I keep an eye on USAJobs just to see what positions the Federal government is trying to fill. Lately, there have been a lot of postings for Chief, New Media, New Media Specialist, and similar positions. Most of these positions are in agency communications or public relations groups and are responsible for aspects of the agency Web site, implementing blogs, and assisting agencies in understanding this new Web 2.0 world.
It might not seem like it on the surface, but government buyers are nervous. Why? Because in this economy government, and more specifically the Federal government, is the only one really buying and every technology vendor in the world wants to sell to them. Why would this make a government buyer nervous? It would seem like a good thing to give government that level of choice. Choice is not the issue, the choices are.
One of the most common questions I receive when it comes to content is how do I know if my content is relevant? In their book Creating Breakthrough Products by Jonathan Cagan and Craig M. Vogel, the authors write that what makes a great experience for a user is a combination of three elements – useful, usable, and desirable. When it comes to providing content usefulness is the easiest – you just have to know what the user wants and provide content that is relevant to that want. The problem for government agencies, who are still designing sites and publishing blogs under the mindset that everyone is a customer, is not knowing what content is relevant to the user.
I routinely speak with technology vendors about the government market – who is doing what, which agency is buying, what new technologies government is interested in purchasing, best ways to penetrate the market, etc. In the last year I have seen a large upswing in one particular type of conversation – a vendor new to government wanting to know how to penetrate that market.
In speaking with a number of government Web managers and corresponding vendors recently, I have been asked a lot about why government Web sites and new media efforts are so “poor.” My first response generally is what do you mean by poor and I have been told things like “You can’t find anything on the site” or “The tweets are a mismatch of junk” or “The blog is filled with government speak that few understand” among many others. I then explain that it is most likely because they didn’t build a solid foundation before they started.
Alice: Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?
The Cat: That depends a good deal on where you want to get to.
Alice: I don’t much care where.
The Cat: Then it doesn’t much matter which way you go.
Alice: …so long as I get somewhere.
The Cat: Oh, you’re sure to do that, if only you walk long enough.
Federal Computer Week reported last week that the US General Services Administration (GSA) has continued the Federal government push into Web 2.0 by signing agreements with four mainstream social media service providers – blip.tv, Flickr, Vimeo, and YouTube that resolves the unique legal issues for government. The use of Web 2.0 technologies isn’t a new thing for government, but this agreement will accelerate its use by agencies, which is great. The problem is that government may be falling down the proverbial rabbit hole.
Like your High School speech teacher told you, before you decide what kind of speech you are going to give, define who your audience will be. The same advice applies to social media channels. How do you define your primary audience and target your message? Buy using personas.
Government is jumping into the social media muck with both feet, which I would argue on the surface is a good thing. It is fun to watch government employees taking to Twitter, Facebook, and other channels while government agencies are setting up blogs, making videos, and distributing podcasts. For once, government isn’t far behind during this digital revolution! What’s the problem?
Three years ago I spoke at a Forrester conference on what I saw as the future of eGovernment, something I called iGovernment (the slide deck from that presentation is publicly available on Adobe’s Web site). Given the promises and spoken intents of the current administration, I think it is important to revitalize this idea of iGovernment.
How well do you think government is doing when it comes to using and implementing Web 2.0 technologies? To find out I spent a morning a couple of weeks ago speaking at an event sponsored by Adobe on Enabling Transparency And Citizen Centric Services featuring presentations and discussions by representatives from GSA, TSA, and HHS. So what is the Federal government doing well when it comes to Web 2.0?