There are loads of easy ways to find out about volunteering.
In England, visit do-it.org.uk to search for volunteering opportunities online. On the Volunteering England website you can read more about volunteering and contact your local Volunteer Centre
In Scotland, you can find your local Volunteer Centre on the Volunteer Development Scotland website
In Wales, search online for volunteering opportunities on the Volunteering Wales website. Or you can contact your local Volunteer Centre.
In Northern Ireland, search for opportunities online on the Volunteer Now website.
For information about volunteering overseas, visit do-it.org.uk and Volunteering England
Wednesday, 30 September 2009
Sunday, 20 September 2009
Learning the lessons of Web 2.0
Why governments and charities should learn to let go
Web 2.0 companies and applications are driving the development of the internet. Firms like Salesforce.com and Facebook have revolutionised work and social lives by creating platforms for communities to develop and interact online.
Now Tim O’Reilly, the man who coined the term ‘Web 2.0’, is turning his attention to government. He thinks the lessons from success on the web can be applied by politicians and civil servants.The key to the success of Gvt 2.0, he argues, is moving towards government as a platform. That is, rather than attempting to do everything themselves, government’s role should, wherever possible, be to enable others .
“Imagine if the state government were to reimagine itself not as a vending machine [ie providing finished products or services] but an organizing engine for civic action....Can we imagine a new compact between government and the public, in which government puts in place mechanisms for services that are delivered not by government, but by private citizens?”
Some of this rhetoric might sound a bit right-wing, especially from a British perspective. But this approach could in fact have broad appeal, whether you believe that government is currently too big or too small. It’s not about how much government does, but how they go about it.
Furthermore, what O’Reilly is describing is the same principle that underpins community development. Good development workers don’t impose solutions, they help communities to identify problems and solve them for themselves. Why shouldn’t government work in a similar way?
The challenge, whether you are a development worker or a government is to create what Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg calls “elegant organisation” – as he did for social interaction, with spectacular results. This isn’t always easy to do, but the starting point is to recognise, that, as Zuckerberg says, communities already exist, what’s required are effective ways to bring them together.
Charity 2.0
The lessons of the new ‘platform economy’ are also considered in Jeff Jarvis’s recent book, What Would Google Do?
He argues that the drivers behind Google’s success can also be applied by other sectors of the private and public sectors. Like O’Reilly, he stresses the importance of either joining a network or creating a platform and giving control away rather than holding it at the centre.
On the Mindnumbing Thoughts blog, Marc Sirkin considers the implications of Jarvis’s argument for charities. It’s a fascinating read and suggests that not-for-profits find it just as hard to have genuine conversations with their donors and users as governments do with their citizens.
“It's time to flip things inside out,” Sirkin argues, “and let your true fans help redesign your organization from the ground up. Have you really talked to donors, patients and families about what they think about those controversial policies? Have you asked your event participants to collaborate with you on how to make the event suit them better? Have you done anything that would indicate that you are actually listening?”
Giving control away can be scary. But it’s what governments and charities need to do.
Web 2.0 companies and applications are driving the development of the internet. Firms like Salesforce.com and Facebook have revolutionised work and social lives by creating platforms for communities to develop and interact online.
Now Tim O’Reilly, the man who coined the term ‘Web 2.0’, is turning his attention to government. He thinks the lessons from success on the web can be applied by politicians and civil servants.The key to the success of Gvt 2.0, he argues, is moving towards government as a platform. That is, rather than attempting to do everything themselves, government’s role should, wherever possible, be to enable others .
“Imagine if the state government were to reimagine itself not as a vending machine [ie providing finished products or services] but an organizing engine for civic action....Can we imagine a new compact between government and the public, in which government puts in place mechanisms for services that are delivered not by government, but by private citizens?”
Some of this rhetoric might sound a bit right-wing, especially from a British perspective. But this approach could in fact have broad appeal, whether you believe that government is currently too big or too small. It’s not about how much government does, but how they go about it.
Furthermore, what O’Reilly is describing is the same principle that underpins community development. Good development workers don’t impose solutions, they help communities to identify problems and solve them for themselves. Why shouldn’t government work in a similar way?
The challenge, whether you are a development worker or a government is to create what Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg calls “elegant organisation” – as he did for social interaction, with spectacular results. This isn’t always easy to do, but the starting point is to recognise, that, as Zuckerberg says, communities already exist, what’s required are effective ways to bring them together.
Charity 2.0
The lessons of the new ‘platform economy’ are also considered in Jeff Jarvis’s recent book, What Would Google Do?
He argues that the drivers behind Google’s success can also be applied by other sectors of the private and public sectors. Like O’Reilly, he stresses the importance of either joining a network or creating a platform and giving control away rather than holding it at the centre.
On the Mindnumbing Thoughts blog, Marc Sirkin considers the implications of Jarvis’s argument for charities. It’s a fascinating read and suggests that not-for-profits find it just as hard to have genuine conversations with their donors and users as governments do with their citizens.
“It's time to flip things inside out,” Sirkin argues, “and let your true fans help redesign your organization from the ground up. Have you really talked to donors, patients and families about what they think about those controversial policies? Have you asked your event participants to collaborate with you on how to make the event suit them better? Have you done anything that would indicate that you are actually listening?”
Giving control away can be scary. But it’s what governments and charities need to do.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
