Digital self-exclusion

June 11, 2009

A new (10 June 2009) report is hot off the Ofcom press. Research by Ipsos Mori on behalf of Ofcom has looked at: Accessing the internet at home A quantitative and qualitative study among people without the internet at home

The 184 page document examines in great detail a statistically significant population, whilst proposing different options  that might encourage people to take up computer usage and broadband. Of the estimated 30% without access it appears that in 42% of cases there is no interest and of the adults who do not have access to the Internet, 43% would remain unconnected even if they were given PC and connection for free.

Whilst nothing to celebrate, these figures do confirm the need to maintain other channels or mediated services through e-channels for the foreseeable future.

Advertisements

Get Carter

March 21, 2009

At the moment I’m never quite sure whose job (in government) it is to analyse who uses different channels and why, but at least Ofcom cover the digital one. The latest report (20 March 2009), of 58 pages and 37 pages of annexes, presents interesting results and, as the Head of Ofcom is reported to have said at a presentation, comes in direct conflict with the Carter report – Digital Britain – and some of the spin coming from the centre.

Significant variables to online participation are economic group, qualifications and age and it is appearing that the Internet is both supplanting and replacing traditional channels, which is a worrying trend towards disenfranchisement!

What struck me was the section where it was highlighted that the greatest popularity for online activity was for giving views, getting in touch with elected representatives, joining organizations and taking part in surveys and consultations. This was reinforced by the fact that being invited to partake in online consultations was an effective trigger.

It is also clear that there is a desire for traditional channels to remain open, particularly for those without access to, confidence, or trust in the new ones.


Customer insight guidance

August 14, 2008

In an exercise that reminds me of that old definition of a consultant*, the IDeA have asked RSe Consulting to produce guidance on customer insight and RSe are asking the advice of the IDeA Community of Practice.

Below I list the questions and my brief responses, the questions do actually focus the mind:

1. How would you define customer insight and how does it differ from other concepts such as customer focus and customer satisfaction?

1. Customer insight is brought about by having sufficient information about customers and their communities. As a practice I prefer citizen engagement, which can only occur successfully (providing satisfaction) when insight is available and focused upon dealing with need.

2. What do you see as the difference between customer insight and citizen insight?

2. The difference is between customer and citizen. All citizens are the customers of government, customers are not necessarily those of government. Customer insight is the type of information provided by Mosiaic and CACI, citizen insight doesn’t exist currently but would be the accumulation of knowledge about particular citizens or groups of them collated from central and local government experience and practice.

3. What are the main challenges faced by Local Authorities looking to develop their customer insight?

3. The main difficulty is that citizen insight is contained within bands of need or service. HMRC’s insight may well be different to that of a district council dealing with the same citizen. Fortunately or otherwise data protection restricts the sharing of much insight.

4. How do you think Councils and local partners should work together to develop their customer insight and what are the challenges in doing so?

4. As with 3, the main challenge is data protection.

5. What are the core customer insight tools that you have seen used well in the sector and by whom?

5. GIS has been used well to map neighbourhoods and their citizens by LA’s such as Sheffield.

6. What tools do you feel are not well understood and used within the sector?

6. The tools are not really ready yet! Geographic Information Systems can be used but need greater layers of data to truly identify citizens within their differing neighbourhoods. How available the data is to be shared is another matter.

7. What do you think should be the key objectives of this guidance?

7. Don’t reinvent the wheel!

8. What are the most important issues that the guidance should cover?

8. Citizenship has obligations as well. Differentiation between consumers and citizens is important when inclusiivity is discussed. Interesting paper on this in ‘Communications – The Next Decade’, published by Ofcom, entitled ‘What citizens need to know. Digital inclusion, information inequality and rights’ by Damian Tambini.

There are of course other papers around the citizen or customer debate but I think its time to call a halt and focus on the needs, satisfaction and engagement of the citizen.