Big Data is being touted as one of the great hopes for the future of government. All the information generated across health, transport and other sectors can be used to tailor services, deliver efficiencies, open up commercial opportunities – the list of benefits seems endless.
Unfortunately, the example of Care.data has caused great anguish. It is becoming the poster boy / girl for how government is failing to communicate about Big Data. If they cannot get their heads around the how to communicate Big Data then the opportunities will be lost.
The changes proposed by Care.data are very basically that GP health records will be uploaded onto a national database which can then be used by researchers and others. The data will also be available to others who pay a fee (a processing cost) for access. The data will be anonymised. The Government has, apparently, been telling us about the new system and our options.
However, a listen to the Wired UK podcast or a read of their recent guide to and blog, provides a great overview of the problems being encountered with Care.data. As Olivia Solon’s blog complains:
“The problem is how it’s been communicated to patients. Its been an absolute shambles. The junk mail leaflet, the vague FAQs, and the rambling blog posts with inconsistent language and jargon.”
Whilst the issues involved are undoubtedly complex, they are not helped by poor communication. This will only make matters worse, risk public outcry and ensure a Daily Mail style backlash. In particular, set against the backdrop of the activities of the National Security Agency (NSA) and Edward Snowden’s revelations then you have a hugely sceptical, and worried, general public. It sets the Big Data agenda back and prevents the benefits from coming forward.
The worries people have about data – leaks, hacking, being identifiable, being used by others for purposes not originally intended, sharing of data etc. – have yet to really be considered by government as the Care.data problems illustrate. These are bigger issues for all parts of government, not just related to health.
Some very good work being done by the Open Data Institute to promote an open data culture across government “to create economic, environmental, and social value.” David Cameron has already called on departments to open up data sets and in a letter he said that “the Government must set new standards for transparency.” The Government is a signatory of the G8 Open Data Charter and published an action plan for implementation in 2013. If full implemented, the five principles contained in the Charter would represent a significant change in the way that government, at all levels, operates.
However, what seems to been missing so far is any idea about how to communicate all this, including the benefits to the public at large. Tech geeks may find it really interesting, and it is, but if it cannot move beyond these confines and reassure the public, then the benefits cannot be delivered.
THERE ARE FIVE KEY CONSIDERATIONS FOR GOVERNMENT
- The need to convey the benefits of Big Data in concrete terms, not just the abstract.
- Ensuring that accompanying opt ins / outs are straightforward and therefore easy to communicate.
- Being clear about who can have access and on what basis (are they buying it?).
- Understanding who they are talking to – GPs, medical professionals, technology professionals and the general public all require their own approach but most of these audiences seems confused by Care.data.
- Get businesses on board with the approach and also work with those who may instinctively be a little more hostile to the agenda.
Government will only develop a robust approach if it is challenged in advance and it can be questioned whether government should be the lead party on this issue.
If Government doesn’t get the communications right then the public will ultimately be the losers.