EGOV4U and a history of the world in 100 sociotechnical networks

Discussions of technologies frequently consider the impacts and present certain technologies as leading directly to particular outcomes. Hence, we get stories about how social networks lead to riots (or the post-riot clean-ups) or the Arab spring. These stories are recent examples of the wider story about the internet being an inherently democratic technology (and, before that, TV, radio, telegraphy and printing). Visions of technologies as fixing things are very attractive to policymakers who can present themselves as technocratic fixers (and, of course, their opponents either as Luddites or in some way ‘not getting it’).

Recently, Shailey Minocha and I gave a presentation at the Regional Studies Association Winter Conference in London entitled ‘A sociotechnical network perspective on e-government technologies’, elaborating some of our thinking as part of the EGOV4U project impact evaluation work. (The other members of the OU team also presented – Mike Grimsley and Anthony Meehan ‘Impact evaluation of multi-channel eGovernment services tackling disadvantage and social exclusion’, and Leslie Budd and Ivan Horrocks ‘Multi-channel governance and electronic democracy’.

Our paper discussed some of the project partners’ initiatives viewed as sociotechnical networks. This is one way discussing technology such that the artefacts are not seen in isolation from the social contexts in which they are both designed and used. We also drew on ideas of various ‘capitals’ (of which financial, human, and social capitals are the best known) articulated in the EGOV4U Impact Evaluation Framework.

While we were preparing the presentation, I was listening to the BBC’s podcasts of ‘A History of the World in 100 Objects’ based on objects in the British Museum’s collection. I missed most of the programmes when they were originally broadcast, but they are excellent listening on the motorway to Milton Keynes. They are great examples of how to think sociotechnically. The material objects are described physically, but this is just a starting point for some fascinating accounts of the networks of relationships, ideas and resources that went in to creating them, how these are reflected in the artefacts, and the functions that they served in the societies which produced them.

I couldn’t resist including an example from the series in our presentation and chose the head of Caesar Augustus. To me, it is an irresistible story of projecting reputation of a ruler, in ways quite familiar to us. The bust was created by skilled sculptors in a society which had the human and financial resources to support them. It reflected a particular image of Augustus as a youthful and virile ruler, and the British Museum’s particular bust was sent to what is now southernEgypt, on the borders of the Roman Empire. The clincher for me, though, is that the BM’s bust is pitted with sand from being decapitated, buried and walked on by Kushite rebels against Roman rule. Ultimately, this bust and its message proved eminently resistable.

Now I’m a curator too, apparently – IBZL on Scoop

My colleague Shailey Minocha emailled me asking why I used paper.li instead of scoop.it to curate stuff. I hadn’t come across scoop.it, so have just spent an hour creating a scoop topic about IBZL as a way of seeing what it is. Which wasn’t what I meant to do when I settled down at my desk this afternoon…

EGOV4U TV interview in Malta

I’m a member of the OU team responsible for the impact evaluation of EGOV4U, a European project concerned with egovernment, local authorities and social exclusion. The EGOV4U web site introduces the project and partners (local authority bodies from Dublin, Malta, Milton Keynes, Rijeka, and Rekjavik. Our impact evaluation website describes our evaluation work in more detail. On a recent visit to our partners in Malta, the Local Councils’ Association I was interviewed about the OU’s involvement in the project for a TV series that’s part of the project. The interview is below, about 12 minutes in… 

IBZL IADIS Conference paper

In July, I presented a paper I wrote with OU colleague Simon Bell, Shaun Fensom (Manchester Digital), and Keith Straughan (Dean, University Centre Milton Keynes) at the IADIS conference ‘ICT, Society and Human Beings’. The paper reports on the first round of IBZL workshops that we held during 2010 and the ‘Phase 2′ workshop held early this year. The paper goes in to less detail about the Imagine methodology than the Futures paper (written with Simon – see below), instead reporting and reflecting on how we used it in developing project ideas.

The reference for the paper is below, and it can be downloaded from the OU’s ORO repository.

Reference

Walker, Steve; Bell, Simon; Fensom, Shaun and Straughan, Keith (2011). The ‘Infinite Bandwidth, Zero Latency’ Project: inventing a digital future. In: IADIS International Conference: ICT, Society and
Human Beings, 24-26 July 2011, Rome.

IBZL Blog now up

Rather belatedly, we’ve created a blog for the IBZL project at http://ibzl.wordpress.com/. At the moment, I’ve started to post some of the materials we’ve developed over the last year, but I and others from the IBZL project, will be contributing to it in ‘news’ mode over the coming months.

OU graduation – now and in five years?

This afternoon I went to the OU graduation ceremony in the Bridgewater Hall in Manchester. They really are wonderful occasions. Every student who crossed the stage has a story to tell – whether it’s the older gentleman who was collecting his BA _and_ his BSc or the one whose (adult) granddaughter shouted ‘Well done granddad!’ from the audience, the woman whose PhD was on elearning in Unison, or the woman whose infant child’s cry of ‘well done mummy’ and, of course, many others. These events are family occasions in a way that other degree ceremonies aren’t – while most undergraduates disappear from the parental home for three years, many OU students’ families will have been an important part of the support network that got them through. As the VC said – if there’s one thing harder than being an OU student, it’s being a member of an OU student’s family. And it was particularly moving when some of the students stood to applaud the OU staff.

But amidst all this, I felt increasingly angry. What will an OU graduation look like in 5 years? Will there still be the same diversity of students across their lifecycles, studying for their own reasons rather than for employment? Despite our best efforts, I doubt it. Who’s going to decide, once they reach middle age that now is the chance to study for that degree they’d always meant to? The demolition job that the ConDems are carrying out on HE funding, taking advantage of New Labour’s preparatory sorties, will have consequences that are little short of evil.