Transparency Camp 2010 (credit: Avelino Maestas)

While attending the 2010 Transparency Camp sponsored by the Sunlight Foundation, there was much talk about measuring the effectiveness of government transparency efforts.  My biggest question was (still is) how does one measure such abstract thoughts when there is no widely recognized tangible goals?

At Saturday’s session of Measuring Transparency Success, Justin Grimes presented 4 measurable goals for government efforts to be transparent:

1. Proactive dissemination of government information that citizens want/need;
2. Release of citizen-requested information through the Freedom of Information Act;
3. Citizen accessibility and ability to understand information from #1 and #2; and
4. Encouraging and protecting whistleblowing (in the spirit of the No FEAR Act).

Okay, so that’s one perspective, and while I agree with him that those are good quantifiable start, there was much discourse in the room about measuring the perception of transparency.  But how does one do that?

Web analysts like me struggle with the concept of perception, because it is a qualitative measure with subjective bias.  Those types of data are hard to measure (sometimes even impossible) and hard to analyze (sometimes even more impossible).  When you put such high barriers of entry, you increase the risk of those tasks not getting done, because resources at smaller agencies are spread thin and the tools/skills they need may not be readily available.

Case in point: having an entire department report on basic site metrics is more difficult than it actually sounds. Cost, learning curve and effort are huge barriers to implementing and analyzing Web measuring tools. Yes, tools such as Google and Yahoo! Analytics are free, but there is much trepidation in using such tools, because there is this internal distrust of “all things free.” What is not being considered here is that those free tools also come with the advantage of a less steeper learning curve and an easier interface that allows the Web metrics novice to learn fairly quickly.  In addition, because there is high accessibility to everyone, there are tons of online resources for use of these tools.

Most important of all, what these tools provide, especially to agencies with fewer resources within that department, is the ability to start small.  In many areas, not just the government, there is a tendency to kick off a project with guns blazing. While there are appropriate venues for those, the failures of many ambitious ventures is reaching too high of goals in too short of a timeframe.

It’s like losing weight. It’s great for folks in the Biggest Loser to attain their ideal weight goals in a 12-week timeframe, but for people whose lives are not spent all day in a gym and under a scrutiny of a nutrition and fitness entourage, thinking that we can lose 100 pounds in 12 weeks is only setting ourselves up for failure.

Same applies for metrics. Start small, invest small.  That doesn’t mean that you don’t put your best effort forward – it means that you shouldn’t have to sink a fortune in something that hasn’t been tried before.  With small successes along the way, you can increase effort and investment until perhaps a paid tool would provide the best features to need your needs.

Measuring transparency requires baby steps that begin with tangible measures. If everyone (government, private sector, activists) wait until abstract or qualitative measures, we lose an opportunity to start somewhere and work from there. As cliche as it may be, I still say that Rome wasn’t built in a day, neither should transparency measures — find that small rock and work from there.

How can Government 2.0 efforts be meaningful if the people behind them don’t necessarily believe in the tactics? While most federal agencies are trying to jump into the social media scene, a study from the National Journal Group, which surveyed federal government employees and Hill staff, found that most of them view social media platforms as “pointless” and “passing fads.”

Just another proof that Chris Brogan can read my mind. Re-reading previous blogs (oh, the handful of them) made me wonder if I should change the way I communicate, the way I reach people, the way I present myself. Guess I’m not the only one doing some of that kind of soul-searching today. Chris Brogan suggests always taking the time to evaluate how to connect, how to continue being of value — before being overstretched chips away at your ability to be of value.

Web metrics is not rocket science, but don’t hire idiots, either. Reading Gary Angel’s post on Metrics Meltdown reminded me of a recent thought I had about the industry making Web analytics more complicated than what it is (or what it should be).  Analysts keep throwing jargon like “infrastructure, data quality, expertise.” That’s great, but there’s nothing wrong with using common sense and Web experience to assess and make sound conclusions about Web performance using consistent and reasonable measures.

Well, I’m not too worried..just yet.

Primarily since I think there is a misunderstanding with Google’s intent to release this product.

The federal government is increasingly trying to at least catch up (and for some compete) online with the private and non-profit sector when it comes to technology and innovation.  Successful Web teams, regardless of sector, know that performance measurement is an important part to developing a robust online programs.  Sure, some of the more tech-savvy agencies have invested in some form of paid Web analytics package, but with a platform as user- and budget-friendly as Google Analytics, access and ability to use Web metrics reporting would become easier.

But it’s not that easy. Despite GSA’s recent approval to list Google Analytics in its apps.gov site, there is still some hesitation to use the tool because of federal restrictions on persistent cookies and agency trepidation on potential violations of user privacy.  After all, even the Web analytics community isn’t too sure who owns the data on Google Analytics.  Even when agencies have received waivers to use persistent cookies for their analytics programs, there is still some hesitation to using Google Analytics.  After all, 1. you can’t possibly trust anything that’s free and 2. Google is the new Microsoft.

Perhaps, an opt-out functionality may not be the cure-all for the federal government’s issues in Web metrics, but at least Google is trying to step into the right direction of meeting agencies halfway.

Until the product is available and we can see how it truly affects clickstream reporting, let’s not panic just yet.

I’m starting again to use this blog for a couple things:

• An outlet to organize my thoughts.  Currently, I am drowning in goals, data and ideas, and I need a place to brainstorm and organize information.
• Testing ground for cool analytics things that I can’t do at work.  Enough said.
• A (hopefully) safe place to recruit input from the outside world.  There are a lot of brilliant people out there.  Some I know from real life, some I’ve never met before and some I won’t ever met in this lifetime. But they are smart and they have ideas — very useful, innovative, AMAZING ideas.  Sometimes it just takes asking to get those out.

While I won’t readily admit to this in real life, I have recently watched 17 Again.  There was a scene in which the main character’s soon-to-be-ex-wife accused him of never finishing any projects he started.  I was rather embarrassed to admit that I could relate to him.  But just like him, I’m hoping to redeem some of those incomplete projects by picking them up and continuing them (sans the magical transformation to being 17).  I’ve got a lot of catching up to do with this blog.

• Andrew Turner gave a great presentation on Data Visualization using Government Data during one of yesterday’s sessions.  He has shared his presentation slides and links to demos he did over at delicious.
• The White House Office of New Media released a video that highlights current initiatives from different federal agencies using social media.
• Great post from Andy Krzmarzick on how Twitter can make a positive impact on worker morale (especially offsite workers).
• Information on potential barcamp for Citizen Engagement.

I was going to post a consolidation of my notes from the different sessions I attended, but a tweet from Jeffrey Levy, EPA Director of Web Communications, got me thinking about something else.  His tweet was “OGIers, name the single most enduring thing you learned.”  My twitter response was “Need to find balance between openness and security – would open lots of doors and get lots of buy-in.”  Of course, that would be the most key thing in my mind–that was the bloody theme!

Well, so I thought to myself, ‘Now what?’ How would I let all of the knowledge sharing in the past two days affect how I do my job — after all, that was the reason why I attended.  I thought, ‘there were so many different facets of a social media strategy discussed that it’s difficult to determine where to start.’ AHA! Maybe having a strategy to start would help.  I know, I know..this is going to take a while and will go beyond the scope of this one blog post, but at least we have a starting point.  Now I just have to integrate our organization mission (to provide data to the public and stakeholders) with these different ideas:

• Creating small projects that have profound long-term effects.
• Working with key stakeholders in the fundamental values (security, records management, privacy) to address their concerns about reaching our end goals (engagement, participation.
  
• Engaging internal stakeholders to start changing culture toward one that is more flexible to change. Perhaps, reminding them that the strategic intent is already in place; we’re just changing — updating if you will — our toolkit. (Crediting Joshua Salmons from DIS for that great insight.)
• Demonstrating potential ROI to managers — keeping in mind that what is important to them may not be what is important to me.
• Making data understandable by all kinds of users.  One of the key ways to achieve this goal is data/information visualization.

In days to come, there will be more brain-dumping as I work on this strategy. For the time being, I am going to rest my poor brain cells — they have been suffering on information overload (not necessarily a bad thing).

The reason being President Obama leaves me a little skeptical. While he may be inspiring and charismatic, there may also be a different motivation for the young people to get into federal service. Yes, there are the pay and benefits, but could it be that the generation who “grow up digital” be catching on to the rise of innovation and technology in the federal government? After all, they are already driving innovation in the new economy and are easily adapting to the new technology. Could it be that government 2.0 is their next innovation challenge to conquer?

• The Government Social Media Subcouncil is looking for input on their current list of Web 2.0 Governance Policies and Best Practices.
• They are also thinking of putting a series of webinars together. The webinars would be introduction to different social media tools. They’re gathering input on the outline for the blog webinars (edits due July 27, 2009).
• The Federal IT Dashboard now has a blog. The folks behind the project are looking to get feedback on how to make the information available on the site more useful and engaging.

The percentage for visiting government Web sites increased during this time period, but never surpasses the 10% mark. With many interesting and useful information published in US government Web sites these days, this begs the question: What’s stopping American adults from using government Web sites as a daily resource of information?

Could it be usability? In 2003, 97 million Americans (77 percent of Internet users) use government Web sites to obtain information. Obviously, government sites as an information resource is clear, but there are barriers to daily use. Do they not update enough? Are there no functionalities (such as RSS feeds) that allow them to get the information (even if it’s the same information from day-to-day) readily without having to navigate through the site or even go to the site at all?

Could it be branding? At a recent talk I attended, Tim O’Reilly shared a story of a congressman who told him “Why do we need NOAA when we have the Weather Channel?” Information published by government agencies are used by us daily without knowing the source — should it be time that agencies take credit for their work? Are government agencies willing to be innovative to create interactive tools to make their data more engaging, more understandable? Or are they willing to associate themselves with the external innovators who are using their data?

Surpassing the 10% mark entails branding U.S. government sites as a reliable, easily accessible resource of information relevant to the day-to-day of American adults. In the time of fickle attention spans and rapid trends, can government sites keep up?