|
Wired up Communities are not about the
delivery of equipment and training.
PC ownership and internet access are
common, although less so among deprived
communities and certain sections of
the population. The outcome will be
about participation and communication
in and beyond the community, and between
its members and groups, and the things
that this leads to. The planned development
of technology-based services can impact
on all or any of the issues of an area.
Participatory design of these services
is the bottom line for community renewal
through ICTs. WuCs offer that opportunity
with a blank canvas to draw solutions
to local problems.
Raising
awareness and vision
Projects do not all start from the
same place. Some will have grown from
community-based activity, others will
be ‘invented’ from regeneration policy,
housing action policy or because a
funding opportunity has arisen. ICT
projects can derive from skills, educational,
family, employment, access to services
and other policies locally and nationally.
Or someone thinks it’s a good idea.
The vision thing
The route
map gives a general indication
of the process, and shows that an
envisioning process comes early in
the project cycle. In the early stages,
running the WuC
online game is a useful exercise
to envision the various partners,
and suppliers and most importantly,
local residents. By providing the
vision of what the Wired up Community
is setting out to achieve, the project
is better placed to build partnerships
by defining the services it will deliver
locally.
This process should say:
Who the project is for
There has been little evidence of
a selection criteria coming into play
or the targeting of 'special needs'
groups or the 'difficult to reach
people' in the community. This was
primarily on the basis of tight timescales
to promote schemes and to sign up
potential participants across a physical
area rather than by any characteristics.
However, some later work by the Alston
project on equal opportunities to
meet special needs was well regarded.
What is the ‘offer’
Prior to designing posters, leaflets
and information booklets to market
its activities and services locally,
the project must be clear on its 'offer'
of equipment and support services
to the community right at the outset.
This should be derived from:
- Existing research into needs
- By engaging with local people
through the online game to start
the planning process
- By the terms under which the project
is funded
Otherwise the impression can be given
that it is in a state of flux or lacking
direction by making ad-hoc decisions.
If a decision has still to be taken
(for example on 'charging policy for
support services') it should be made
clear that it is still under consideration
before any public commitment is made.
For example, the use of 'free' in
any context is particularly vulnerable
to a range of interpretations. Although
the PC and new printer are provided
'free of charge', a number of recipients
will think that it should extend to
consumables too - paper, ink cartridges.
There is a similar issue with potential
or actual charges for the ISP and
technical support. Decision-making
should ideally involve community representatives
through the formal structures of the
project, structures that may reflect
the existing pattern of community
consultation, or enhance or develop
it.
Who will do it
Publicity for the project, the use
of existing channels in the community
and voluntary sector, and the holding
of open events such as the online
game will result in commitments from
organisations and individuals. Some
of these individuals will be recruited
as project champions – in their own
right or as already existing activists
in the community. Not all champions
will emerge at the beginning – and
allowance should be made for turnover
and new recruits.
When they will do it
Community involvement takes time,
and project plans need to recognise
this. Nevertheless, some people will
want to get on straight away.
Back to Top
Community
perceptions
While there is a behind the scenes
realisation that the new project requires
a bit of time to become assimilated
into local plans, the community itself
is rather less patient. Fuelled by
reports (or rumours) of a free computer
or set top box and eager to get information,
community activists will seek out
'inside' sources to tap - invariably
members of the steering group and/or
project staff. Left unchecked and
without a proper marketing and publicity
strategy in place, the project becomes
subject to the vagaries of the community
'rumour mill' with a run of clarifications
issued on a regular basis. This is
specially true where previous consultative
exercises have in the eyes of the
community lead nowhere, or where local
‘political’ people see the project
as a an area for focus of grievances.
It is therefore all the more important
to get the marketing and publicity
right - especially against a backdrop
of some cynicism about the aims and
merits of the WuC scheme.
Residents choose to participate on
their own terms and they will accept
the laid down strictures or find ways
to work within them. 'What's the catch'
and 'there's 'nothing for nothing'
reactions usually means that the project
initially finds it difficult to sell
the benefits of participating in the
project. Those who choose not to get
involved become the 'most difficult
to reach' people and this needs proactive
attention from the project.
Some people might refuse to participate
because they are fearful that their
personal information may be passed
on to the relevant government departments
- for example, the local council tax
office, or the Benefits Agency or
HM Customs & Excise. From the
outset, there may some degree of suspicion
in community activist circles that
because the project is funded by a
government department, it is probably
trying to 'spy' on people by monitoring
web habits and/or data mining.
These scenarios underline the importance
of employing community networkers
in a community development role to
deal with misinformation or misunderstandings
and to be able to counter this with
posters and leaflets clearly setting
out the project's 'offer'. Beyond
paid staff however, there is a critical
role for project champions in working
in and for the community.
Back to Top
ICT
Champions
The rationale behind selecting and
engaging a pool of 30 to 50 local
ICT champions from the community is
that it provides them with a vision
of what can be achieved with access
to ICT. By running a focus group for
the ICT champions, local people begin
to see how a number of ICT projects
or initiatives can impact on the community.
The pool of ICT champions is a valuable
resource to the project, but only
if they are properly engaged with
the project in the early stages when
the fledgling project is still trying
to get rooted in the community.
The investment in working early with
the project's ICT champions begins
to yield results, but requires time
and effort on running training, focus
groups and discussions
However, the use of unpaid volunteers
is risky if it reflects staffing shortages
on the project because there is a
lack of revenue funding in support
of the capital grant. If the project
fails to provide dedicated project
staff time or funding to develop ideas
and initiatives, this inexorably leads
to 'unsupported' volunteers, who begin
to drop away as their interest in
the project goes into decline.
The pool of volunteers can dwindle
to a core group prepared to persevere
in the face of adversity - especially
where they have come up with a number
of ideas. Yet, ICT champions can defend
the project when is in trouble or
is poorly perceived by the community
and this makes the investment of time,
effort and resources with ICT champions
so worthwhile.
A general rule of thumb in working
on a community ICT project is that
everything takes time with people
and often much more that initially
thought.
Champion roles
Here are some ideas:
- circuit riders or troubleshooters
- installers
- running awareness days in communities
- running the online game in communities
- actual first steps training but
in the form of informal support
- help desk staffing
- local web masters or correspondents
- as champions within community
groups with a brief to show, teach
- acting as demonstration points
by having the PC available for the
public to come and see, and even
apply for one
- supporting centres, sheltered
homes etc. by regular visits
- writing documentation
- organising small business events
- helping with technical development
strategy
- seeking out the hard to reach
people
- assisting in documenting the
current ICT facilities and developing
this in to an online map
- and of course working within
local people to come up with projects
services and content.
Back to Top
Useful
Documents
Communities
and ICT (zipped 34kb) is a PowerPoint
presentation aimed at local authority
managers that challenges the assumptions
and provides a useful starting point
with its helpful notes.
A workshop
report (PDF, zipped 64kb) covers
the process and outcomes of a two
evening start-up session with WuC
champions, many of whom were already
active in their communities and the
regeneration agenda. Another report
on champions workshop (PDF, zipped
70kb) covers a session for new champions
in a rural area.
Your
contribution (RTF, zipped 32kb)
is a handbill setting out what is
required from champions/volunteers
Volunteer
policy (Word, zipped 21kb) and
ICT
champions policy (PDF, zipped
100kb) both are actual examples of
policy statements.
Examples
of outreach activity and community
participation (Word, zipped 6kb)
gives specific examples drawn from
the pilot WuCs.
Champions
procedures is a list of topics
discussed when setting up a champion
system in one project.
Conference
champions workshop (PDF, zipped
22kb) is the output from a Wired up
Communities conference that provides
a SWOT analysis of issues then concerning
champions who were attending the conference.
Involvement
and engagement by people and the community
in wired up communities projects
is a summary of discussions at a focus
group workshop run with the WuC projects.
Back
to Top
|
