enough that there actually is some internal coordination that I (as a citizen) don’t have to a) check to be sure it’s the same and b) write to that/some agency to tell them they aren’t the same so I need to know which is right.
4. I’d like to read 10 simple words instead of 100. I’d like to have the 3 best options instead of 20. I’d like to know where to start the process, instead of confronting 25 links listed in alpha order. I’d like some help – like a decision tree – so I can figure out what government program might be best for me. I’m not stupid. I just don't have time to read a library of government information from umpteen agencies, sort it out, analyze it, and try to figure out what the heck it all means. I’d rather have expert government analysts do that. I paid a lot of taxes last year…I think I deserve that service, don’t you?
5. I want all government websites to look alike. I honestly don’t care which one is prettiest. I honestly don’t care if one is an award winner (I'd like all government websites to be "award-winning" quality). I just want to figure out where the topics are and what the words mean one time, and I want to be able to navigate all over the government with that knowledge. I want to be able to recognize a government website in one quick glance – because it looks like all the other government websites I visit. Then I know I can trust (there’s that important word again) it.

I’ll understand if you can’t bring me everything this year, Santa. If you could bring one or two, I'd be really happy. And whatever you can’t get me this year, that’s OK…I’ll just put it on my list next year. I figure if I keep asking, maybe I'll get what I want, one day. Thanks for listening (there's another one of those important words), Santa.

So Many Possibilities…But Where to Begin?

I’ve been doing a lot of treadmill thinking about what I’d suggest if I were advising the Obama team on government websites. So many exciting ideas floating around - great ways to improve public service via the web - and they all require resources. So I think I’d suggest that the Obama team start by getting a handle on what they’ve got to work with. Then they can make good strategic decisions about how and where they can re-direct resources to these new initiatives. Here are three ideas:

1. Do an inventory of all government websites. Yes, count them. Find out what purpose each plays, who the audience is, how much traffic they’re getting, and what they cost. What do they contribute in terms of mission achievement and/or service to the public? I’m guessing you could make some decisions right off the bat about eliminating redundancy, closing obsolete sites, and targeting consolidation. See where you can free up resources to do other things better, faster, smarter.
2. Do an inventory of “top tasks.” Find out what the public really requests/uses/needs most often, across government. Agency web managers should be able to list their top 3-5 tasks by looking at their data and email, over time. Pick ten or so of those top tasks; and use the Web Managers Council to convene cross-agency working groups of web managers, content experts, usa.gov staff, and maybe even citizens, for each of those ten. Have each working group look at the content currently available across government (usa.gov’s topical links directories should help). Figure out how to eliminate duplication, consolidate where possible, and – this is something we just haven’t done well across government – put the content in some logical order (maybe it’s steps…”start here;” maybe it’s decision trees…if this, then that; maybe it’s categories) so the public can use it more easily. Target these top tasks for web 2.0 applications - maybe how-to videos; maybe outreach through social media. Get a plain language expert to work on the project. Then put all this on usa.gov. If this works, do more.
3. Start a governmentwide web content certification process. Some agencies do this already. Bring discipline to content management by putting the onus for quality on the right players – the organization managers who create and own it. Require managers all the way up the chain to certify to the agency head – on some regular basis – that the content their organizations have posted on their websites is current and accurate. Hold them accountable. There’s nothing like telling managers that their performance ratings will be affected if their web content is wrong or outdated, to put focus on the importance of quality. Chances are this also will help keep web content to a manageable mass.

A good baseline is a good place to start. It should help identify the resources needed to turn some of those wonderful possibilities into reality.

Related links:

USA.gov Shines The Light On a Big Problem: Redundancy

Forewarned Is Forearmed

Transition Tests Leadership

Ah – I remember it well…during the last transition, new requirements for our website were coming from all directions. Web managers and team members all over the Department were being urged by the new political team to do this, that, and the other. Many of the new political staff didn’t give a hoot that the Department had policies and procedures for what goes on the website and how it gets there, nor did they care about making sure we retained our goal to look like “one HUD.” It was every branch/division/office for itself.

Transition was a great opportunity for rogue web team members, itching to do their own thing, to go off in their own direction. All they needed was the ear of a new political aide (who probably was unaware of Department web policies), and they had their sanction. Indeed, we eventually saw a major section of the Department break off and create its own website. That we were able to retain as much stability and make as much progress as we did was a minor miracle. And HUD wasn't the only government agency facing this phenomenon.

The last transition was a huge challenge to the leadership abilities of government web managers. This transition will be no different.

How do you keep a web organization together and on track, when you have no legitimate (delegated) authority over all the players? How do you show the incoming political executives and aides the value of a unified strategy across the agency and across government, to improve government websites? How do you keep all you’ve accomplished from falling apart? You have to lead!

It’s as simple (and challenging!) as this: you have to get in to see the new team; and you have to articulate what you want to do and where you’re headed, in terms that this political audience understands. You have to persuade them that it’s the right thing to do for the American people. You have to show your passion for, and conviction in, the strategic direction of the web manager community. You have to know your message and stick to it. You have to repeat it over and over, like a broken record. And you have to make sure that your entire web team can articulate the same principles and direction.

You must be a strong leader to be successful in managing government websites - always. But your leadership abilities have never been more critical than they are now. Hold your team together through your leadership. Inspire them – and your new bosses – to work together across the agency and across government to create websites that provide first-class service to the public. Speaking as a citizen, we are counting on you to do that. Lead!

Ready, Set, GO!

Finally, the Presidential election is behind us! We have our new President-elect, and the very good news for government web managers is that President-elect Obama is web-savvy and very ambitious about using technology to make government more open and transparent to its citizens. So…are you ready?

The transition teams are moving into your agencies right now. You’ve been planning for months. But just in case you still need some pointers on strategy, here are three.

Make an appointment to meet with the transition team TODAY! Find out the name of at least one person on your agency’s transition team and call or email that person, asking for no more than 30 minutes to brief him/her on the agency’s web plans. Go to that meeting well-rehearsed.

Plan a 20-minute presentation, leaving 10 minutes to answer questions and to ask how you can help them succeed. Give them just 3 pieces of information:

• Who are we serving? Describe your web audiences and what they want/use most (top tasks). Use a few stats, and explain why those stats are important to the new administration. Don’t overwhelm them with “what is” because they’re going to be more interested in “what will be.”
• What are the goals for improving public service via the web? Give them a copy of the Web Managers Council White Paper, and describe how the web manager community is working together to improve all government websites. Again, make sure they understand how this will help them implement their objectives.
• What help do you need from the new administration? Tell them what policy changes you need to improve service to the public. If your governance structure needs to be fixed, that should be one of the first items on your agenda. Talk in terms of the value of these changes to the new administration. Keep it short; keep it positive.

Make sure your name and contact info is on each piece of paper you leave behind. Offer to meet again to discuss specific goals and strategies.

Tip for success: take a member of the Web Managers Council with you to this briefing. Show that the community stands together.

Meet with your web organization. You must keep your web team informed. Tell them whom you’ve met, what you’ve said, and what’s been said to you. Your team may be getting information, too. Pool your knowledge to get a better picture of the new team and what they want and need. Players and information will be changing quickly, so find a good way to communicate regularly with your web organization.

Stay plugged in to what’s going on across government. Don’t skip over that email from the Listserv or the Web Council leaders – you need to know what other web managers are learning. Listen in to all Forum calls. Check webcontent.gov frequently. We serve best when we serve together. So keep alert to information your colleagues may be getting or giving – it could really help you be successful with the new team!

It’s an exciting time! Change is good. You’re prepared. Be steady. Ready, set, GO!

Work Together Through This Transition

It’s just weeks away…the both longed-for and feared “T” word: transition! It doesn’t matter where your politics lie…when you’re a Fed, you psych up for this event. New bosses. New initiatives. New energy. New challenges. And a new opportunity to show how government web managers are working together to improve public service.

The federal Web Managers Council has crafted a strategy for achieving cross-government goals. They based it on ideas from the web manager community. It’s all right there. Now you have to sell it to the new administration. You have to tell them why it’s important to your agency, to all agencies, and – most of all – to the public. You have to convince them that it’s critical and worth their attention and support. So here’s a thought: if it’s a web community plan, why not do your briefings in web community teams?

How you convey a message often is as critical to success as what you say. If your message is "we have a cross-government strategy," couldn’t you underscore your point by having 2 or 3 web managers from other agencies with you? It's that whole actions speak louder than words thing.

Be strategic. And remember: we serve best when we serve together.

Related links:
5 Things Government Web Managers Should Do Before Transition
Three Wishes

Leading Strategically

Gwynne Kostin, web manager at Homeland Security, jumped right into a leadership role after Hurricane Katrina hit in 2005. A member of the federal Web Managers Council, Gwynne marshaled government web managers into information “lanes” and managed a governmentwide effort to provide consistent, concise information for hurricane victims, relatives, and friends. It was a real milestone in the government web manager community –the first time we really worked together to create and manage content on a specific topic, across government websites. Gwynne recognized a management problem and stepped in to provide a strategy and the leadership to solve it.

Since then, Gwynne has led subsequent disaster responses, improving the process each time. She doesn’t wait to be told what to do. She just does it. That’s real leadership.

Now, Gwynne has done it again. As part of the government’s most recent response to devastating hurricanes, Gwynne developed a “widget” – a piece of computer code – that shows 6 simple links:

Federal Hurricane Response

• Get Prepared
• Find Friends & Family
• Health & Safety
• Donate & Volunteers
• What Government Is Doing
• En espanol

This widget appears on the Homeland Security website and – from there - can be copied by other web managers and placed on their own websites, helping the public get the same consistent hurricane information from the government, no matter which website they visit. It saved time and effort for individual web managers because they didn’t have to replicate or create their own set of links; and it provides commonality across government, a bonus for the public. Once again, Gwynne identified a management problem – need for quick, consistent information across government – and used a web 2.0 technology to solve it.

One of my greatest concerns about the Web 2.0 revolution is that web managers will use these technologies and applications because they’re “cool” – not because they are the right solution to a management problem or goal. Gwynne Kostin has demonstrated the right way – the strategic way - to do it. That’s real leadership.

An Inventory Is A Place to Start

24,000 + federal government websites…where do you begin to address that massive amount of clutter (not to mention overlap, waste, vanity, etc.)? A good inventory is a place to start.

Federal web managers would be doing their new bosses – and all Americans – a big favor if they just simply count the websites. Collect basic data:

• Title
• URL (.gov, .mil, .fed.us, .com, .edu – come on…ferret out all those hidden sites!)
• Purpose (that should be entertaining)
• Average monthly visitors (unique visitors per month, over a 3-6 month period)
• Cost (ah-ha! No cheating. Count FTE – both full-time and at least half-time, contracts, and IT costs, at a minimum)
• Calculate a cost/visitor ratio

Put it all together (Web Managers Council) and see what you’ve got.

Want to help the next President (and his team) figure out what they’ve got and what they need to do next? Start with an inventory. I double-dog dare you.

Another Voice on Common Look and Feel?

Darrell M. West, formerly of Brown University and now of the Brookings Institution, has released his latest review of e-gov: “State and Federal Electronic Government in the United States, 2008.” Like most federal web managers, I have some concerns about West’s studies…how is it that an agency’s score can change so dramatically from year to year, when virtually no changes were made to the website? But that question aside, West’s reviews always are interesting reading.

One recommendation that West makes in this year’s report really jumped out at me. It’s way down on page 8, under “Policy Recommendations:”

“The most striking discovery while researching state and federal websites was the importance of consistency. States that had websites that were completely inconsistent from one agency to the next were harder to navigate, because each site seemed like an independent entity. Sites that were consistently formatted, however, were much easier to use because one knew where to find certain links with the prior knowledge of their relative locations on other state sites.”

And in a box on that same page:

“Agencies should have layouts similar to the portal page so that users can automatically identify that agency’s website as a government unit.”

On this concept, I am in total agreement with Darrell West.

Years ago, we figured out that if an agency used a common template for all of its component offices and divisions, it makes us look better to the public; and, more important, it makes it easier to use our website(s). I remember when I forced all of HUD’s field and Headquarters offices to move to a single template, back in the mid-1990s. I was nearly tarred and feathered. I was pulling all the creativity and fun out of web management. I was too controlling. I was hated. But you know what? It was the right thing to do. The public loved it. We immediately began getting email from our website visitors saying how much easier it was to use the site and how much it made us look like a single, unified agency, speaking with one voice.

Many federal agencies now “get it” and have pulled all (or most of) their component sites into a single look and feel. USDA did a dynamite job doing just that a couple of years ago. So if it’s the right thing to do across an agency or – as West suggests – a state, why wouldn’t it be the right thing to do across the federal government?

Further, I agree with West that agencies should have layouts similar to the portal page, so that visitors recognize us as a unit. The portal for the federal government is USA.gov. You’ve heard me harp on this over and over – it’s a great design, it’s been tested and tested for usability, so why not use it across the board?

Read Darrell West’s report. It’s worth it. And keep mulling over that idea about a common look and feel across the federal government. The time for tough love may be coming.

USA.gov Shines the Light on a Big Problem - Redundancy

USA.gov is a terrific website. I love the design – simple, uncluttered, pretty easy to use. The USA.gov team has done a good job sorting through and categorizing thousands (and thousands and thousands and…) of links to government websites. And in doing that, they have exposed one of government’s biggest problems: redundancy. Duplication. Overlap. Waste.

Go to USA.gov and pick any topic…let’s say “Family, home, and community.” That’s a category that touches all of us. Drill down through “Homes and housing” to “Home buying and financing.” On that list, you find 12 links that mention “loan,” “mortgage,”
“finances,” “down payment,” or some derivative of these terms. These links lead to information at or from at least 6 different federal agencies (some are publications posted on the Pueblo, Colorado site). One of them takes you to another page of links on mortgages, from even more agencies. Two of the links on that page go to mortgage calculators (one from Ginnie Mae; one from the Federal Reserve).

OK – I’m a citizen looking to my government to give me some good, objective tips on getting a mortgage. And you expect me to plow through all this stuff, sort the wheat from the chaff, and figure out where to start? Come on, folks. Don’t you people talk to one another? Can’t you pull this together in one easy, step-by-step guide? Don’t we pay you to make our lives easier – not harder?

There’s nothing like seeing these long lists of links, topic-by-topic, to recognize inefficiency. I didn’t take time to read through all this info (few would), but I’d be willing to bet there’s at least some duplication (duh) and possibly even some conflicting advice. After all, when you let that many different players publish without coordination or editing, you’re bound to find some conflicting opinions.

We who work(ed) in the federal government know that duplication and lack of coordination across government is rampant. But the internet has really exposed this problem to the public.

So how do you solve it? Well, we’ve already got a model in many agencies: distributed authorship. You create one template with a good set of rules, put someone in charge of enforcing those rules, and let many authors contribute to a single website. You make sure that each topic has a good editor who sees to it that redundancy is eliminated and conflicts are resolved. You scrap all (or at least most) of those individual government websites and use those resources to create content for that single site…content that incorporates all the facts, tips, and services from all the relevant agencies, content that leads the reader through the steps.

USA.gov has sorted out the topics. We know which agencies need to work together, to pool knowledge and resources. The next step is to agree on the goal. That will take courage and humility (it’s hard to give up autonomy). Would it be easy? No. Is it the right thing to do? Yes.

Related links:

• What’s Missing from E-Gov? A Mandate to Communicate
• Common Look and Feel – Why Go Further Than USA.gov?
• Three Wishes
• Follow Those Brits!

Today’s Government Web Team Needs to Cover the Bases

Government websites are evolving into service stations where the public can drive up, find and use the service they want, and drive away quickly. Government agencies are starting to use the power of “social networking” sites to deliver information and advertise services. Government web managers are paying more attention to what the public wants and are using sophisticated metrics and usability tests to make sure they get it right. And – more than ever – the public is clamoring for websites that talk their talk…that communicate. So what kind of web team do you need to handle this big job? You need one that has all the knowledge, skills, and abilities to cover the bases.

If I were creating my “dream team” today, here’s what I’d want (and let’s just pretend money is no object):

1 Content Manager (note: I did not say “Web Content Manager” – more on that later). GS 15.

• Major functions: Overall leadership and strategy for content management operations. Representative to agency executives and interagency efforts. Overall editor-in-chief.
• Why? There’s got to be one leader at the top.

1 Deputy Content Manager GS 15.

• Major functions: chief problem solver; chief surrogate for the Content Manager.
• Why? You’ve got to have a trained and knowledgeable surrogate. You’ve got to build redundancies. And you’ve got to create a training ladder so that, by the time you need a new Content Manager, you’ve got one ready. Oh – and you’ve got to have a chief problem-solver…someone who can really dig in on those complex problems, sort them out, and come up with the right answers.

1 Technology Analyst (OK – you could call this person “Webmaster”) GS 13/14

• Major functions: look for new technologies to carry out content goals; analyze how new technologies could be used to improve content; oversee technology contractors; liaison to CIO.
• Why? You no longer can dump all that tech responsibility on the CIO. You need to have someone on your own team who can be looking down the road, who understands the content goals and can bridge the gap between communicators and the CIO staff. Whether the next President has an E-Gov Director or a Chief Technology Officer or some other IT lead at OMB, you need to have someone on your team paying attention to that side of the house.

1 Audience Analyst GS 13/14

• Major functions: develop and analyze metrics; do usability testing; analyze email, correspondence, call-ins to determine what the public wants and what the agency is telling them; recommend new/revised content to meet audience needs.
• Why? No more guessing allowed. The public expects us to know what they want and give it to them efficiently and effectively. You need an expert analyst who can make sure your content does just that.

1 Director of Local Content GS 13/14

• Major functions: lead Regional Content Managers; develop local content; coordinate with agency program office outreach operations; direct marketing and outreach.
• Why? The public wants that local touch. Sure, they want to know how to buy a home. But what they really want to know is how to buy a home in where they live (or want to live). Most agencies have field operations – you’ve got the people out there who have that local expertise. Use it.

1 Intranet Manager GS 13/14

• Major function: manage the intranet.
• Why? Employees deserve to have someone paying attention to their wants and needs, someone who will make sure content up-to-date and served in ways that make sense to them. No more making this one of many tasks assigned to one of your team members. Give it the resources it deserves.

2-3 Project Managers GS 11/12

• Major functions: plan, coordinate, implement, evaluate specific projects such as training, management controls, quality control, documentation, quarterly certifications, foreign language pages, developing new content, editing, etc.
• Why? So many projects – so little time! You need skilled project managers to make sure none of those balls drop. And this is a great training opportunity for aspiring content managers.

5-7 Regional Content Managers GS 13/14 located in agency offices outside of Washington DC.

• Major functions: Lead content operations for an assigned geographic area; develop content by state (or city); direct marketing and outreach at the local level; editors-in-chief for local content.
• Why? Folks in the field know this stuff. And you’ve got to have someone on site who can lead the effort, who have personal touch with the public

5-7 Deputy Regional Content Managers GS 11/12

• Major functions: assist Regional Content Managers and act as surrogates
• Why? Redundancy and assistance

1-2 Staff Assistants GS 7/9

• Major functions: Assist in day-to-day operations of the content team, assist in project management
• Why? Someone’s got to keep you going…cross those ‘t’s,” dot those “i’s.” And it’s a great way to pull entry-level employees into your career ladder, train them for bigger jobs.

OK – so why “content” and not “web content”? Well, for a couple of reasons. First, I believe that “web” limits the thinking of agency executives. When they hear or read “web,” they think of a website and computers – not about the tasks being served or the words on the page. They pigeonhole the content manager into a “techie” slot, rather than in the more appropriate “communicator” slot.

More important, I think it’s inevitable – and right – that, one day, all communications operations will be put under one organizational umbrella…websites, publications, call centers, and any other methods of content delivery. Someday (hopefully soon), government leaders will realize that we need to create content once and deliver it many ways. So let’s get those leaders thinking of us in terms of “content” management – not just “web” management. And when they staff those umbrella organization jobs...well, there we’ll be.

It’s transition time – use it. Get your staffing plan ready. Let your new bosses know what you need to run a successful contemporary government web team. The next President is sure to know the power of government websites. He is sure to make new demands that will affect you. This is a great time to take a hard look at your web team and make sure you’ve got what you need to cover the bases.

Related links:

5 Things Government Web Managers Should Do Before Transition

Are We Ready for E-Democracy?

Steve Clift recently published a thought-provoking article called, “Sidewalks for Democracy Online,” part of the Personal Democracy Forum’s “Rebooting Democracy” series. Steve is a long-time proponent of “e-democracy” – creating government of and by the people – not just for the people, using the internet. I’m with Steve. Involving citizens in the work of government in meaningful ways is the right thing to do. We should have online forums. We should create online work sessions allowing citizens to interact with their government to define issues and solve problems. We should use social networking options and wikis to bring government and citizens together. We should draw on the energy and ideas and talents of the public to improve the work of their government. But I wonder…are we ready for e-democracy?

Is there enough real interest among citizens – beyond the advocates – in being involved in government to make it worth the cost? Is the government (at least the federal government) ready to take this on – to change its culture - even with a President who is behind it? Is Congress ready to fund it (because we all know that unfunded mandates never last)? Are we ready to do the kind of promotion that it will take to change the skepticism of the American people?

Let’s be honest - the current culture of the federal government – like it or not – is very authoritarian. It’s, “we know what’s best for you.” Come on, feds…when was the last time you were encouraged to go out and listen to citizens? Sure, we take comments on proposed rules; but don’t we sometimes put more energy into rebutting them than embracing them? Aren’t we more likely to pull out that regulation or handbook and tell a citizen, “no” than to talk with that citizen about options?

And on the other side...many citizens want their government to be all-knowing. They want to trust their government to give them the right answer. So – to some – creating e-democracy might cause dissonance. “I’m so glad you listened to and adopted my idea, Government; but that means you weren’t completely right in the first place. If that’s true in this case, is it true in others? Can we really trust you to be right? I thought we were paying you people our tax dollars so you can solve these problems.”

Actually, e-democracy is not a new concept for government. Many agencies made attempts in the past. In the late 90s, we jumped all over the online discussion possibilities at HUD. We had a number of discussion rooms, both for HUD partners and for citizens. Some were around specific topics. Some were pretty much wide open – “let’s talk about what citizens can do in their communities to make them better.” What we found – nearly across the board – is that we got very little citizen participation; and those that did participate often used the discussion rooms to ask specific questions about HUD programs. There really wasn’t much discussion.

The bigger problem was managing the discussion rooms. Though a HUD employee was responsible for each discussion room, too often they didn’t visit the rooms regularly. Thus, we’d see nasty comments from people who had asked questions that weren’t answered or discover other participants (non-government) giving wrong information. We also saw discussions going way off track; and in a couple of cases, we saw small groups of regulars basically hijack the discussion room for completely different purposes. Managing discussion rooms is a workload item that needs appropriate staffing. Without that staffing – we learned - they fail.

E-democracy could work. What would it take?

• A change in culture. A President who makes it a priority, gets Congressional backing, creates the policies, dedicates the resources, and holds government employees accountable – from top to bottom – for results.
• A change in values. Government managers and staff have to be rewarded for listening and discussing alternatives with the public – involving them in the process. They have to value a new way to do business.
• Planning. Agency executives have to incorporate e-democracy in their management plans. They have to allocate appropriate (underscore “appropriate”) staff to engage in online forums, analyze and respond to citizen questions, take action on the solutions that are generated, and follow up to let citizens know what became of their ideas so they’ll want to participate again.

For our part, web managers need to think it through. We need to prepare. We need to use our experience to identify potential pitfalls and be ready with solutions. We need to develop practical implementation strategies based on a realistic assessment of resource needs; so if we’re asked, we can propose a sound, thoughtful, realistic method for ensuring success. We need to do this as a community - engaging those with knowledge, experience, and ideas - so we all can succeed.

E-democracy is a concept that is gaining attention from both parties. It’s a good thing. Are we ready?

Don't Make Your New Bosses Do All the Thinking

You’ve read their intentions, on their campaign websites. You’ve speculated and pondered what they may want to do, as far as the internet is concerned. But here’s the question: what should they do?

You’re the pros. You’ve been running government websites for a long time now. You know where the candidates are being idealistic and where they’re being practical. You know what policy issues will have to be addressed to make their promises come true. More important, you know what else needs to be done, to improve the way the government serves citizens. So what advice will you give them?

I’ve read a couple of interesting articles recently. Both got me thinking. The first was an article in the Wall Street Journal, “The Next American Frontier,” by Michael S. Malone. Malone talks about the change in America – especially in the behavior and expectations of young people. He describes many of them as “entrepreneurial” – wanting to work for themselves, do their own thing. How can we help our new bosses respond to this new generation of citizens? How can we help them use the internet to attract those young people to government service? Certainly work-at-home situations and virtual teams could help. What else could we suggest?

The second article was on Atlantic.com…an article called “HisSpace,” by Marc Ambinder. It’s specifically about Barak Obama and his intentions to seize the power of the internet to involve the public in government. But the author wonders if Obama can succeed, if he’s elected. Can he meet the expectations of the public?

Read both of these articles. Share them with your web friends. Talk about them. Look for more “think piece” articles. Throw what you read into the mix, along with your experience and knowledge; and really think seriously about what we can do to help our new President (whoever he or she is) succeed. What can we propose to our new bosses to help them (and us) move toward the future?

Don’t make your new bosses do all the thinking. All three of the Presidential candidates are outsiders – they haven’t worked in the Executive Branch (OK – you might say that Hillary has been close…but she hasn’t been where you are). Give them a break. Do the right thing. Give them some meaty proposals - some really forward-thinking ideas that are based in the reality you know - that could really improve the way the government serves citizens.

Good Things Do Happen to Good People

I was absolutely delighted to see Sheila Campbell chosen one of the top 10 innovators in government information technology this week, with the presentation of the 2008 Technology Leadership Awards. Bravo, Government Computer News! You got it right.

Being a web innovator is a thankless job. It’s tilting at windmills, rolling the stone uphill, and all those other old (but accurate) clichés. I don’t know anyone who has worked more tirelessly to make government websites meaningful to citizens than Sheila.

I first met Sheila as she was coming off maternity leave, in 2004. We were designated co-chairs of a cross-agency working group charged with developing policy recommendations for OMB, in compliance with the E-Gov Act of 2002, Section 207. Sheila was on the FirstGov (now USA.gov) staff and was not especially well-known in the web manager community. But she dug into that task like the dedicated pro she is.

We had a tight deadline (mandated by the legislation); and we had a geographic challenge – I was in Tucson, and Sheila was in DC. That meant that she had to do all the legwork in Washington. Sheila earned her place in the web manager community – and my trust and respect – by going way beyond the call of duty. She’s a born leader, and she was a great partner on a pivotal project.

Since then, Sheila created a website for government web managers (webcontent.gov), shepherded a new training academy for government web managers (Web Manager University), and – at the same time – served as a leader of the Web Managers Forum and Web Managers Council. Those are great credentials. But that’s not what makes Sheila such a deserving honoree, in my book. It’s her sincere passion for using the web to serve citizens that puts her on one of my pedestals. It’s how she puts her heart and soul into that goal. It’s how she worries about doing the right thing and how she pushes the web manager community toward better service. Sheila is a true “public servant.” She never loses sight of her raison d'être. She never gives up. She’s a true leader.

Way to go, Sheila! You definitely earned this affirmation.

When Web Managers Gather...

On Monday and Tuesday, some 450 government web managers from across the country will gather in Washington to hear new ideas, network, and - this year - build energy toward that action-packed time of change that comes with electing a new President. This annual meeting of the web manager community is perhaps the best use of their time all year, as far as the public is concerned, because – for a few hours – they are “government” web managers – not HUD web managers or State Department Web Managers or Indiana web managers or Chicago web managers. And when web managers start thinking and acting collectively, their power – and their results – increases exponentially.

For those couple of days, they raise their heads and look around at all that they have in common. They share ideas. They nod at common problems and common goals. They make notes about new ideas they want to try. They seek out one another at lunch or after a session to talk more about pet peeves or get more “how to’s.” They form alliances and talk about working together to make all government websites better. They take time to think about those they serve: the public. They get re-charged…they get excited. That’s a good thing for you and me, Citizen.

If you’re one of those smart web managers going to the Web Managers conference, have a great time! Soak it all up. Meet your colleagues. Seek collaboration. Get on board with the community’s plans for transition. Go home inspired!

(Oh – and if you aren’t going this year, be sure to sign up early next year. This is a “don’t miss” opportunity! It’s good for you. It’s good for those you serve.)

5 Things Government Web Managers Should Do Before Transition

A couple of weeks ago, I taught a Web Governance course for Web Manager University. To get ready for that class, I polled some of my former colleagues to see where web governance stands, across government. After all, we’ve been running government websites for 13 years now; so I expected that most agencies would have most pieces (roles, responsibilities, relationships, rules, and review) in place. Wrong! I was surprised to see how many lacked some of the basics.

With transition coming, web managers need to pin down their governance structures. Even if it’s not perfect, document what you’ve got – if only to show where there are holes. Find out what you're spending to run your website(s) and be ready to talk about return on investment.

Imagine a new boss walking in and asking you for your policies or procedures or management controls or strategic plan; and you reply, “I don’t have them.” What if your new boss asks what you're spending on the website and you say, "I don't know?" What if those new bosses walk in with a long list of ideas for using the web, and you don’t have a strategic plan and firm knowledge of your budget and resources so you can point out what trade-offs will have to be made to accommodate those new initiatives? You’d be putting your new bosses in the position of making a bad decision because you didn’t have the facts to help them make a good one. Not a great way to start.

Here’s my advice to government web managers. If you do nothing else, do these 5 things before the November election (and the arrival of those transition teams):

1. Document everything NOW! Write down your existing governance structure, policies, publication procedures/standards, and operating procedures. Have them ready for the new team. Identify deficiencies and plans to correct them.
2. Identify and document management controls (procedures) to prevent fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement of web content. Make sure you’re using them.
3. Find out how much you’re spending to run the website(s)! Include FTE (staff) – both full-time and part-time – and contract dollars spent on content support. If you can find out technology costs, that’s good, too. Know your budget. Be ready to discuss return on investment and justify costs.
4. Come up with at least one or two performance measures tied to mission achievement and/or public service. Traffic and customer satisfaction measures are not enough to justify a website.
5. Develop/document a strategic plan. Be able to show your new bosses where you’re going and explain why, in terms of impact on mission/public service. Incorporate governmentwide goals. Include goals to correct deficiencies in governance structures, policies, procedures, and management controls, as well as goals for progress. Be ready to discuss all your initiatives (including web 2.0 initiatives) in terms of the strategic goals they help achieve.

Do yourself a favor. Get these ducks lined up. You’ll look like an effective manager and be on much better footing when you talk to your new bosses. Tick, tick, tick.

Is It Better to Give or to Receive?

In the mania that is “Web 2.0,” I wonder why no one is talking about message boards?

A recent article about the official who is managing the United Kingdom’s reorganization of government websites got me thinking. At the end of the article, this official mentions that he thinks government should get active on message boards, answering the questions of citizens. You know what? I’d kind of forgotten about message boards.

Many of us tried using message boards/discussion boards fairly early on, in the evolution of our government websites. I ended up taking ours down because – honestly – we just didn’t have the staff to manage them. We learned pretty quickly that you have to have someone – preferably a glib subject matter expert - who can step in to monitor the discussions, keep everyone on course, and correct any misconceptions. Once I took it down, I forgot about the message board capability. But this article got me thinking about it again.

Blogs are a great option for government agencies to deliver information to citizens in an informal way. They let government officials step out of the formal “governmentspeak” and behave like normal human beings. I’ve seen a couple of pretty good government blogs, including Gov Gab and EPA’s Flow of the River. Blogs do offer the opportunity for citizens to comment and respond. But it seems that few do. I wonder if we’ve got it backwards? I wonder if – as that UK official suggests – we should let citizens frame the questions, and government officials can comment or respond?

Maybe it’s time to resurrect that old message board/discussion board technology and see if it might have merit, in this “social” revolution. Maybe those officials who are writing blogs could serve citizens better if they spent that time answering the questions that citizens pose. Maybe we should reconsider our strategy. Maybe in addition to - or instead of – giving out advice, we should receive our cues from the people we serve. Something to consider.

Beware the "Google is King" Strategy

This morning, I read another article about what’s going on with government websites in Great Britain. For those who don’t know, they’re in the process of shutting down many (most?) of their websites, focusing on two supersites: DirectGov and BusinessLink. Actually, I like that idea.

But the thing the struck me about this article is that, apparently, some officials in Great Britain – like some of the officials at our own Office of Management and Budget – think that all we need to do is post our vast government libraries online and let citizens use Google to sort it out. It’s not a bad concept. But is it really “public service?” Is our only responsibility to the public to make information available? Or do we have a responsibility to help the public find what they want and use it?

I still think there is value to organization, navigation, and - most of all - pointing out a path to follow toward the goals citizens want to achieve, on government websites. That's the value that web managers/editors can add. That’s something that Google cannot do.

Web managers need to be ready to address the “Google is King” thinking because if that becomes our government’s web strategy, then web managers could end up being relegated to the role of (as Gerry McGovern calls it) "putter uppers."

What's Missing from E-Gov? A Mandate to Communicate!

Early this week, I mailed a copy of my assessment, "What's Missing From E-Gov? A Mandate to Communicate!" to each member of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. That's Senator Joe Lieberman's committee, and they're working on reauthorization of the E-Gov Act of 2002 (E-Government Authorization Act of 2007, S. 2321, if you want to look it up). I made a plea to the Senators to consider adding some provisions to encourage (force?) government to communicate more effectively with citizens. Will I be heard? Who knows. Maybe one of the staffers will read it and ask some questions. I'd consider that to be a victory.

If you'd like to read the entire report, you can download it (in Word). If you'd just like a summary of what I recommended, here goes:

1. Issue a “Citizens Bill of Rights” to serve as the guiding principles – and government’s promise – for communicating with the public.

When citizens interact with their government, they should be able to:

• Get the information or service they want without knowing which agency supplies it.
• Get answers to their questions promptly, completely, and in words they understand.
• Complete government transactions – including applying for programs and filling out forms – online, and those processes should be easy to find and easy to use.
• Talk to a human being when they want to.
• Get the same answers to their questions, no matter who they ask or how they ask them (online, in writing, on the phone).
• Get clear and accurate instructions on where to start and what happens next.

2. Appoint a Director of Communications at OMB, comparable to the Director of E-Gov and responsible for governmentwide communications policies.

3. Designate GSA to be the operations center for government communications. Charge GSA to develop and implement a plan to coordinate the agencies and to consolidate content and communications across government. GSA’s Office of Citizen Services and Communication already has many of the right pieces, including the USA.gov staff and USA Services. They just need the authority to bring it all together, across government. As part of the strategy, they could:

• Establish a common design for most government websites. We’d save money across government (do you know how much it costs every time you design a website?), make it easier for citizens to use all government websites, and probably eliminate a lot of vanity websites.
• Establish a common dictionary of terms, so agencies use the same words to mean the same things. Develop these terms based on words that the public uses and would recognize – not based on terms the government commonly uses. Train government writers to use them.
• Create 3-5 “supersites” to serve as one-stops (but not just “portals” or link lists) for citizens. For example,
  o USAServices, where citizens would find brief, well-written narrative to lead them through the top tasks that they seek most often
  o USANews, where the public could find news and information about the administration’s initiatives and accomplishments
  o USAInfo, to serve as the library for important, but less requested information. Give it a great search engine.

4. Establish a senior level Chief Communications Officer at each Cabinet level agency and at other agencies that carry out programs of interest to citizens. Charge the CCO with overseeing and coordinating content operations (including web, print, telephone) so agencies create content once and deliver it in many ways. Create a staff with strong communication skills – writing, editing, and communicating with the public. While Public Affairs could be part of this operation, it has a distinct function and audience (press), not to be confused with the broader audience of “citizens.”

5. Issue a mandate to all agencies to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of current government communications (web, print, telephone) and to develop plans for streamlining and improvements, to include:

• Identifying and improving the efficiency of those “top tasks” that many citizens seek.
• Developing an inventory of all information delivery devices (including all websites) and justifying each.

6. Commission a study to assess how the public wants to interact with government in the future. Work with the Pew Research Center or another entity focused on how the public interacts with government to learn:

• What critical information and functions the public would like to be able to get from the federal government that they can’t get now,
• Which critical information and functions currently available to the public could be delivered better if it were streamlined or improved, and
• Which critical information and functions the public think are most important to get from the federal government (“top tasks”).
  
  Use the results to direct improvements.

Agree? Disagree? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Forewarned is Forearmed

If you haven’t been watching what’s going on with Great Britain’s websites, government web manager, you should be. Those who don’t learn from history are destined to repeat it.

To bring you up to date, the UK government (wisely, in my view) decided to shut down a large number (951) of its agency websites in favor of consolidating content – by topic/service area – on two “super” sites: Directgov and Businesslink.gov. Now, watchdog groups are starting to ask questions- not only about the advisability of that course, but also about what led to that decision. In an article published by The Register, entitled “Watchdog Criticises UK Gov Websites,” some very interesting issues were raised at a recent hearing of the Commons Public Accounts Committee.

Don’t be distracted by the poking at Directgov (though there is one interesting issue about that site, which I’ll mention later). The questions that should draw your attention (and possibly chill your blood!) are these:

1. How many government websites are there? What do you mean, you don’t know?
2. How much are you spending on these government websites? What do you mean, you don’t know?
3. Who is using your websites and what are they looking for? What do you mean, you don’t know?
4. Why were government websites allowed “uncoordinated growth” for 10 years?

Many U.S. government web managers have been struggling with these same questions for years. The Web Managers Advisory Council (and its predecessor, the Web Content Management Working Group, of the Interagency Committee on Government Information) continues to work to address these issues. In fact, one huge step forward toward getting a handle on U.S. government websites was OMB’s 2004 policy that government websites – for the most part – must have .gov, .mil, or .fed.us domains. However, to my knowledge, there still is no official inventory of all U.S. government websites.

In the early days of the web, citizens were just so grateful that the U.S. government was putting information on the web that actually could help them. Now, however, citizens are raising their expectations – even demands. They want content to be “searchable.” They want content to be written so they can understand it. They want to be able to find those “top tasks” that they often use, and they want them to be easy to use. That brings me back to that one interesting issue about Directgov…according to The Register article, the watchdog group wondered why Directgov doesn’t offer more “functionality.” “It’s not a very awe inspiring website is it when the only thing you can do is renew your car tax?” Hmm. Could they be suggesting that citizens want better access to those “top tasks” and that they want those “top tasks” to be easier/more efficient to use?

When the new administration comes onboard next year, they’ll be asking questions about past actions and strategies on a myriad of topics. With the growing dependence on the web to communicate with citizens, someone in the new administration is likely to zero in on what the government is doing with its websites. Get ready, folks. Document your history. Publish your policies, procedures, governance structure, management controls, and strategic plans. Inventory your agency websites and be prepared to defend the reason for each. Identify those “top tasks,” make them easy to use, and put them on the front page. Know what you’re spending on your websites – and be prepared to justify it. Forewarned is forearmed!

Related links:
The Answer for Better Searching? Better Content!
We Need a Communications Czar

The Answer for Better Searching? Better Content!

Yesterday, the Washington Post reported that the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs was to hear testimony from Google, Wikipedia, and others about the failure of government agencies to make their content “searchable.” The article claimed that some of the authorities scheduled to testify blame poor organization of content for the search problems. Well, that’s certainly part of the problem. Where web managers place content definitely contributes to its accessibility. But there is a bigger culprit: the words on the page are not words that the searching audiences use or recognize or – in many cases – even understand. This isn’t rocket science: if people are searching using terms that don’t appear on your web page, they probably won’t find that page. We’ve just got to do a much better job getting the words right.

The Web Managers Advisory Council has worked for the past 2 years to help agencies focus on improving their “top tasks” – those processes and pieces of information that a significant number of citizens seek, routinely. Again – no rocket science here. You need to make sure those tasks are worded properly so that citizens can understand them; you need to make sure that they’re efficient – especially if it’s a process; and you need to put them in places where citizens can find them (dare I suggest front page links?). Seems like that should be an easy thing to do – right? Wrong.

It’s stunning how many agencies are struggling to identify their top tasks. Improve them? That can get very political. Is there funding to make a process more efficient? How do you get the agency to make that a priority? Will “the powers that be” permit you to replace those front page news releases and photos of the agency head with links to top tasks? And here’s a biggie: do agency authors and web editors know what words citizens use and recognize? If you do know, can you get agency managers (and lawyers) to permit you to use simple, plain language wording?

Web Manager University offers web writing courses every session. Indeed, they’ve typically been full. My take? They should be required. And not just of web managers. Anyone who contributes (or approves) web content needs to know how to make the words work. If you get the words right – searching is bound to get better.

One more thought on this issue (I can’t resist beating this drum)… I had a boss once who taught me that the only way to solve a problem is to deal with the root cause. So what’s the root cause of this problem? The Federal Government doesn’t really value communicating effectively with citizens. Some federal managers don’t even recognize “citizens” as their audience. Agencies don’t put money and resources into good communications. Content – for the web, for publications, for call centers – isn’t written and edited by skilled communicators. We don’t even have a mandate to put web content management under a professional communicator. Communicating isn’t something that just anyone can do. It takes skill. It takes experience. It takes understanding of the audience. It takes commitment.

We can make our websites more searchable if we fix the words. We can make government more effective if we make communicating with citizens a priority.

Related links:
We Need a Communications Czar
Three Wishes
Somebody Needs to Say “No!”

Stop Blaming Your Bosses!

I hear, over and over, such comments as: “my boss just doesn’t get it,” “I can’t get support from my boss,” “we need to educate our bosses so they’ll do what we want them to do.” OK – I’ll admit it…I actually uttered words to that effect, once or twice. But now, I realize we were (are) wrong. It isn’t our bosses’ fault that things aren’t going our way. It’s our own fault. And there is something we can do about it. We can communicate.

In my experience, most bosses do their best to make good decisions that forward their missions and goals. Most bosses really are good people who want to do the right thing. Heck, I was a boss a few times. I know I always tried to do right things, based on what I knew about the issues. And that’s the key. We need to make sure that our bosses have all the facts, in a timely way, so they can make good decisions (ie - decisions that we like!).

We need to communicate well and often, to make our bosses aware of what we’re doing, the issues we’re facing, the options for making things better, and - yes - that we are hard-working, talented individuals who know what we're talking about. That means we’ve got to take the time to send those bi-weekly accomplishments reports (don’t wait to be asked!). That means we’ve got to write those issue papers - laying out problems along with our proposed solutions - in a timely way, so our bosses have time to consider and ask questions and make good decisions. That means we’ve got to make appointments with our bosses and get on the agenda of management meetings and use our ingenuity to let them know both what we’ve achieved and what we’d like to achieve. ‘Tis better to err on the side of over-communicating, than under-communicating. ‘Tis better to be a pest, than a hermit. ‘Tis better to be in your boss’s face, than off your boss’s radar.

Bosses do sometimes make decisions we don’t like. Sometimes, that’s because they know things we don’t know. But don’t let them make a bad decision because they don’t know something you do know. Don’t blame your boss for your failure to communicate.

Related links
What If Our Bosses Don’t Want to Be Educated?
Make Time to Lead
9 Questions Every Web Manager Needs to Ask

Have You Seen "Gov Gab?"

The USA.gov team rolled out it’s latest innovation: Gov Gab, the government blog that helps citizens figure out government. They’ve done a great job. The look is good. The posts are well-written and friendly and generally the right length (one of the entries had a few too many photos…but they’re just getting their feet wet). So, great blogging!

But actually, this is better than a blog. This is the kind of content I’d love to see on USA.gov. It does what Google can’t and lists of links don’t: it makes sense out of the top tasks. It is the right length. It talks to citizens in their language. This is what I’ve been yipping about!

If the Web Managers Advisory Council could figure out how to deliver cross-agency (both horizontal and vertical) content this way – get the agency web managers to work with the USA.gov writers to “tell the story” (at least for the top tasks) - and integrate it into the USA.gov website, I think it would be a huge step forward in communicating with citizens.

Really well done, Bev Godwin and company at USA.gov. Kudos to all!

Related links:
Make the Words Work
Why Have All These Government Websites When We've Got Google?
It's All About the Content
Connect the Dots

Common Look and Feel – Why Look Further Than USA.gov?

I was looking at USA.gov this morning; and it struck me that the design they’ve got could work for most government agencies.

I like everything about the masthead. It’s clean and simple. The branding is perfect. It’s got tabs, which - for agencies - could be “Citizens,” “Partners,” and “Media.” I like the “top services” section. It gives prominence to the “top tasks” that the web manager community is working to identify and enhance. And the content below that section could be customized to the agency, using the directory layout (and – where appropriate – taxonomy) on USA.gov as a model.

I know the USA.gov team did a ton of usability work on the design, so why reinvent the wheel? Why not just use this template across government?

I think part of the fear tied up with the common look and feel discussion is the thought of coming to agreement on a design. Well, why not use what we've already got? I know I could have fit the HUD content into that format. Maybe you’d exempt the Smithsonian and a few others. But certainly the cabinet level agencies could adopt this design easily.

If I were pitching to the new administration, I’d pitch this. Shouldn’t THE government look like THE government?

Related links:
Three Wishes
Serving the Public - What Lies Ahead
Common Look and Feel - Maybe the Time Has Come

We Need a Communications Czar

One of the issues that web content managers have faced for years is that there is no “content” advocate at OMB to help sort through the policy challenges we encounter trying to manage these huge communications vehicles (websites), effectively. The general content policies that exist have come through the technology Offices. While they are helpful, they don’t go far enough to ensure the excellence that U.S. citizens deserve. Content and technology are different beasts. They need different shepherds. We need a Director of Communications Policy at OMB.

We need someone at the top who is looking across government, at all the ways we communicate with the public (web, telephone, publications, etc..), and developing policies that ensure we’re providing consistent information and services in ways that audiences can use it. The technology folks are working hard to make sure the “how” is effective. But who is looking governmentwide to make sure the “what” is effective?

Right now, web content managers use “best practices” and critical mass to institutionalize cross-government web management procedures. Some argue that this is appropriate, within the grassroots culture of the internet. But we’re talking about the government here. We’re talking about public service. Shouldn’t our content be consistent, no matter how it is delivered and no matter which agency(ies) provide it? Shouldn’t our services be communicated effectively, so citizens can use them easily? Even the best oven won’t make a lousy cake taste good. Even the best technology won’t make lousy content serve citizens effectively. We need more than evolution and critical mass to ensure that the government (collectively) communicates well with the people we serve. We need a communications policy chief at the table.

It’s time. It’s needed.

Related links

• Three Wishes
• A Couple of Thoughts About Governance...Thought Two: Across Government
• Somebody Needs to Say "No"
• Working Best When We’re Working Together

Playing Links Ping Pong

Let me start by saying that I’ve never liked to play ping pong. It makes me dizzy and – because I’ve never been especially adept – it makes me frustrated. So when I got dumped into a game of “Links Ping Pong” the other day, I felt the same way.

I was helping a friend find some information from the government. We started at the agency that made most sense…did a search…didn’t find exactly what we wanted. So we started through the topics, each of which led to pages of links. Within 2 clicks, we were playing “Links Ping Pong.” We’d click on an item in one list of links, only to be linked to another list of links. We chose an item from that list of links and – yep – got linked to another set of links (this time, on another agency’s website – in another window!). OK. So we picked one of those links and – you won’t believe this (or maybe you will) – we went right back to the first agency’s website…to – you guessed it – another list of links.

At that point, we gave up.

The lesson is this: yes, the web is all about linking. But the value that the web manager brings to a website is making sense of all those links. I can go to Google and get a list of links. The reason I’d go to an agency website – instead of Google – is to get real content or to be guided through links in some sort of logical way (“first, you do this” or “go to this site and look for this”). I don’t go to government websites to play links ping pong.

If you do use a link, I’d appreciate it if that link took me to real content – not just to another menu of links. If you do take me to a set of links, please describe what I’m going to find – or I should look for – on that set of links. Don’t abandon me! And please, oh please, don’t use acronyms or program names that don’t make any sense to me, as your linking text. At least provide an explanation for those of us who don’t speak your language.

The saddest part of this whole adventure is that my friend turned to me and said, “See, this is why I never use government websites.” We all are judged by the performance of each. So dig in and do the work, web managers. Make your links count. Do it for your own agency. Do it for all government agencies.

Three Wishes

OK, folks – the clock is ticking down to the next Presidential election. In a little more than one year, transition teams will be walking into your agency, nosing around, looking for opportunities to make changes that will improve operations (and, quite honestly, make them look good). So, if that transition team were to call you in and tell you that they are going to grant three – and only three – wishes, what would you tell them?

Remember, bosses – especially new bosses – want to do things that will promote their own objectives, make them the first to do something, improve efficiency and effectiveness, and – most of all - reflect well on them. If you can articulate your wishes in terms that will meet both your new bosses’ needs, as well as your own, it’s a win-win situation. You’ll have a much better shot at having those wishes granted.

I already have my three wishes (yes, I realize I probably won’t be asked…but who knows?):

1. Combine all content operations into one single office, in each agency. Create content once and serve it many ways. I’d combine web content, publications content, and call center content – at least that which is targeted to the general public in one “Office of Communications” or “Office of Citizen Services” in each agency. Improve consistency. Staff the office with people who know what the public wants and who can write content from the audience’s point of view.
What do the bosses get? Efficiency and improved service to the public.
What do we get? The same. In addition, this should stop the madness about where web content management should live in the organization (not IT, not Public Affairs – communications!).

2. Use one common web design for most of government. I know, I know – you guys don’t like this. It would limit your creativity and autonomy. I was there. I know how you feel. But if you step back and look at it from the public’s point of view, having one design would make it easy to recognize a website as an official government website. More important, it would make it easier to use all government websites if the public only has to learn one navigation system and taxonomy. It finally would make us look like one government (which is what the public thinks we are!). And – here’s a biggie - it would save a boatload of money that currently is being spent agency-by-agency for web design. We could hire the best usability and design specialists to put it together, and we’d still save money across government.
What do bosses get? Significant cost savings and very visible evidence that they’re making government more efficient and effective.
What do we get? We can use our funds to do other things: improve critical tasks, eliminate outdated content, and develop new functionality. Also, it may help stop the proliferation of government websites – at least if the motivation is only to look different.

3. Split out “top tasks” and “message” content and feature them on their own governmentwide websites. Use USA.gov for critical tasks (the tasks that many citizens want to find and use). Create USAnews.gov for information about the goals and accomplishments of the administration. Let Public Affairs offices manage that content, and get it off agency websites. Agency websites, then, could remain libraries for other public information and sources of information and services for business partners.
What do bosses get? Better management and visibility for “message” information and a legitimate claim that they improved service to citizens.
What do we get? Solutions to long-standing design conflicts. We’d eliminate those front-page press releases and pictures of political bosses that use valuable real estate, making it hard to spotlight other important information. And our critical citizen tasks would be featured on usa.gov, making it easier for citizens to find them. It also might help us toward the longer range goal of consolidating content, by topic, across government.

So what would you wish for across government? Across your agency? If you don’t know, you’d better start thinking about it right now.

Transition offers a wonderful opportunity to reassess and to start in new directions. But the window of opportunity may be very short, and it may not open again for 8 years. So be ready. Know what you want. As important, know how to ask for it. Be ready to present your requests so that bosses see the value to them, as well as to you. If you do, you just might find that your wishes will come true!

PS: This same advice works at the state and local level, too!

Related links:
What Are We Going to Be?

Serving the Public – What Lies Ahead

Common Look and Feel – Maybe the Time Has Come

What Are We Going To Be?

Government web managers are at a real crossroads. Since government websites began to appear – back in 1995 - web managers’ primary goal has been to stir up business for the website. We begged, borrowed, and linked (no “stealing” with the web!) to create more content, to make as much government information public as possible and to serve as many citizens as possible. But here we are now, with these behemoth websites that are trying to be all things to all people. And it just isn’t working. There’s too much to categorize and maintain effectively. We don’t have the horses to keep up with it. The key services (aka “top tasks”) that most citizens want are buried among information that may be interesting to just a few people. And on top of all that, our bosses want to use the prime real estate on our sites to advertise their accomplishments (I’ll call this “message”). What’s a web manager to do? More important…what are our websites going to be?

The Web Managers Forum has been encouraging web managers to identify the top tasks and focus on improving them, both in placement and in efficiency. It’s a great idea and a worthy goal, since it acknowledges the fact that citizens want – and expect – to be able to get basic government services online. And if you don’t believe that there is a real need to fix these tasks, just take a half hour and see if you can find what citizens want on government websites. Seeing is believing.

I’ve been fascinated to listen to colleagues who are bewildered by this effort, often because they don’t know where to begin. Why isn’t this obvious? Why haven’t they been featuring top tasks all along? And then it hit me: they’re confused because they’ve got conflicting goals. If your goal is to create the great online government library, how does that jell with featuring only the top tasks (and “clearing out” the clutter that makes it hard to find them)? How can you feature top tasks when your bosses want you to feature their initiatives and successes? I think we have to step back and hash this out. We have 3 goals operating across government – and each is a worthy objective, with a vocal constituency. We need to figure out how to address them, while – at the same time – straightening up our websites so they don’t continue to look like schizophrenic free-for-alls that many of them have become. I think there are some options.

One option is to simply pull off the administration “message” into a separate website called “USANews.” Put it under the aegis of the White House communications office, and let the Public Affairs Officers populate and manage it. The media and those who want to find out what the administration is doing will have one-stop shopping, rather than having to go looking at each agency website. Agencies will continue to have the ability to put forth their messages. If we pulled out the “message” content, at least our agency websites only would need to balance the goals to publish everything, while featuring top tasks.

Another option is to feature top tasks on a separate website called “USAServices.” The tasks would remain on agency sites, but web managers wouldn’t have to be so worried about stripping away other content, to feature them. They’d be organized by topic – not agency – on the USAServices site.

Since we’re all facing a lack of resources to really manage all the content on our sites, maybe we should consider setting up a common content management system that dumps content into one major “USAInfo” site. Ask NARA, working with a consortium of internet librarians and records management officers, to guide classification; and make content creators (agency program managers) responsible for keeping content current or pulling it down. At the same time, web managers could turn agency sites into slimmer, trimmer, more usable service centers, focusing on top tasks.

Or, if we’re reluctant to give up control of any of the three goals, maybe we could just set up agency sites with three tabs (similar to amazon.com): news, services, information. If we did it across government, our audiences soon would learn which category suits their purposes. USA.gov could aggregate the content under each tab, across government.

We do have 3 goals, and each is legitimate. None of them is likely to go away. So we need to deal with them. And there are solutions. The place to start is to recognize the problem and start working together to sort it out. We need to figure out what we want to be.

One caution: don’t wait too long…the citizens are getting restless!

Related links:
Serving the Public - What Lies Ahead

Doing the "Big Think"

From the beginning, the internet has challenged the creativity of government web managers who struggle to improve the reach of citizen services, amidst the constraints of government. The list of strategic issues has not dwindled over time. In fact, it has lengthened.

Last week, I taught a leadership course for web managers, part of Web Manager University’s spring curriculum; and we spent a good part of the afternoon talking about some of the broad strategic issues that web leaders face, including:

What should/can government websites be? Massive libraries? Most requested/used tasks? Can we manage the growing volume of information? What does the public really want? What does the public really use? How do we keep information accessible without overwhelming the public with its mass?

Managing more with less…how much are we really spending on web operations? Do we know? When someone asks (and they will), can we justify it? Can we find ways to share web management resources across government? Can we add new technologies and uses of technologies (wikis, blogs, interactive media, etc.) while maintaining the quality of current content?

Consolidating content operations within agencies…can we consolidate content operations (web, publications, call centers) so we create content once and deliver it in many ways? How do we make sure the public is getting the same answers, no matter how they receive the information? Do we have staff that are skilled in writing and editing content, based on a sound understanding of citizens as the primary audience? Should each agency have an “Office of Citizen Services?”

Consolidating content across government horizontally…the public thinks we are one government, yet we promote agency (organization) websites. Should we rethink how content is organized across government? Could it be organized by topic, instead of organization? Could we serve content through one (or a few) sites, instead of 24,000? Can we consolidate “top tasks” across agencies?

Consolidating content across government vertically…citizens don’t know which level of government provides what services How can we integrate content among levels of government?

Common “look and feel,” taxonomy across government… More than 24,000 federal public websites, each with its own design and taxonomy…can we bring some commonality across government to improve our service to citizens? Is it the right thing to do?

The students in this class came from all parts of government web organizations: field offices, tech operations, small sub-agencies, and agency web teams. They weren’t the top agency web managers, but – at least by the end of the day – they realized they are web leaders. They discussed these big issues, and more, enthusiastically. They engaged. They enjoyed it. And they did a great job delving into strategic challenges we all face. They did the “big think.”

It’s a mistake to assume that, if you aren’t on the agency-level web team, you don’t need to spend time analyzing broad strategic challenges. You do. The government needs web leaders at all levels – especially those out in the field and down in the branches of headquarters operations – to be part of problem-solving. You can’t just sit in your corner of the world and assume/hope that someone else is doing the thinking. You have to stick your head up and look around, see what’s coming down the pike, and talk about it. You have to help your agency web manager and web managers across government lead change, no matter where you are in the organization.

And agency web managers: you need to create opportunities for emerging web leaders to do the Big Think. You need their insights and help to meet these challenges. You need to stimulate discussion and encourage these leaders to spread their wings. We need web leaders at all levels to create the critical mass that enables change and progress.

Strategic thinking isn’t just the responsibility of the top web managers in the organization – it’s the duty of every single person in the content management community. So look around you. Start a conversation with other web leaders. Do the big think!

Can YOU Find What Citizens Want on Government Websites?

We want citizens to think of government websites first, when they have an everyday problem to solve - don’t we? We want them to use our websites (collectively) to do all sorts of common tasks – find a home, get answers about household poisons, prepare their kids for school, get the best medical information. And citizens WILL come to our websites repeatedly – if they continue to have good experiences…if they consistently can complete the tasks they want to complete in a reasonable amount of time.

Like it or not, citizens think of “the government” as a single entity. And – like it or not - citizens make judgments about all government websites, based on their experiences with any government website. So it’s in the best interest of each of us to know how all of us are doing. How do you do that? It’s simple. See if YOU can find what citizens want on government websites.

Here’s a little test. Take a half hour, and see how many of these questions you can answer. Here is the only rule: you only can use government websites to do your research. You may use USA.gov or Google’s U.S. Government search to help you. But that’s it. These are common scenarios that any citizen might encounter. Ready? Go.

1. Housing: Your younger brother is a school teacher, making $35,000 a year. He’s single. He wants to buy a home. He lives in Iowa. He’s only got $5,000 saved for a down payment and closing costs, so he hopes there might be some government programs that could help him. He has no idea how to buy a home, and he doesn’t know where to begin in the process. You’ve volunteered to help him figure out what steps he needs to take.

2. Health: Your 75-year-old mother-in-law has just been diagnosed with gall bladder disease. She has to see her doctor tomorrow to discuss options for treatment. She has no idea what the gall bladder does, much less what this disease means. She only has Medicare, so she’s concerned that the best treatment won’t be covered. She’s called you asking that you help her figure out what’s going on, what to expect, and what questions to ask.

3. Food: Your office has decided to “adopt” a low-income family for Christmas. One of the things this family desperately needs is help buying healthy foods, on a very tight budget. They probably qualify for some government programs, but they don’t know what. As important, they really need some tips on how to buy healthy foods, on a low-income budget. At least 2 of the children are suffering health problems as a result of obesity. You’ve been given the task of coming up with some advice for them.

4. Education: Your neighbor’s daughter is a good student – not top of the class, but in the top quarter. Her parents had some hard times, and they just don’t have the money to send her to college. You’re thinking that there must be some government programs that could help this promising young woman go to college, without creating a debt so heavy that she’ll never be able to dig out.

OK – so how did you do? Could you complete your tasks quickly? Could you find what you need easily? Was everything written so you could understand it? Were the searches helpful, or did they overwhelm you? Did the most useful information turn up high on the list? Did you believe that you got comprehensive information?

If you had a great experience, then woo hoo! That’s victory for all of us. But if you didn’t have such a great experience – if you found it easier or harder in some cases than in others – then let’s talk about it. Let’s use the Web Content Managers Forum and the Web Managers Advisory Council to raise concerns and think about better options. If we want citizens to come to government websites, then we have to work together to make sure all of our sites deliver efficient and effective service. We do serve best when we serve together.

What If Our Bosses Don’t Want to Be Educated?

For years, government web managers have bemoaned the fact that we can't make the progress we hope to make because our “bosses” don’t listen to us. They don't give us credit for knowing what we’re talking about (because anyone who uses the internet thinks he/she is an expert in web design), don’t understand that you can’t give front page links out like chits, and don’t get it that citizens don’t want to see photos of political officials on the front pages of government websites. Sound familiar? I’ll bet. So, for years, we have talked about how we need to “educate our bosses,” so they’ll understand and support us (and let us do our jobs).

Now, as I reflect – and as I continue to hear my former colleagues talk about the need to “educate their bosses” – it occurs to me that maybe we’ve been barking up the wrong tree. Maybe it's time to realize that strategy isn't working. Maybe our bosses don't want to be educated. Maybe they have too much else on their minds. Maybe we should use what has worked for us before: the power of our grassroots community...the power of critical mass.

Look at the change we caused just two years ago, with the recommendations to OMB we made through the Web Content Management Working Group. We didn’t suggest that everyone start doing a bunch of new things. No – we went out and found those “best practices” that already were being used in many or most agencies, and we asked OMB to incorporate them into policy. The result was that agencies that hadn’t implemented the practices (in many cases, because they couldn’t get their bosses’ support) now had a mandate. Further, now that the practices have been sanctioned, they will be less susceptible to changing bosses and changing administrations.

If one web manager wants everyone in the agency to start using standard metadata so that search engines can help citizens find what they want more easily, he or she may not get very far. But if several web managers in several agencies get together and decide to use the same metadata and if the usa.gov staff jump onboard and agree to start harvesting certain content by using that metadata, you can cause change. You can control your own destiny.

So, yes – do keep briefing your bosses and telling them ways they could help you improve your websites. Do share your knowledge of your audiences – especially citizens. Do seize opportunities to use management support to make your websites and content practices better. But be realistic. Your bosses have a lot of other things to worry about. So instead of getting frustrated and feeling powerless when your bosses don’t give you a blank check, apply your energy and leadership to something that works. Build critical mass. You can cause right things to happen. You just have to work together to do it.

"Change from the top down happens at the will and whim of those below.” --Peter Block

A Couple of Thoughts about Governance – Thought Two…Across Government

Everyone who knows me or who has read prior blog entries knows I am a strong advocate of cross-government web governance. I think it’s absolutely the right thing to do and the only way to achieve the quality web content that the public (aka – taxpayers) deserve. But I do think getting from where we are to a successful cross-government governance structure is tricky. Why? Because we’re going to be moving from the current (and long-standing) grassroots governance structure to a centralized governance structure. And existing grassroots leaders – often agency web managers – aren’t going to be eager to give up their autonomy. I’ve been there – I know. So the key is to use that leadership within the cross-agency structure.

“Well, of course,” you think. “That’s what the Web Managers Advisory Council is for.” Yes, the Advisory Council is an important part of this process. But I don’t think it’s enough to effect the kind of change in governance I hope for.

I’ve already written that I think GSA’s Office of Citizen Services should be given the lead – and the authority – to coordinate web content operations across government. If GSA is given that role, they need to implement it with great thought and complete understanding of what they’re undertaking. In my opinion, the first thing they need to do is hire a few of those experienced agency web managers – those grassroots leaders. Get those skills and that perspective on the staff. Build goodwill. Further, it would be great to rotate agency web managers through the Office of Citizen Services routinely, to keep the agency perspective fresh within the Office of Citizen Services and to give agency web managers a taste of the big picture point of view.

Four years ago, when we formed the Web Content Management Working Group, we agreed that how we went about developing our recommendations to OMB was as critical as what we recommended. We knew we had to involve all the key players - in a meaningful way - and listen to all the key constituencies or – no matter what we recommended and no matter what OMB said – change wouldn’t happen. The same concept applies here. The only way cross-government governance will work is to seize the power of the existing grassroots leadership and incorporate it in the new governance structure.

A Couple of Thoughts about Governance – Thought One...At the Agency Level

CIO or Public Affairs? Public Affairs or CIO? The debate of the past 12 years lingers. No doubt it will become an issue – again – as the administration changes in 2009. I’m not sure why these are the only two choices (more on that in a minute), but if they are – why hasn’t this been settled long ago?

The logic seems clear. Websites – at least internet websites – are about interacting with the public. CIOs aren’t about the public – they’re internal service providers. They exist to serve internal clients – the program managers. They don’t interact with the public, nor should they. They don’t have staff who are knowledgeable about the public, nor should they. They don't have writers and editors on staff, nor should they. Public Affairs, on the other hand, is all about the public and writing and editing. The fact that most Public Affairs operations focus entirely – or almost entirely – on the press aside, if the only two choices for the web content management function are the CIO and Public Affairs, then the answer to this long-standing debate seems clear. It’s Public Affairs.

But wait – how about another option? Actually, two.

One of the really great guesses that the executives at HUD made way back in 1995 – and subsequent executives have retained – is that the web management function belongs with the chief management officer in the agency - in HUD’s case, the Deputy Secretary. Why does that make great sense? Two reasons. First, agency websites should be about mission and program delivery. The chief management officer is the top official in charge of day-to-day achievement of mission and program delivery. So it’s a perfect match. Second reason…the Deputy Secretary is organization-neutral. The CIO and the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs are peers on the organizational chart, along with all the other chief program officers. If there is a disagreement with a web policy, can the CIO or Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs really tell a peer “no?” Of course not. Either they’ll acquiesce (which is deadly for the website) or the issue will get elevated to the Deputy Secretary anyway. So why not just put the function with the executive who really has the final say?

But here’s an even better option: create a new organizational unit with a single mission: serving the public. Staff it with people who are experts in audience analysis and communications. Set it apart from other organizational components – so it remains neutral – and give it the authority to act as editor-in-chief for all program content served by any means to the public. I won’t go on more here – I’ve already written about this in prior entries (linked below). But I do think agencies have to get a grip on the fact that there is a huge "public" out there that is neither business partner nor press, and their web governance structures need to reflect that fact.

Related links:
Serving the Public – What Lies Ahead?
Somebody Needs to Say “No”

Serving the Public – What Lies Ahead?

Well, the Presidential election looms near. Actually, it’s 18 months away…but heck, all the candidates are already out there campaigning. I guess we should be thinking ahead, too! So, let me rub my hands together, pull out my crystal ball, and offer some ideas about the way things might look in 2012, at the end of the first term of the next President...with the right leadership and a little bit of political will.

1. Agencies manage content – not websites

• Agencies have consolidated all operations or “channels” for delivering content to citizens into one “Citizen Services” organization, headed by a manager and staff who are expert writers, editors, and communicators. Content is created once and delivered in a variety of ways – websites, call centers, publications, video, audio, podcasts, cell phones, Dick Tracy wristwatches, etc.
• Citizens can get content through multiple channels. So, for example, if they start by calling a call center number, they may be led through using a website, watching a podcast, participating in an online live discussion, or using some other content delivery mechanism. Content is seamless from one channel to another.
• The term "web manager" has been replaced by "content manager."
• Content for the public uses a standard taxonomy that is developed by a cross-agency group of content managers.
• Lead content managers in each agency must be certified by Content Manager University, having completed courses - or proven proficiency - in plain language, writing for the public, editing for effectiveness, management analysis, usability, audience analysis, and other skills needed to create and manage excellent content.
• Content managers work across agencies to identify and create content “continuums,” to add value to the audiences’ experience. These continuums help the audience know where to begin, next steps, and related options, across government.
• Agencies get content development and management assistance through central contracts managed by GSA’s Office of Citizen Services, in such areas as audience analytics, technical support, and other common commercial functions.

Why? Well, it just makes good sense to consolidate content creation so you do it once and use it many ways. Why have one staff creating content for a website and another staff creating content for a call center and yet another staff writing publications? Shouldn’t everyone be saying the same thing? Why reinvent the wheel just because you’re serving content through a different technology? Isn’t it logical that it’s more efficient – and certainly more prudent - to have one great group of writers and editors, who truly understand and know how to communicate with the public, developing content rather than multiple and separate staffs?

2. The federal government appears as one, on the web.

• GSA's Office of Citizen Services coordinates the Citizen Services operations across government, ensuring that content on common topics is consolidated, that duplication is eliminated or at least mitigated, and that the public gets consistent content no matter how they receive it.
• 5 cross-agency websites serve as the entry points for all government information served on the web. These 5 websites – and only these 5 websites - are marketed to the public. The public no longer has to figure out which agency to ask, and they don’t have to remember a multitude of URLs…just 5:

1. USA.gov is the entry point for the general public to access the most requested information and services. Its scope remains limited and focused on the content (tasks) that most citizens and visitors to this country want and need.
2. USAbiz.gov is the entry point for business partners and state and local governments to access key information and services. It links to additional information on agency sites, grouping those links by topic so businesses and governments are sure to find all the information they need.
3. USAnews.gov is the site for information about the initiatives and achievements of the current administration. It is managed by the White House communications office and the council of Public Affairs Officers.
4. USAmil.gov is the entry point for all military information and services. It is managed by the Department of Defense.
5. USAarchives.gov serves as the library of government information from the Executive Branch. It is managed by NARA and the council of records management officers and is staffed with web librarians who help categorize its content. USAarchives.gov contains content that is esoteric (sought by a limited audience) or obsolete and/or is considered official records, including content from prior administrations.

• Agencies are limited to a single website, and those websites follow a standard design that has been developed by an interagency content council working with GSA’s Office of Citizen Services and usability experts. Agency websites exist to feed the 5 USA websites. Agency websites are not marketed as separate entities.
• Cross agency portals have been taken down. Instead, information and services are organized by topic and displayed through the 5 USA sites, harvested through use of metadata, XML schemas, content management systems, and other technologies.
• GSA’s Office of Citizen Services has the authority to pull domain names and use other sanctions to ensure that these operating rules are followed.

Why? Let’s face it – most citizens think they have one government. Sure, they know that there are many different agencies. But they think of the government as a single entity. That’s why they get so frustrated when they try to enter “the government” through an agency and hit a dead end. “Don’t you people talk to one another? Can’t you just get me to the right place? What do you mean, ‘no?’ Why are you telling me something different from what that other agency told me?”

Citizens don’t know – and don’t want to know - how the government is organized. Why do we force them to search through more than 24,000 federal websites to find what they want? There is ample data to show that people make better decisions when there are fewer choices.

Let’s stop competing and start cooperating. Let’s stop spending millions of dollars to design and maintain more websites than we can count and, instead, go with a standard design that meets all usability criteria and that the public will recognize.

3. Citizens can talk to a human being, when they believe they need to.

• USAServices, as the central call center for the US Government, can respond to questions on any government topic. Staff are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week; and strict protocols ensure that the public isn’t kept waiting more than 5 minutes to speak to a human being.
• The 5 USA websites offer real-time online Q&A chats, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. These chats are staffed by program experts trained in cross-agency content.

Why? Shoot – you know why. You’ve made phone calls and ended up in one of those awful, never-ending phone trees…”press 3 for English…press 5 for an appointment…all our operators are busy now…bye-bye.” Or you’ve done that Google search that turned up 5,285 results on “what is a gallbladder.” Excuse me - could someone please tell me where to start?

Sometimes you just want to talk to a person. And since you’ve paid your taxes, shouldn’t you be able to do just that?

Fantasy or prophecy? That depends. Turning visions into reality will require courage, stamina, innovation, organization, cooperation, and – in some cases – sacrifice. Sure, some of it depends on political will. But a whole lot of this can be achieved through good grassroots leadership and coordination. It will mean sticking out our hands and reaching across agencies and functions. Can we do that? I think so.

In the end, it comes down to this: what is the right thing to do? If it’s the right thing, then we have to find a way to do it. And to guild the lily, here are some other words of encouragement:

"Do not let what you cannot do interfere with what you can do." --John Wooden"

"Don't be afraid to take a big step when one is indicated. You can't cross a chasm in two small steps." -- David Lloyd George

“The important thing is this: To be able at any moment to sacrifice what we are for what we could become” – Charles Dubois

"There are three kinds of people: Those who make things happen, those who watch things happen, and those who ask, 'What happened?'" --Casey Stengel

Somebody Needs to Say “No!”

Government websites have been around for more than 10 years now. Both content managers and their audiences have matured, and our websites have grown by leaps and bounds. They’ve developed relatively unfettered by social (or legal) mores and norms. But the days of letting our little darlings sprout with carefree abandon are over. It’s time for discipline. It’s time for everyone to play in the same sandbox. It’s time to grow up. It’s time for someone to say, “no!”

Why is this important? Because the American people deserve better. They deserve government content that is focused, clear, and written in terms they understand. They deserve to find concise, logical information on a topic that’s important to them, organized in ways that make sense (not organized by federal agency!). They deserve one-stop shopping; they shouldn’t be forced to weed through the 24,000+ (and growing everyday!) federal websites. They deserve websites that focus on the services and information that they need most, not these behemoths that make finding what you want more like searching for a needle in a haystack.

I think it’s time for a governmentwide web “editor-in-chief.” We need someone to implement rules and consequences to make sure government websites stay on the straight and narrow, that duplication is eliminated, and that content is well-written. It’s time to stop issuing new government domain names willy-nilly and start requiring agencies to tighten their belts when it comes to websites and web content. It’s time to take down all those obsolete cross-agency “portals” that haven’t been tended in years. It’s time to tell HUD and VA and USDA that they must work together to develop one comprehensive, but concise, source for government housing information, rather than forcing citizens to hop from agency to agency to figure it out. It’s time to say to agencies that if you don’t get it right, it’s coming down. It’s time to support those web managers who often feel like lone rangers out there, trying to get their agency executives to do the right thing.

I’m not talking about censorship (so calm down, folks). I’m talking about discipline. No self-respecting print publication would let its section chiefs do their own thing. They have limits. Editors make choices – we’ll use this content and not that – to keep their publications manageable and focused. They take out the red pens and cross out content that is poorly written or duplicative or (perish the thought!) contradictory. They say, “no.” That’s what we need in the federal government. We need a strong, non-partisan (so no political appointees, please) professional web communicator to cause agencies to play together and to make sure that the federal government – as a whole – does its best to serve citizens online.

Are we talking about OMB? No, absolutely not. OMB is concerned about high level policy. It doesn’t want to get into operations. I think we’re talking about GSA’s Office of Citizen Services. It’s already established. It has the right aims. It already has good staff (though it would need more). It has USA.gov, which already serves as the de facto leader of the web manager community. What it lacks is the cross-agency authority to bring agencies in line. I think it’s time to give them that authority.

It’s time to grow up, websites. I know – you don’t like having to play with those other guys. You’ve enjoyed doing your own thing. But we serve best when we serve together. It’s time.

Related links

Stop the Proliferation of Government Websites
Working Best When We’re Working Together
Practice What You Know

Follow Those Brits!

Last week, the BBC website published a startling article: “Government to Close 551 Websites!” The article went on to describe the “transformational government” initiative underway in the UK, which will eliminate more than half of 951 government websites, consolidating content in two (that’s right, TWO!) “supersites:” “Directgov” (for citizens) and “Business Link” (for partners). At the same time that I celebrated this brilliant accomplishment of our neighbors across the ocean, I cringed as I thought of the more than 24,000 U.S Government websites that we force Americans to navigate.

Why did the Brits undertake this change? Well, because that’s what their citizens want. They want it to be easier to find the information and services they need. They think there’s too much information out there – most of them are interested in only a percentage of all that “stuff” that government agencies publish. They’d like to have one-stop shopping, and they’d like related information to be organized in ways that make sense to them. Duh. Do British citizens differ from American citizens? No. Americans want the same thing. We hear it all the time. Our stats prove it. Duh. Oh, and by the way, this UK initiative also is going to save millions of pounds. Duh.

So the question is this, U.S. government web managers. Are you going to just sit there and let the Brits outshine us? Or are you going to do the right thing and start getting rid of those esoteric and often outdated or obsolete websites? Are you going to start working across agencies to combine content in ways that make sense to citizens and partners or are you going to stay in your little organizational fiefdoms and drown in the proliferation of useless content? Are you going shift your focus to writing and editing the words so that citizens understand them, instead of worrying about yet another “redesign?”

I’ll tell you what. Take a look at Directgov. It’s plain – no fancy graphics or waving flags. It’s simple – basic content organized in logical ways, using terms that real human beings use. It’s effective. It demonstrates that the government agencies understand what their citizens want and how they might ask for it.

We’ve done so many wonderful things with the web in the U.S. Government. There is much to be proud of and many shining examples of really terrific citizen services. But they get lost in the forest of all those darned websites.

Three years ago, the Web Content Management Working Group established a goal to make U.S. government websites the most citizen-centered and visitor friendly in the world. Well, someone got there before us. But let’s not let that stop us. Let’s do the right thing for the American people. Follow those Brits!

Related links
Practice What You Know
Common Look and Feel – Maybe the Time Has Come
Stop the Proliferation of Federal Websites!

Are You A Great Web Leader?

As we end one year and begin another, it's a good time to take stock of our achievements and goals for the future. So, Web Manager, how do you stack up as a leader? Are there things you could do to improve? Your leadership skills are critical to the success of your web organization. Here's a little self-assessment to help you think about what you do well...and what you might do better.

1. I am passionate about what I do, and I inspire passion in others because of my enthusiasm.

2. I am courageous, and I use my courage to take risks to make sure my web organization does the right thing for the American people.

3. My web team members know what I want to achieve and what I want them to do because I communicate with them effectively and routinely.

4. I listen to my team members and take what they say into consideration as I make decisions.

5. Even when things aren’t going my way, I make every effort to stay optimistic for the benefit of others.

6. I make time to think about the future – about where I want to lead my organization.

7. I read articles, go to training and meetings, participate in interagency discussions, and look for other opportunities to learn more about web content management so that I can be as knowledgeable as possible.

8. I take time to read agency management reports, plans, and other documents; to watch TV when agency leaders are scheduled to appear; and do research on the web to find out what agency executives and top managers are thinking and doing. I have a good understanding of the problems, issues, and priorities of the executives in my agency.

9. I look for opportunities to meet with executives and top managers in my agency; and when I do meet with them, I speak up and try to offer web related options that could help them achieve their goals and solve their problems.

10. Whenever something good happens, I look for ways to share it. I recognize the accomplishments of others, thank people who helped make good things happen, and spread the good news because I know that success begets success.

Were you able to answer "yes" to each question? If so, hurrah! If not, maybe it's time for a New Year's resolution. There's a big year ahead...lots to do to get ready for a new administration in 2009. Exciting times. Happy New Year!

Related links: Make Time to Lead
10 Tips for the Successful Web Manager