I don’t agree with that view because social networking sites are all about personalising, and choosing which bits you want to have on your own homepage.

I regularly visit the Redbridge-i to see new jobs, and other things’s that I’m interested in. I want that there as soon as I log in, as with a couple of other modules. Also, I do want to drag modules around and rearrange from time to time.

I think it’s all about having a choice and personalising is what I like.

Ultimately I suppose it’s about getting a balance.

There’s my two penneth worth!

Nice to see the Chief Exec commenting.

Just caught up with your blog. Thanks for the kicking, and the plug for your own services. As you say, we think we are at the forefront of trying to work through the benefits of interactivity to citizens and the public sector. We would want to be highly accessible too. I will tomorrow ask colleagues to look into the detail of your criticisms.

Our visits have tripled, from an already high level, in the couple of years since we launched Redbridge i. That is not the only measure of success but it does feel to me like strong backing for our basic proposition: every large public agency should be experimenting with all these tools. Some things we have tested have been shaky, annoying, fallen flat; most have had a terrific response. Lots more to come.

Roger

Chief Executive
London Borough of Redbridge

The website front end though is the tip of the iceberg tho’ and do these facilities make access to services more efficient, or they actually create more work at the back end? I don’t know how far along other councils are in joining up website with back office systems, the priorities as we see it is ensureing that web transactions maximise efficiency, and once this is done work on personalisation / involvement facilities.

It is perfectly possible for Redbridge i to have done what they have done, and for it to be accessible. Indeed, it is my hope that they will read this, fix the accessibility problems and then truly show people what can be done (although, like some point out, others might not want to take this approach).

So, once you’ve registered on the site for whatever reason (making a payment, applying for something), the homepage uses this info to customise the homepage appropriately e.g a map which is zoomed to your town, local news, pages you’ve recently visited, links to your nearest library/waste reycling centre/police station etc…

I agree that hardly anyone will want to actively choose homepage content and drag boxes about.

The other important question is, does the personalisation etc actually allow the council to operate more efficiently and effectively? Is the trade off on accessibility worth it?

The point about the use of CMS is long overdue. Councils are spending a fortune on systems and then end up doing all the work in the web team because they don’t have time to check the work of 200 authors or train them effectively.

As for SiteMorse, it is obvious that it’s only purpose is to scare councils into believing their websites are non-compliant in order to grab a hefty subscription fee off them.

I’m all for accessibility, but I think the restrictions of a CMS and all these government regulations are hindering the development of council websites. Surely we should be looking toward the private sector for web design and development, as they are the ones that are not plagued by all these incessant rules.