« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER FIVE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FUTURE OF THE RURAL COMMUNITY GATEWAY
These recommendations are based on the findings of the literature review (which evaluated other websites, as well as best practice from research in online communities theory and practice) and what has emerged from an analysis of the survey and workshops data.
Stating the 'mission' of the RCG
5.1. The absolute priority is that the Gateway must have a stated aim or mission. This was a point of consensus across all workshops. This should include information about: what the site trying to achieve, what are the benefits of using the site, and perhaps becoming members, the impact of the voting and polls. The literature points to this as being crucial as an element of sustainability and of users developing their understanding of the site; it also aids in what McCown calls the 'co-construction of relevance' in that users can see the site's purpose, and adapt that to their own needs.
5.2. The site needs to be appear rural (there are currently no background images that tell the user this is a rural site) in order to differentiate itself from other sites.
5.3. Thirdly, the Gateway needs an interactive map (where users can 'locate themselves'), and a series of 'buttons' for themes or categories (such as agriculture or housing). Users can then either browse at an overview level, and/or go directly to 'their' area of interest. Users need to find ways to identify with that mission or aim, with location, with theme, and with the rural image.
The Gateway as a one-stop rural information provider?
5.4. In order to 'survive' in an age of information overload and almost ubiquitous access to information "anytime, anywhere", the Gateway must differentiate itself from other search engines and information sites. Ways to do this include using: its rural credentials, unbiased information reputation, networking possibilities, and the opportunity to 'have your say'.
5.5. The Gateway therefore needs to add value to its existing role by providing regional differentiation of its information under the Gateway's national umbrella. That is, through links, through the interactive map, and other visual mechanisms, the user can see the national-level information, and then follow through to local and regional links, issues and stories. Further, the Gateway needs to categorise and organise the information, so that it is searchable according to the three main ways: Theme ( e.g. agriculture or housing), Geography ( e.g. Perthshire) and Publisher ( e.g.SNH). Coupled with this, the Gateway needs to shift from reliance on high literacy levels, with a greater balance of words and pictures to guide the user through its functions.
5.6. Specifically relating to funding information, the formation of a "FundingAdvisor.com" (similar to www.tripadvisor.com), is recommended, where users of the Gateway can contribute their own stories and experiences of different funders, for example, how easy it was to fill in forms, how long did the funding take to come through, what were the conditions and drawbacks as well as benefits. Further, the Gateway needs to create a link between the funding availability and geographical restrictions on that funding (for example, is it only available for residents of Angus, or Lanarkshire).
5.7. Different "theme days" are recommended, for example, rural jobs on a Friday. People will come to know that this service exists, and are more likely to log in each Friday. They are more likely then to recommend it to others.
The Gateway as an online community?
5.8 Firstly, the value and benefits of becoming a Member must be identified, and - more importantly - the value of then registering details (interests, location, etc) on the public directory. This recommendation is strongly supported in the literature. Currently, approximately three quarters of the Members have not entered any information about themselves in the public database, and this must be addressed.
5.9 The database interface needs to be user-friendly for first-time users, and needs to contain information which explains why registering their details is important, useful, and time-saving, for them. One additional feature which will increase the 'human feel' and 'community' aspect of the site is encouraging individuals to submit photos of themselves onto their page.
5.10 Further, there needs to be a link between the database and the interactive map, so that members can click on their area (or another area) and have the option to see which other members in their area, with the opportunity created to share their interests. This database will then become a resource not only for Members, but also for the content management team, who can use the information as a way to target new stories, knowing that their membership has an interest in these areas.
Developing 'your Gateway'
5.11 It is recommended that the Gateway develops a "Your Gateway" concept and tools. This will require actions to encourage participation, without forcing the duplication of those other networks which are already functioning well (such as in community transport).
5.12 Integral to this is the need to develop, and supply, an "enabling architecture" to allow for greater peer-to-peer interaction, with a preference for the opportunity to create sub-group spaces.
5.13 A further recommendation is for incremental training to encourage, and equip new and existing members to make contributions online. Ideally, these could be through regional contributors' workshops (using the members' database to target potential new contributors), and mini training events held at a range of rural conferences in Scotland, which would service the dual purpose of publicising the Gateway as a resource, and highlighting its function as a channel and forum for people in rural Scotland to comment and exchange.
5.14 On the site itself, there needs to be greater evidence that people are talking, exchanging and connecting. More visual signposting is required, for users to see opportunities to compare and see what others are doing and give their feedback. The Gateway site needs to appear more lively in these respects, with potential for users and members to say how they have gained from this, for example, through additional information, help with understanding key issues relating to a potential project or funding stream.
5.15 Thought needs to be given to the need for anonymity in some debates and areas of the site. When commenting on news stories publicly, or on legislative announcements or documents, some users requested the possibility to post anonymously. This is particularly the case for those working in Councils and in other agencies where individual's views from an email address clearly associated with government or with another identifiable institution could be taken as indicative of that institution's view.
5.16 There is a need to pilot some offline events which bring together those who have been contributing to, and who have used, the Gateway. It is therefore necessary to investigate the rationale and objectives of such gatherings, perhaps on an annual basis, and perhaps regionally-based, which can follow through key themes and issues developing on the Gateway. These are likely to foster greater networking and communication, with the opportunity for some of the 'online sub-groups' to meet face to face to discuss policy, service delivery, development options for their region or area etc. Great care would be taken, of course, not to duplicate (or compete with) any similar networking activities already taking place at local level.
Marketing the Rural Community Gateway.
5.17 There is a need for a dedicated focus on, and strategy for, improving the marketing of the Gateway in its next phase. Greater clarity is required, firstly, on who is responsible for marketing the site. Marketing needs to focus on its uniqueness. 'Testimonials' could be used in marketing the Gateway to others in rural areas: e.g. the Gateway as a unique opportunity for information-gathering and exchange in rural Scotland; a rural voice - an opportunity for sharing experiences and building solidarity; feeling part of a wider rural community in Scotland. These "social capital" assets need to be publicised in a targeted way. Further statements highlighting the specific benefits for rural users need to be used, since they act as validation of the Gateway. They comprise genuine, thought-through responses from users of the Gateway, and they need to be used in recommending this resource to others.
5.18 Further, there needs to be 'internal marketing' to current Gateway members and users concerning the benefits of becoming a Member, and reasons for increased contributions.
5.19 There needs to be 'internal marketing' of the Gateway to other parts of the Scottish Executive, such that the potential benefits of the Gateway can be realised more widely. This issue has been raised in the context of how the findings from the Gateway's polls (which generate results concerning broadband, wind farms, public transport, roads, and petrol prices) do not appear to attract interest or response from what could be seen as appropriate divisions or departments within the Scottish Executive. It is therefore recommended that consideration must be given to the complexity of issues that this in turn raises, including: the mission of the Gateway (is it to be a tool to lobby for policy change and mainstreaming of 'rural' within other domains such as transport, health); whether and how SEERAD and other Executive Departments should respond; and the way in which the polls are phrased and devised such that the results are considered 'valid' and 'reliable' for injection into policy debate and reformulation.
5.20 There is a need to establish target groups and individuals for the increased marketing activity. A combination of approaches which recognises the range of users is ideal. These are likely to include: web-based marketing, email shots, radio and local newspaper; mini-training programmes, where the Gateway is used in helping people to use the internet or with literacy ( i.e. link with other programmes); targeted sectoral marketing; and through existing networks.
5.21 Thought must also be given to addressing the requirements and priorities of those currently being 'missed' by the Gateway; this needs to be both reactive and proactive. Reactive: evidence shows that certain sectors of the rural population are not being reached by the resources and opportunities of the Gateway. Critical areas that need to be addressed include the needs (and potential contribution) of: micro-enterprises, farming, forestry, and people under 24 years of age, as well as the requirements of individuals as compared with those of agencies. Proactive: firstly, there must be an investigation into equality of access and usage of the Gateway in rural areas, specifically for people with disabilities, and also to establish whether there is any gender bias in usage; secondly, investigation is also needed into whether there is a 'regional' level that is currently being 'missed' by the Gateway's resources, and whether and how they could benefit from, and make contributions to, the Gateway.
Sustaining Scotland's Rural Community Gateway
5.22 It is recommended that SEERAD should continue to fund Scotland's Rural Community Gateway, since the Gateway comprises evidence of SEERAD's commitment to rural Scotland, the Gateway is a useful two-way communication tool between the Scottish Executive and the rural population, and as a one-stop shop of information and networking for rural issues for agencies and individuals. These attributes are felt to be particularly pertinent in a time of rural policy revision, ongoing rural restructuring, where developments in IT-based systems of delivery of support are becoming an important component of citizen engagement and participation.
5.23 In order to implement the recommendations fully, a higher level of funding will be required. The recommendations will require a greater level of content management activity, for example, and additional resources will be needed to underpin successful and effective operation. Continued SEERAD funding does not preclude funding being sought from, and contributed by, other departments of the Scottish Executive, as well as from other public bodies.
5.24 Critical to the ongoing sustainability of the Gateway is marketing, which must identify activity strands which lead directly to: increased participation from individuals, from sectors not represented, plus increased engagement from those who already use the Gateway. The marketing approaches need to be based on a sound 'Gateway mission' and direction, and validated by the evidence from the range of users consulted in this evaluation.
5.25 It is strongly recommended that next stage of the RCG's development comprises a ' Business Planning and Next Steps Phase', to be separately resourced, which will enable wider reflection, as well as strategic and operational planning, for a sustainableRCG for Scotland.
5.26 In order to provide the support and context for this ongoing phase, it is recommended therefore that: the 18-month extension for the Rural Community Gateway take place; the current partnership remains as SCVO, Sift and SEERAD, since any change in supplier would have a negative impact both of the immediate continued delivery of the Gateway, and on the feasibility of the Business Planning and Next Steps Phase taking place alongside its operation; the Business Planning and Next Steps Phase takes place during the first 9-12 months of the 18 month timeframe; and the final 6-9 months of the extension are used to begin implementation of the Business Plan. Within this Phase, a series of focused workshops are required, in order to identify the unique selling points of the Gateway, identify its 'market', potential future directions (including partnership possibilities) and its Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats ( SWOT analysis). The workshops would therefore need to be held with a wider group of stakeholders than the current 'Gateway team' ( SCVO, Sift and SEERAD) in order to ensure that the full range of possibilities is considered. This measured, mapped, and structured approach will allow for an evidence-based set of next steps to be planned, and the feasibility of their implementation to be assessed. Further, the Business Planning workshops would need to have the function of enabling the seeking of complementary funding for the Gateway, and the exploration of potential partnership arrangements.
5.27 The Business Planning phase needs to be underpinned by the development of socially informed 'performance indicators' with which to monitor the Gateway, which complement those focusing on membership numbers and levels of participation on the site. Such indicators will also be expected to reflect the specifics of rural Scotland. Further, alongside the development of the indicators, a separately commissioned Cost Benefit Analysis of the Gateway is recommended, with key outputs including: the identification of the Gateway's achievements, and how it could and should contribute to the needs and requirements of SEERAD, the wider Scottish Executive, and other public bodies.
« Previous | Contents | Next »