08 Feb
Posted by: Michele Ide-Smith in: LocalGov, Social Media
I’ve been doing a bit of research into citizen engagement models for my MSc research and started to think about how these models relate to digital engagement. I looked at various models and frameworks and combined them to help me conceptualise digital engagement.
Firstly I evaluated the participation model provided by David Wilcox in his 1994 participation framework, which was based on Sherry Arnstein’s ‘ladder of participation’ from 1969.
Wilcox’s participation levels
Arstein’s ladder of participation
I noticed some similarities with Charlene Li’s and Josh Bernoff’s ladder of Social Technograph profiles. The profiles are based on survey research into consumer participation in social technologies. The ladder was recently updated to include a category for Twitter users!
The Groundswell site provides an interactive profiling tool which is based on demographic and behavioural data, to help companies define their commercial social technology strategies. However I think the tool has some transferable relevance for defining citizen participation profiles and assessing the propensity of certain age groups and genders to engage.
What would be really useful would be to overlay this behavioural data with the type of profile data that some local authorities have access to, either through OAC or Mosaic, along with other data layers, e.g. Council survey data, Place Survey data.
Li and Bernoff suggest various activities which the Social Technographs participate in. I have adapted these along the lines of Catherine Howe’s recent ‘long list’.
Lastly I thought about what type of roles might be involved at each level and drew inspiration from Steph Gray’s digital engagement roles. I have added other roles which are more relevant to local government, where communities are likely to play a more active role in engagement. Particularly where there are active hyperlocal sites in existence.
So, voilà! An adapted digital engagement framework for communities and local government. It’s a first draft so any comments welcome.
| Participation level | Social Technograph type | Activities | Roles involved |
| Supporting
You help others do what they want – perhaps within a framework of grants, advice and support provided by the resource holder. |
Creators | Publish and moderate a hyperlocal website/blog
Run social media surgeries Upload a video or podcast you create Write articles and post them |
Community Manager
Digital mentor Community Activist Council Officer |
| Acting together
Not only do different interests decide together what is best, but they form a partnership to carry it out. |
Creators | Take part in online deliberations (in forums, web chat etc.) | Social reporter
Community activist Councillor Council Officer |
| Deciding together
You encourage others to provide some additional ideas and options, and join in deciding the best way forward. |
Critics
Conversationalists Creators |
Post ratings
Comment on a blog Contribute to online forum Contribute to/edit articles in a wiki Vote on polls Create a petition Join social networking sites and enagement platforms Use RSS feeds Add tags to web pages or photos |
Community member
Community Activist Councillor Council Officer |
| Consultation – You offer a number of options and listen to the feedback you get. | Critics
Conversationalists Collectors |
Post ratings
Comment on a blog Contribute to online forum Contribute to/edit articles in a wiki Vote on deliberative polls Sign an e-petition Visit social networking sites and engagement platforms Maintain profile on social networking site or engagement platform Tweet Use RSS feeds Add tags to web pages or photos |
Community member
Council Officer Councillor |
| Information – The least you can do is tell people what is planned. | Spectators | Read blogs
Listen to podcasts Watch videos from other users Read online forums Read comments/ratings Read tweets |
Community member
Council Officer Councillor |
This content is published under the Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.
11 Responses
Dave Briggs
08|Feb|2010 1Great stuff Michele! Thanks for sharing!
David Wilcox
08|Feb|2010 2Thanks Michele – this is terrific. Added roles is really helpful. Already thinking how to bring this into the social by social game. It would be interesting to explore further the nature of the activities – what attitudes and skills are involved.
Bookmarks for February 3rd through February 8th
09|Feb|2010 3[...] A digital engagement framework adapted for local government by Michele Ide-Smith – "I’ve been doing a bit of research into citizen engagement models for my MSc research and started to think about how these models relate to digital engagement. I looked at various models and frameworks and combined them to help me conceptualise digital engagement." [...]
Michele Ide-Smith
09|Feb|2010 4I like the idea of including attitudes and skills David. It could become a huge matrix though! I’m keen to evolve this as we progress with our project in Fenland. @curiousc is also thinking on similar lines: http://curiouscatherine.wordpress.com/2010/02/01/community-ambassadors-bit-of-a-rethink-and-a-really-long-list/
Ingrid Koehler
09|Feb|2010 5Hi Michelle, really useful. I wonder if there’s another category which would be something between your bottom two rungs. Someone who might click a voting button or make an *occasional* comment if the barriers of registration aren’t too high.
I think as David Suggests there is something about attitude-skill (as well as attitudes and skills). Recently, I heard of someone who stumbled at the first block – registration. To be fair, it was a slightly confusing situation, but at the same time if you really wanted to you would get past it.
FutureGov » Useful links » links for 2010-02-09
09|Feb|2010 6[...] A digital engagement framework adapted for local government by Michele Ide-Smith via @johnpopham (tags: digitalengagement engagement localauthority gov20 government uk) [...]
Michele Ide-Smith
09|Feb|2010 7Hi Ingrid, I’m sure there are are nuances to the level of participation dependent on skill and attitude. After all the Social Technograph profiles are based on research into ‘consumer’ activity rather than ‘citizen’ activity. And you are right that registration can be a barrier to participation. Which is why I think Councils need to explore authentication services such as OpenID, for example, which would remove the barriers to registration but ensure that citizens are (in theory) accountable. People would then login using the same ID they use to collect email, use social networking sites etc. which is far more natural.
Carl Haggerty
16|Feb|2010 8Hi Michelle,
This is excellent, it really helps my thinking.
I’m currently thinking about Governance and how this is linked with participation – Some very early thoughts i had are here http://carlhaggerty.wordpress.com/2010/01/20/the-governance-ladder/
What i am seeing is a link between the form and level of governance organisations apply, these can differ within organisations as well, and the level of at least the approach to participation.
My view is that we would need to consider evaluating and adapting not just the participation structures but the supporting governance models to ensure that we can actually realise the benefits of these approaches.
Carl
Michele Ide-Smith
16|Feb|2010 9Hi Carl,
I must have missed your post on governance so thanks for bringing it to my attention. I am also very interested in levels of governance that may or may not be appropriate for different types of engagement. I did an earlier post on governance in relation to a current project here: http://www.ide-smith.co.uk/?p=350. I am now imagining a huge matrix which includes skills and governance!
There seems to be quite a bit of research going on at the moment to investigate local government approaches to engagement with communities via social media (e.g. Networked Neighbourhoods, Local 2.0, Public-i, IZWE). I am interested to see what comes out of that research relating to governance and participation levels.
Richard Lum
26|Feb|2010 10Michele,
Very interesting. I know your focus is more on local government and (presumably) established political communities, but have you ever considered how frameworks like this might be useful in designing the governance system to begin with, either as a design element or in the process of design (historically, constitution-making?).
Also, given the mentions of “governance” above, you might find something like http://www.amazon.com/Governing-Complex-Societies-Trajectories-Scenarios/dp/1403946604/ interesting.
Richard
Digital Strategy: How Camden will be engaging with the local community through hyperlocal websites
02|Jun|2010 11[...] A digital engagement framework adapted for local government (an academic overview on digital engagement and hyperlocal blogs activities and impact on citizen participation by Michele Ide-Smith from Cambridgeshire County Council) [...]
Leave a reply
About me
Archived posts
Find me online
Gov 2.0
User Experience
Various friends
Subscribe:
Tags
My bookmarks
My Comments
Great notes Sharon! You’ve captured the main points really well. I was obviously doing too much talking and not enough note writing…
My latest tweets
A design creation of Design Disease
Copyright © 2007 - Michele Ide-Smith - is proudly powered by WordPress
InSense 1.0 Theme by Design Disease