[epsi-coord] Notes on meeting with Juan, yday

Sat Sep 3 07:55:28 BST 2011

Hi Ton

Thank you very much for this update! Some comments inline:

On 02.09.2011, at 12:47, Ton Zijlstra wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Yesterday Tom and I met up with Juan in Luxembourg to discuss our progress with the epsiplatform work.
> 
> He started with a warning, that the current level was not enough to ensure payment in November. This was of course before we showed him our work we did during the summer holidays.
> 
> He also acknowledged we did some things not in the contract (such as note-taking at various events)
> 
> We explained where we are with the website, and he seemed pleased with how that looked. I am trying my best to get our new site on-line this month.
> He also wanted to see more interaction on the site (comments etc.), and suggested we let him know how we intend to do that (already mentioned that the new site makes also the interaction on Twitter and elsewhere visible, not just what happens on the site itself).

I think this is an important point. How do we get new active people to the site? How do we get our old visitors be become more interactive? I am sure the new site will make interaction a bit easier but I guess "interaction" is something that doesn't necessarily happens because of technology.

In the original bid there is this item called "Media and outreach strategy" assigned with 8 days to OKFN only. Outreach is off course a slightly a different task than getting more interaction on the site. But since its related we could spend some of this time in a "interactivity strategy". What do people think?

> We gave him the TRs and he told us to be careful and consistent with language and presentation. He was pleased to hear we hired Pat. 
> We suggested a number of new TR topics, which Tom will mail him for him to give his ok on.
> 
> He generally wants us to be seen to be more pro-active. This is primarily because he needs to be able to show his boss stuff is happening. So we need to  make a point of letting him know what we are doing, as a lot is simply invisible on the site by definition.

I actually think we _do_ need to be more pro-active and not primarily to feed Juan. I think our overall approach should be more pro-active. We should really try now to strive the standard and go beyond call of duty. 

> 
> For the conferences: get a short description/proposal to Juan this month on: when, where and why there, target audience groups, possible EC contirbution in terms of speakers/presence we envision. So his boss can decided if he wants to attend or not. Give them ideas on what we want to do on the conference. Ideas on speakers (again said: no usual suspects. and he indicated Ton is now a usual suspect as well for instance), make it attractive to specialized press (magazines etc.)
> 
> Scoreboard: He wants a scoreboard that gives all countries at least 50% of the points. So use indicators that look at key elements of the PSI Directive (he thinks this is in current proposal not the case, 'as if you don't understand the directive') Then add things that cover the extras: who is moving to marginal costing, has a real portal, redress mechanisms, promoting PSI re-use.  Have a look at OECD indicators for inspiration or as source. (this is what the OKF's Open Knowledge Index does as well)
> In the e-gov action plan monitoring PSI is a key action. They told MS that our scoreboard would be part of the way this gets adressed. So we may be called upon to go with Juan to high level meetings to present the results of the scoreboard, and talk about the indicators. This is urgent to him now, he doesn't want to stand there empty handed. So get a reasonable list of indicators, including with how the MS now score on that. Maybe already show something on PSI Group meeting (13th Sept!!!)

I have attached an overview of list of indicators used in the following international surveys / studies: 

Bertelsmann Transformation Index (BTI)
Democracy Barometer (DB)
Standard Eurobarometer (SE)
9 E-‐Government Umfrage der maltesischen Regierung (EGS)
UK Citizenship Survey (CS) 
Freiwilligensurvey (FS)
SAS Forsa Open Government Survey (OGS-‐SAS)
OECD Open Government Survey 2010 (OGS-‐OECD)
OECD Survey on Integrity 2010 (SOI) 
Transparency International Globales Korruptionsbarometer (GCB)
Transparency International Korruptionswahrnehmungsindex (CPI)
Transparency International Bestecher-‐Index/Bribe Payers Index (BPI)
TI National Integrity System (NIS)
One World Trust Global Accountability Project (GAP)
Open Budget Index (OBI)
Privacy International: Freedom of Information around the World (PI)
Economist Intelligence Unit’s Index of Democracy (EIU DI)
Government at a Glance (GG)
Eurobarometer’s special survey ‘Consumer Protection in the Internal Market’ (SpE CP)
Eurobarometer ‘Consumer Rights and Consumer organisations in the Czech Republic’ (SpE CR)

Not all of them are suitable for our need but it gives you a good overview on the methodology (sorry the attachments are in German language only but the point of course to the studies which are in most cases english). 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 2011-08-31_Open Government Indikatoren.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 520825 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/private/epsi-coord/attachments/20110903/ebd94c03/attachment-0002.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 2011-08-31_Open Government Konzepte.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 266739 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/private/epsi-coord/attachments/20110903/ebd94c03/attachment-0003.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------

> 
> He wants more showcases/products shown. New is more important than country of origin. Can be very local, very niche. But let it be examples that can be quoted, referenced. He's tired of seeing the same examples everywhere: 'apps were great last year, but now the novelty must be in what the apps actually do', so apps that do well somehow commercially are of interest.

As discussed yesterday in a call with Antti and Ton, Antti will start working on this. We have reallocated 2 days from "building list of sources" and 3 days from "starting and maintaining Twitterlists / blogrolls / linklist of people/orgs in PSI/country/sector/stakeholder" originally assigned to OKF to the showcase task.

> 
> He wants us to do a quick analysis (as in next week) of the outcome of the public consultation on Scientific Information. He's prepared to waive a TR for it.

Puh! Who could do this? I am afraid Tom an d I am on Holidays, Antti on Showcases and Ton busily on the new website. So either Hans or Marc?

> 
> He's worried about the impact of budget cuts and austerity measures on the PSI re-use momentum. So good examples are needed. And we need to bang the drums. Told him I am now looking into how to actually save money with open data for governments. 

This is a very good point and also an interesting one. It this also to be a TR?

> I will go through this set of rough notes for actions. One action Tom and I agreed on yesterday: let's have a weekly point in our confcal: what to send Juan. So we regularly feed him with things he can talk about with Richard and others. 

I think this is really a good idea. Lets do this.

All the best
Daniel

> 
> best,
> 
> Ton
> 
> -------------------------------------------
> Interdependent Thoughts
> Ton Zijlstra
> 
> ton at tonzijlstra.eu
> +31-6-34489360
> 
> http://zylstra.org/blog
> -------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> epsi-coord mailing list
> epsi-coord at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/epsi-coord