5 Responses to “Can Martha teach the government not to think it’s Google?”

  1. Matt says:

    Couldn’t agree more. Love the Google anecdote

  2. Gordon Rae says:

    Tom: not only do I think your ideas are all very sensible, I also feel quite excited at the possibility that somebody might be allowed to do them. The names you mention would make a very talented team, and the BBC as an organisation is an excellent role model for government in combining a public service ethos with good design that makes people want to use its services.

  3. digerato in gov says:

    All good stuff Tom and the Google anecdote is so spot on.

    But you don’t mention the width and depth of digital talent already in and around the civil service who struggle to evangelise and innovate but don’t get a voice with decision makers.

  4. eric joyce says:

    Super piece. I hope the government will move in the ways Tom suggests. MLF’s private sector experience is especially important, I think. The risk with Directgov as it stands is that it actually has the potential to stifle new thinking and small entrepreneurial ventures. If it’s essentially government self-referencing, then private and 3rd sector ventures not within its ambit risk being bypassed by people accessing the big central machine following extensive advertising through the COI. There’s also the question of ‘not invented here’ – it’s to be hoped the govt will harness services which already exist rather than trying to invent anew – see Tom’s example of a new algorithm to be designed in-house, if it ever was. Room for cautious optimism, though.

  5. Duncan says:

    One of the problems with using Facebook to manage internal communication is that the data resides on someone else’s servers and you lose control of the data. This is okay if the data is not sensitive, but not an option for sensitive data. A better option may be to use a Wiki.


Leave a Reply