105. Social Media and the Public Sector

Global conversations, especially among Generation Y,¹ were born circa 2004. Beginning 1995 until then, the Internet had hosted static, one-way websites. These were places to visit passively, retrieve information from, and perhaps post comments about by electronic mail.

Sixteen years later, Web 2.0² enabled many-to-many connections in numerous domains of interest and practice, powered by the increasing use of blogs, image and video sharing, mashups, podcasts, ratings, Really Simple Syndication, social bookmarking, tweets, widgets, and wikis, among others. Today, people expect the Internet to be user-centric. Web 1.0 was about getting people connected, even though its applications were largely proprietary and only displayed information their owners wished to publish. More advanced (and cheap or free) software can now assume, correctly, that people stand ready to connect; it is therefore far more interactive and people-aware. Users generate content (e.g., blogs, Flickr, wikis), business intelligence (e.g., FreshBooks, Prosper), reviews, and opinions (e.g., TripAdvisor), products (e.g., eBay), networks of contacts (e.g., Facebook, MySpace), statements on the value of web pages (e.g., Google PageRank), distributed storage and server capacity (e.g., Peer-to-Peer networks), connectivity (e.g., mesh networks, Wi-Fi sharing), and expressions of taste and emotion (e.g., Delicious, Last.fm) that search engines, not portals, fetch. Since traffic equals money, simple online economics drive uninterrupted change in the way we live, learn, work, and play.

The form that communications take is collectively dubbed as “social media”.³ Where that is enriched by high levels of user interactions, the contents of the platforms promoting it across connected devices are in near-permanent “beta” stages of development, being and becoming at the same time, both As-Is and To-Be. In all instances, success hinges on a plausible promise, effective Web 2.0 applications, and an acceptable bargain with users (Shirky 2008). Meaning is the new message.

The world may not yet be flat but technology is most assuredly leveling organizations and the silos in them: users have been given the tools to do things together in networks and no longer rely exclusively on the traditional structures, viz., functional, geographical, product, customer/market, or matrix organizations, that up to this time had enabled them to collaborate and contribute to serve common aims in (the lower echelons of) the hierarchy of needs.⁴ They are newly empowered and emboldened. Specifically, with positive (and, to the unprepared, negative) ramifications, information is far more transparent than in the past; users can access up-to-date information instantly on any topic; there are few barriers to involvement; and online communities therefore coalesce all of a sudden.

Social communities now exist in almost every conceivable domain. However, four broad types of online communities have morphed into Web. 2.0 entities in a new, horizontal architecture of participation and connection that prizes credibility.⁶ They are relationship-, interest-, transaction-, and fantasy-oriented. Communities of the first type organize around (usually) intense life experiences that lead to personal bonding between members. In the second type, interactions center on topics of common interest. The third type of community revolves around facilitated buying and selling of products and services and the delivery of information that supports transactions.⁷ The fourth type plays roles in simulated environments.

These four types of online communities hold significant value-creation potential for users, public sector agencies, nongovernment organizations, and the private sector. Opportunities to add value through new channels lie pell-mell in content addition; subscription revenues; closer understanding of explicit or latent needs; product or service ideation or creation; and better targeting of market segments. Naturally, the scope for value-creation hinges on the particulars of a community and who organizes its space. Nonetheless, well-designed and well-implemented social media brings with it the power of every user on the planet: its influence can only grow because, unlike in the past, control is shared with the crowd and very real feedback is fast. Users generate content and voice their feelings far and wide. From “wisdom of the crowd”⁸ reactions, organizations can collect detailed information on users, build valuable relationships through conversations about people’s experiences, deploy higher levels of engagement, and refine offerings and related messages to better match needs. The uses of social media are boundless: Web 2.0, a.k.a the Social or Relationship Web, amounts to nothing less than a massive social experiment.

Many individuals already use Web 2.0 applications every day and consider life without these applications unimaginable. As time flies, a greater percentage of the population will feel the same. Already, younger personnel expect to work in organizations where Web 2.0 is the norm and are dismayed to discover that many of the applications they use in their personal lives are not available professionally. What is more, today’s teenagers will soon enter the workforce.

This groundswell invites public sector agencies, nongovernment organizations, and the private sector to engage, innovate, and create relevance according to the types of relationships they want. Organizations and Web 2.0 are not the easiest fit: sometimes, a cultural shift must happen for technology to make a difference. But all must learn how to stay nimble and flexible in an ever-changing digital environment.

Elements of the private sector have begun to thrive on opportunities to forge, build, and deepen relationships with people, both internally and externally. From the early adoption of Web 2.0 applications such as blogs and wikis, they are expanding the mix of tools and shifting from using them experimentally to embedding them in their business processes.⁹ Some are transforming their organizational structures and opening their corporate ecosystems in consequence, for example, by encouraging clients, audiences, and partners to join them in developing products. They can now reach mass audiences, target niche markets, craft messages, and create great client experiences, cost-effectively, in ways they only dreamed about before. To build Web 2.0-friendly cultures that are transparent, agile, creative, user-centric, and empowering these high-performance organizations at once asked themselves:

Driven by internally focused objectives rather than a service-delivery mentality, bureaucratic in decision-making, traditionally slow to change, saddled with top-down hierarchical structures in which positional authority no longer compels, the public sector is a relative newcomer to social media. On the social technographics ladder, most public sector organizations are inactives (Li and Bernoff 2008)¹⁰ that continue to rely on yesterday’s technology to address tomorrow’s problems.¹¹ They must change their world or the world will change them. Accepting that the Internet is increasing the economic and social value of the information they hold, they must stretch mindsets to understand emerging mental models and equip themselves with the right policies, strategies, resources, delivery mechanisms, and management skills to take part in collaborative relationships in the digital economy. Why should they do so? First, the public sector bears social responsibility for embracing change—else, it faces reputational risk. Second, the social media will soon play a major role in defining how public sector organizations are considered: their accomplishments are measured not just by what they do but also, more and more, by perceptions of that.¹² Third, and most important, Web 2.0 applications offer unprecedented opportunities to achieve more simple, user-oriented, transparent, accountable, participative, inclusive, responsive, joined-up, networked, and efficient government.¹³ To reap these, public sector organizations must meet people where they are. Increasingly, that is online. All the time more, they will need to be aided by third parties acting as intermediaries in providing more granular, or component-based, content and services, with implications for the design of these.

For Web 2.0 applications, the most favorable context is high trust, collaborative, and knowledge intensive. Three aspects, all having to do with management (including that of human resources), favor success on the Social Web: a lack of internal barriers to Web 2.0,¹⁴ a culture that favors cooperation, and early adoption of Web 2.0 applications for communication, interaction, and service. (Web 2.0, as much else, is about people, not technology.) For this, public sector organizations must develop social media strategies across multiple networks, both internally and externally focused: from how their personnel should conduct themselves as employees¹⁵ to what is considered competition. The transition they must accomplish requires strong leadership for engagement by senior managers (whom most surveys discover cannot easily grasp the potential returns from Web 2.0); competency in forging, building, and deepening relationships on the Internet; policies to both protect organizational assets and ensure appropriate personnel behavior;¹⁶ and, finally, training so that everyone understands Web. 2.0 applications, how to use them in the context of the organization, and their respective roles.

In the twenty-first century, three broad challenges are plain to see: emerging global issues, rising citizen expectations, and aging populations. In the age of the Internet, Web 2.0 applications dictate how responsive the public sector must be.¹⁷ A shared vision for the journey necessarily encompasses stakeholders (who to engage with), reason (rationale for acting), activity (what to do), and tools (how to do it). In quick steps, public sector organizations can start with the following:¹⁸