<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The importance of evaluation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://davepress.net/2009/04/20/the-importance-of-evaluation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://davepress.net/2009/04/20/the-importance-of-evaluation/</link>
	<description>Using the internet to make government more interesting</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:12:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Michelle Lyons</title>
		<link>http://davepress.net/2009/04/20/the-importance-of-evaluation/comment-page-1/#comment-3008</link>
		<dc:creator>Michelle Lyons</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 17:05:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://davepress.net/?p=1488#comment-3008</guid>
		<description>There appears to be several things being discussed here.

1) Evaluation of online activity (website around the G20 summit &amp; online consultation etc); and
2) Digital engagement which is about open and transparent government practice that begins with a conversation and builds into a meaningful ongoing relationship.

The type of evaluation metrics needed for these two distinct activities are very different. It becomes a question of volume versus quality of interaction (in it&#039;s most basic form).

At the moment there are plenty of guides and frameworks that outline how to evaluate consultation and engagement activities. However, there isn&#039;t anything that outlines how integrated (on-&amp;-offline) approaches are measured nor how relationships are maintained and built over time.

Steph&#039;s and Stephen&#039;s work are great starting points but as Simon quite rightly points out we need to move away from one-off events/projects that engage citizens and move towards involving citizens in the policy/decision making process. This, of course, would require a different set of metrics.

In terms of a common framework it is difficult to achieve. When I was working @ DIUS with Steph (hi!) I invited people to contribute to an evaluation framework but only a couple of people responded - probably because it&#039;s an emerging area.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There appears to be several things being discussed here.</p>
<p>1) Evaluation of online activity (website around the G20 summit &amp; online consultation etc); and<br />
2) Digital engagement which is about open and transparent government practice that begins with a conversation and builds into a meaningful ongoing relationship.</p>
<p>The type of evaluation metrics needed for these two distinct activities are very different. It becomes a question of volume versus quality of interaction (in it&#8217;s most basic form).</p>
<p>At the moment there are plenty of guides and frameworks that outline how to evaluate consultation and engagement activities. However, there isn&#8217;t anything that outlines how integrated (on-&amp;-offline) approaches are measured nor how relationships are maintained and built over time.</p>
<p>Steph&#8217;s and Stephen&#8217;s work are great starting points but as Simon quite rightly points out we need to move away from one-off events/projects that engage citizens and move towards involving citizens in the policy/decision making process. This, of course, would require a different set of metrics.</p>
<p>In terms of a common framework it is difficult to achieve. When I was working @ DIUS with Steph (hi!) I invited people to contribute to an evaluation framework but only a couple of people responded &#8211; probably because it&#8217;s an emerging area.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cat Wilson</title>
		<link>http://davepress.net/2009/04/20/the-importance-of-evaluation/comment-page-1/#comment-3007</link>
		<dc:creator>Cat Wilson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:35:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://davepress.net/?p=1488#comment-3007</guid>
		<description>Thanks for pointing this out Mr Briggs. I&#039;ve forwarded on to the team. It&#039;s very interesting to see some of the info around big events and how different departments are measuring their success .</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for pointing this out Mr Briggs. I&#8217;ve forwarded on to the team. It&#8217;s very interesting to see some of the info around big events and how different departments are measuring their success .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steph Gray</title>
		<link>http://davepress.net/2009/04/20/the-importance-of-evaluation/comment-page-1/#comment-2997</link>
		<dc:creator>Steph Gray</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 22:36:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://davepress.net/?p=1488#comment-2997</guid>
		<description>Must - get - evaluation - post - written...

Re: business case - it may be just a point of terminology, but I see the basic task of project definition (what it is you&#039;re doing, why, how, with what and to whom) as slightly separate from the business case which to me is about having an evidence base for a justification why the project will achieve its aims, based on prior examples. Maybe I just have rather high hopes for my business cases.

@Simon: Agreed, it&#039;s an unusual example. But it&#039;s not the success or otherwise of the engagement so much that I find really positive, but the fact that it had clearly defined goals, some proper welly behind it and is being thoroughly evaluated - at least partially in public. Sure, we&#039;ve seen evaluations like the Hansard Society&#039;s Digital Dialogues before but defining, implementing and evaluating your own digital engagement is still unusual and rather impressive.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Must &#8211; get &#8211; evaluation &#8211; post &#8211; written&#8230;</p>
<p>Re: business case &#8211; it may be just a point of terminology, but I see the basic task of project definition (what it is you&#8217;re doing, why, how, with what and to whom) as slightly separate from the business case which to me is about having an evidence base for a justification why the project will achieve its aims, based on prior examples. Maybe I just have rather high hopes for my business cases.</p>
<p>@Simon: Agreed, it&#8217;s an unusual example. But it&#8217;s not the success or otherwise of the engagement so much that I find really positive, but the fact that it had clearly defined goals, some proper welly behind it and is being thoroughly evaluated &#8211; at least partially in public. Sure, we&#8217;ve seen evaluations like the Hansard Society&#8217;s Digital Dialogues before but defining, implementing and evaluating your own digital engagement is still unusual and rather impressive.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Simon Dickson</title>
		<link>http://davepress.net/2009/04/20/the-importance-of-evaluation/comment-page-1/#comment-2996</link>
		<dc:creator>Simon Dickson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 21:43:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://davepress.net/?p=1488#comment-2996</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m wary of people using the London Summit as a role model, though. Too big, too global.

I&#039;ve never felt comfortable with short term, fixed term projects like this. The examples of true &#039;engagement&#039; which I&#039;ve experienced have been when people open themselves up to the wider world, not for one specific day, but as an integral part of their work and/or life.

Let&#039;s think about the word &#039;engagement&#039;. When two lovers get engaged, they aren&#039;t doing so - in theory, at least! - just to organise a large one-off event, namely the wedding. It&#039;s the first step in a much longer process leading to &#039;til death us do part&#039;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m wary of people using the London Summit as a role model, though. Too big, too global.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve never felt comfortable with short term, fixed term projects like this. The examples of true &#8216;engagement&#8217; which I&#8217;ve experienced have been when people open themselves up to the wider world, not for one specific day, but as an integral part of their work and/or life.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s think about the word &#8216;engagement&#8217;. When two lovers get engaged, they aren&#8217;t doing so &#8211; in theory, at least! &#8211; just to organise a large one-off event, namely the wedding. It&#8217;s the first step in a much longer process leading to &#8217;til death us do part&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: paul canning</title>
		<link>http://davepress.net/2009/04/20/the-importance-of-evaluation/comment-page-1/#comment-2995</link>
		<dc:creator>paul canning</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 18:24:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://davepress.net/?p=1488#comment-2995</guid>
		<description>I was really impressed by the transparency of this. Others would be well-placed to watch and learn.

As budgets get squeezed, as they will, the need for provable results is only going one way. Motto: Be a Boy Scout and be prepared.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was really impressed by the transparency of this. Others would be well-placed to watch and learn.</p>
<p>As budgets get squeezed, as they will, the need for provable results is only going one way. Motto: Be a Boy Scout and be prepared.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
