Thanks to Maddie at Social Fish for pointing me to Steve Radick’s post, What Makes Government 2.0 Different from Enterprise 2.0? I was chewing on a parallel topic last week when I was wondering why government can’t put together marketing campaigns like private sector firms do. The bottom line is we’re talking about very different animals. As Steve writes:

“What makes implementing social media on the intranet of a government agency like the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) different than say, General Motors (GM)?  I’ve worked with clients from across the government who are all seeing social media succeed in helping organizations communicate, collaborate, and share information better than they ever have.  From wikis in the Intelligence Community to internal blogs at IBM, many of my clients see these articles and want to use social media to realize these same benefits, but don’t know how to do it.  The first thing that I have to tell them is that just because another organization, company, or agency implemented blogs or wikis or whatever else, they won’t necessarily see the same results, especially if they compare themselves to case studies in the private sector.  There are several fundamental differences between implementing social media behind the firewall in the government as opposed to a Fortune 500 company.”

Steve goes on to point out six of those differences and then asks for any others.

I offer a seventh, purpose of the organization.

Private sectors firms exist to make cash, the government exists to provide public services. So while in both environments I can see great reasons to embrace a web 2.0 workflow, the desire to undertake the transition likely varies. When we develop communication plans at Mind and Media we always determine the hook, meaning we answer “what’s in it for the audience?” Without hook it’s difficult to get buy in. Well, for profit companies will bite on a hook that contributes to higher efficiencies, greater competitive advantage, and better recruiting and retention—all elements that contribute to greater profits. The collaborative tools of web 2.0 support those elements so the private sector is more likely to push for their adoption.

But again, there are great reasons for government to embrace web 2.0, as well. One hook is knowledge management. As Steve points out, every four years can mean big shake ups in government agency personal and operations. Add to that mix, the constant stream of retirees leaving federal service. How can everything in their collective minds be captured, searched, and updated without effective use of tools like wikis and knowledge management systems? Members of the SES could build a legacy on the adoption of web 2.0 strategies.

Now let’s look outside the agencies, toward the public. Certainly the primary web presence of most government agencies are the epitome of a resource website. Visitors come with inquires and obtain information. On that type of site the most valuable tools are simply good organization and powerful search. But what about agency efforts to raise public awareness or support public education? In those cases, user-generated content or other social media tools could prove invaluable. A site like Hireveteransfirst.gov (very different in purpose from its parent agency dol.gov) serves the purpose of supporting veterans by encouraging companies to consider them for hire. That mission could be furthered by letting employers and veterans actually interact on the site, or on existing social networks, like Facebook. Veterans and employers, both, could share tips and participate in an ongoing dialogue. The result could be both greater success of the mission, but also a lesser workload on the agency because the role of gatekeeper is lessened and audience interaction is increased.

Support you mission, lessen your burden, improve efficiencies…no matter if you’re working in government, private sector, or non-profit, how can you not be attracted to social media and web 2.0?