WRITTEN ON September 12th, 2008 BY Sir Bonar Neville-Kingdom GCMG KCVO AND STORED IN Uncategorized
Sir Bonar writes:
I see the Society of Local Goverment IT Managers has called for senior public sector managers to embrace Web 2.0. This is quite fallacious in my view.
I should first point out that our own Whitehall IT managers are thoroughly superior to their counterparts in local government. This is simply because any good IT manager would naturally rather come and work in Whitehall, just as the university applicant who could get to Oxbridge would hardly choose Loughborough.
Second, this local government group with its absurd acronym has no mandate to call for the rest of the public-sector IT community to do anything. That’s the job of our own IT manager through the proper channels. I would remind you that our goverment IT profession was set up by people from Accenture. They pretty much invented all this sort of thing, and know what they’re doing. When you pay that sort of money you expect the best and you act on what you’re told.
But above all the delivery priority for the Whitehall IT manager has nothing to do with so-called Web 2.0. My own modest blogging efforts aside this new-fangled, cheap, simple-to-use stuff is really only for students and ne’er-do-wells. Remember: we in government cannot choose our customers. And our processes of Customer Insight tell us that Web 2.0 is not what the public wants from us. What the public wants is more like this – straightforward, reliable Web 1.0 implementations with no fancy trickery.
Yes, it’s expensive when we outsource such projects to our trusted suppliers at Intellect, but as I’ve said already one has to pay for quality. We are undertaking some of the largest Web 1.0 implementations in the world. I do wish the detractors and the news media would take this into account.
Speaking of local government it should now be clear to us all that councils, well-meaning as they are, cannot be trusted with our personal data. Personal data needs serious gold-standard treatment and cannot be left to random chance. The latest proposal from CESG and DCLG is that all personal data held by local authoriities should be at once sent on memory stick by courier to our secure vaults in Cheltenham, to be kept under armed guard. I’ll be pushing this mandatory guidance through the appropriate channels in the next few weeks. We have to be seen to be taking this personal data issue seriously, and leaving it in the hands of local government is hardly the right way forward. I think this daft, iresponsible call from Socitm gives us precisely the opportunity to, well, sock it to Them. More anon.
14 Responses to “Absurd call for public sector to embrace web 2.0”
Bravo Sir Bonar,
..and another thing people don’t like: conversation. They don’t want to know why things are happening or to be able to ask questions and get answers. They certainly would never be interested in sharing information or ideas that make make services better or simpler.
All they want is a structured linear system, they want to be told which line they need to stand in just now. When they get to the end of that line they want to know which office they should wait outside next.
The beauty of web on is you can do all that without them ever talking to a person, so none of those questions people don’t want to ask or answers that you are too scared to give.
Thanks for the input.
This shows typical Whitehall attitude towards local government, we have to implement all the stupid regulations you come out with and get no respect for our work. we do 10 TIMES as much local contact with people as Whitehall departments yet still we have to put up with this pomposity. And th idea with the memory sticks must be the stupidest idea I have ever heard. Ridiculous and totally unprofessional.
Sir Bonar
You seem to be very impressed by consultants, mentioning that
“I would remind you that our government IT profession was set up by people from Accenture. They pretty much invented all this sort of thing, and know what they’re doing.”
I have not seen any evidence that they” really know what they are doing”, except by making lots of money.
I have NEVER seen a convincing report on RESULTS of government projects implemented by Accenture. Actually, their reports are more like publicity pieces, but apparently some people buy it.
I challenge you to present something that shows systematic RESULTS (and costs included) of projects implemented by Accenture for governments.
Furthermore, I think the aprioristic assumptions and the predilection that you show for a private company is quite worrying for tax payers. Your criteria, given your position, seem a bit biased to say the least.
But, as an external observer, I can only congratulate Accenture for their great work on customer management skills: the customer in that case, is not the citizen, but you Sir Bonar.
Amanda
I have to agree with Patricia that this site itself is a perfect example of why the public sector need embrace 2.0 technology. While the government may not choose its customers the people can always choose who provides and administers the government. Better to let the students and troublestarters have their soapbox before they start demanding more than that.
Sir Bonar
How do you know for sure that the site to which you have linked is definitely that of HMG’s CIO?
Sirs,
Have I been hoaxed? I would certainly not contribute to a discussion of internet 2.0 and security had I known my email address would be published in a linked manner accessible to all types of bots and scripts. Please remove public access to the email address provided in confidence.
I love Sir Bonar’s column, but judging from the comments here it seems the irony doesn’t always transmit so well.
The so-called Liberal party have vowed to stop consultants being paid by central government. We may find soon that the only thing standing between us and anarchy is Sir Bonar.
Sir Bonar has asked us to convey the following
Thank you all for your kind comments.
To cover off one or two points:
Yes, I’ve always found Accenture most impressive.
Re Anon’s point, I know HMG’s IT manager very well, and I hardly think he’s likely to put up a Web Site that was anyone else’e other than his own. So I’m not sure I take your point. All I am saying is that it is an exemplary Web Site, and we need far more like it .
Patricia – see me in my office. Now!
Sir Bonar,
I find your comments most disturbing. Surely we should be using Web 20.0, not Web 2.0, in order to maintain the UK’s world leadership in bureacratic database and surveillance related technologies.
Yours, etc
I really enjoyed the irony, and the reactions. But I actually agree with Sir Bonar that the call to EMBRACE web2.0 is quite absurd. I blogged about it here http://egov20.wordpress.com/2008/09/19/another-commandment-of-govt-20-dont-embrace-web-20/
I would certainly not contribute to a discussion of internet 2.0 and security had i known my email address would be published in a linked manner accessible to all types of bots and scripts
http://www.n-frames.com/
People will still have to seek out information much like they do now. Political participation has trailed off because of apathy and disbelief in the system and not because of the difficulty of staying informed. If its not entertainment people won’t seek it out, its the difference in viewers of the Daily Show/Colbert Report vs. CNN/MSNBC.
Er, Sir Bonar, I hope it’s alright for me to put a comment here (as we didn’t get a chance to talk between you giving me the draft to type up and post on the site, and you rushing off to the board meeting in Conference Room A). The things is, I wonder whether you are contradicting yourself a little here. Your blogging, which I believe you are quite excited about, IS actually a good example of Web2.0. And of course if people read what you say, it might prove quite important to the future of public services. More prosaically, perhaps, there’s something rather Web2 which I have come across recently which I was thinking tentatively about proposing at the Private Office Heads/SPS Cluster Group Meeting next month – it’s called Doodle (www.doodle.ch), and it enables extremely easy scheduling of meetings. It would save so much time for diary secretaries trying to organise cross-Whitehall meetings between you all (eg Weds am group) – especially given that not all the Outlook systems talk to each other (such as those not on the x.gsi) plus the fact that even when the systems work, some of your colleagues STILL refuse to enable their calendars to be open and accessible.
Anyway, just a thought. See you at elevenses.
Patricia