First day of Online Information always has a special buzz about it and yesterday was no exception. The conference was crowded and at some points during the day it was standing (or sitting on the floor) only in some of the tracks. The exhibition was also buzzing with the usual range of meeting by chance of old friends and contacts, as well as the fulfilment of carefully planned meetings and briefings.
The IWR stand was particularly busy with the December issue in great demand (no surprise there). If you haven't seen a copy or you want to join or rejoin the circulation list, then come by the stand and leave your business card.
There is no doubt that much of the conversation at the conference and the exhibition revolved around how the profession would cope in a downturn. I think the answer is pretty positive. The profession is brimming with ideas and initiatives to help organisation do what they have to do better and there are a seemingly endless stream of new products and tools which should help to harness the brain power.
And yesterday's business pages in The Times agree with my assessment. Discussing Reed Elsevier the report suggested the information business is not "overly sensitive to the economic cycle".
Wednesday, 3 December 2008
Tuesday, 2 December 2008
IWR Information Professional of the Year 2008
IWR would like to offer their congratulations to Natalie Ceeney (CEO of The National Archives) who has just been announced as Information Professional of the Year 2008.
Having met and interviewed Ceeney soon after I joined IWR, I was quickly aware of her passion for information and the role it has to play in government. Hearing her speak on various occasions since it is clear that passion also applies to the people who are involved in that profession.
Although Natalie had a prior engagement this evening and couldn't pick up the trophy in person, well done from all of us here.
To hear more from Natalie, she will be addressing the conference tomorrow morning in her session "Do We Have a Profession?"
More then.
Having met and interviewed Ceeney soon after I joined IWR, I was quickly aware of her passion for information and the role it has to play in government. Hearing her speak on various occasions since it is clear that passion also applies to the people who are involved in that profession.
Although Natalie had a prior engagement this evening and couldn't pick up the trophy in person, well done from all of us here.
To hear more from Natalie, she will be addressing the conference tomorrow morning in her session "Do We Have a Profession?"
More then.
Online Information - Innovators Under the Spotlight
After my somewhat lengthy post of Clay Shirky's opening keynote I wanted to keep this next post brief. It was a session of information innovation experts giving us their advice on how best to implement your own online strategy.
As moderator to this session, Euan Semple noted that by engaging in the more cutting edge of innovation there is a high degree of risk being involved (citing the experience of his own redundancy). Big changes how organisations work and how they relate to the people that work with them are coming he said.
Here is the gist of key points and principles I picked up from them:
Consider what are the information needs of your target audience?
Where are the gaps in what people want?
Make what you do fun and entertaining for users. Experience is key not necessarily the information
Pilot groups often don't work as customers often don't know what they want or need
Let people make their own niches in your space
The process should be about lifting the lid off of something - rather than creating it, it should be easy because there should be a vacum of information to fill
Too many tools can put off users and spook them
Explaining what the idea is key. How would you explain it so that it is easily understood?
People need to see the benefits offered to communities in order to recommend an online service.
More later...
As moderator to this session, Euan Semple noted that by engaging in the more cutting edge of innovation there is a high degree of risk being involved (citing the experience of his own redundancy). Big changes how organisations work and how they relate to the people that work with them are coming he said.
Here is the gist of key points and principles I picked up from them:
Consider what are the information needs of your target audience?
Where are the gaps in what people want?
Make what you do fun and entertaining for users. Experience is key not necessarily the information
Pilot groups often don't work as customers often don't know what they want or need
Let people make their own niches in your space
The process should be about lifting the lid off of something - rather than creating it, it should be easy because there should be a vacum of information to fill
Too many tools can put off users and spook them
Explaining what the idea is key. How would you explain it so that it is easily understood?
People need to see the benefits offered to communities in order to recommend an online service.
More later...
Online Information - Open Keynote, Clay Shirky part 2
Utilising crowds in Business
What does that mean for business models? For Shirky in the old Gutenberg economic model (publisher decides what is distributed in order to make money) the risk is born by the publisher. What the internet has done is allow anyone can publish to anyone (less risk less cost) anyone can say anything to anyone. It's too much content to corral, instead of why publish something? it is now why not publish something?
Because there is no economic/efficient way to control what gets published, so instead it is better to allow content to get out there and then choose what is of interest and therefore value. Also consider that even though some information out there is in public, the content might not be for public consumption - think twitter or your average blog
One of Shirky's final examples (which I love) is the story of how long suffering Josh Wheedon fans (long suffering because all the popular programmes that Wheedon makes get cancelled). With his latest venture, Doll House due to air in 2009, the fans have this time takend the initiative and have already started a "save the show" group. Cynical maybe, but they figure why wait until that decision is made? By then it will be too little too late, they don't trust the official marketing department so have instead become an unofficial one.
The old divisions of information management content producers have gone said Shirky, or are at least disappearing, it means that everyone involved can move across these boundaries.
So with these horizons and no boundaries what is the next thing to do? For Shirky, its about discovery and innovation. "Explore, try new things there is no obvious roadmap
he said, "It's a period of experimentation not transition".
What does that mean for business models? For Shirky in the old Gutenberg economic model (publisher decides what is distributed in order to make money) the risk is born by the publisher. What the internet has done is allow anyone can publish to anyone (less risk less cost) anyone can say anything to anyone. It's too much content to corral, instead of why publish something? it is now why not publish something?
Because there is no economic/efficient way to control what gets published, so instead it is better to allow content to get out there and then choose what is of interest and therefore value. Also consider that even though some information out there is in public, the content might not be for public consumption - think twitter or your average blog
One of Shirky's final examples (which I love) is the story of how long suffering Josh Wheedon fans (long suffering because all the popular programmes that Wheedon makes get cancelled). With his latest venture, Doll House due to air in 2009, the fans have this time takend the initiative and have already started a "save the show" group. Cynical maybe, but they figure why wait until that decision is made? By then it will be too little too late, they don't trust the official marketing department so have instead become an unofficial one.
The old divisions of information management content producers have gone said Shirky, or are at least disappearing, it means that everyone involved can move across these boundaries.
So with these horizons and no boundaries what is the next thing to do? For Shirky, its about discovery and innovation. "Explore, try new things there is no obvious roadmap
he said, "It's a period of experimentation not transition".
Online Information Conference - Opening Keynote, Clay Shirky
Part 1
Clay Shirky, author of "Here Comes Everyone" spoke to assembled delegates this morning about the nature of how we like to share and use our information and how that has led to the next information distribution revolution.
Shirky discussed how communities work and come together through publishing their shared interests, all a platform like flikr needs to do to work is provide the infrastructure. Users then share tips and help each other with their problems - it's a good example of how every URL has the potential to be a latent community he said.
Ultimately people turn themselves into a user community.
The distinction between publishing and communication is more blurred. Flikr's advantage is that it doesn't have to decide what info will be useful Shirky pointed out, by managing less Flikr offers more opportunities for its users. It is one of many such areas out there that do this successfully and makes a good example.
Another intersting example Shirky shared with us was the attention to detail given to the Dr WHO Wikipedia page - edited no less thab 9000 times! That would average about 2-3 edits per each users one would expect - however to demonstrate how we can't rely on a simpistic model of user behaviour Shirky pointed out that the editing process and contribution was far more skewed. For example, 2200 contributors edited the page once while 965 edited it multiple times, one user in particular has edited the entry over a 1000 times! The point is though is that there aren't typical users or typical behaviour.
If you wanted to tap this kind of commitment (especially if its provided for free) for your content consider how you would pitch that to a decision maker - would you even dare?
Colaboration and Collective Action
The story of HSBC reneging on its "free" OD fee for students recently was a PR disaster. When the bank went back on its word it angered many of its student customers. As a bank it knew that to move your money and finances to a competitor is no easy matter and so therefore they could afford to upset them. What tHSBC didn't count on was that students use Facebook and know what it can do.
The protest group acted as staging post for the outraged to come together, others offered advice on how to move their money and who to, it acted as a clarion encouraging even more dissaffected so the story made the national press. HSBC backed down not because the students were upset but because they were upset, organised and co-ordinated.
It is the difference between just reporting what HSBC had done than reporting and offering a way to do something about it.
However Shirky noted that we still tend to underestimate these tools, as they are often used for entertainment and frivolously so. For Shirky they can (and have) been utilised for far more significant uses - the example he gave was of flash mobs entering the main square in Belarus to protest against the law that crowds were not allowed to gather there. The state could do little as each person came there individually not as a group and with a big grin on their face. What is important is that there was the intention among each individual in how they would use this tool, by doing so they became a community with power - albeit shortly.
It is this in part that means there is no longer a difference between the producer of information and the consumer of it. The internet has the many to many element at the core of its nature.
CONTINUED in part 2
Clay Shirky, author of "Here Comes Everyone" spoke to assembled delegates this morning about the nature of how we like to share and use our information and how that has led to the next information distribution revolution.
Shirky discussed how communities work and come together through publishing their shared interests, all a platform like flikr needs to do to work is provide the infrastructure. Users then share tips and help each other with their problems - it's a good example of how every URL has the potential to be a latent community he said.
Ultimately people turn themselves into a user community.
The distinction between publishing and communication is more blurred. Flikr's advantage is that it doesn't have to decide what info will be useful Shirky pointed out, by managing less Flikr offers more opportunities for its users. It is one of many such areas out there that do this successfully and makes a good example.
Another intersting example Shirky shared with us was the attention to detail given to the Dr WHO Wikipedia page - edited no less thab 9000 times! That would average about 2-3 edits per each users one would expect - however to demonstrate how we can't rely on a simpistic model of user behaviour Shirky pointed out that the editing process and contribution was far more skewed. For example, 2200 contributors edited the page once while 965 edited it multiple times, one user in particular has edited the entry over a 1000 times! The point is though is that there aren't typical users or typical behaviour.
If you wanted to tap this kind of commitment (especially if its provided for free) for your content consider how you would pitch that to a decision maker - would you even dare?
Colaboration and Collective Action
The story of HSBC reneging on its "free" OD fee for students recently was a PR disaster. When the bank went back on its word it angered many of its student customers. As a bank it knew that to move your money and finances to a competitor is no easy matter and so therefore they could afford to upset them. What tHSBC didn't count on was that students use Facebook and know what it can do.
The protest group acted as staging post for the outraged to come together, others offered advice on how to move their money and who to, it acted as a clarion encouraging even more dissaffected so the story made the national press. HSBC backed down not because the students were upset but because they were upset, organised and co-ordinated.
It is the difference between just reporting what HSBC had done than reporting and offering a way to do something about it.
However Shirky noted that we still tend to underestimate these tools, as they are often used for entertainment and frivolously so. For Shirky they can (and have) been utilised for far more significant uses - the example he gave was of flash mobs entering the main square in Belarus to protest against the law that crowds were not allowed to gather there. The state could do little as each person came there individually not as a group and with a big grin on their face. What is important is that there was the intention among each individual in how they would use this tool, by doing so they became a community with power - albeit shortly.
It is this in part that means there is no longer a difference between the producer of information and the consumer of it. The internet has the many to many element at the core of its nature.
CONTINUED in part 2
Online Information Conference - Opening Keynote
"We are now seeing a new set of business innovations and it's an interesting time to develop business, information being at the heart of business. Without the information tools and tech that we will here about can't hope to be successful." So opened this year's Online Information Conference courtesy of its chairman Adrian Dale
The theme for this year (subsequent to the economic bubble bursting)
Dale explained how in the 1960s and 70s it was those professionals in personnel who saw the importance of their role in a businesses strategy to justify their place on the board. Their its predecessors in Finance were the same. Meanwhile, the 1980s and 90s was the time for the business process managers - the supply chain managers in other words to take the lead and further influence their organisations for business benefit.
For the information profession, that role has largely been contained and formed as a number of cottage industries such the realm of the librarian, web development, the records manager. Now though we are moving into a time when it's the information manager that takes the lead, said Dale - at least in those organisations that have the foresight.
Why now?
For one, because of the vast amounts of information being generated across the globe. A live feed from EMC showed a row of whirling numbers projected across the world to represent this current data generation, in fact 432bn GB created since 1st Jan 2008.
We are dealing with the explosion of information and it has now caught up with us, said Dale, we have got to get to the heart of these processes. Most businesses won't understand how to manage information properly. Unfortunately that can mean less cottage industry of information management and more like a personal approach with everyone managing their own, but is that really a strategy?
This opened up the floor for Keynote speaker Clay Shirky, author of and "Here Comes Everyone - the power of organising without organisations. More to follow...
The theme for this year (subsequent to the economic bubble bursting)
Dale explained how in the 1960s and 70s it was those professionals in personnel who saw the importance of their role in a businesses strategy to justify their place on the board. Their its predecessors in Finance were the same. Meanwhile, the 1980s and 90s was the time for the business process managers - the supply chain managers in other words to take the lead and further influence their organisations for business benefit.
For the information profession, that role has largely been contained and formed as a number of cottage industries such the realm of the librarian, web development, the records manager. Now though we are moving into a time when it's the information manager that takes the lead, said Dale - at least in those organisations that have the foresight.
Why now?
For one, because of the vast amounts of information being generated across the globe. A live feed from EMC showed a row of whirling numbers projected across the world to represent this current data generation, in fact 432bn GB created since 1st Jan 2008.
We are dealing with the explosion of information and it has now caught up with us, said Dale, we have got to get to the heart of these processes. Most businesses won't understand how to manage information properly. Unfortunately that can mean less cottage industry of information management and more like a personal approach with everyone managing their own, but is that really a strategy?
This opened up the floor for Keynote speaker Clay Shirky, author of and "Here Comes Everyone - the power of organising without organisations. More to follow...
Monday, 1 December 2008
New powers for the ICO
Just when you thought it was safe to dismiss the UK's data protection tsar the Information Commissioner as a toothless watchdog, Justice Secretary Jack Straw finally grants him the powers worthy of the title. Yes, last week saw Information Commissioner Richard Thomas finally get what he has been asking for over the last year or so - the ability to impose monetary penalties on organisations for "deliberate or reckless" loss of data. He is now also able to inspect central government departments without having to ask permission first - a rule so absurd it totally undermined the ability of the ICO to carry out effective checks.
And the experts I spoke to broadly welcomed these new powers. Most seemed to think that the long, long list of public and private sector organisations which have lost sensitive data could all have avoided their infamy if they'd just followed the DPA. By granting the ICO the power to enforce this much-maligned piece of legislation, the argument goes, they might actually pay more than lip service to the law.
Another interesting element of the news is the new funding structure the ICO will be getting. Instead of a flat-rate notification fee, the ICO will be able to charge depending on the size of the notifying organisation. Details have yet to be thrashed out but the idea is that it will finally give the watchdog the financial support it needs to carry out its work effectively, although if it's partly used to fund the £50,000 pay rise mooted for Thomas, the move will not win many supporters.
So what does this mean to you? Well, if you were thinking of just paying lip service to the DPA, you're probably better off re-examining your data handling strategies and taking it a whole lot more seriously. The ICO has teeth at last and is probably not afraid to use them. However, while it certainly will be handing out fines and punishments and naming and shaming those who are reckless with data, Thomas has consistently stressed that much of the work of the ICO is in educating organsiations about good data handling practices and compliance with the DPA.
To that end, the ICO last week also released a new report, Privacy by Design, listing ways in which firms can design information systems incorporating privacy enhancing technologies from the get-go, rather than thinking of these technologies as an add-on, or an afterthought. It's well worth a look.
And the experts I spoke to broadly welcomed these new powers. Most seemed to think that the long, long list of public and private sector organisations which have lost sensitive data could all have avoided their infamy if they'd just followed the DPA. By granting the ICO the power to enforce this much-maligned piece of legislation, the argument goes, they might actually pay more than lip service to the law.
Another interesting element of the news is the new funding structure the ICO will be getting. Instead of a flat-rate notification fee, the ICO will be able to charge depending on the size of the notifying organisation. Details have yet to be thrashed out but the idea is that it will finally give the watchdog the financial support it needs to carry out its work effectively, although if it's partly used to fund the £50,000 pay rise mooted for Thomas, the move will not win many supporters.
So what does this mean to you? Well, if you were thinking of just paying lip service to the DPA, you're probably better off re-examining your data handling strategies and taking it a whole lot more seriously. The ICO has teeth at last and is probably not afraid to use them. However, while it certainly will be handing out fines and punishments and naming and shaming those who are reckless with data, Thomas has consistently stressed that much of the work of the ICO is in educating organsiations about good data handling practices and compliance with the DPA.
To that end, the ICO last week also released a new report, Privacy by Design, listing ways in which firms can design information systems incorporating privacy enhancing technologies from the get-go, rather than thinking of these technologies as an add-on, or an afterthought. It's well worth a look.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)