Like most people of a certain vintage in a digital-ish profession I went through a stage where Techcrunch was my bible and I desperately wanted to be a part of a successful startup. In the end I spent a year at a [not] successful example and learned loads — not least that it wasn’t the world for me.
Over time I realised that what I really enjoyed was helping rather staid organisations embrace these new internet age opportunities. I liked the idea of being the digital patient zero — infecting organisations with virulent strains of transparency, open source, agility and ownership. None of it was rocket science and a lot of it was just attitude but amongst the frustrations there is a lot of fun to be had.
Clearly things have changed at GDS but I will forever be thankful for their work in infecting the whole blooming Civil Service. There are amazing digital teams now at DWP, Home Office, Ministry of Justice, HMRC, DVLA, Companies House, Land Registry and every other corner of Government. Hell even we punch above our weight in Newport.
Now it is fun to watch this contagion spread even further afield and how it effects these big, iconic organisations.
Like many, many people I love the NHS and everything it stands for and over the years it has served me well on a number of occasions (I am prone to breaking bones and my kidneys have been on a work to rule for 30 years) so the NHS Alpha project is something that is great to see. They are a small team working in an insanely complex space with an enormous amount to tackle but they have brilliant, passionate people and a sensible approach so it is worth keeping an eye on.
Sure places like the BBC and the Guardian have been doing it longer — and their alumni have had more than their share of influence on all of this activity but there is something of a real goldrush going on now (which means it is going to get even harder to recruit I imagine!)
So what will be the next big institution to catch the digital transformation sniffles?
There was an interesting debate online last week for anybody interested in digital government and particularly the work of the ‘Government Digital Service’.
Chris Cook, an editor on Newsnight and formerly at the Financial Times, wrote an article on the BBC website that lambasted the work of GDS in relation to moving Government departments and ‘arms length bodies’ to the single domain. It basically accuses GDS of destroying data or at best making it near impossible to find. He is dismissive of the need for all Government departments to follow a common design and, rather unfortunately, calls for a return to the pre-GDS sites of ‘2009’.
The article was not without (high profile) supporters and they debated the matter heartily with the many advocates of the work GDS have done. Despite being on leave (in theory) I followed the debate closely and was pleased, if amused, to find ONS on the different side of an online debate about Government websites — we were being held up as a positive example (or rather the Alpha was)!
It was not an uncommon set of complaints to me as similar concerns came up regularly during our research for the Alpha. GDS have themselves admitted in the past that the strong focus on the needs of the ‘mainstream’ user had left the site a bit deficient in supporting more specialist requirements and the arbitrary date cut-off for historic content has never worked well and pointing people to the National Archive copy of sites is rarely a good enough response.
Not for the first time Stefan Czerniawski from the Cabinet Office summed it up best on Twitter;
“we shouldn’t tell people not to be frustrated when they are — and iteration is absolutely the solution”
I have every reason to believe that GDS will respond in time and provide something that works for the wide range of users who visit the single domain but the reality is they are a finite group, albeit a talented one, and their priorities have been elsewhere to date. The move of 300ish websites from across the Government web estate was completed last week — a Herculean task (whether you agree with the necessity or not) and the ‘exemplars’ covering transactional services are well established now so maybe the changes are just around the corner. I don’t know. GDS have an ever increasing remit it seems and I have no special insight in to their priorities.
I will say this — without the work of GDS and the lessons and approaches they shared there is no chance our Alpha (and hopefully everything else upcoming) would have been a success. The fundamental difference, and the one that has pleased the very critics of GOV.UK, is that we are building a website for specialists from day one and we are doing this because following the GDS blueprint confirmed for us that it is the right thing for us to do. The prominence of making decisions based on user research and data is very much a GDS legacy — while it had advocates before in Gov circles it is now virtually impossible to consider working on a digital project without that activity — and it is that research that allowed us to make the case to not try and be all things to all people.
Anyway to conclude I understand why Mr Cook is frustrated and I know many people both in and out of the Civil Service who share his concerns but I trust in GDS. In the people and the processes they follow. In the meantime I will continue to work on making our little corner of the Gov web estate as useful as possible.
I’ve just finished reading ‘How Google Works’ by Eric Schmidt and Jonathan Rosenberg. It is an interesting book and certainly gives an insightful of the way the senior echelons at Google operate. While it is hard to disagree with some of the brains behind one of the greatest success stories of the ‘internet era’ I found I was uncomfortable with about as much of the advice and examples as those that I found inspiring.
I guess that says more about me and why I work for the Civil Service and have spent my career working in education, research and government rather than taking more lucrative opportunities in the private sector.
There were some things I found extremely interesting though. The whole section on recruitment and how important it is really helped open my eyes. I am not sure the Google techniques and processes are really transferable but certainly their focus and prioritisation of the issue is something I will learn from.
The idea of a communicator as a really good ‘router’ and the idea that as the ‘router’ you also act as a filter for the dissemination of information was also an analogy I liked and could relate to.
The stuff that chimed most though was the idea of ‘believing your own slogans’ and how really needed to become something that everybody buys into. You need to articulate a belief system that your organisation (or team) cares about. Your values are what guide your people to make good decisions and empowers them to be proactive.
I realised this is something that the Government Digital Service have been particularly successful at. ‘Delivery is the strategy’. ‘Users first.’ ‘Digital services so good people prefer to use them.’ These are just a few of the slogans that GDS team members reiterate at every opportunity — from the government Chief Digital Officer at illustrious conferences to developers, content designers and user researchers you bump in to in a pub or coffee shop.
I’ve been spending a bit of time thinking about what would be the equivalent slogans for the work I am doing and the team we are building.
These are my starters for ten;
> We are user focused. Always.
> A website so good people forget they are using it.
> Data-intense, design-simple.
> The website is a team sport.
Thoughts? The use of ‘website’ singular and not ‘digital services’ is deliberate. For now the focus is…well very focused ☺
I gave similar version of this talk at DigPen in Plymouth and WebDevConf in Bristol in September/October 2014.
Morning — hope you have had your coffee and are sufficiently fed and rested for the day. Over the course of the next several hours there will be loads of great talks where the speakers will share their hard earned knowledge and experiences with you and hopefully you’ll leave late this afternoon feeling you have learned a few things.
This isn’t going to be one of those talks.
I honestly doubt you’ll learn anything new in the next 20 minutes or so but hopefully you’ll get a bit of an insight in to working in a different environment and get some perspective on your own problem projects — because as bad as they get you can always remind yourself that you are not me.
I work for the Office for National Statistics in Newport, South Wales. A place not exactly awash with either statisticians or digital professionals so clearly the perfect place to base the organisations digital team.
The ONS produces the majority of newsworthy statistics. There is rarely a day where some mention of the organisation does not occur on the evening news or in the national press. The census, inflation, GDP, house prices, immigration — hell even the most popular baby names — comes from us.
ONS statistics are used/misused in Government policy and debates and were prominent in the recent Scottish referendum and are likely to a major factor in next years election.
This is important stuff.
The subtitle of this talk is;
“The most important, worst, website in the United Kingdom.”
It was something said to me by Tom Steinberg. For those who don’t know Tom he runs MySociety, the team behind things like TheyWorkForYou and FixMyStreet, so they know a little but about civic minded websites
He claims he did not originate it — that he was just passing it on — but he would be in good company if he did.
“..it [the ONS website] is also the world’s worst website.” Simon Rogers, Facts are Sacred
“the ONS website is a national embarrassment.” Tim Harford, The Financial Times
“..the Office for National Statistics website is virtually unnavigable.” Peter Wilby, The Guardian
“the ONS website – aaaargh” Chris Giles, The Financial Times
“The Office for National Statistics website makes figures hard to find and statistics are often presented in a confusing way..” Public Administration Select Committee
The really horrible thing is that you can’t really argue with any of these comments. Except maybe the fact that it is the worst website in the world — I’m pretty sure that honour belongs to http://www.fabricland.co.uk/
The site though is a monument to a number of poor decisions regarding technology, design and usability. There are some mitigating factors but to be honest nobody wants to hear them and they sound like weak excuses.
One comment from a user satisfaction survey last year summed it up best;
“When I know I have to use the ONS website I want to cry.” Real User.
“Have to” is actually more important than the crying thing here. Because that is the reason that despite all the flaws in the website we still get around 500,000 uniques per month. Not massive but nothing to sneeze at. The simple fact is that we are pretty much operating a monopoly — if you want the statistics in a timely manner there is only one place to come. At 09.30 (often nearer 09.32) on a date publicised up to a year in advance the stats you are looking for will appear in various dark corners of theONS website.
So we are in a bit of a unique situation. A site so bad you would think it would be impossible not to improve it but then another twist. It turns out the site is so unstable that you can’t deploy as much as a minor improvement without risking the whole house of cards falling down….and the only thing worse than the current ONS website? No ONS website.
So this is what we find ourselves with.
A completely blank sheet of paper as it were. A rare privilege but also pretty terrifying.
So where to start?
Like so many these days I am a fully fledged convert to the ‘Cult of GDS’. Unfortunately ONS is a distant branch of the GDS family and thus we have less access to their prophets or priests and instead must make do with their holy scriptures.
Of everything GDS have achieved — much of it amazing and game changing — the thing I turn to most often is the Service Manual. It has provided a blueprint for delivering sensible, modern, user focused digital services….within the context of the CIVIL SERVICE. That is a spectacular achievement.
For many — if not all — of you the Service Manual will just seem like a definition of normal. Best practice. Old hat. Within the public sector it is world shaking. You will have all come across one Government IT disaster or another covered in the news — the missed deadlines, massive overspends, failure to actually deliver. This does not even scratch the surface of how broken IT/Digital has been in Government.
The Service Manual gives the people working in the Civil Service reference points that were forever lacking and as it is a living document it evolves to meet changing needs.
Sure it doesn’t fix everything — and god knows procurement in particular is still a nightmare — but it gives people a starting point, a common language and the evidence that there is another way (rather than signing another massive contract with Fujitsu).
To demonstrate the reach of the Cult it recently started a US branch. The US Digital Service published its ‘Playbook’ recently and it approaches the GDS teachings from a slightly different angle, albeit an equally valid one that has significant similarities. The USDS was born out of the disaster and then rescue of the Healthcare.gov website in the US — a site that provided a single, coherent case study of everything wrong with the old way of buying/implementing Gov IT systems and what could be achieved with this new approach.
…but before there was a Manual or a Playbook there were the Principles. The founding text of GDS these 10 principles underpin all the decisions made by GDS ever since and dozens of other projects in and out of Government ever since.
So rather than slavishly follow what was already there we drafted a new list — inspired by what came before but focused on our particular focus.
If we were only going to have a single principle it would be this one — it is THE principle that binds all the thinking around Government digital thinking these days..
1. Users first — the foundation of the entire project will be our user research. We will work with user stories and will test at every step possible with real users. We will not ignore our internal users though — the Publishing team will have as much influence on the design of our publishing tools as external users do on the front-end.
The interesting (well to me) thing about our user focus is that it isn’t really the users I expected. Given the criticism we had received, of which I shared but a drop in the ocean, I expected to focus on those expert, vocal users.
However we did a LOT of user research. Surveys, interviews, online tree tests, testing out scenarios in our user lab. We also studied our analytics and sat in with our customer contact centre. What we discovered was that those vocal experts were far outnumbered by a quieter (though not silent) majority of what we have come to term foragers in our persona types.
So we are focused on building a website for these types of people and betting that providing a great user experience for them will suffice for everybody. It is a bit of a risk as potentially it leaves us open to more criticism from the usual suspects but I think it is worth it in the long run.
2. Data Driven — this is more than just using data to support the decisions we make regarding the site — though that is key. The site itself needs to be ‘data driven’ from the ground up. A Data API needs to be a key consideration from the start if not something immediately achievable. Any chance of future proofing this site is going to rely on this.
3. Google is our homepage — 80% of our traffic already comes from Google and that is despite our current anti-SEO strategy. This needs to be at a minimum a two fold issue. Develop an IA that works for users who enter the site from search queries and add technical SEO features from day one (Persistent, hackable URIs. Schema.org.)
4. It is about the numbers — get users to the numbers they need quickly, and in the right format — be that a single figure, a chart or graph, or an Excel file. Expert users know what they want: get out of their way. Information foragers may not know exactly what statistics they need: help them find the right data for their situation.
5. Do not reinvent the wheel — wherever possible we will use open source tools and technologies and build on top of the great work that already exists. We will not fall in to the trap of ‘not invented here’ and we will accept that sometimes good enough is good enough.
6. Build for sustainability — when we select these open source technologies and tools we need to consider existing communities, support and the ability to recruit people with the required skills as well as the ability to train staff in that knowledge.
7. Bake in accessibility from day one — we won’t fall in to the trap of being forced to retrofit good accessibility practices in later in the project. We will start with it as a core requirement. We will publish an accessibility policy for the Alpha at the start of development.
8. agile not AGILE — we won’t get hung up on Scrum vs Kanban vs DSDM. We will work with the principles of the Agile Manifesto front and centre in our approach but we will, as a team, decide on an approach that works for us.
9. Machines have needs too — the Data API is important here but whatever we do we must make it simple and straightforward to access ‘machine readable data’ from the site. Persistent URIs and using open standards for statistical releases (i.e. http://dataprotocols.org/tabular-data-package/) are a minimum target.
10. WWGDSD * — above all else we will follow the GDS Manual and work towards the requirements of the Service Standard. • what would GDS do
So now we have a starting point but we still haven’t really put pen to that blank piece of paper. We needed to start.
So we looked at all our research and feedback and we started created wireframes. My god did we create airframes. In Keynote. In Axure. In Bootstrap. Not to mention a thousand Sharpie sketches in a dozen Moleskin notebooks.
There were a couple of reasons for this. For a start despite the growing stack of wireframes we hadn’t really settled on a final approach but we had pretty much settled on a set of elements that we needed. Secondly I wanted to create a resource that would make it easier to get the myriad of other ONS web properties under control and consistent. It was not a part of this project or even my remit but I saw an opportunity.
The lovely folk at CX Partners in Bristol helped us out with this — and the fact that working with them meant one day a week I didn’t have to commute to Wales had nothing to do with them getting the project.
The work has been a learning experience — nobody in my team had approached anything like this before and my insistence on code being the key output rather than Photoshop files made some colleagues nervous. Working collaboratively with the CX team has been incredibly useful and we have certainly made some significant breakthroughs due to that relationship but there has also sometimes been a case of too many chefs. I’ve certainly learned a lot about what is needed from me as a Product Manager and I realise I haven’t always delivered on that.
It has provided a great foundation though for the project that is the main focus of all my waking hours at the moment…
Like the good little GDS followers we are we are in the process of building an Alpha. In what is probably a teaching you to suck eggs moment here is the GDS definition of an Alpha;
“A short phase in which you prototype solutions for your users needs. You’ll be testing with a small group of users or stakeholders, and getting early feedback about the design of the service.”
The big difference for us is the ‘small group of users or stakeholders’. We are going big. Like the original AlphaGov project that ended up becoming GDS we are going to go public with our Alpha. In December of this year we will launch the new website at alpha.ons.gov.uk and basic open it for feedback from all comers. It should make for an interesting Christmas.
In order to hopefully limit the shock of the new in December we are already user testing every 2 weeks and then using that feedback to influence priorities for upcoming sprints we are also doing quite a bit of informal feedback gathering. Basically everything and anything to verify we are on the right track as we go along.
The other GDS like aspect to the project is our commitment to being open — we blog everything over at digitalpublishing.ons.gov.uk — we have an open Github account at github.com/onsdigital — we are @onsdigital on Twitter and for my sins I keep getting up in front of you lovely people to share my pain.
If you didn’t follow the link well shame on you but here are a couple of excerpts that sum it up for me;
The Public Service Internet already exists, in part, in Wikipedia and Mozilla and OpenStreetMap and Archive.org and the Linux community, among many open source efforts and non-profit organisations. No doubt many of us already donate to those organisations. Here’s some news for you: it isn’t enough, not by half.
Let’s take some responsibility and leave the internet a better place than we found it.
Now I do donate to many of those organisations and a couple of others but he is right — if I want anything to change that probably isn’t enough.
Elsewhere in the piece he writes about being an ‘advocate’. This is something I used to consider myself but I think I have lost my way over time and part of that was due to ‘open fatigue’ I think.
So much of the open data world seems to entirely obsessed with the licence and release issue to the detriment of usable outcomes. I’m not really that interested in the license considerations behind open source, data, access etc — and I would bet money that I am still considerably more interested in that stuff than the majority of people. I am interested in what can be achieved with the data to make life better for people.
Open source increasingly seems to be clogged up with a million vanity projects with two contributors and no discernible USP from a thousand other similar projects. I’m not sure we really need quite as many content management systems for sure.
I’ve been soul searching quite a bit recently about where my head is with regards to a lot of this stuff. At OKFestival in Berlin I felt a little out of step with the convictions of many of the attendees — not all of them as there was certainly an underlying theme about moving towards delivering on the potential of all this ‘openness’ and not just ‘noodling’ around the edges but many of them had a powerful belief in a kind of pure ‘openness’ that I lack these days.
So maybe the ‘public service internet’ is a more useful term for me in my own thinking about my beliefs in this space.
According to Ofcom ‘public service broadcasting’ is defined as;
TV programmes that are broadcast for the public benefit rather than for purely commercial purposes.
It is the ‘public benefit’ over ‘purely commercial’ element that seems to make some sense. The internet has often felt like a space driven by commercial agendas to the detriment of all else in recent years and anything that pushes back against that would seem important. But it gives more flexibility to how this benefit can be achieved I think.
I think as a term it also has the benefit of potentially encompassing a lot of things. Organisations/products/services like Mozilla, Wikipedia, Open Streetmap and Linux were mentioned but it could just as easily cover the work of GDS and a great deal of the stuff covered in the ‘civic tech’ world not to mention the BBC/Channel 4 and their activity in this space with their clear ‘public service’ remits. Basically anything I have ever been interesting in working with or on.
So for the time being at least this is how I am framing my thinking — I support the ‘public service internet’ and if that happens to be achieved in an ‘open’ manner all the better but I’m not going to sweat it. Also I am going to put my support behind efforts with the scale to make an impact and change how people view things.
Like the man said it is time to take some responsibility.