tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1737262791051632022.post7806853996014362518..comments2023-05-23T00:32:23.804-04:00Comments on Professional and Non Partisan Thoughts on Renewing the Public Service: Cpsrenewal.ca Weekly Column: Blogs and the Government of CanadaTariq Pirachahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16448252241636631334noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1737262791051632022.post-43787503799346073672009-03-09T11:16:00.000-04:002009-03-09T11:16:00.000-04:00I think the integration of Web 2.0 into the Public...I think the integration of Web 2.0 into the Public Service will need to be brought in piecemeal to ever have any chance of being accepted as worthwhile work tools.<BR/><BR/>If you unleash a bunch of blogs, there will be enough of them that people ignore for nay sayers to build their case that blogs are wastes of time.<BR/><BR/>However, if smaller changes are brought forth in a timely manner, i.e. GCPEDIA, GEDS 2.0 (or whatever you want to call it), etc. Then you'll have a better platform to work from to incite bigger changes.<BR/><BR/>Or in essence: start inciting changes where the benefits are the most evident, and then you'll have a broader base willing to support the ideas of blogging & tweeting in the Public Service.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1737262791051632022.post-88064674756878369572009-03-06T15:20:00.000-05:002009-03-06T15:20:00.000-05:00P.S. I guess I sound a bit like a nay-sayer myself...P.S. I guess I sound a bit like a nay-sayer myself.. but that is not my intention at all. I'm hoping that people will open up to big paradigm change and with this web 2.0 stuff we might have more of a chance.Amanda Parrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11138258120217404883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1737262791051632022.post-50004435629145873852009-03-06T14:49:00.000-05:002009-03-06T14:49:00.000-05:00I largely agree with you. Of course the change is...I largely agree with you. Of course the change issue is not just about doing things differently for the sake of it, but actually working to improve things, sometimes in ways that would involve a major paradigm shift. Seems you have to identify blockages and shortfalls before you can remedy them (few enjoy that), and even further, having identified them even in the nicest most positive way, meaningful change sometimes requires such a paradigm shift that the burden of the rethink in itself just is not appealing to people, even when the results would be. In my experience, people generally (?) prefer the comfort of the given parameters and will lift their head up, completely understand the posibilities presented, then smile and say "that will never change."Amanda Parrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11138258120217404883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1737262791051632022.post-86755124486524035432009-03-06T13:07:00.000-05:002009-03-06T13:07:00.000-05:00Amanda - I think it's worth being considered a pes...Amanda - I think it's worth being considered a pest to be what Seth Godin calls "Creative instigators". It puts us in the company of all the great unappreciated innovators of their times! <BR/><BR/>However, to avoid being thought of *only* as sh*t disturbers, we have to get all of our work done, establish ourselves as ethical, hard-working and values-based employees, and suggest appropriate, business-driven use of technology (as opposed to doing cool things just because we can) and finally, I think we have to pick our battles. It's not always worth it...<BR/><BR/>However, there is a nice way to do just about anything, isn't there?<BR/><BR/>And Nick - don't worry buddy, you're not tweetin' to yourself!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1737262791051632022.post-31534235741663152322009-03-06T07:20:00.000-05:002009-03-06T07:20:00.000-05:00You quoted Eaves as saying, Relevant information r...You quoted Eaves as saying, Relevant information rises to the top, and reputation and merit guide it there (not official or bureaucratic top down authority).<BR/><BR/>Don't you find that organizations can be self-replicating and what is relevant to solutions often remains buried because it would require too much of a shake up to acknowledge certain possibilities? And is it not those who bury possibilities most effectively that often gain the reputation and merit (for "people skills") so that the elephant remains effectively underground? Innovators can often be considered pests and irritants.Amanda Parrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11138258120217404883noreply@blogger.com