Another common governance challenge is caused by individual business areas working independently of the web team and developing their own web applications or publishing sub-sites. These rogue sites are generally easy to spot as they are characterised by quality issues such: poor non-standards compliant coding, accessibility and useability issues, inconsistent branding and “look & feel”, etc. This is because these rogues sites are often able to by-pass the rules (policies, standards, guidelines) and processes which help to ensure the organisation’s web activities meets recognised ‘good practice’.
Governance is not just about roles and ownership; a key aspect is being able to control how the environment is run. The most obvious issue with different areas doing their own thing is the organisation’s web activities become fragmented and difficult to manage. However, this by-passing may be evidence that the existing web governance mechanisms are seen as irrelevant or more alarmingly as a bottleneck to getting an outcome. For governance to be effective it needs to be both viable and relevant.
Good
There are accepted conventions which guide the day-to-day operations of the internet and intranet. Theses are typically comprised of a combination of: recognised guidelines and standards, processes and procedures, and assigned responsibilities. On the whole these conventions are followed regardless of which business area is involved because they are seen having value such as making the things easier or more reliable. Critically, in situations where it is important that rules are strictly followed it is difficult for these to be by-passed, for example; accessibility, branding, security and disaster recovery.
There is probably a fair degree of reliance on individuals with specialist expertise who know the recognised good practises. This allows a degree of flexibility to adapt to emerging business requirements. However, this approach is unlikely to workable in situations characterised by rapid change, complexity or high risk.
Better
Rather then just relying on expert knowledge and accepted good practices much of the control aspects of governance is built into the organisation’s systems and business processes. This approach can take several forms. For example to enforce rules around publishing and web site content changes a CMS with good workflows and access controls is used. Business processes are used to guide other aspects of the environment, for examples ‘change control’, ‘disaster recovery and continuity planning’.
Finally, expert know-how is codified into standards, guidelines and procedures to define rules for managing parts of the environment not covered by systems or processes. Where possible these are kept simple and orientated to managing practical activities. This is not about having a weighty policy manual that attempts to document every aspect of the web environment as these tend to be an end in themselves rather than a practical resource.
Best
The organisation combines all of the above and builds on this further by using recognised methodologies to direct and guide the development of the web environment. Again, this can take a number of forms. For example; a UCD development process can be used to help keep developments focus on user’s needs along with recognised project management methodologies to help focus on business requirements.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You've raised some good points, but why would you assume that rogue sites are poorly coded, unusable, inacessible etc? Are you assuming that that's a definition of a rogue site?
ReplyDeleteSome rogue sites may be very useful - they just don't fit into your template.
When you are dealing in the government sector, you are speaking on behalf of your Government. You generally don't want websites that are not under the organisation's conscious control and adhering to the communciations policy, as you can set your department and political masters up for unwanted criticism.
ReplyDeleteThat said, there's a growing place for wikis and public engagement, but they need to be carefully managed. See, for example, the NZ SSC's egovt wikis (http://webstandards.govt.nz/)
A inaccessible site would be a rogue site in government space, imho, as all govt info on a site should be freely available to everybody in a form that thay can use it.
Hi guys - you were quick of the mark (must be a Friday arvo thing)
ReplyDeleteKerry – I wasn’t assuming all rogue sites are poorly code. However, the problem ones usually are. In my experience this is more of a problem in the intranet space.
Yes that's interesting point about "non-approved" sites being very useful. Some of the background research I read while preparing this implied that the less regulate approach has been very useful in providing the space to explore (see reference below). So an interesting challenge in governance terms is how to set the boundaries for these activates with out make the ‘rules’ to ridged (all about managing risk apparently)
nzlemming - I’m off to read your link now!
Web site governance hotly contested in many agencies
Joab Jackson, 06/05/06
http://www.gcn.com/online/vol1_no1/40941-1.html#
From the point of view of someone nearer the 'bottom end' of a local government's managerment structure, one of the main issues I have come accross is that strict guidelines and a resulting CMS is put in place, which provides a strictly compliant 'corporate' website and everyone's happy they have conformed to Central Government guidelines. Then as time progresses, public-facing departments find they are not able to deliver the information/services their 'clients' need to receive (and are used to receiving from commercial organisations). I see a main problem being that government organisations provide many different services/products to a whole range of 'customers' and a 'one-size-fits-all' CMS is not sufficinetly flexible to be effective across this spectrum. Generally, commercial organisations have more defined products/services aimed at smaller groups. If they introduced a completely new & different product/market they would create a seperate brand & associated website.
ReplyDeleteSo guys, here are some of the problems, you just need to find the solutions!