Catalyzing Congressional Collaboration

This morning a colleague of mine forwarded me Nancy Scola’s Personal Democracy Forum post Are Congressional “New Media” Clubs Missing the Point?  In short, Nancy challenges whether Congressional new media caucuses are “simply self-serving clubs dedicated to winning the YouTube-Facebook-Twitter arms race.”  (Just perfectly articulated, I think.) If so, she explains, they are missing the point and losing an opportunity.  Indeed! 

As I’ve said many times before, “Web 2.0 is not about the tools and technologies; it’s about the cultural shift that they are catalyzing.”  It sounds like the new Congressional Caucus on Blogging and New Media, and the Republican New Media Caucus that Nancy mentions in her post get this a little bit and should be commended for venturing into this area.  However, her point is well taken that there isn’t an Openness and Participation Caucus… right now it’s all about understanding and utilizing the tools and technologies.

Congress’ participation in social media mirrors the phenomenon that I’ve seen over and over again: when individuals or organizations are at the beginning of the Social Media Adoption Curve, they focus on the tools and believe that the Web 2.0 Holy Grail is mastery of these technologies.  Once they’ve reached a point of general technology proficiency and comfort, though, they realize that understanding the tools is just a stepping stone and that the path is about communicating and working differently — more collaboratively.  Where the path of collaboration takes an individual…a corporation…a government agency…Congress…is for them to create.

I’ve been noticing rumblings atop the Hill.  With some terrific early leadership (small “l”)  in the Gov 2.0 discourse  and grassroots events by early evangelists such as Rob Pierson, Congress is starting up the Curve.  Perhaps they’re starting to notice the Gov 2.0 innovation and leadership so prevalent in the Executive Branch (even despite Agencies’ bureaucratic structures).

Congress has the unique challenge of fragmentation: each Congressional office operates as a separate “small business,” for lack of a better analogy.  Each Representative and Senator has his/her own budget to allocate as he/she sees fit: more staffers, higher salaries, etc.  So, though we lump them all together as “Congress” it’s a bit like thinking of the businesses in a local town as a single entity.  The reality is that there are many, many nodes with unique constituents and key issues.  Each office is at a different point of awareness, education, participation, relationships and collaboration.

Coming up October 12 & 13  is the inaugural Congress Camp unconference.  As one of the organizers of Government 2.0 Campback in March, I, of course, am a biased proponent of unconferences as an ideal way to introduce participation and collaboration to public and private sector organizations and interest groups, by SHOWING — as opposed to telling — them what this whole Web 2.0 (for an ongoing lack of a better term) movement is all about.  It is certainly my hope that Congress Camp exposes the Hill to new, more collaborative ways of thinking about citizen engagement.

As Nancy so succinctly states at the end of her post, “An Openness Caucus would be a recognition that, from the public’s perspective, the issue isn’t new media. The issue is new politics, whether it happens through the web or telephone or carrier pigeon.”

The “unorganization” phenomenon

Over the past few weeks I have come across a number of projects and initiatives being led by “unorganizations” — groups of people who come together for a common cause, but who are independent agents and not a formal corporation, organization or association of any sort. 

The first was, of course, the recent unconference that I co-organized, Government 2.0 Camp.  It was important to me from the event’s inception to make sure that it was owned by the people.  By design, the largest sponsorship was $1,000–just 1/20th of the total funds raised–so that no single organization owned the gathering. 

But how do you do business as a non-entity?  Duke Ellington School of the Arts (DESA) required Government 2.0 Camp to sign a standard  contract for use of the venue.The contract was between DESA and Government 2.0 Camp.  I signed the contract, but felt soft of silly doing so, as Government 2.0 Camp wasn’t a formal organization. 

One interesting idea that was suggested by Nancy Faget, an attendee of Government 2.0 Camp, was selling the proceedings from Government 2.0 Camp to a book publisher.  In fact, she claims that two are already interested!  Session leaders and other attendees could author the chapters and the proceeds could fund Government 2.0 Club.  How do you fund a non-entity?  To whom would the publisher write the check? (Yes, in reality, I know we’d form a 501C3 or similar, but the philosophy of this is still a rather intersting conundrum.)

The closing session of Government 2.0 Camp was a brainstorming discussion about creating and formalizing Government 2.0 Club–the and official creator of Government 2.0 Camp.  We were lucky enough to have Chris Heuer, founder of Social Media Club, to guide our discussion and ideas with his experiences from creating and growing Social Media Club.  The difference, however, is that Social Media Club is owned and operated by founders Heuer and Katie Wells.  Our vision for Government 2.0 Club is the embodiment Government 2.0, itself: owned and operated of the people, for the people, by the people.  

A few days after the unconference, my co-organizer, Peter Corbettsent out an summary and wrap-up e-mail to all attendees that directed interested parties to the Government 2.0 Club website for session summaries and other unconference proceedings.  He signed his message “the unmanagement.” 

The “unorganization” phenomenon extends beyond Government 2.0 Camp and Club, however.  I have been working over the past two weeks on a proposal for a community organizing project for a local municipality that is being created, driven and funded by “concerned citizens.”  It’s quite a legitimate initiative led by a number of impressive for-profit and non-profit organizations as well as philanthropic individuals.  I frankly don’t know who will sign the contract or write the checks.  Those are details that someone or some organization will shoulder for the sake of the cause, just as I signed the venue contract for Government 2.0 Camp. 

Another example of “unorganization” made its way across my computer screen earlier this evening and prompted this blog entry: TEA Party Tax Day.  Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the politics of Tax Tea Parties, it’s interesting to note that there is no Organization behind this tremendous grassroots organization.  When you click the About or Contact buttons on the site, you are just brought back to a page that says ”Please see the Help Organize area for the most commonly asked questions and the answers” and enables you to fill out a form for more information or to organize a “tea party” in your area.  I asked a top Hill staffer for more information about this and learned that this initiative really is being run as a collective effort of like-minded tax opponents and is not “owned” by any single organization. 

The challenges of the “unorganization” also remind me a lot of what’s going on right now in the Government 2.0 movement.  Government agencies–especially the General Services Administration–are successfully working through barriers, like Terms of Service challenges, that prohibit them from signing agreements with third party social media service providers, e.g. YouTube.  Issues of indemnification and defense are two barriers cited by the Federal Web Managers’ Council in its December 23, 2008 paper Social Media and the Federal Government: Perceived and Real Barriers and Potential Solutions.  In cryptic non-legal simplification: because the government is owned by the people, it cannot be sued and thus, cannot agree to indemnifya third party.

Why are all of these “unorganizations” popping up?  Collaboration.  As I’ve written about in many previous blog posts, we are in the midst of a major cultural shift from the Broadcast Era in which large media organizations intermediated our information, to the Collaboration Era in which we can have influence that rivals the most watched Superbowl ads.  Individuals + collaboration = game changing ideas.

How will the legal, organizational and philosophical challenges be resolved for and by the increasing number of “unorganizations” that are emerging in the Collaboration Era?

The Catch-22 of Collaboration & Social Media

I Need Social Media!
Clients regularly approach MiXT Media Strategies requesting social media help:

• Can you help me set up a Facebook page?   
• How do I “do” Twitter? 
• I want to “use” bloggers to broaden the reach of my marketing campaign—where do I find them?  

These are the wrong questions for two reasons. First, these are the wrong questions because social media is not about the tools and technologies.

“Huh?  What about all of the blogs, social networks, RSS feeds, video-sharing sites, etc.?”

Nope.  Those are tools.  Social media is about the capabilities that these tools enable.  Successful social media starts not with the tools and technologies, but with good, old-fashioned business planning: mission, vision, goals, objectives, strategies. 

Second, these are the wrong questions because they are selfish.  The behaviors and capabilities that social media tools enable are engaging, participatory, relational—social.  They are not something that you “do” to your customers to elicit click-throughs, response rates or sales.

To create a successful social media strategy for your organization, you must first understand social media in context.

What’s Going on Out There
There are two world-changing dynamics in action right now.  First, the proliferation of social media tools and Web 2.0 technologies is fragmenting the communications landscape.  Not only are there now simply more communication choices, but these new tools and technologies enable us to further fine-tune our communications by speed, formality, time and place.  We have myriad choices never before possible.  How we communicate is now as complex as what we communicate. 

Second, we as a culture are emerging from the Broadcast Era and entering the Collaboration Era.  This means a marked change in the way we communicate.  In the Broadcast Era, we pushed information AT our audiences through traditional, one-way media vehicles.  The Collaboration Era brings about a whole new set of capabilities that change our communication expectations.  No longer are people satisfied receiving information, they expect to be able to jump in, engage and be a part of the two-way conversation.  The opportunity to participate in new and meaningful ways is changing us from content consumers to creators, participants, collaborators…communities.

The Opportunity: a Case for Collaboration
Collaboration makes organizations more efficient and more effective.  Organizations that embrace collaborative practices—supported by innovative social media tools and technologies—will decrease costs and increase sales by increasing satisfaction and retention of employees, customers, vendors and partners.

The Challenge: a Catch-22 of Catch-22s
What complicates things is that each of these dynamics, in and of itself, is a Catch-22.

• We can’t understand the benefits of collaboration until we collaborate; and yet we can’t truly collaborate until we understand the benefits of doing so.
• We want to understand the value of social media tools before we invest our time and energy in using them; and yet, we can’t truly understand the value of social media tools until we use them.

What further complicates things is that collaboration and social media tools together create a Catch-22.

• We can’t truly understand the benefits and possibilities of social media tools until we use them to collaborate; and yet we can’t truly understand the benefits of and possibilities for collaboration until we utilize social media tools collaboratively.

collaboration                   social media

The confluence of these two separate but connected Catch-22s presents a solution: the Confluence Process.  Teaching organizations to use social media tools and catalyzing a cultural shift towards collaboration requires a process that manages the interplay between these two dynamics.

The Confluence Process that MiXT Media Strategies has developed enables organizations to use social media tools to learn the value of collaboration while simultaneously engaging in collaboration to understand the full extent of social media tools’ value.

Which is the Cause, Which the Effect?

I’m here at the WeMedia conference today and tomorrow in Miami, FL. You can check out the Twitterfeed for #wemedia.

There are great discussions going on here about the future of our country and world, communications, collaboration and media.  I’ll share with you some of the concepts and thoughts here.  Not the most coherent blog post I’ve done, but I just wanted to get down some of the ideas.

————–

One concept that’s been presented is that it’s now the “end of apathy” thanks to emerging social media tools and technologies.  However, as I think about this, I’m not sure which is the cause and which is the effect, so here’s what I’ve come up with:

• chicken : egg :: apathy : tools that enable action

Tools that enable collaboration and innovation would not be created with out the desire to collaborate and innovate.  And yet, without the tools and platforms for collaboration and innovation across time & place, these behaviors are not maximized.

—————

In the morning sessions, Dale Peskin presented an Agenda for Smart Capitalism:

• outcomes not income
• connections not transactions
• people not products
• creativity not productivity

At lunchtime, I had an interesting discussion with some folks who were slightly rubbed the wrong way by the political agenda of this conference/conference organizers.  Their assertion: most everything presented this morning supported a liberal agenda.  Objectively, when you look at the case studies presented, this is pretty much true. 

My question, however: is this a cause or effect?  Is it that the innovative application of social media tools & collaborative concepts are primarily coming out of organizations with liberal agendas OR that liberal agendas are more likely to think differently and therefore embrace collaborative and innovative tools to solve their problems?

Collaborative Government: Recapturing Our Founding Principle

I had coffee this morning with Mark Drapeau, National Defense University fellow and author of two terrific recent and impressive articles on Mashable about government 2.0.  As I was driving to my DoD office afterwards, I was thinking about the implications of government 2.0 and began to establish this concept of collaborative government. 

Now, for the first time in history, we have the opportunity to truly live the “we the people” vision of our founding fathers.  Social media’s collaborative capabilities can level the playing field for us–the people–to create, improve, and manage our country as could previously only be envisioned.

Of course, we’re really just at the beginning of this new era.  72% of Americans are online.  According to Universal McCann’s recent “Media in Mind” tracking study, 50% of Americans are using social media today.  This study shows that only 10% of Americans blog.  Although this is just one indicator of engagment and active participation in social media, it’s an important one. 

It’s one thing to have a broadband connection, it’s another to usethe Internet.  It’s one thing to set up your Facebook profile, and quite another to be proactively and regularly collaborating via a social network.  The difference that I’m poking at is between attending an event and participating in a conversation.   The former is very much of a Web 1.0 metric, the latter–harder to measure and gauge–is what social media is all about: collaboration.

As our population has grown beneath the shadow of the broadcast media era, citizens have lost involvement in and ownership of their government.  Many view The Government as a impenetrable fortress around which they must navigate.  I live in Washington, DC.  I drive past the Capitol, the White House, and the myriad marble government buildings and icons, daily.   It’s easy to develop this perception.

But this is not the spirit of America.  Our government is of the people, for the people.  The rapid evolution of social media solutions provide government agencies with opportunities to leverage the best minds across the country to solve their biggest challenges.  This is my concept of collaborative government. 

There are a number of private organizations–Understanding USA and Personal Democracy Forum, being two–leading the charge to bridge this gap for citizens by utilizing social media tools to break down the perceived fortress and encourage citizen-government interaction.  As important and in the right spirit as these organizations may be, and as accessible and interactive as they make government information and data, the interaction still occurs outside the government “fortress.”  To maintain the safety and security of our country, this must, in many cases, remain.  Therefore, only government agencies–protectors of information and data–can initiate true citizen-government collaboration.

NASA’s blog, OpenNASA.com, is a great example of one agency understanding this and trying to engage and appeal to its next generation of advocates–and prospective employees.  The Department of Defense, is working to create a social media wiki that enables a collaborative dialogue about Defense needs and applicable industry innovations. The State Department has created “virtual embassies” that enable valuable interaction with U.S. citizens and foreign nationals.

As social media tools evolve, there will be more and more ways for government agencies to initiate a collaborative government.  What if USA.gov were to add a collective ratings layer, similar to the functionality of Yelp or Digg, to enable users to help users find the most valuable and relevant information across the government?  

The possibilities for creating our collaborative government will be endless.  Our government agencies must not just advocate social media, but truly embody its collaborative spirit–the spirit upon which our country was founded.