Talk:Science of Governance

Initial notes:

About GSlides file presentation Science of Governance through self-administered Data

If this was an academic paper I would accept because good students are entitled to study hard the perspective of the teacher, but this you are working for the audience instead, it’s a Lecture for any audience from anywhere in the planet, so empathy is much more important

Don’t forget that they are not mostly native in english ether have your C2 level english skills

Logic flow of the product presentation:

Slide 1

Science of Governance through Self admin Data and OpenHack

What do users read/Understand?

1st Self-Administered data

2nd Science of Governance

3rd Open Hack in Bali

4th G20

5th XLP

Notes:

Normally a title can’t create any confusion:

users ask if this is a presentation of Self-administered Data or Science of Governance, they won’t understand they won’t get “science of governance through Self-administered data”

I would bet either “Open Hack” or “Science of Governance” only, in the first page. You have all the way to develop your thinking

Slide2

Learning/Governance must be grounded in Data

What do users read/Understand?

Learning and Governance || Learning Governance || Learning about governance (can be one of the 3 which misleads the attention) must be grounded in data

There are 3 means to learn it:

More important: Scalable workflow which is the government “ways of work” should be inclusive

2nd most important: Executable rules for learning organization is the government “ways of work” should be effective

3rd Place: Trustworthy data source for learning is the government “ways of work” should be self accountable

Notes:

Not sure if the pyramid is to determine an hierarchy since in my opinion self-accountability or scalable are both in the same importance

This is page 2 after title - It has to set up the answer to the audience, instead we have a default situation:

Title is Learning/Governance (not coherent on the meaning) the 3 means or directives (we don’t know exactly what they are) don’t link directly to self-administered data (or self-managed data), but to principles: ability to Scale (Which is a principle of business and Lean), Effectiveness and continuous learning (again, it’s a lean principle) and Trust (inspite of being written trustworthy data source for learning)

Proposal: This is the first slide after title, determines the question it should face more a “Why” and “what” in the current problem on “Governance”. Audience is expecting to engage a concise link to Governance problem and the Hackathon in this first slide

Something like: Why do we need to self-administered Data into our lives?

We want societies to be: trustful, scalable and effective

So we won’t have any unnecessary waste and live better…

Slide 3

This one I am completely lost. After reading it several times I get the idea that Science and Governance currently are based in Symmetries

I know that this is not what you are saying, this is my reading/perception

Problems:

1 - Your title says explicit “Science of Governance” this title is “Science and Governance”

2 - The image used of pyramid is the same as previous slide, audience will understand that is related. When we read closer it matches if we know, but it’s not explicit for a 1 minute slide presentation

Proposal:

Always make as much as possible to connect with the previous and the next message (Why do we need self-admin data) which would be the “how” (the process) the importance of Hackers, and it’s history such as Emmy Noether and others.

Don’t need to repeat the pyramid because Mother of Symmetry won’t relate directly to effectiveness or reduce waste, but to self-organization (which of course can lead easily to reduce waste and effectiveness.

Instead of the Pyramid would show the history contributions