We Consider Open Data To Be Part Of A Broader Trend

We consider open data to be part of a broader trend towards “open government” where open
data combines with social media, mobile technology and other feedback mechanisms to
transform the relationship governments have with citizens, delivering better, more relevant
public services (which we could broadly term “citizen-centric” open data). Open data also has
the power to improve individuals’ lives through private or third sector innovation on the back of
publicly-available data sets, resulting in valuable services and economic growth (which we could
term “consumer-centric” open data).
Our analysis of these global trends and our experience has underlined that the US government
is right to think of transparency and open data as an evolutionary process that should adapt
flexibly to changing priorities. Public sector managers and citizens have changed the way they
use the available information:
- Citizen-user feedback has diminished over time, but there is increasing external interest in
more specialized data sets.

- Performance dashboards provided public servants with a good start to allow better
management and comparison between agencies, and they now have appetite for more detailed
analytic capabilities to conduct sophisticated analysis and drive change at agencies.
Where the publication of raw data sets has been useful for specialist developers, in our
experience it has not always reached its full potential. Experience so far shows that data is most
useful when it is released in a consumable fashion, and usability (for both the specialist
developer audience as well as the non-specialist citizen audience) should be a key consideration
in making open data real. Under-exploitation of the data already in the public domain may be
for two reasons: the data is not always in a standardized format, and the market for the
information may be underdeveloped. Rather, information should be easily accessible, well
organized, intuitive to use and understand and data sets should be complete. In order to realize
the full potential of open data – for both citizens and entrepreneurs (and to minimize the
burden on public services), we think it is important to:
- Compromise for short-term publication, but focus on rigorous data hygiene standards for data
currently being collected: The data is only as good as its quality. Inaccurate datasets can be at
best misleading and at worst, harmful. Data quality is central to the open data agenda – but we
agree that the cost of completely “clean” data may be prohibitive, and therefore a compromise
needs to be found between quality, cost and timeliness.
- Reduce, reuse, recycle: the burden on public service providers can be minimized by prioritizing
the publication of data sets that are already being collected – for example management
information about service quality and outcomes rather than collecting new data sets. Provision
of context will also be important for the publication of service performance data so they can
fully understand this information and to avoid any misinterpretation of this data by the public.
- Make it valuable for citizens: Open data has been most empowering and successful both in
the US and internationally when it has been real for citizens, i.e. where individuals can relate to
the information provided and can affect real change. Successive examples show that open data
that is provided at a local (e.g. city), neighborhood and even street level can be most effective.

- Standardize for easy comparability and interoperability: standardized datasets in consistent
formats will enable citizens / users / developers to compare and analyze the information easily
– this is particularly important for organizations like police or local authorities where citizens
may want to benchmark organizations against their peers.
- Turn data into intelligence: Many public sector organizations are data-rich, but marshaling the
different data sets to create usable, analytical intelligence to provide insights (either for
managers, commissioners or the public) can be more challenging. Widespread adoption of
analytic and predictive modelling techniques that analyze and visualize information would
provide more easily consumable insights for those inside and outside organizations.
- Make targeted investment to turn “data” into a “service”: the Government should make
limited and targeted investments to transform a few crucial datasets into “services” by making
them easily consumable – good examples are mash-ups like the crime maps. This is particularly
important for the citizen-centric open data agenda and will help establish a market and
stimulate demand for further publication of datasets.
As part of the prioritization process and as discussed in our overarching perspective, we think
the government is right to think about transparency and open data as an evolutionary process
that responds to changing needs (from users, developers and public services) over time. Based
on our experience we have developed a framework for approaching open data in this way and
adapting to user needs as they become more sophisticated and which could be useful in
developing an organization’s open data strategy and identifying the steps that should be
prioritized.
In some circumstances it may be prohibitively expensive to gather and process a raw dataset –
so it may be worth assessing the viability of encouraging the private sector to pay and
commercialize the data. Under such circumstances Government should consider making it an
obligation for the purchaser to publish the dataset in its raw format. If the Government is able
to make targeted investments to turn the data into a service, there may be scope to sell these
services to the public and to create a revenue stream. Although beyond the scope of the
consultation, the Government may wish to consider charging for access to anonymized datasets
if direct commercial gain may result – for example pharmaceutical firms and health data.

The proposals should also apply to non-public sector providers of frontline public services such
as charities or private sector businesses for the transparency agenda to be meaningful and
accountability to be real. It would also help build the case for mixed provision of public services.
We would urge the government to implement measures to ensure consistency of data collected
and its presentation to allow comparison across providers.
One approach may be to include data publication as an assessment criterion in tenders to
incentivize providers. As a further step, the Government may want to consider the feasibility of
making data collection and consistent presentation a contractual obligation. If this were
pursued, it is worth considering transition arrangements for current contracts until the contract
is completed.
Although the legal and regulatory framework exists, it will be important to give further
consideration to guidelines and standards to protect personal data under the open data
agenda. These should include clear guidance on what constitutes personal data in this context
(for example taking into account the many decision notices under the Freedom of Information
Act) and standards for anonymization and pseudonymization (which have great potential in the
context of health data). Individuals should be protected on a level playing field and
consideration given to how data sets could potentially be merged or reconstituted across
government so standards should be consistent and robust.
To improve accountability and public service performance, the publication of existing
management information should be prioritized – which should not place an additional burden
on organizations at they will be collecting and reporting this information as a matter of course.
We do, however, recognize that different levels of management information are currently
collected; from operational data, through to service performance measures, and then output
and outcome information. We recommend prioritizing publication of outcome, output and
service performance measures. Most operational data is unlikely to be meaningful to the public
and will need contextualizing to ensure it is not misinterpreted.
An effective way to ensure open data standards are embedded would be to make them a
contractual obligation. In addition, we agree with the government’s aim to ensure the public

sector is an intelligent, demanding customer. As part of this, it would be helpful to create focus
groups that allow suppliers and other stakeholders to contribute to open data standards in a
productive way.
Jeff C. Palmer is a teacher, success coach, trainer, Certified Master of Web Copywriting and
founder of https://Ebookschoice.com. Jeff is a prolific writer, Senior Research Associate and
Infopreneur having written many eBooks, articles and special reports.
Source: https://ebookschoice.com/we-consider-open-data-to-be-part-of-a-broader-trend/

We Consider Open Data To Be Part Of A Broader Trend

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to We Consider Open Data To Be Part Of A Broader Trend (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

We Consider Open Data To Be Part Of A Broader Trend