Deep conversation needed on BIG's Ageing Better community platform. How about asking people in for a coffee?
Update at the end of this post confirming the online community is likely to be launched within a few weeks, and that it will be public and open to anyone interested. I'll be promoting the idea of additional networking to the Age Action Alliance via their Digital Inclusion Group.
Following my Storify of tweets yesterday about the Big Lottery Fund's Ageing Better online community, Paul Webster helpfully responded “a conv to watch”. But how to keep the conversation going?
RT [@davidwilcox](https://twitter.com/davidwilcox): [@kenclemens](https://twitter.com/kenclemens) [@shirleyayres](https://twitter.com/shirleyayres) [@watfordgap](https://twitter.com/watfordgap) Quoted in "Sharing [#AgeingBetter](https://twitter.com/hashtag/AgeingBetter?src=hash) innovation" [http://t.co/kS3wMdeENg](http://t.co/kS3wMdeENg) <a conv to watch
> — Paul Webster (@watfordgap) October 22, 2014
Some really important issues were raised by Paul, Shirley Ayres and Alastair Somerville, following Ken Clemens picture of the announcement sheet at an Ageing Better event. Backstory in these posts.
- Is there a general strategy for digital engagement and innovation in the £82 million programme?
- Will the knowledge sharing platform be closed, for programme leaders only?
- Wouldn't it be better to connect with conversations already taking place on blogs and other social media?
- If a new system is planned, wouldn't a networking tool like Yammer be better?
- Will the winning submissions from partnerships be published, so we can see what is being planned?
- Shouldn't the programme be setting standards for transparency, online learning and public debate? And all that in a few messages of under 140 characters. Far more cogent than I see in many forum-based online communities.
The issues are particularly important - as I've argued in more detail in this paper - because the knowledge-sharing and innovation challenges faced by the Ageing Better programme typify those of competitive, centralised, big-spend approaches. It seems crazy to focus so much money on 15 areas (among many more who expressed interest) and then spend so little effort on helping those beyond the privileged few learn from the activity. There's also the question of how much learning from well-funded projects will be relevant in the leaner years ahead?
The difficulty in holding a conversation about these issues is, I suspect, compounded by BIG's role as a funder and inevitably rule-bound organisation. On the one hand anyone in receipt of BIG funding, or hoping to get some, will be wary of wading in.
On the other hand, BIG has to be seen to be scrupulously even-handed and cautious … particularly after the little difficulties about funding for projects related to Big Society. (However, I do recall that there were attempts to question, at the time, whether those investments were such a good idea … more open conversation might have helped avoid later embarrassment:-)
I should declare some further interest here, since I led a small team carrying out an exploration for BIG into directions their People Powered Change programme might take, back in 2011-12. That involved a lot open blogging, tweeting and a creative event. So I know that BIG is open to conversation within an appropriate format.
I don't think anything so substantial is needed to get things started. Nor do I think online exchanges should be in the lead. Maybe something like a David Gurteen Knowledge Cafe? If the Treasury can host a discussion on How can we more actively share knowledge, BIG could host its own. David has even produced a tip sheet on how to run a Cafe yourself - though I know it will be best if he facilitates.
So the answer to the challenge of how to keep the conversation going could be as easy as “pop in for a chat and a cup of coffee”. And tweet it as well.
As a small contribution to the online chat I'll also be posting shorter pieces over on this Known blog that I hope will more easily integrate posts and social media comments.
Update: just after I pressed the button to publish this post I got a tweet from BIG's Older People team following up my earlier requests for a chat saying one of their Ageing Better managers would be in touch soon. That's really encouraging.
Further update: the chat was very helpful in confirming that the online community will be launched within a few weeks, and that it will be open and public. I felt, from our discussion, that there was acceptance of the value of strengthening digital innovation in the programme through links with a range of interests in the field. I'm sure BIG will be make their own connections - and I said that additionally I would report to the Digital Inclusion Group of Age Action Alliance with a proposals to complement the new platform with some bottom up network building - as outlined here.