That’s right, read a thread about GOVERNMENT ORGANOGRAMS, a year on from our @instituteforgov #IfGhackday #opendata
Part of Cameron’s May 2010 pledges (bit.ly/2LXhdqE) to open up data, they include names, salaries, professions, jobs of civil servants & units w/in depts

But…

Patchy publication, and data quality, suggested they weren’t being used.

After a session @ODcamp, bit.ly/2NO6C1R, & a Govt Data Publishers meeting (thks @nickmhalliday), a few reasons emerged:
- Political mandate unclear/faded
- Difficult (although bit.ly/2dHnglv)
- But the biggest one: people didn’t see the value in them





- People still talk about the hackday as a model that could be used to show the value of other datasets
- Refreshed Cabinet Office guidance (Dec 2017) made depts’ responsibilities for transparency data clearer bit.ly/2jWzQzd
Prompts questions: what problems are you trying to solve with the data? What questions are you trying to answer?
There’s a sense of organograms being a transparency pledge without thinking these through. Even though…
Useful for us on the outside.
Useful mgmt info. Etc.
How do you move from dogfooding (bit.ly/1nDaUfH) to foie gras?
That is, from idea depts should use own data to getting them to do so?
(From 2015:)

- What data do you need to run a govt?
- How do you make it as easy as possible for people to record, find and use government data?
