Tag Archives: digital by default

There Are Only 10 Types of People

I made an off-the-cuff remark about the tendency of people to use this image to illustrate articles about ‘digital’. It appears to depict some binary instructions traversing the walls of some kind of weird quantum tunnel. Or perhaps the tunnel is supposed to represent an Internet connection, who knows?

13129-itok=5aT4aaLR

The Binary Tunnel

In the same publication, on the same day, we find a similar image used to illustrate a different story – this time we seem to be looking at a funky binary cube.

binarycube

In response to my plea to photo editors to step away from these abstractions of ‘digital’ Jeni Tennison asked the (not unreasonable) question “What are people supposed to use instead?!?

Jeni

I started to reply to Jeni but only got as far as “Well, they could always use…”

What could they use? What image conveys ‘digital’? My problem with the binary cube/tunnel is that binary code is literally (and I mean that ‘literally’ literally) as far from the end user experience as it’s possible to get. Binary is the bottom layer of computing – the language of the machines. Very few people in the world have ever or could ever code in binary. It’s an old joke:

“There are only 10 types of people – those who understand binary and those who don’t”

OK Mr smarty pants, what image could we use to put at the top of all those articles about ‘digital’? Well, I’m as guilty as the rest – this is a logo for the Sheffield City Region CIO Forum that I designed a while back. Spot the binary?
SCR CIO

To my shame, the ones and zeroes mean something – 010000110100100101001111 codes for the text string ‘CIO’. Sorry.

The image below is my take at representing ‘digital’. It’s not very good (I’m no designer) but it does try to depict digital in use in a way that most humans would recognise. Photo editors everywhere – I give it to you, copyright free. You are welcome.

DigitalImage

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Not just a digital strategy – it’s a business strategy for a digital age…

By fixating on the need for a digital strategy document we can often forget that the real goal is a set of digitally enabled business strategies or service plans.

You don’t just need a digital strategy – you need all of your service areas to write service plans and strategies that exploit digital.

Digital shouldn’t be handed down from the top of the organisation – it should bubble up naturally from the people who are tasked with delivering services. The business areas should be irrepressibly enthusiastic about using technology – they shouldn’t need coercing.capture

This is why our new strategy was co-produced with the various business units in the Council, with the aim of pulling together all aspects of the organisation’s digital work under one roof.

And here it is – our Digital Council Strategy 2016 to 2019:

Click here to see RMBC’s new Digital Council Strategy

 

 

 

 

Digital = Automation (or how to keep your looms clog-free)

Pretty much every meeting I attend these days involves some discussion of ‘Digital by Default’ or ‘Channel Shift’.do-it-online

Often these meetings see me waxing lyrical about digital things and trying not to roll my eyes when someone says “But what about the people who are not online?” (someone ALWAYS says this – I’ve blogged on it here).

Recently, in one of these meetings, I had something of an epiphany. I was being challenged by a non-believer over digital’s business case when I realised that what I was failing to get across is simply this – doing things digitally means that a computer carries out tasks that would previously been done by a human. D’oh!

Digital = Automation

Pretty obvious huh? But once I’d stopped using the phrases digital by default and channel shift and started using ‘automation’ instead I found it much easier to get the message across. We automate processes to make them cheaper, faster and better.

4.1.2

Spot-welding robots on a car production line can get through many, many more cars per day than a human workforce – and they don’t need to sleep, it’s a 24/7 service.

Similarly, by automating a process and putting it online we make our services faster, better and cheaper (and 24/7). Why are online services cheaper? Largely because humans are expensive things to employ and online services don’t need as many humans.

As this graphic shows, an online transaction is MUCH cheaper for the council than a face-to-face equivalent (I believe that these figures are from some SOCITM research). channelshift

As well as helping me explain why digital is better, these thoughts of automation led to a further insight – the reason we’re finding it so hard to ‘do’ digital is that it is being resisted by our own employees. Let’s travel back in time 400 years or so to help me explain….

A ‘sabot’ was a type of wooden clog worn by poor people in 16th century Europe (bear with me, this does have something to do with digital).wooden-shoes

When automatic knitting machines and looms were invented the peasants feared for their jobs. The new looms could make better quality clothes and they could do it much faster than the old hand-looms.

In an effort to protect their jobs the disgruntled weavers threw their sabots in to the inner workings of the loom in order to smash the machinery. From this action we get the word ‘sabotage’. 

This is a lesson from history that we could do well to pay attention to today. Everyone apart from the saboteurs thought that the new weaving machines were a great innovation. The manufacturers could make more clothes and blankets, the consumers got better clothes at much reduced cost. The loom makers were prized for the technical prowess. Everyone was happy apart from the people who used to do things the old way.

turkeyNow, as then, the people who are most likely to block an innovation are the people whose livelihoods are threatened by it. Turkeys are unlikely to vote for Christmas.

It’s hard for a large public sector organisation to ‘do’ digital. But why should this be? Our customers want it – they prefer to do things online. The leaders of the organisation want digital – it saves them money and allows for headcount reduction through automation.

The only people who don’t view digital as self-evidently the right thing to do are the humans who will be displaced by the automation of these transactions.

There is a way to approach this problem that keeps everyone happy. It’s essential that we don’t attempt to hard-wire a link between digital/channel shift and financial savings. This seems counter-intuitive, I know, but if you start your digital transformation by saying “We’re going to channel shift and this will mean we can drop headcount by 10 people by the end of the year” you’re going to find that your looms fill up with clogs and the project is suddenly very much harder than you thought it was going to be. You can’t really ‘do’ digital to processes unless you take the process owners with you – hearts and minds.

Instead, the message should be “We’re going to do digital/channel shift because it will ease your paperworkloads and help you cope with recent headcount reductions – we know you’re buckling under the strain and this project will help with that. What’s more – our customers will get a better service.”

You back this up by not taking any departmental/service budgets to fund the digital projects. Instead you fund this transformation at the centre knowing that there is a self-evident invest-to-save business case. For a small investment you’ll reap big savings.

In a year’s time, when the project is up and running, the people on the ground can see that they now have much less work to do and you find that you can now accept all those voluntary severance applications that you had to turn down last year. Headcount shrinks – incrementally and without too much trauma.

In summary – don’t get hung up on trying to predict the savings you’ll make from digital. It’s impossible for you to accurately put a figure on what you’ll save and to try to do so will result in resistance from the process owners. Instead, be resolute in the belief that automation is self-evidently the right thing to do and know that, to paraphrase Field of Dreams..

If you build it, the savings will come.

FOD

 

The Great Digital Transition (and why you should take the long view)

I spend much of my time extolling the virtues of all things digital to VIPs across the the public sector. “We should be digital by default!” I exhort “Let’s re-engineer your processes top to bottom and make them available online –  the service will improve, the citizens will love it and you’ll save lots of money“.

“We get it” they say “we know about channel shift – we’re with you, but what about the people who are not online?

At this point in the meeting I pull out my Great Digital Transition diagram:

Digital Transition

We or fortunate/unfortunate to live in a fascinating time when society is making the transition from nobody being online to everybody being on line.

There’s a risk that we get stuck in this moment and lose sight of the big picture. Sure – there are some people who are not online but that will only be true for the blink of an eye, relatively speaking.

It’s open to debate as to whether it’s the public sector’s job to get people online (my personal opinion is that the public sector has a key role to play in fostering digital inclusion).

getonline

This is almost a moot point however – our citizens will all be online eventually (if they want to be) regardless of any digital inclusion work we do.

94% of adults in the UK have a mobile phone. Yes – many/most of these handsets will not currently be Internet capable or the owner will have a tariff which excludes data – but this is set to change. Can you envisage a future that includes mobile devices which do not feature connectivity as standard and all you can eat data by default? I can’t.

97% of UK homes have a digital TV. Can you envisage a future which doesn’t include the ability to get online via a digital TV? I can’t.

By 2020 all our citizens will have a way to get online if they choose to do so and the proliferation of online-only services and savings will mean that they have a compelling reason to avail themselves of the various connectivity options.

I suspect that things like Universal Credit (online only), online shopping discounts/savings and the relentless march of Facebook and Twitter will do more in motivating people to get connected than all our inclusion strategies put together.

I was talking to a septuagenarian acquaintance of mine recently – a lady who has been steadfastly anti-digital. She’s now online and routinely uses online services. “What changedcandy your mind?” I asked “Someone showed me Candy Crush.” she said.

Of course – there will always be people who prefer not to go online – that’s fine. It’s important to remember that not everyone in the UK is a telephone user – but nobody ever holds up this fact as a reason not to offer contact centres as a channel option.

The impact of the Internet on public services can be confusing and worrying for the people who deliver those services. We live in a fleeting moment when the transition to digital is not complete – but this must not stop us from designing public services from the starting point of assuming that everyone is online (if they want to be).

It’s easy – design good online services and they will naturally become the channel of choice for most people. That’s your channel shift done, what’s next?

Sources:

http://media.ofcom.org.uk/facts/

http://www.publications.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/digital/strategy/government-digital-strategy.pdf