The question for this session was "Hot potato, hot potato: How do we embrace ownership for Open Government when cross functional ownership is crucial?"
- Ownership of Open Government has to be pushed down to the lowest levels.
- The Open Government Directive provides "cover"/context/rationale for great open and collaborative initiatives already underway.
- Open Government is not the mission, it's a way of organizing agency missions
- Need to be careful of too much focus on "Compliance" or having a "Check the Box" mindset
- Stories are critical in communicating success
- Multiple agendas exist in a cross-functional context. (important to reconcile, or adapt?)
- It's not clear if anyone actually owns Open Government (governance not clear)
- CIO & Public Affairs clearly have a stake
- Should Open Government be "push" or "pull" (discussion around value of both, perhaps a hybrid?)
- Should Open Government be "separate" or "embedded"? (discussion leaned toward embedded/integrated)
- Decision making in silo's often result in "least wrong answer" - definitely sub-optimized results - innovation not possible
Concept of community as network introduced
- Need a place to come together
- Networks (in this context) are people
- Multiple networks exist, overlapping and having "connection" or "integration" points
- Open Government Playbook Workshop is a network/community, serving as one such venue for integration. There are others.
- Open Government is the integration point for innovation.
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.