SocialButterfly

Alex, I think what we’ve both realized here is that organizations across both the private and public sectors are dealing with similar benefits AND risks that our government clients are tackling. It goes back to one of my theses on Government 2.0 - “Your Government agency/organization/group/branch/division is not unique.” We would all do well by looking outside our primary area of expertise to see how other organizations have dealt with the transparency issue. There was a recent article in Fast Company that I found really interesting (http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/140/made-to-stick-stop-solving-your-problems.html) that I think you will too. It basically says that no matter what problem you have, someone, somewhere, has solved it already, and chances are, it was in an entirely different “vertical” - maybe even nature itself. That’s why I think we all benefit greatly from looking outside government for answers to our problems and vice versa.

Steve,

Thanks for highlighting and sharing the article with me from Fast Company. This past week has definitely elevated my thinking about my own problem and solution finding process. When I talked with Andrew, it was uncanny some of the exchanges we shared and how they ran almost parrallel to the same type of questions my non-profit and government colleagues ask–i.w. How do you engage your comunity? How do you bridge the online with the offline? etc. Same thing happened during the #read4change chat about non-profits and transparency. It was like deja vu.

Another reason why we should looking beyond our own domain is because it makes you better at your current domain because you never know what problems, challenges or questions will arise next. Plus, it’s always fun learning new things and taking what you know and applying it in a new and different form.

[...] with someone you believe in.  One of the aspects of the world business and politics is the concept of transparency.  This means that when truth is withheld, it may cause much more trouble than it is worth.  When [...]

I share your interest in non-profit transparency, and find the kiva controversy to be quite interesting. It seems we are in an age where people finally appreciate the truth over persuasive cover-ups. I think that Matt Flannery, the CEO of Kiva, is a great role model for the idea that full transparency can actually benefit a company. I’d like to politely offer a correction to your background of the Kiva controversy. Kiva has never attempted to hide the fact that they partner with microfinance institutions (MFIs) across the globe. The controversy was in reaction to a blog post (http://blogs.cgdev.org/open_book/2009/10/kiva-is-not-quite-what-it-seems.php) by David Roodman, in which he exposed the fact that loans are distributed to entrepreneurs before they are posted on the website. This means that the person-to-person model that makes Kiva so appealing is in fact a fiction.

@Tucker Thank you for the clarification–it takes a village right? I hope university classes are looking at the Kiva case as a way to spur conversation around the topic.