Talk:Science of Governance
Initial notes: 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
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