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
Thursday, September 27, 2007
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
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
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
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
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
Sunday, September 23, 2007
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.
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.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
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
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
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
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
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
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
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!
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!
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
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.
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.
Monday, March 05, 2007
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
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
Saturday, March 03, 2007
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.
“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”
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”
Sunday, February 18, 2007
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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- USAmil.gov is the entry point for all military information and services. It is managed by the Department of Defense.
- 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
Monday, January 29, 2007
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
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
Friday, January 19, 2007
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!
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!
Sunday, December 31, 2006
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
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
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
Practice What You Know
Most of us know by now that citizens don’t know – and don’t care to know – how government is organized. They don’t want to have to figure out which part of your organization provides the information they want – they just want the information organized in ways that make sense to them. So most agency websites are organized by topic or audience – not by organizational structure. In fact, that was one of the recommendations made to OMB from the Web Content Management Working Group, in 2004. Makes sense, right?
Why, then, do we revert back to organizing our online information across government, by the government’s structure? Yes – we have FirstGov (thank God!), which indexes our content by topic and audience. But executives still advertise individual government (organization) websites; awards still promote competition for the best agency (organization) website; and web managers continue to reinvent the wheel every time they “redesign” or “refresh” their (organization) websites, giving little thought to the advantages of commonality across government.
I’ve been there – I know how tempting it is to remain an isolationist. The web has offered a unique opportunity for government employees at the staff level to control something – to make a difference. That’s a powerful motivator. But let’s face it – it’s just not the right thing to do. The right thing to do is to practice what we preach inside our organizations, across government. The right thing to do is to work across government toward a common look and feel, common terms, common organization of content, and merging/consolidating like content in ways that make sense to the audience. It shouldn’t fall to the FirstGov staff to make sense of information and services across government. You should work with your colleagues to make that happen.
I know this is hard. Giving up autonomy is painful. But you can’t have it both ways. If it’s not right to structure your agency website around your agency’s organization, then why is it OK to organize government information by the organization of government? Think about it.
Why, then, do we revert back to organizing our online information across government, by the government’s structure? Yes – we have FirstGov (thank God!), which indexes our content by topic and audience. But executives still advertise individual government (organization) websites; awards still promote competition for the best agency (organization) website; and web managers continue to reinvent the wheel every time they “redesign” or “refresh” their (organization) websites, giving little thought to the advantages of commonality across government.
I’ve been there – I know how tempting it is to remain an isolationist. The web has offered a unique opportunity for government employees at the staff level to control something – to make a difference. That’s a powerful motivator. But let’s face it – it’s just not the right thing to do. The right thing to do is to practice what we preach inside our organizations, across government. The right thing to do is to work across government toward a common look and feel, common terms, common organization of content, and merging/consolidating like content in ways that make sense to the audience. It shouldn’t fall to the FirstGov staff to make sense of information and services across government. You should work with your colleagues to make that happen.
I know this is hard. Giving up autonomy is painful. But you can’t have it both ways. If it’s not right to structure your agency website around your agency’s organization, then why is it OK to organize government information by the organization of government? Think about it.
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
Web Manager Certification
Web Manager University has come a long way since we dreamed it up, more than a year ago. As I skimmed the course list for the fall semester, it occurred to me that there are consistent themes – courses that come up nearly every semester: “Writing for the Web,” something on usability, something on metrics, something on governance or training, and something about current or coming web technologies. So I wonder…could we come up with a list of courses that all government web managers should take? Is it time to come up with a web manager certification program? Is it time to institutionalize this job – governmentwide – and develop standards that define what this job is?
Think about it. Certification could do a number of very good things. Probably the most obvious advantage is that it would enhance your credibility, both within your own agency and within the web manager community. It says “this person has taken a core set of courses that give him/her a well-rounded grasp of government web management.” It says, “this person cared enough about the work to take this series of courses.” It says, “this person is ready to move on to greater responsibility.” Bosses love to say, “my employee is certified.” Even if the courses don’t increase your knowledge or skills (and it’s hard to imagine that you won’t walk away with something you can use), the certification will bolster your bosses’ perceptions of you.
But there are other good reasons that a web manager certification program could be beneficial.
1. In designing a basic curriculum, the web manager community will have to come to agreement on a set of KSAs (knowledges, skills and abilities) that all web managers should have. Those KSAs could be used if and when OPM ever classifies a web manager series. It could give web managers some input into their destiny.
2. Everyone can learn something by taking courses. It’s good for all of us to get out of the office now and then and to sit down with a group of our peers to listen and learn. Even experienced web managers who may be fairly expert in a subject area undoubtedly will get tips and tricks from their colleagues that they can use. I was a web manager for 10 years, but I learned something new from my peers every time I sat down with a group of them.
3. It will create a cadre of government employees that agencies can tap into, when vacancies occur. Wouldn’t you feel more confident hiring someone who has completed a basic web management curriculum? I know I would.
4. It will strengthen the web manager community. Web managers will get to know other web managers; and when you know someone, you are more likely to exchange ideas and successes and lessons learned with him/her. The more we share across agencies, the better we all become.
5. It will raise awareness of the fact that being a web manager is not the same as being a public affairs specialist or computer technology specialist or writer/editor. It is a complex job unlike any other, and it is not a job that just anyone can do. There IS a specific body of knowledge that you must have to be successful. Those of you who struggle to get your bosses to understand what you do might find that a certification program could be an eye-opener.
So I wonder…is this an idea whose time has come? You have the vehicle – Web Manager University. The question is: are you ready for the challenge?
Think about it. Certification could do a number of very good things. Probably the most obvious advantage is that it would enhance your credibility, both within your own agency and within the web manager community. It says “this person has taken a core set of courses that give him/her a well-rounded grasp of government web management.” It says, “this person cared enough about the work to take this series of courses.” It says, “this person is ready to move on to greater responsibility.” Bosses love to say, “my employee is certified.” Even if the courses don’t increase your knowledge or skills (and it’s hard to imagine that you won’t walk away with something you can use), the certification will bolster your bosses’ perceptions of you.
But there are other good reasons that a web manager certification program could be beneficial.
1. In designing a basic curriculum, the web manager community will have to come to agreement on a set of KSAs (knowledges, skills and abilities) that all web managers should have. Those KSAs could be used if and when OPM ever classifies a web manager series. It could give web managers some input into their destiny.
2. Everyone can learn something by taking courses. It’s good for all of us to get out of the office now and then and to sit down with a group of our peers to listen and learn. Even experienced web managers who may be fairly expert in a subject area undoubtedly will get tips and tricks from their colleagues that they can use. I was a web manager for 10 years, but I learned something new from my peers every time I sat down with a group of them.
3. It will create a cadre of government employees that agencies can tap into, when vacancies occur. Wouldn’t you feel more confident hiring someone who has completed a basic web management curriculum? I know I would.
4. It will strengthen the web manager community. Web managers will get to know other web managers; and when you know someone, you are more likely to exchange ideas and successes and lessons learned with him/her. The more we share across agencies, the better we all become.
5. It will raise awareness of the fact that being a web manager is not the same as being a public affairs specialist or computer technology specialist or writer/editor. It is a complex job unlike any other, and it is not a job that just anyone can do. There IS a specific body of knowledge that you must have to be successful. Those of you who struggle to get your bosses to understand what you do might find that a certification program could be an eye-opener.
So I wonder…is this an idea whose time has come? You have the vehicle – Web Manager University. The question is: are you ready for the challenge?
Related links
Why Don't Web Managers Have Their Own Job Series?
Contracting Out Web Manager Duties
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
When Times Get Tough…Celebrate!
You’ve just been told that your FY07 budget has to be totally reworked; you’re already past deadline for submitting your annual 508 review; one of your team members just let you know she’d accepted another job; and the server is going down intermittently, for seemingly no reason. Everyone is looking to you for answers and – probably – a miracle or two. Yep – it’s another day in the life of a government web manager. The problems, issues, and requirements can get pretty overwhelming. Is it time to despair? Heck no. This is the time you need to celebrate your success!
Most web managers feel like they’re out there on that limb all alone. Truth is, you probably are. The managers above you don’t really know what you do – they just expect you to have the best website in the government. This is one job in which you just have to create your own support. How do you do it? You jump up and down, wave your arms, and remind everyone – especially yourself – just how much you’ve achieved. Pick out 5 processes that used to be done manually and take ages, and tell folks how much better and faster they’re being done now. Look at the growing number of citizens you’re reaching through the web, and remind your organization how terrific it is that federal agencies actually can serve citizens directly – and do – every single day. Count up how much more you’re doing with so much less, and do some bragging.
When times get tough, don’t let it get you down. Put on your biggest smile, pull out your pom-poms, and give a big cheer for all that great stuff that’s happened just because you and your team have done such a darn good job.
There now. Don’t you feel better?!
Related links
Web Managers Check Your Image
10 Tips for the Successful Web Manager
Most web managers feel like they’re out there on that limb all alone. Truth is, you probably are. The managers above you don’t really know what you do – they just expect you to have the best website in the government. This is one job in which you just have to create your own support. How do you do it? You jump up and down, wave your arms, and remind everyone – especially yourself – just how much you’ve achieved. Pick out 5 processes that used to be done manually and take ages, and tell folks how much better and faster they’re being done now. Look at the growing number of citizens you’re reaching through the web, and remind your organization how terrific it is that federal agencies actually can serve citizens directly – and do – every single day. Count up how much more you’re doing with so much less, and do some bragging.
When times get tough, don’t let it get you down. Put on your biggest smile, pull out your pom-poms, and give a big cheer for all that great stuff that’s happened just because you and your team have done such a darn good job.
There now. Don’t you feel better?!
Related links
Web Managers Check Your Image
10 Tips for the Successful Web Manager
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
Don't Underestimate the Value of Community
In 1996, we pulled together 100+ people throughout HUD for a web management meeting. We’d never done this before. After all, HUD only had been in the “web” business for a year. We met in Indianapolis, to try to keep costs down. We had one person from every HUD field office and at least one person from every Headquarters office. Many were staffers who were doing some sort of volunteer work on our website. Some were there because they drew the short stick when it came to finding a representative for their offices. A few came just to see what was going on. We were a motley crew.
We met for two days. We updated everyone on plans for the coming months, showed them websites that we hoped to emulate, discussed issues they were confronting, and brainstormed together about possibilities for the future. We went to meals together, worked in groups together, and got to know one another. And in that meeting, an amazing thing happened. A spirit of community was born that was to be the foundation for the success of HUD’s web organization.
It was like spontaneous combustion. We put together a bunch of individuals - each bringing passion, ability, or just plain ol’ curiosity, let them know the sky is the limit, had some fun together, and – bam! – we’ve got a pack that energizes and helps one another across the Department. It was phenomenal. It was contagious. And it lasted.
In 2000, we started the Web Content Managers Forum. Our internal community at HUD was going strong, but we felt isolated. We wanted to trade ideas and find out how our colleagues in other agencies were dealing with problems…or if they even had the same problems we were facing. I’ll never forget that first meeting of the Forum. We had people from 20 or so agencies, as I recall; and we couldn’t talk fast enough. It was like a revival meeting. Web content managers were starving for camaraderie, and the Forum gave them that venue. The community expanded.
The Forum met monthly, after that. I won’t say that every Forum meeting was a “high,” but I will say that people who came to those meetings left feeling better about their own jobs, either because they learned something from a colleague or they found out that the way they were doing things was pretty darn good. Eventually, the Forum grew so large that we went to conference calls, instead of "in person" meetings. It was a gamble. We risked losing that community spirit in order to gain wider involvement. But guess what? The esprit de'corps stayed in tact. In fact, I’d say it grew. Now people all over the country were part of the government web manager community. Hardly a week goes by without a Forum listserv message from some member of the community, looking for information or recommendations to solve a problem. The community pitches in and helps. I've never seen it fail.
In the past two years, the Web Managers Advisory Council has sponsored a series of workshops, both in Washington and out in the field. The sessions were good. Some were great. But there’s no doubt in my mind that the thing most people value – and take away with them – is the sense of community…that sense of mutual respect and support and energy. Put a bunch of web managers together, and the bonding just happens. We feel better and do better because of it.
A couple of weeks ago, my former colleagues at HUD had another HUD web manager meeting, this time in Albuquerque. I talked to a few of them, both before and after the meeting (the community doesn't throw you out just because you retire!). They discussed plans and possibilities for the future. They went to meals together, worked together in groups, and re-established their personal relationships. And once again – bam! – the sense of community took over. A couple of them confessed that they’d been feeling a little down, a little isolated (even though they talk on the phone every day!). But after a few days together, the energy reappears. The community never fails to help you adjust your views, to rekindle your passion, and to remind you that - together – we can do something really important for citizens.
Coming together with others who are facing the same challenges you face is not only enjoyable – it’s essential. Being a government web manager gets more difficult every year. But you are not alone. There is a strong community that’s eager to help you, support you, encourage you, energize you, and involve you. You need them, and they need you. Never underestimate the value of your community.
Oh, and if you aren’t already a member of the web manager community, just go to webcontent.gov and find out when the next meeting of the Forum is scheduled. Go ahead. Jump right in. The community will be there for you.
Related Links
Proceed Until Apprehended
History of the Web Content Managers Forum
Working Best When Working Together
We met for two days. We updated everyone on plans for the coming months, showed them websites that we hoped to emulate, discussed issues they were confronting, and brainstormed together about possibilities for the future. We went to meals together, worked in groups together, and got to know one another. And in that meeting, an amazing thing happened. A spirit of community was born that was to be the foundation for the success of HUD’s web organization.
It was like spontaneous combustion. We put together a bunch of individuals - each bringing passion, ability, or just plain ol’ curiosity, let them know the sky is the limit, had some fun together, and – bam! – we’ve got a pack that energizes and helps one another across the Department. It was phenomenal. It was contagious. And it lasted.
In 2000, we started the Web Content Managers Forum. Our internal community at HUD was going strong, but we felt isolated. We wanted to trade ideas and find out how our colleagues in other agencies were dealing with problems…or if they even had the same problems we were facing. I’ll never forget that first meeting of the Forum. We had people from 20 or so agencies, as I recall; and we couldn’t talk fast enough. It was like a revival meeting. Web content managers were starving for camaraderie, and the Forum gave them that venue. The community expanded.
The Forum met monthly, after that. I won’t say that every Forum meeting was a “high,” but I will say that people who came to those meetings left feeling better about their own jobs, either because they learned something from a colleague or they found out that the way they were doing things was pretty darn good. Eventually, the Forum grew so large that we went to conference calls, instead of "in person" meetings. It was a gamble. We risked losing that community spirit in order to gain wider involvement. But guess what? The esprit de'corps stayed in tact. In fact, I’d say it grew. Now people all over the country were part of the government web manager community. Hardly a week goes by without a Forum listserv message from some member of the community, looking for information or recommendations to solve a problem. The community pitches in and helps. I've never seen it fail.
In the past two years, the Web Managers Advisory Council has sponsored a series of workshops, both in Washington and out in the field. The sessions were good. Some were great. But there’s no doubt in my mind that the thing most people value – and take away with them – is the sense of community…that sense of mutual respect and support and energy. Put a bunch of web managers together, and the bonding just happens. We feel better and do better because of it.
A couple of weeks ago, my former colleagues at HUD had another HUD web manager meeting, this time in Albuquerque. I talked to a few of them, both before and after the meeting (the community doesn't throw you out just because you retire!). They discussed plans and possibilities for the future. They went to meals together, worked together in groups, and re-established their personal relationships. And once again – bam! – the sense of community took over. A couple of them confessed that they’d been feeling a little down, a little isolated (even though they talk on the phone every day!). But after a few days together, the energy reappears. The community never fails to help you adjust your views, to rekindle your passion, and to remind you that - together – we can do something really important for citizens.
Coming together with others who are facing the same challenges you face is not only enjoyable – it’s essential. Being a government web manager gets more difficult every year. But you are not alone. There is a strong community that’s eager to help you, support you, encourage you, energize you, and involve you. You need them, and they need you. Never underestimate the value of your community.
Oh, and if you aren’t already a member of the web manager community, just go to webcontent.gov and find out when the next meeting of the Forum is scheduled. Go ahead. Jump right in. The community will be there for you.
Related Links
Proceed Until Apprehended
History of the Web Content Managers Forum
Working Best When Working Together
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Make Time to Lead
The more I reflect on my time as a government web manager, the more I realize that the most important thing you can do for your organization is lead. Being a leader is different from being a manager. Managers have to organize, plan, delegate, oversee, and evaluate. Leaders have to inspire, persuade, and engage people who may – or may not – share their goals and see their visions. Certainly, you must be a good manager. You have a product to maintain. But you also must be a leader. You have to lead your agency to seize the potential of the ever-changing Internet to deliver the best content possible. The problem is that management activities often overwhelm you. You have to make time to lead.
In the early days (the mid-90s) of government websites, we had plenty of time to lead. We weren’t bothered by creating and defending budgets, meeting volumes of mandates and requirements, and keeping on top of millions of pages of web content. Most of our websites were relatively small at that point, and few of us had policies and procedures imposed on us. We were just making it up as we went. If we were going to get these websites moving, we had no choice but to lead.
I remember making the rounds, asking executives if we could brief them on the web. Then we’d show them websites like Dealernet, where people could search for cars. We’d say, “wouldn’t it be great if people could find their HUD homes online just like this?” You could feel the interest and energy rising.
I’d send out routine email updates to managers, both in Headquarters and the Field, telling them what we were working on and challenging them with new possibilities. When someone came in with a problem or negative attitude, we sat and brainstormed with them until it turned into a positive. We didn’t talk about limits – we talked about possibilities.
When I heard that an executive was thinking about a new idea or initiative, I got on it…sent him/her an email with a suggestion for ways the web could help, along with a request to discuss. When we had meetings with staff from throughout the Department who worked on the web, we focused on innovation and excitement. We refused to be sidetracked by constraints, and we brainstormed ways to get around obstacles. We looked for opportunities to get out and show our websites to partners and citizens. We jumped at the chance to go to conventions and conferences and set up our little table, where we could talk one-on-one with the people we hoped to serve. We listened to what they said, and – out of those discussions – new ideas were born.
But as time went on, websites grew in number and size; Congress and OMB took note and started making rules we had to follow; and executives and public affairs staffs began to see government websites as their own publicity venues. As more and more people began using the web, everyone became an “expert” on design and content (indeed, most were not!). It got harder and harder to “herd the cats” toward doing the right thing for citizens.
Now, government web managers face hundreds of challenges and decisions every day. Demands are growing, while resources are not. It’s hard to get away from the phone and email to get out and talk to managers and staff, face to face. And when you do, you’re often met with indifference from people who now take the web for granted or petty issues that fail to consider the broader goals of the website and the organization.
When was the last time you actually got out of the office and talked to everyday citizens – personally – about what they want and expect from government websites? When was the last time you went to a Principal Staff meeting and made a pitch for 5 “out there” visionary ways they could use the web to further the mission of the agency? When was the last time you had an honest-to-goodness brainstorming session with your web team, where whining was tabled and optimism was praised? When was the last time you published a “good news” briefing on your intranet or sent it to managers in a memo, where you laid out 5 great things that have happened at your agency because of your website?
With the growing pressures of being a government web manager, it’s hard to make the time to lead. But it’s so necessary. It’s how you move the agency forward to use the web in smarter, faster, better ways. And you know what? It’s how you keep yourself energized. It’s one of the “fun” parts of being a web manager. Don’t let yourself get trapped by management demands and issues. Make time to lead.
Related links
Proceed Until Apprehended
10 Tips for A Successful Web Manager
In the early days (the mid-90s) of government websites, we had plenty of time to lead. We weren’t bothered by creating and defending budgets, meeting volumes of mandates and requirements, and keeping on top of millions of pages of web content. Most of our websites were relatively small at that point, and few of us had policies and procedures imposed on us. We were just making it up as we went. If we were going to get these websites moving, we had no choice but to lead.
I remember making the rounds, asking executives if we could brief them on the web. Then we’d show them websites like Dealernet, where people could search for cars. We’d say, “wouldn’t it be great if people could find their HUD homes online just like this?” You could feel the interest and energy rising.
I’d send out routine email updates to managers, both in Headquarters and the Field, telling them what we were working on and challenging them with new possibilities. When someone came in with a problem or negative attitude, we sat and brainstormed with them until it turned into a positive. We didn’t talk about limits – we talked about possibilities.
When I heard that an executive was thinking about a new idea or initiative, I got on it…sent him/her an email with a suggestion for ways the web could help, along with a request to discuss. When we had meetings with staff from throughout the Department who worked on the web, we focused on innovation and excitement. We refused to be sidetracked by constraints, and we brainstormed ways to get around obstacles. We looked for opportunities to get out and show our websites to partners and citizens. We jumped at the chance to go to conventions and conferences and set up our little table, where we could talk one-on-one with the people we hoped to serve. We listened to what they said, and – out of those discussions – new ideas were born.
But as time went on, websites grew in number and size; Congress and OMB took note and started making rules we had to follow; and executives and public affairs staffs began to see government websites as their own publicity venues. As more and more people began using the web, everyone became an “expert” on design and content (indeed, most were not!). It got harder and harder to “herd the cats” toward doing the right thing for citizens.
Now, government web managers face hundreds of challenges and decisions every day. Demands are growing, while resources are not. It’s hard to get away from the phone and email to get out and talk to managers and staff, face to face. And when you do, you’re often met with indifference from people who now take the web for granted or petty issues that fail to consider the broader goals of the website and the organization.
When was the last time you actually got out of the office and talked to everyday citizens – personally – about what they want and expect from government websites? When was the last time you went to a Principal Staff meeting and made a pitch for 5 “out there” visionary ways they could use the web to further the mission of the agency? When was the last time you had an honest-to-goodness brainstorming session with your web team, where whining was tabled and optimism was praised? When was the last time you published a “good news” briefing on your intranet or sent it to managers in a memo, where you laid out 5 great things that have happened at your agency because of your website?
With the growing pressures of being a government web manager, it’s hard to make the time to lead. But it’s so necessary. It’s how you move the agency forward to use the web in smarter, faster, better ways. And you know what? It’s how you keep yourself energized. It’s one of the “fun” parts of being a web manager. Don’t let yourself get trapped by management demands and issues. Make time to lead.
Related links
Proceed Until Apprehended
10 Tips for A Successful Web Manager
Sunday, April 09, 2006
Reward Collaboration
Back in the mid 90s, Government Executive Magazine did an annual “Best Feds on the Web” article. In those days, we who were honored used that external validation to build credibility and interest within our agencies. Our websites were just infants then; and they needed all kinds of support to grow. Then along came the E-gov awards, the Digital Government Awards, the Brown University ratings, the American Customer Satisfaction Index (which became a competition when they started publishing the results), and a myriad of other awards that recognized the accomplishments of single agencies. Our bosses loved it, and so did we. But now that government websites are full-grown, I wonder what purpose those awards serve? I wonder if it is really a good idea to pit one agency website against others?
Most citizens view “the government” as a single entity. They want good, simple, well-written web content that will help them get the services they pay for. They don’t care what agency it comes from. They don’t care that one website has been rated better than another. They expect every government website they visit to be “the best.” The Web Managers Advisory Council established the goal: to make US government websites the most citizen-focused and visitor-friendly in the world. To do that, we have to work together. We need to reward collaboration.
We used to do an annual “Web Day” at HUD. We started it to recognize the “volunteers” among the HUD staff who put in extra hours and energy to make our website better. We honored the best web managers and the best marketers and the best web pages in the field and in Headquarters. But eventually, we realized that these awards were reinforcing organizational divides. We were sending conflicting messages: on one hand, we were telling HUD staff to consolidate information and services across organizations and make HUD’s website reflect “one HUD.” On the other hand, we were rewarding web managers who were “better” than others and forcing competition. You can’t have it both ways – if you want people to work together, then you’ve got to reward collaboration.
Wouldn’t it be great to reward agencies who get together to consolidate information and reduce duplication? Wouldn’t it be great to recognize those web managers who reach out to other web managers to help them make their sites better? Wouldn’t it be terrific to honor agencies that share applications with other agencies, so we don’t all have to reinvent the wheel? If we want citizens to get the best of their government from every government website, then we need to downplay competition and reward collaboration.
Related links:
Common Look and Feel - Maybe the Time Has Come
Working Best When Working Together
Most citizens view “the government” as a single entity. They want good, simple, well-written web content that will help them get the services they pay for. They don’t care what agency it comes from. They don’t care that one website has been rated better than another. They expect every government website they visit to be “the best.” The Web Managers Advisory Council established the goal: to make US government websites the most citizen-focused and visitor-friendly in the world. To do that, we have to work together. We need to reward collaboration.
We used to do an annual “Web Day” at HUD. We started it to recognize the “volunteers” among the HUD staff who put in extra hours and energy to make our website better. We honored the best web managers and the best marketers and the best web pages in the field and in Headquarters. But eventually, we realized that these awards were reinforcing organizational divides. We were sending conflicting messages: on one hand, we were telling HUD staff to consolidate information and services across organizations and make HUD’s website reflect “one HUD.” On the other hand, we were rewarding web managers who were “better” than others and forcing competition. You can’t have it both ways – if you want people to work together, then you’ve got to reward collaboration.
Wouldn’t it be great to reward agencies who get together to consolidate information and reduce duplication? Wouldn’t it be great to recognize those web managers who reach out to other web managers to help them make their sites better? Wouldn’t it be terrific to honor agencies that share applications with other agencies, so we don’t all have to reinvent the wheel? If we want citizens to get the best of their government from every government website, then we need to downplay competition and reward collaboration.
Related links:
Common Look and Feel - Maybe the Time Has Come
Working Best When Working Together
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
Make the Words Work
Recently, my mom had to have gallbladder surgery. What did I do when I heard about it? I went to the web. What exactly was wrong with her, and what would surgery entail? I ran a Google search, and – being the loyal former government web manager that I am – I started with the government sites.
First one…too complicated. Second one…way more than I needed to know. Third one…written for practitioners – not me. Forth one…well, by this time, I gave up on government sites and went to the private sites. First site…bingo! Second site…bingo! Succinct. To the point. Clearly, the writers understood the audience precisely and wrote…precisely.
OK – so why can’t government web managers do that? Why can’t they edit their content so government sites provide succinct, audience-friendly information? Government web managers know that content is king. They know that less is more. They know what their audiences want (at least, they SHOULD know what their audiences want!).
You know what I think? I think at least some government web managers are so busy and distracted by design and usability (and yes – I know – “usability” also means content) and 508 and podcasts and RSS feeds and governance issues and budgets and all the other balls they have to juggle that they just can’t keep their focus on the most important thing they do: make the words work.
Please, government web managers. Step back. Look at how you’re spending your time. Make time - every week, every day - to get out your big ol’ red pen, and edit, edit, edit! Because if your words don’t work, nothing else matters. We aren’t going to choose your site.
Related links:
It’s all about the content
Who’s your customer?
Connect the dots
First one…too complicated. Second one…way more than I needed to know. Third one…written for practitioners – not me. Forth one…well, by this time, I gave up on government sites and went to the private sites. First site…bingo! Second site…bingo! Succinct. To the point. Clearly, the writers understood the audience precisely and wrote…precisely.
OK – so why can’t government web managers do that? Why can’t they edit their content so government sites provide succinct, audience-friendly information? Government web managers know that content is king. They know that less is more. They know what their audiences want (at least, they SHOULD know what their audiences want!).
You know what I think? I think at least some government web managers are so busy and distracted by design and usability (and yes – I know – “usability” also means content) and 508 and podcasts and RSS feeds and governance issues and budgets and all the other balls they have to juggle that they just can’t keep their focus on the most important thing they do: make the words work.
Please, government web managers. Step back. Look at how you’re spending your time. Make time - every week, every day - to get out your big ol’ red pen, and edit, edit, edit! Because if your words don’t work, nothing else matters. We aren’t going to choose your site.
Related links:
It’s all about the content
Who’s your customer?
Connect the dots
Saturday, March 11, 2006
Common Look and Feel – Maybe the Time Has Come!
In the next couple of years, most smart federal web managers are going to start thinking about redesigning their sites, in preparation for a new administration. You remember what we all went through when the Bush administration came on the scene – right? No matter which party wins, the new administration will want its own fresh look and feel. Maybe this is an opportunity to do something that would be great for our audiences and could save money across government. Maybe - instead of doing your redesign alone - it’s time to work with your colleagues across government to find more common design elements that you could implement across government. Maybe it’s time for a common look and feel.
Let’s think this through. We already know, from usability testing, that the public responds well to common terms and common placement of content elements. We embraced that notion when the ICGI issued its recommendations for the content of federal public websites in June 2004. The more design consistency we can achieve, the easier it will be for citizens to use government sites. We also know that the public doesn’t know – and doesn’t care to know – how the government is organized. It’s not really important to them to know which agency is providing the information and services they want. It’s only important that they find it. So from the customers’ point of view, a common look and feel makes good sense.
Look at it from the practical side. How many of you can afford to go through redesigns every couple of years? I know from my own experience just how costly a redesign is. It’s not just the cost of hiring the graphic artists to do the design – you’ve also got to do usability testing. If you could pool your resources and do a single basic design, think how much you (and the taxpayers!) would save.
Is this an unprecedented risk that could fail? Well, look what Canada has done. Most of their government agencies use the same basic design – topics down the left and a common tool bar at the top. The public only needs to learn one navigation system to use any of the Canadian agency sites. It helps them get in, get what they want, and get out quickly and efficiently. That’s great customer service.
Would it be easy? Heck no. Even in agencies that already have everyone on a common template, it would mean a major effort. But if you’re already planning to do a redesign anyway – and, again, you probably should be - then why not give this some thought?
So let’s see… It would be better for the customers. It would save money across government. It’s not unprecedented – Canada has proven the concept. What’s the downside? Well, you do lose agency distinction. And you lose some of your own autonomy and ability to be creative. I know – that hurts. But we have to remember that it’s not about us – it’s about those we serve. If we can serve better by serving together, then shouldn’t we?
You have some time to think this through. Why not sit down together and see just exactly what must be different and what could be the same, in terms of design. I’ll bet you’ll find there’s more in that second column than you thought there would be. Maybe you could agree to a few common elements – topics down the left and a common toolbar, at least.
This could be a very good time to take that next big step in the evolution of U.S. government websites and start looking for a common look and feel.
Related links
ICGI report
Use of Common Content, Placement and Terminology (from webcontent.gov)
Why Have All These Government Websites When We’ve Got Google?
Let’s think this through. We already know, from usability testing, that the public responds well to common terms and common placement of content elements. We embraced that notion when the ICGI issued its recommendations for the content of federal public websites in June 2004. The more design consistency we can achieve, the easier it will be for citizens to use government sites. We also know that the public doesn’t know – and doesn’t care to know – how the government is organized. It’s not really important to them to know which agency is providing the information and services they want. It’s only important that they find it. So from the customers’ point of view, a common look and feel makes good sense.
Look at it from the practical side. How many of you can afford to go through redesigns every couple of years? I know from my own experience just how costly a redesign is. It’s not just the cost of hiring the graphic artists to do the design – you’ve also got to do usability testing. If you could pool your resources and do a single basic design, think how much you (and the taxpayers!) would save.
Is this an unprecedented risk that could fail? Well, look what Canada has done. Most of their government agencies use the same basic design – topics down the left and a common tool bar at the top. The public only needs to learn one navigation system to use any of the Canadian agency sites. It helps them get in, get what they want, and get out quickly and efficiently. That’s great customer service.
Would it be easy? Heck no. Even in agencies that already have everyone on a common template, it would mean a major effort. But if you’re already planning to do a redesign anyway – and, again, you probably should be - then why not give this some thought?
So let’s see… It would be better for the customers. It would save money across government. It’s not unprecedented – Canada has proven the concept. What’s the downside? Well, you do lose agency distinction. And you lose some of your own autonomy and ability to be creative. I know – that hurts. But we have to remember that it’s not about us – it’s about those we serve. If we can serve better by serving together, then shouldn’t we?
You have some time to think this through. Why not sit down together and see just exactly what must be different and what could be the same, in terms of design. I’ll bet you’ll find there’s more in that second column than you thought there would be. Maybe you could agree to a few common elements – topics down the left and a common toolbar, at least.
This could be a very good time to take that next big step in the evolution of U.S. government websites and start looking for a common look and feel.
Related links
ICGI report
Use of Common Content, Placement and Terminology (from webcontent.gov)
Why Have All These Government Websites When We’ve Got Google?
Sunday, March 05, 2006
Knowing Your Audience Is a Web Manager’s Most Important Asset
Web managers need considerable knowledge, skills, and abilities to be successful. You must be an excellent writer and editor. You must be an effective teacher and marketer. You must be visionary. You must be courageous. You must be an outstanding communicator. But the thing that sets you apart from just about every other employee in the organization – the knowledge that you must have and that you cannot succeed without – is knowing your audience.
In my experience, government web managers are way too modest about showing off their greatest asset - what they know about the audiences. We’ve gained that knowledge from email, stats, focus groups, usability testing, phone calls, and public website demonstrations. It’s that knowledge that helps us know what words to use on the website, what content to turn down or delete from the website, and what content to showcase. It’s that knowledge that helps us decide the structure or our websites; and it sends us searching for new content, as we learn that audience wants and needs have changed. If you don’t know your audience, you simply cannot be a good web manager.
If you want to let your bosses know why you are such a huge asset to them and why they should trust you when it comes to managing the agency website, show them what makes you so unique – show them what you know about the audience.
Related links:
Who’s Your Customer?
10 Tips for the Successful Web Manager
Connect the Dots
In my experience, government web managers are way too modest about showing off their greatest asset - what they know about the audiences. We’ve gained that knowledge from email, stats, focus groups, usability testing, phone calls, and public website demonstrations. It’s that knowledge that helps us know what words to use on the website, what content to turn down or delete from the website, and what content to showcase. It’s that knowledge that helps us decide the structure or our websites; and it sends us searching for new content, as we learn that audience wants and needs have changed. If you don’t know your audience, you simply cannot be a good web manager.
If you want to let your bosses know why you are such a huge asset to them and why they should trust you when it comes to managing the agency website, show them what makes you so unique – show them what you know about the audience.
Related links:
Who’s Your Customer?
10 Tips for the Successful Web Manager
Connect the Dots
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
What’s So Important About a URL?
HUD is championing a new URL: fha.gov. It’s not a new website. It’s really a shortcut into a particular section of the existing HUD website. So the question is: why did HUD executives decide to create this URL? Does this unique URL help the public get to what they want? Or is it just one more name to remember in the jungle of government websites?
If web managers want to control proliferation of websites and URLs, then we’ve got to understand the causes. So why do executives like to promote these “designer” URLs?
If web managers want to control proliferation of websites and URLs, then we’ve got to understand the causes. So why do executives like to promote these “designer” URLs?
- Is it a marketing strategy? Do they think it’s easier for the public to have a separate URL for each product they want to promote?
- Did one part of the agency want to distinguish its own work from the work of other parts of the agency?
- Did it happen because the existing website has grown so large that important content is getting lost? Have executives lost confidence in the ability of the Departmentwide website to communicate what they think is important?
- Did it happen because executives or staff don’t know, understand, or (most important) value the Department’s web policies?
- Was it an off-the-cuff idea that gained momentum without consideration of its ramifications on the rest of the agency, the government as a whole, or the public?
In truth, it probably was a little bit of each of these factors…and maybe others.
HUD has a long-standing policy that there is one single website for the agency and that everyone will promote that URL. Yet key executives decided to do something different. They surely had compelling reasons to take this action. What were they?
URL "creep" isn’t just HUD’s problem – in fact, HUD has been better than most agencies in controlling website proliferation. This is a problem that needs to be addressed across government. And to do that, we need to understand the causes. Ultimately – another URL is not good for citizens.
What is so important about having a new URL? Answer that question, and you’ll be on the road to solving the problem.
Related Posts: Stop the Proliferation of Federal Websites
Is It Time to Enlist the CIO’s?
With the number and volume of government websites running amok, it's time to establish governmentwide management controls over websites. Maybe, Content Managers, it’s time to enlist the support of CIOs. Government web managers have struggled to distinguish “content management” from “technical management.” But it’s time to form alliances to bring about governmentwide consistency and better overall management.
The Web Managers Advisory Council might do a thoughtful briefing for the CIO Council, for starters. Let them know what you’re doing, the problems you face, and what you’ve learned from and about citizens; and suggest ways the CIO Council could work with you to address some of these ongoing problems.
The CIO Council has recognition, money, and access to the top management at OMB. If you can explain the issues in ways that make sense to them, you could create some powerful allies.
Think about it.
Related Posts:
Stop the Proliferation of Federal Websites
Where Are We Going?
The Web Managers Advisory Council might do a thoughtful briefing for the CIO Council, for starters. Let them know what you’re doing, the problems you face, and what you’ve learned from and about citizens; and suggest ways the CIO Council could work with you to address some of these ongoing problems.
The CIO Council has recognition, money, and access to the top management at OMB. If you can explain the issues in ways that make sense to them, you could create some powerful allies.
Think about it.
Related Posts:
Stop the Proliferation of Federal Websites
Where Are We Going?
Sunday, February 19, 2006
Why Have All These Government Websites When We’ve Got Google?
A couple of months ago, I heard someone ask a question that should chill the blood of every government web manager: why bother having all those government websites when we have Google? Initially, I thought, “absurd.” But later, I started to wonder what he meant.
- Did he mean that government “home pages” are a waste of time because citizens can’t find what they want on home pages? With Google, they get right into the website – bypassing all that “overhead.”
- Did he mean that all our testing and anguish over information architecture is a waste of time because citizens still have to figure out how to navigate the more than 24,000 government websites, each with its own look and its own layout?
- Did he mean that the public doesn’t know or understand the government organizational structure so they don’t know where to go in the government to find what they want? It’s easier to go to one place – Google – and not worry about which agency it comes from.
- Did he mean that there’s so much program and content duplication and overlap among agencies that the public gets frustrated having to go from one agency website to another to get the full picture? That they’d rather have it pulled together in one place?
- Did he mean that he isn’t aware of FirstGov as the front door for government information?
- Did he mean that he’d rather see us just dump all of our content into one gigantic online “file cabinet” and let citizens find it using a tool that’s already proven itself to be reliable, fast, and easy to use - Google?
What do you suppose he meant? You’d better figure it out because, one day, the Washington Post or a member of Congress may ask the same question.
What value do you add by having a separate website? Do you add value by organizing content in a coherent way, leading citizens through the steps or a progression? Do you add value by saying, “start here?” Do you add value by saying, “this link is going to help you more than that link,” or – better yet – just eliminating that link that really isn’t so helpful? Do you add value by explaining what a complicated piece of content means, in simple terms?
What do you do that Google doesn’t or can’t do? Figure it out, folks. Be ready to explain it. If having all these separate government websites has no value, then – indeed – why have them?
Related post: Connect the Dots
Web Managers – Check Your Image
To be effective in your job, you have to be part of the management process. You can’t just sit back and wait to be asked for your opinion. You have to make your place at the table. You have to be viewed as a management asset – an idea person who adds real value in planning sessions...someone who comprehends management problems and offers possibile solutions…someone who is ready and able to jump in and explain your ideas in terms that executives understand.
If you are going to lead your agency to use the web in new and better ways, you have to cause executives to make you part of their management team. Your image – how you are perceived by executives – is critical to your success. So, Web Manager – take a look at yourself.
If you are going to lead your agency to use the web in new and better ways, you have to cause executives to make you part of their management team. Your image – how you are perceived by executives – is critical to your success. So, Web Manager – take a look at yourself.
- Do you look like someone who could walk into the office of the agency head and make a presentation? Do you look like someone who your agency head would want to take with him/her to a public meeting to talk about your website?
- Can you talk to executives in their language? Do you know what your executives want to achieve? Can you demonstrate that you understand the issues and challenges they face? Are you credible?
- Can you articulate what you do - or can do - to help them, in ways that mean something to executives? Most executives don't know what Web Managers do, other than post content that other people give you. They don’t know you are a consultant and analyst and designer and teacher and editor and marketer and innovator. They don’t know that you have important information about their customers that could help them. Do you sell yourself and your capabilities?
- Do you find ways to get in the door? Do you ask to meet with executives regularly to brief them on where the web is now and where it’s going? Do you ask them what they’re working on and offer web-related ways to accomplish it? Do you share “good news” – tidbits about increases in web use, positive feedback from customers, or facts to show how much more work is getting done because of the web? Do you walk up and introduce yourself to executives and take advantage of opportunities to slip in your ideas? Do you show them that you’re a go-getter and a team player?
Perception is everything. If you want agency executives to think of you as someone who is smart, savvy, dedicated, effective, and capable – someone they want to have on their teams - you’ve got to walk the walk and talk the talk. Are you this person? If not, you’d better get busy and fix your image.
Tuesday, January 31, 2006
USANews.gov?
Government web managers are struggling to keep the balance of “mission” and “message” on their websites. Public affairs shops understandably want to use the web to promote the initiatives and successes of the agency. But citizens really come to government websites to find the services they offer. Web managers are challenged to make sure all of those needs are addressed.
Maybe a new website is the answer. I know - I'm one who complains about too many websites. But maybe - by creating just one more - we could eliminate the need for new websites for every new initiative. Maybe we should create: USANews.gov.
USANews.gov could hold the news releases from all agencies, sorted by agency and topic. It would be similar in concept to USAJobs, which holds all government vacancy announcements.
There are a number of advantages to having a single news website:
- Political leaders and agency public affairs offices could promote one single web source for all government news, instead of promoting an array of separate news websites.
- News agencies and citizens would have one place to find all current government news.
- Citizens and reporters could search all current news by topic, easily.
- By removing news items from the agency websites (particularly, home pages), agency web managers could use that prized front page space to feature services that the agency provides for citizens. A link will get visitors to agency news on USANews (just as we currently link to agency job announcements on USAJobs).
- Public affairs offices could post news releases directly to USANews. For some agencies, that could eliminate steps and get news posted more quickly.
USANews could be owned by the White House or OMB or it could be an interagency portal, run by a council of public affairs officers.
USAJobs is a good example of the value of putting common information on a single website. USANews could be a real plus for the government and for the public.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
