WikiCED manual: Difference between revisions

'''Being a catalyst for change in an organization.'''

The requirement for change from within is recognized everywhere. In the business world, it's becoming known as "intrapeneurship." This manual is particularly designed for those involved in Community Economic Development (CED). We're going to use change based on low cost technology as our lens because the spread of the Internet and the ready access to computers have created many opportunities; however, aspects of this manual should be applicable to many circumstances.

= Considerations for introducing technology change =

Many people  dream about being a change hero, making one suggestion – like Rosa Parks[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks], African American civil rights activist whom the U.S. Congress later called "Mother of the Modern-Day Civil Rights Movement did in 1955 when she refused to obey a bus driver's orders - and suddenly we have a successful transformation that everyone recognizes. The reality is usually far more complicated.  

People have very good reasons to be hesitant about change. It's always a good idea to wait and see what other organizations similar to yours, are doing. If you're going to try to leap ahead, make sure you have solid partners and that you are not compromising the organization (i.e.: changing the organization's focus or making participation more difficult for some).

Computer systems can yield tremendous efficiencies but they can also force people to work in ways that may be difficult to adapt to. There's always a question of individuals adapting to technology (tech) versus the tech adapting to the person. Good technology will consider the user experience and impact just as important as the potential gain. This can be recognized by learning about successful uses of the technology and the kind of background and processes that went into its development. Many companies and projects (potential components of your innovation) are very technically driven. Whatever clever “invention” a technical person managed to come up with becomes the focus. This may be a good model for ultra competitive commercial enterprise but it's not so good for social organizations. Signs of a good service provider are multidisciplinary teams that include, where practical, designers, content experts, and end user representation, as well as those focusing only on the technology (hopefully with some interest in the context).

Ultimately, however, individuals and the organization will have to adapt to the way the technology works. No technology is completely flexible so with past procurement and training some processes will need to be changed, information constrained to a system, and systems interfaced. As an individual, you'll have to consider how your innovation can be integrated (or not - [[wp:Loose coupling | loosely coupled]] system are often considered the most robust).

For example, consider the idea of organizing information. Today, it takes weeks for an information request to be processed by the city, and what you'll get is a photocopy of a document that can't be easily re-used. Many organizations have incredible struggles classifying and describing information (developing ontologies). If an organization has thousands of documents, relevant content can be more easily found in a well designed system, and individuals can serve themselves. International organizations using shared ontologies can match documents and develop sophisticated linked systems that allow consistent communications and access to information. Yet defining and restraining content to ontologies perfectly is a problem that has existed for thousands of years due to differences in individual and cultural perceptions. It's best not to get caught up in these kinds of "wild goose chases" unless it's a core requirement and the expertise or cues are available.

Sometimes, change can mean completely changing the way things are (i.e.: replacing factory workers with machines) but it's often better to think of '''augmentation''' of people's roles particularly when it comes to today's imperfect computer systems. In a clinic, a new system can cause patient harm if a system loses a record but having a receptionist who recognizes patients and expects events can lead to a richer system that is safe and personal and has added utility.

When looking at technical implementations today, there is an "artificial line that views such technologies as assistive rather than normal options; products are designed for or against certain users." (http://asyourworldchanges.wordpress.com/2008/10/06/using-the-curb-cuts-principle-to-reboot-computing/)

As many are aware, navigating the world as a person with disabilities often results in frustration or complete denial to everyday services. Resolving these problems yields unexpected benefits. When a curb is cut for wheelchairs, navigation is also made easier for those with baby strollers, bicycles (where permitted), and inattentive walkers. The same is true of ramps and elevators - making a change for disabled persons improves the situation for everyone. This leads to a shift in thinking towards [[wp:universal design]] - the idea that instead of treating accessible design as an afterthought it is a way to lead overall design. This provides benefits including greater access to employment, education, culture, citizenship, and information in general.

Using technology, this is enabled by the fact that most information is stored in one way or another in text format. Email is text and most organization content has a text basis. The low level format of Web pages is HTML, which accommodates accessible features. Suddenly, individuals with mobility, cognitive or vision disabilities (estimated to be [http://www.un.org/disabilities/convention/facts.shtml 650 million people around the world], or [http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/071203/dq071203a-eng.htm one in seven Canadians] - not including the elderly) are on a more equal footing with everyone else - they're tremendously enabled.

Consider a well implemented Web page: behind the scenes, presentation is separated from content; headings are used to indicate sections; and multimedia content has a text summary. A person with vision disabilities, whether it's very common colour blindness, contrast problems, or acute focus problems, can use a variety of techniques to access this information. They can change the font size in their browser, they can replace colours. They can use a screen reader, which reads the document using text to speech, treats headings as a table of contents, and allows the individual to easily scan the page rather than forcing them to "read" it top to bottom.  

There are no mysteries involved in why this happens. People like "Flashier" content, and companies will often hire designers specifically to create "sexy" first impressions, meanwhile using outdated or unrounded approaches to low level design. It's important to look past first impressions to make sure your content works well for everyone and that it is future friendly. [http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag.php WCAG] is an international standard for accessible web page design.

The most important risk to consider when implementing technology is privacy. Collecting masses of personal information in one place presents an incredible risk if not managed carefully. Policies and training for any individuals with access to this data must ensure it is kept off networks as much as possible and always encrypted when not possible.  

The second risk is around "intellectual property." It is an unfortunate fact that many organizations, including public and social organizations, create "proprietary databases" featured in grant applications and for other purposes. This results in silos that can be developed using public funds for social benefit and yet are territorially protected from re-use. The benefits of protecting this "property" versus the benefits of sharing or building on information with other organizations must be managed legally, and using technical means, particularly considering cases where information may be published without clear terms of use.

The times are changing. Governments have a mandate to provide more low level access to information, and semantic content, shared methodologies and metrics, and more sophisticated programs that enable very high level information of re-use across organizations.

As an example, in 2004 for a project, detailed information on Member of Parliament voting records was required. After research, it turned out the easiest way to retrieve this information was to "scrape" it from the Parliament web site. In 2009, faced with a similar requirement, we prepared to "scrape" it again, but a last second email to the Parliament Web team yielded all the information we needed in an easily reusable format. A week later Parliament formally announced public availability of this data. (http://www.boingboing.net/2009/04/17/canadian-members-of.html) This follows trends in the US and UK that yield very real benefits in transparency and accountability.

A third risk is content lock in. Over time, governments, large business, and organizations have pushed for the need for standard formats for data. This prevents over-reliance on a vendor and permits information re-use. If your information is hosted, make sure you have local copies of readable data.

|Personal, work group - information is not published online, is kept personally or exchanged via email.

|Individuals and groups are used to using tools such as MS Word, and they provide easy facilities to create formatted data

|'''The constructionist principle'''

|Organizations are socially co-constructed realities; therefore, articulate desirable collective futures.

|'''The principle of simultaneity'''

|The first question is fateful; change begins the second the system begins to engage in inquiry.

|'''The poetic principle'''

|We create our organization in our daily stories; therefore, use words that energize and inspire people.

|'''The anticipatory principle'''

|The collective image of the future guides us; therefore, artfully create positive images.

|'''The positive principle'''

|Craft the unconditional positive question to generate momentum and sustainable change.

Eve Sibley, founder of [http://www.worldfoodgarden.org WorldFoodGarden.org], writes:

I was just a lone artist/activist with a tiny bit of money to spare when I got into this a year and a half ago. I saw the potential of using the ever-growing internet to help more people sustainably grow their own food, so I invested that money into hiring somebody to build a website towards those ends. My biggest hurdle has been that I didnt know anything about website languages or databases or anything technical when I got in, just had a vision that included "a website." So basically what happened was I expended all of my funds on a site written in (proprietary software) which no one really wants to update because of the language, so now we are having to start over in a lot of ways by forming a volunteer development team that believes in the cause and wants to make the site move forward. Long story short - the empowerment of the individual that is happening through internet technology gave me (an individual) permission to try use it to change the world, but there are soo many different technical options that the mission almost drowned in that sea. In one light it is a funding issue, but in another its that the accelerated advancement of IT is just really hard to keep up with if you aren't trained to know what is what.

</blockquote>

 

==Technology applications==

=Technology use in the non-profit sector=

In considering technology use in the non-profit sector, "three major "themes" seemed to emerge: the perceived lack of technology in the non-profit sector, the push to "catch up", and the unique strength of the non-profit sector in the information age." (http://www.merrillassociates.net/topic/2001/04/technology-and-non-profits)  

Often, social organizations who rely on funding will have to tailor their proposals so they appear to follow external mandates. This disconnect can lead to a distortion in implementation where no real goals are reached or can simply lead to wasteful, pointless resources, such as unused computers or websites developed without any real motivation as organizations simply need the overhead funds available in implementation or can't reasonably focus on the benefits.

... also numerous topic specific groups exist on sites like Facebook.

There can be alternate ways to measure success from a qualitative perspective. Here are my suggestions from an  appreciative  perspective. Please be aware that I am using this term appreciative  freely. The suggested measurements of qualitative evaluation and success in this paper are based on my personal explorations and therefore do not, in any way or form, reflect the principles of Appreciative Inquiry (AI)

Here is a brief  description of Appreciative Inquiry (AI). Appreciative Inquiry (AI) assumes that  every living system has untapped and accounts of the  positive1. Appreciative Inquiry is a methodical discovery that a living system is at its optimum in social, political, economic, ecological, and  human terms when it is most vibrant, effective and constructive2. AI seeks to build a  transformational union between a people and it's capacities that are achievements, assets, unexplored potentials, innovations, strengths, elevated thoughts, opportunities, benchmarks, and strategic  competencies through lived values, traditions, stories, visions, expressions of wisdom spiritual  insights, and future possibilities 3. Appreciative Inquiry questions and dialogues to imagine and  innovate about successes, hopes, and dreams instead of negating and criticizing downward into a  diagnostic spiral of despairing hopelessness4.

In working with small children who are climbing into a dangerous area, instead of saying ''don't climb there!''  Re-direct the children with a positive gesture ''Look!! Play here!''

AI's vision based approach and 4-D Model consists of stages of Discovery, Dream, Design and Doing and 4-I Model of Inquire, Imagine, Innovate and Implement 5. The SOAR (Strengths, Opportunities,  Anticipations, and Results) framework for inquiry and decision-making is a compatible AI framework to strategic planning 6.  SOAR is integral to developing strong relationships to implement sustainable  development practices7.  AI's triple bottom line of economic prosperity, environmental stewardship,  and social equity or "profit, planet, people." provides a solid framework for measuring and  evaluating progress toward a sustainable socio-environmental-economic model with another social  construction and metaphor8.

Building evaluation capacity entails developing a system for creating and sustaining evaluation  practices9.  Evaluation scholars have recommended that evaluation be more democratic, pluralistic,  deliberative, empowering, and enlightening10.  Current evaluation practices are diverse, inclusive of multiple perspectives, and supportive of the use of multiple methods, measures, and criteria11.  Evaluation Appreciative Inquiry is a highly participatory form of inquiry to address issues12.  Appreciative Inquiry and collaborative, participatory, stakeholder, and learning-oriented approaches  to evaluation emphasize *social constructivism, that is, that making sense and meaning is achieved through the interaction13.  

Suggested appreciative success indicators of a vision, design, action, or project can be measured  with point systems by examples such as how:

# reports for recognizing and publicly praising accomplishments;  

# charts recording relative progress over time

# anecdotal stories for publicizing successes  

# attending to those that make a difference 15

# to define one's working relationship with an organization as a contribution  

# to acknowledge the impact that the quality of one's work on others  

# to accept the outcome of one's actions 16

1 - 5: Appreciative Inquiry - http://appreciativeinquiry.case.edu/intro/whatisai.cfm

6 Appreciative Inquiry - http://www.appreciativeinquiry.net.au/

8 - 12 Appreciative Inquiry -

13 Social constructivism:

17 - 18 International Institute for Sustainable Development, Beyond Problem Analysis: Using Appreciative Inquiry to Design and Deliver Environmental, Gender Equity and Private Sector Development Projects, Trip Report 3: July - December, 2000 India http://www.iisd.org/ai/myrada_report3.htm