Food for Thought Blog
Gallup “86’d” their Presidential Approval Survey. After 88 years, it’s time, but not for the reasons they say.
As an Appetizer:
Gallup has announced it will stop measuring presidential approval after 88 years, calling the move part of a broader effort to align its work with its mission. The decision has sparked skepticism, with some critics suggesting political pressure from the Trump administration. I argue the poll has become increasingly irrelevant in today’s hyperpartisan political climate, where a nearly even partisan divide makes approval ratings predictable and less reflective of objective public opinion. With voters largely entrenched along party lines, presidents are unlikely to see approval ratings rise much above the mid-50s regardless of performance, except in cases of severe failure.
As the Main Course:
Staff writer Dominick Mastrangelo of THE HILL reports today that Gallup will no longer measure presidential approval after doing so for 88 years. This is a huge announcement. Gallup said the change is “part of a broader, ongoing effort to align all of Gallup’s public work with its mission.”
Yet, when the first line on Gallup’s “About Us” web page states “Helping People Be Heard,” it sounds a bit suspicious that one of its longest-running, most widely-followed, and internationally-published polls doesn’t fit that mission.
Many reader comments of the article voiced skepticism of Gallup’s reasoning, writing that it is because of pressure from the White House. They wrote that Gallup was falling in line with other media outlets that are caving to pressure (lawsuits?) from the Trump Administration’s efforts to clamp down on news media that report negative news about the president –real or editorial. When asked about this, a Gallup spokesperson stated the reason is due to “a strategic shift solely based on Gallup’s research goals and priorities.”
Happy trails. It’s a survey with predictable results that doesn’t yield any useful data unless it shows extreme negative ratings towards a president (more on this later). My question challenging its usefulness is based on today’s political environment and a growing hyperpartisan society.
Registered voters are split almost evenly between the two major parties, with independent voters divided about the same regarding the two parties’ polarized ideologies (Dem 45/Rep 46). Reinforced by politically-biased news media, voting-along-party-line partisan elected government officials, and mis- and disinfomred family and peers, when asked their opinion of a sitting president, can we expect to get an objective picture of public opinion of the U.S. president these days?
So what good is the Gallup Presidential Approval poll anymore? For years, I have cited the poll in my American Government classes at FGCU. However, I question its validity as an education tool, except for using it to showcase America’s growing chasm between the two political parties and their ideologies. My theory, or perhaps my suggestion, is that the survey has become irrelevant.
Due to the close 50-50 split of registered voters and partisan ideologies between them, we will no longer see presidents achieving above a 55% approval rating +/- a few points, even when they are performing well. A mediocre score has become predictable except when their performance is bad. Trump’s Gallup approval rating of 36 as of last December was among the lowest the organization had found since it began taking the poll in the 1930s.
So the timing of Gallup’s decision may be that they see the same writing on the wall. This may be a proactive move on their part, realizing what is happening with their survey, public opinion, and Trump’s presidency. Or they are being reactive, already hearing criticism from the current Administration.
If Gallup just stated the real reason for cancelling the survey is that it’s become useless due to the current political environment, that would make more sense. But, they didn’t. Halting the survey due to “a strategic shift” based on research goals and priorities sounds more like a decision based on self-interest and preservation.
Educating the Public: A Brave New World
This is a reprint of a guest column I was invited to submit to Barrett & Greene Inc. published on 11/29/2023 (Adapted for the TDK blog, readers have the option between the “appetizer” version and the “main course” version.)
As an appetizer…
In a democracy, the news media’s vital role in disseminating government information faces challenges with the rise of social media. As technology transforms communication, government officials argue its advantages for efficiency, while journalists warn of unchecked government influence. Public trust in both government and news media compounds the issue. Acknowledging low trust levels, governments aim to engage residents through social media, with 55% of American adults using it for news. Caution is urged, advocating for greater coordination between public organizations and the media to ensure historic checks and balances endure. Recommendations for government managers include treating news media as constituent VIPs, using dedicated technology platforms for communication and information exchanges, and building media partnerships for informed public discourse to navigate challenges and uphold democratic principles.
As the main course…
Disseminating information about government and public affairs is a basic responsibility of the news media in a democratic society. The Founders believed it was important for a formal institution, independent of government, to have the responsibility to oversee, vet, and inform the public about government affairs and guarantee it constitutional protection.
However, with rapid advancements in digital communication, the landscape is changing. Social media supplements and at times circumvents the role of the traditional press as a means for state and local governments to get their messages across to a broad audience. This trend introduces new challenges and opportunities to inform, educate, and engage residents that impact government deliberations and policymaking.
Many public officials argue that using these enabling technologies improves efficiency in delivering information to larger, more diverse populations they serve. The journalism community warns that when the government circumvents the news media, residents become vulnerable to government influence with unvetted information that may lack accuracy or contain slanted content. There are elements of truth to both perspectives.
Compounding the complexity of the issue are the historically low levels of public trust in both the government and the news media. In the context of a functioning democracy, acknowledging this reality becomes crucial in understanding the dynamics between the message and the messenger, and the public’s response.
For the most part, the goal of governments is to inform and educate the residents they serve, and it’s not a surprise that they are increasingly inclined to meet the public on common ground. “The percentage of American adults who use social media for news, sometimes or often, is now at 55%,” according to Amy Mitchell, the Pew Research Center’s director of journalism. That’s up from the presidential election of 2016 when 42% of adults received at least some news from social media.
Enabling technologies present opportunities to expand the dissemination of public information, but caution must be taken. Government managers can play a pivotal role in enhancing the quality of public information and education. Here are three recommendations that advocate for cultural shifts within public organizations –which are never easy:
1. Treat the news media as a VIP member of your constituency. Proactively utilize technology to work with the traditional news media in disseminating information to the public about your agency’s programs and policies.
Consider your department as one of many digital entry and dissemination points to the media and the public. Go from an information gatekeeper to an information gateway using technology to stream relevant content to a wider audience.
Work with your communication manager to build relationships with journalists through regular media briefings and position yourself as a point of contact for media inquiries that address your span of control within the administration.
2. Use a dedicated technology platform beyond social networks. A scalable, enterprise technology public engagement platform is essential to sharing information on a large scale. Each agency should have its designated portal providing easy access to information for the public and the media.
Public engagement platforms benefit your agency and the news media in two ways. First, it is a proactive repository for information about your programs and policies the public and the media can easily access. Second, it serves as a collection point for public input and feedback. The information and exchanges amplify your message to a larger audience and can identify topics of interest the news media may want to follow up on. Your communications director and IT department are key internal partners.
3. Build news media partnerships for informed public discourse. Governments use public forums to inform residents about public policies and projects. The media’s role has been that of an observer.
Partner with the news media to cosponsor public forums, both conventional and online, and share responsibility for managing public information and feedback. Each institution serves a different role and purpose as a public information provider. However, working together provides inclusive background and analyses which help build public support and trust and minimize misinformation.
Be creative with the partnership in navigating community awareness around other critical public issues, such as misinformation education and digital media literacy campaigns.
The digital age has ushered in new challenges and opportunities for the primary institutional providers of public affairs information –the press and the public sector. While technological changes empower governments to play an increased role in information dissemination, trust must be preserved – a goal that is becoming ever more difficult.
To restore public trust, both the government and the news media must build meaningful relationships with the residents they serve and with each other. Improving their roles as public information providers becomes the first and most crucial step in navigating the complexities of governing in the digital age while upholding the principles of democracy.
Decentralizing Public Engagement – Building Trust and Participation through Flattened Hierarchies
As an appetizer…
In today’s digital democracy, government unlocking the full potential of public engagement in deliberative practices requires a three-pronged approach: expanding participation scope, flattening hierarchies, and embracing scalable technology platforms. This decentralization strategy offers numerous benefits, from flattening hierarchical engagement processes including online to distributing and leveraging residents’ knowledge and participation for better decision-making. Eight propositions guide this transformative process, emphasizing the role of trust-building, strategic technology use, and the need for dedicated public engagement platforms, especially over conventional social networks. By meeting resident expectations and preferences, governments can secure public support, fostering two-way communication and closing the feedback loop. Decentralizing public engagement isn’t just a technological shift; it’s a cultural transformation toward more inclusive, transparent, and informed governance.
As the main course…
E-Government and Gov 2.0 refer to the government’s increased use of communication and information technologies to communicate about and deliver programs and services to constituents. In public engagement processes, the landscape is evolving rapidly in today’s digital age.
While transactional engagement between government and residents has embraced technology, there remains a gap in deploying effective tools for participatory or deliberative processes. This lag was painfully evident during the COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting the need for greater adoption and more innovative solutions beyond traditional engagement practices.
The challenges faced in modernizing public engagement in deliberative processes relate to institutional culture and the technology landscape. Public officials must commit to expanding engagement opportunities, while GovTech companies should explore their platforms’ potential as advocates and facilitators for broader public participation. Addressing these challenges could unlock the full potential of technology and deliver substantial benefits to the government, the public, and democracy.
Decentralization or flattening of hierarchical structures for deliberative public engagement addresses these challenges and helps achieve the benefits. Decentralizing public engagement involves three critical components:
- Expanding Participation Scope: Move beyond customary means to increase and distribute a community of users, or residents, engaged in decision-making processes.
- Flattening Hierarchies: Collapse established hierarchical processes and establish new forums that increase resident motivation and foster participation and feedback.
- Scalable Technology Platforms: Adopt and deploy across the entire organization to integrate traditional and digital public engagement processes for government deliberations.
Decentralization provides many benefits for both residents and public officials including:
- Opening more doors and dialog between the public and government on specific issues.
- Expanding accommodations beyond conventional engagement practices.
- Leveraging residents’ energy, enthusiasm, and expertise about their community with the public work of government.
- Organizing, facilitating, and reporting government deliberations that improve inclusive and informed decision-making.
At the “Rethinking Public Engagement Summit” sponsored by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA), I presented eight propositions to support the concept of decentralizing public engagement:
Proposition #1: Building Trust: Public engagement serves as a direct pipeline for building trust in public institutions, with transparency and resident participation contributing significantly to establishing a positive reputation or brand.
Dr. Dannielle Blumenthal, the former director of digital engagement at The National Archives writes about how governments build strong brands. She states “The distinction between government branding and branding in the private sector is that government branding always comes down to trust, …you have to put money in the ‘trust bank’ first, establishing a positive and distinct reputation for trustworthiness and a particular set of values.”
Proposition #2: Technology and Cultural Transformations: Recognize the risks and benefits of increased participation in deliberative practices and develop strategies that minimize risks while maximizing the benefits of technology and cultural transformations.
In the digital age, local governments have gone from operating in a fishbowl to operating in an aquarium. More traffic, more eyes, more interest, and more opinions.
Eleven years ago the PEW Research Center and the Knight Foundation found only 3% of residents received information about their government from the government. The local news was the overwhelming source. Today, more local governments connect directly to their residents with their own information technology and social networks; even foregoing working through their local news media. This creates a new level of public information challenges that are covered elsewhere.
Proposition #3: Essential Technology Platforms: A scalable, enterprise technology platform is crucial to increase capacity, inclusion, and complement conventional practices.
Technology platforms enable ongoing and daily collaborations with residents and stakeholders beyond traditional forms of outreach. New digital avenues for G-C/C-G communication have been created including the ability to stream public meetings, send email, operate 311 call lines and apps, and enable social media.
However, governments have become overly reliant on using social media channels. It’s not uncommon to find scores of social media accounts on a local government website. Unfortunately, social media can be counterproductive to deliberative public engagement (see Proposition #7)
Proposition #4: The Wisdom of Crowds: The idea that large groups are collectively smarter than individual experts should be recognized, pursued, and facilitated using technology for better decision-making.
Managing large numbers of participants may be seen as unwieldy by those tasked with managing those processes. However, excluding people –directly or indirectly– who will be impacted by government decisions can create problems beyond poor decisions. It can create suspicion and mistrust among residents, and possibly lead to lawsuits.
Here is where public engagement platforms pay dividends. Not only can they organize and facilitate large numbers of participants, but through decentralized public engagement, they can be expanded to multiple areas to accommodate dispersed engagement in more areas of government deliberations.
Proposition #5: Quality vs. Quantity Challenge: Resolve the challenge through greater participant attribution and validation.
The power of public comment. In government deliberations, the need for structured and validated public input is critical. Identifying the origin (who and where) of constituent comments provides decision-makers with important information that can be crucial when making decisions on their behalf.
The public engagement technology platform used by deliberative bodies should offer multiple options or levels for attribution and validation surrounding resident participation. Depending on the need or requirement, the options should range from allowing anonymity (think public rally or assembly) to requiring full acknowledgment and certification (think public comment at a council meeting).
Proposition #6: Rethink Conventional Engagement: Transform traditional boards, commissions, and task forces into issue-focused online communities with their own “mini-publics.”
These traditional advisory panels are convened with small groups of residents. Typical local governments may have between 15-25 of these forums focused on a single program or policy. They are ripe for transformation in today’s digital government.
Using public engagement platforms, local governments can transform these outdated boards into issue-focused online communities. Members of the new structured forums include motivated residents, or “mini-publics” who have a keen interest in specific issues –safety, health, education, transportation, and land use planning– and will enthusiastically contribute their knowledge and ideas to improve policy-making.
Proposition #7: Avoiding Social Media Pitfalls: Social networks are ineffective for meaningful collaboration and pose potential threats to deliberative public engagement due to their lack of structure and control.
Social media can be counterproductive to deliberative public engagement. By their design, social media are anti-deliberative. They enable bad actors to disrupt and fractionalize public attention and collaboration. There is also the growing presence of bots appearing as residents on government social network accounts posting false information. That makes the government culpable for spreading mis- and disinformation.
Social networks cast a wide net that neither effectively reaches the intended audience nor provides pathways for meaningful input and feedback. Social media can provide channels for broadcasting information to the public. They are not recommended for collaboration or collecting public comment in deliberative processes. Instead, governments should be using dedicated public engagement platforms as issue-networks as alternatives to social networks (see Proposition #6).
Proposition #8: Meeting Resident Expectations: Secure and maintain public support by meeting resident engagement expectations and preferences, fostering two-way communication, and closing the feedback loop.
A fundamental trust issue for public engagement surrounds meeting people where they are, educating and motivating them with information to participate, and following up to inform them how their input impacts decisions. From national surveys conducted in 2022 and 2023 by PublicInput, a provider of community engagement software, the general sentiment expressed by a majority of residents was that many were unaware of opportunities to participate. And when notified, those who did not participate claimed not receiving enough information from the government prevented them from offering an educated response.
The features and functionality of the technology along with supportive project management are crucial to maintaining positive relations by empowering residents and building trust. Public engagement platforms should handle most if not all of the administrative tasks to complete a full engagement life-cycle from notification to education, solicitation, reporting, concluding, and archiving with updates provided throughout.
In conclusion, decentralizing public engagement is not just a shift in using technology, but also a transformation involving the institutional culture of the organization. By embracing the three components—expanding participation scope, flattening hierarchies, and adopting scalable technology platforms—governments can educate and motivate community residents and tap into their knowledge and wisdom. Eight propositions offer a roadmap to navigate the collective challenges and help maximize the benefits of decentralized public engagement. Increasing interest and participation builds trust, and results in more resident inclusion and informed government decisions.
Treat Residents as Stakeholders, Not Customers by “Channeling” Community Engagement
The challenge for successful communication and information-sharing
As an appetizer…
This article compares communication strategies between public institutions, particularly local governments, and the private sector. While both sectors aim to engage their audiences, they differ significantly in purpose and approach. Local governments often struggle due to resource limitations and legal constraints, unlike private businesses which aim to make themselves accessible and distinct. Social media plays a role but poses challenges for governments due to scattered accounts and limited staff resources. An omnichannel approach can improve government communication. It’s crucial to recognize that residents are stakeholders, not customers, and prioritize meaningful participation to build trust and enhance civic infrastructure in local communities.
As the main course…
Most public and private organizations have a communication and information-sharing (CIS) strategy for their audiences. Businesses interact with prospective and existing customers. Public institutions interact with constituents and residents.
The Power of Branding: The Public Engagement Asset
When it comes to branding, jurisdictions should consider public engagement as part of their strategy.
Read as an appetizer…
Public organizations and their jurisdictions should integrate public engagement into their branding strategy, mirroring how businesses manage their brand image. A positive community brand attracts businesses, conventions, and tourists and relies on residents’ trust in their local government. Trust is foundational for public institutions and crucial for political participation and social cohesion. Yet current data shows growing public mistrust of government. To help (re)build trust, increasing transparency and community cooperation is essential. Public engagement, facilitated by technology platforms, enhances transparency, fosters involvement, and boosts trust, positively impacting a government’s brand and image. Creative communication strategies and the right technology enable an open, progressive local government to build and maintain a strong brand.
Read as the main course…
Note: This is a reprint of a blog post contributed to PublicInput.com)
ReaJust as companies work to improve the image of their brand, many local governments do the same. Creating and maintaining a favorable community image has always been a key component of any economic development strategy. Typically falling on local chambers of commerce and convention and visitors bureaus, promoting a positive community brand helps attract businesses, conventions, and tourists.
IIJA: Engagement’s Impact on Funding
(This is a reprint of a blog post contributed to PublicInput.com)
As the National Association of Regional Partnerships, or NARC, wraps up its annual National Conference of Regions meeting in Washington, D.C., two important federal funding initiatives have regions thinking about new opportunities and challenges for their connected jurisdictions.
The American Rescue Plan Act, or ARPA, and the (“Bi-partisan”) Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, or IIJA, will distribute $1.9 trillion and $1.2 trillion, respectively, to state and local governments
National Investment: Local Impacts
ARPA funds are tied to the economic hardships suffered due to the COVID-19 pandemic and can be used for supporting public health expenditures; addressing negative economic impacts of the pandemic; replacing lost public-sector revenue; and providing premium pay for essential workers.
IIJA funds provide a huge multi-year investment into the improvement and innovation of the nation’s infrastructure. Everything from transportation to broadband internet expansion and water pipe replacement is the target of this federal funding program. Roads and bridges are the biggest beneficiaries.
Social, environmental, and infrastructure challenges facing local jurisdictions typically do not stop at a legal boundary. Hence, the need for these jurisdictions to have established formal agreements in place to tackle these challenges and opportunities as a collective.
It’s very common for these agreements to cross state boundaries. For this reason, regional planning, which includes multiple jurisdictions working together to benefit the whole, will be front and center in these programs. Front and center in that process are MPO’s (Metropolitan Planning Organizations) and COG’s (Councils of Governments) as groups focused on regional initiatives and investments.
As the federal government plans a historical disbursement of funds for state and local infrastructure improvements, local governments are preparing to make their pitch for needed funding for their communities. Many of these initiatives will involve multiple jurisdictions and regional planning partnerships will be critical to pursuing federal funding.
Competition, Planning, & Public Engagement
Competition for IIJA funds will be stiff. “This is why it’s crucial that so many state and local government leaders are doing preparatory work now to position their organizations for the coming influx of federal money,” according to Ellory Monks, co-founder of The Atlas, an online community for local government leaders to crowdsource ideas and advice.
Engagement is highlighted as a key to securing funding
The focus for local jurisdictions in their planning puts public participation as a top priority. Governments will conduct historical civic listening sessions to collect input from residents about their preferences for infrastructure improvements. How well these jurisdictions capture the collective voices of their residents will be tied to the success and the level of funding requested and received.
IIJA includes descriptive requirements for public engagement
No other federal funding program has been as insistent of jurisdictions and descriptive in their requirements surrounding resident engagement to ensure representation, inclusion, and equity in their public participation efforts.
For example, the IIJA offers provisions promoting digital equity along with a $2.75 billion allocation to the category. Among requirements for jurisdictions to qualify for these funds, they must provide detailed plans that:
-
- Identify barriers to digital equity faced by covered populations in the state;
- Provide an assessment of how the objectives will impact the state’s civic and social engagement; and
- Provide a description of how states plan to collaborate with key community stakeholders and residents
For jurisdictions to meet the important community engagement requirements, the act allows and encourages the use of technology to encourage public participation in the planning process. This encourages public institutions to utilize their civic infrastructure to improve their physical infrastructure.
The Competitive Edge: An Engagement Platform built for equity
Today, many jurisdictions are recognizing the opportunity presented by the pandemic to re-imagine the way they connect and engage with their residents.
PublicInput’s unified public engagement platform helped many jurisdictions provide equitable access to the public process when traditional means of engagement were no longer possible. By providing options for residents to provide input online, by phone, email, and even text messaging, organizations reported significant increases in participation.
Increasing the volume of participation is one thing, but measuring improvements in equity has been an even more noteworthy benefit of new approaches. Agencies using PublicInput’s Equity Mapping tool have combined census data layers from the EPA’s EJSCREEN with their resident database to visualize engagement from neighborhoods most impacted by the pandemic.
Equity Mapping layers showing participation in low-income and linguistically isolated communities in Austin, TX
Geospatial layers like these can be even more valuable when combined with a resident database that can generate resident segments by census block, EPA EJSCREEN percentile, or another relevant filter such as Qualified Census Tracts (QCT’s). An example below shows how Guilford County, NC did exactly that using PublicInput’s segmentation and reporting tools. By creating a segment of respondents who live or work in Qualified Census Tracts, they were able to zero in on the input from areas that qualify for ARPA spending.
Guilford County leveraged PublicInput’s segmentation tools to report on ARPA engagement specifically from residents in Qualified Census Tracts
QCT’s have historically been a key focus for Community Development Block Grants, but more recently have become relevant in deploying ARPA funding. Federal guidelines offer even greater flexibility for expenditures in Qualified Census Tracts, as these areas are often home to communities, households, and businesses disproportionately impacted by the pandemic. With the right technology, agencies can now improve how they engage these communities, and use data to clearly identify key themes and needs.
Whether you’re deploying ARPA funds or pursuing IIJA funding for critical projects, being able to demonstrate equitable community engagement will likely become the tipping point for local governments securing competitive federal dollars for their community.
Improved Public Engagement with Expanded Virtual
(This is a reprint of a blog post contributed to PublicInput.com)
How can virtual engagement improve public participation in 2022?
State and local governments and their constituents have seen expanded use of virtual and online engagement over the last two years. This expanded use, which was initiated primarily in response to pandemic-related social distancing at conventional public gatherings, has encouraged successful virtual engagement for both synchronous and asynchronous collaboration.
Governments that take advantage of smart communication and information-sharing technology enable greater interaction with residents by meeting the public’s growing preference to connect virtually.
Residents are responding to governments’ broader reach and finding more avenues to connect with their public officials to contribute ideas and suggestions towards community public policy challenges. Both groups benefit by sharing information and ideas that should lead to more informed decision-making for jurisdictions.
Expand virtual, increase impact
Looking beyond traditional public engagement processes, such as those occurring at regular meetings of legislative bodies, e.g., council meetings, or for planning meetings that require public comment such as transportation projects, how can the government expand the use of virtual engagement in 2022 and have greater community impact?
Federal Funding
One emerging area within public planning involves new federal funding programs that emerged during the pandemic to address local social and economic challenges. While federal funding initiatives have historically required public outreach to collect input, the current administration has expanded the public participation criteria to require more and more inclusive resident engagement. These requirements are an important part of federal programs such as the American Rescue Plan, also known as ARPA, and its predecessor, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
Both of these measures lay out specific requirements for local jurisdictions to follow and to present their plan for qualifying for federal funding before the funds are provided. Both programs mention using virtual and online options to increase the representative participation of residents in the planning and prioritization of community needs.
Regular business and virtual platforms
Other opportunities for governments to expand public participation by utilizing virtual platforms are in the daily work of conducting the public’s business. This work can be ad hoc or ongoing depending on its activity.
For example, many programs, initiatives, or policies presented at council meetings or assigned to an agency may appear on a meeting agenda and receive a smattering of conversation by public officials and brief public comments at the meeting. However, using an online public engagement platform that can centralize information and communication around that topic can help government and the public continue their collaboration which builds greater awareness and enables sharing of more ideas in the decision-making process.
Expanding public participation using virtual platforms allows governments to focus on external challenges such as health care, education, or public safety or dial in on internal challenges such as budgeting, revenue, and expenditures.
Policy Making Improvements
Other areas of policy that can be expanded for greater public participation can be in the multiple public boards and committees where a small representation from the public (perhaps one member from each ward or district) provides input and feedback to government around the topic their board is focused on. These areas include beautification, code enforcement, police review, historic preservation, public arts, economic development and housing.
Local governments usually have many boards and committees. Formalizing a method for using virtual engagement to increase resident feedback helps provide the government with greater insight and understanding around those purposes while providing the representative citizen members of those boards with opportunities for input and feedback.
Increase equity and inclusion
Opening government for greater public involvement must rely on proven technology to accomplish an equitable and inclusive representation of the community. The virtual public meeting formats convened during the pandemic and revisited again, as the current Omicron strain threatens new shutdowns of public gatherings, have shown the public’s interest to not only attend virtual proceedings but also contribute to the matters being discussed.
Public Engagement and the CIO
(This is a reprint of a blog post contributed to PublicInput.com)
CIOs and IT see a greater role in public engagement
Modern-day government is adding democracy to their list of CIO priorities. In the 2020 State CIO Survey conducted by the National Association of State CIOs (NASCIO), “Digital services and emerging technologies” took over as the #1 priority replacing cyber security which had held that spot for four years. While CIO/IT engagement with citizens has addressed many public policy areas, those exchanges were never as critical as in their new role that began in March 2020.
When COVID-19 struck, public officials retreated from conventional public engagement practices for the health and safety of themselves and for the members of their communities. Despite this, the imperative for local governments to remain open and continue dialog with residents and facilitate their participation in deliberations remained –particularly in times of crises
Many local governments were unprepared technologically and procedurally for a seamless transition from conventional, in-person meetings to virtual ones. As a result, the circumstances propelled by the pandemic set the stage for an incredible transformation in the IT government space.
CIOs and their teams became the central government employees in public meetings. They were the architects and managers to build and at times run the platforms for public bodies and the public to virtually connect and collaborate.
The expanding CIO role is being recognized by government leaders who are realizing their value beyond traditional technologists and as key players and enablers in the future of government-citizen collaboration.
“We have also seen concrete evidence that technology is expected by the general public and important for communicating and engaging at scale.” CIO quote from NASCIO survey
Leveraging Technology
Most CIOs and IT staff were challenged early on in the pandemic to cobble together multiple technologies to replicate and comply with traditional in-person meetings and requirements.
Today, many have found end-to-end solutions offering the best fit to bring more diversity, equity, inclusion, and meaning to public engagement and decision-making processes.
Expanding the role and influence of CIOs and IT to ensure the government has a secure and manageable platform that improves both the quantity and quality of collaboration with residents offers both an opportunity and a challenge.
In this year’s NASCIO survey, “with responses being collected a full year after the pandemic began, one answer overwhelmingly stood out as the biggest driver for state governments’ need to digitize: ‘better online experience for citizens.’”
A survey from Emerging Local Government Leaders (ELGL) echoed this at the community level. Asked which areas of government where software and technology adoption were made during the pandemic would become permanent, 83% of respondents identified “community engagement.”
What does this new role of “democracy enabler” mean for CIOs and for their departments?
This larger role illustrates the importance of technology solutions to public engagement in governing today. The responsibility to contribute to successful engagement is spread across a broader spectrum of government employees, each contributing their talent to the process.
Public engagement is more than collecting input and feedback from residents. It is a central theme for public institutions to build and rebuild trust among constituents and the opportunity to collect more informed input from subject matter experts in their communities that lead to better decision-making for the whole.
Expect to see an ongoing role for IT as local governments continue to utilize virtual methods along with conventional forms of public engagement to provide residents and public officials with a blended, or hybrid environment that takes advantage of the benefits offered using both formats.