> Part IV: Recommendations <

 

Our recommendations will be structured around a model that is basic to communication theory: Sender > Message > Channel > Receiver. 

·      Sender – The individual or group communicating a message.

 

·      Message – The information that is being communicated.

 

·      Channel – The vehicle used to deliver the message/information.

 

·      Receiver – The audience for whom that message was intended.

The Recommendation

1) Identify the key players and their intentions. In our opinion, there are two constituent groups, and in Diepsloot, the final solution must allow both to play the role of “Sender” and “Receiver”.

 

·      Top-down: Government > Community Member

 

·      Bottom-up: Community Member > Government

 

·      Between: Community Member > Community Member

 

The relationship between “Sender” and “Receiver” will indicate the type of “Message” that the “Sender” wants to send or that the “Receiver” needs to receive.

 

·      Top-down: Information targeted for mass consumption that helps keep the people informed, but also, helps alleviate some of their administrative burdens. It is also important that this information cannot be freely updated or modified (so the example of an open chalkboard originally considered by the GS team may be problematic for this type of communication).

 

·      Bottom-up: Typically a response communication model where the Community Member is either looking for clarification on an issue, or, is looking to provide feedback. The nature of such communication requires an open platform where individuals can easily post or modify the questions that are submitted. One thing to consider here, however, is the high illiteracy rate and the fact that a written system alone may not satisfy the fullest needs of the community.

 

·      Between Community Members: Follows as a hybrid of the above two communication experiences, though the tools utilized to support these efforts will be most effective if they can leverage those created for the “Bottom-up” system.

 

2) Prototype before you meet with members of the community. It’s a philosophy we have unabashedly taken from studying how some of the great design firms operate (most notably, IDEO and Fahrenheit 212). With the parameters defined, it is important that the GS team develop a series of potential solutions before arriving at Diepsloot and beginning their efforts. This exercise will help the team eliminate some options that may have little to no merit and it also may help the team identify a few clear-cut winners. Most importantly, however, it will serve as a good warm-up exercise so they don’t enter the engagement, cold.

 

It is our belief that GS should employ a suite of solutions that focus on the functional dissemination of information while also creating a culture that will facilitate information virality. Therefore, we propose the following “prototype(s)” that we feel the GS team should validate with community members and public officials upon arrival in Diepsloot. These recommendations are based upon the information we have to date. It is our assumption that these will be tweaked, modified, or potentially overhauled once the community interviews take place. But in the interest of time, it is important that the GS team approach these interviews with some potential solutions in mind.

 

a.   Government Message Board – A message board where the government can post different types of information, ranging from short-term notifications to long-term reference information, all for public consumption.  We also envision part of the message board featuring a calendar of events, activities, and important dates for a finite period of time (two weeks, one month) that can be introduced by a government official when posted (more on this with point “4″ below). Based on feedback from the community, the GS team should also provide the government with rules around the nature and volume of the information that is communicated (providing such granularity as word and character count to ensure clarity and brevity of information). Because Diepsloot is only two square miles, we envision this board being hosted at the town center serving as a basis for bringing members of the community together to discuss activities, events and issues.

 

b.   Community Message Board – We feel that the chalkboard approach is worth evaluating/considering because it is cost-effective, but we feel that it would be more effective for community members to provide feedback to public officials and/or to communicate with one another. There is some concern that the chalkboard may be misused (erasing of messages, graffiti). If it is found that the chalkboard is being misused or abused, a corkboard can be overlaid so the board is still functional for posting community-drive content, but more difficult to vandalize and abuse. It is our hypothesis, however, that the community will socially enforce proper use of the message board and we do not feel that such abuse or misuse will be a substantial or persistent problem. Similar rules should be developed by the GS team for the nature and volume of information that is provided. Ideally, this board would be located next to, or on the other side of, the Government’s Message Board furthering the concept of a “gathering place” to discuss activities, events and issues.

 

c.   Mobile Communications – It was made clear to us that the people of Diepsloot are familiar and active users of cell phones. This provides the government with the opportunity to get creative with low-cost, high-touch communication activities ranging from SMS messages and updates to free conference calls (with taped calls conveniently accessible for a period of time after the actual call for interested parties). A registry of anonymous cell phone numbers of individuals interested in receiving updates from the government on a variety of topics can be an incredibly effective way to provide timely updates without sacrificing privacy (anonymity is essential). Similarly, text messages can be a way to capture feedback from community members with questions or concerns, to which the government can provide responses via the message boards. Finally, we see an opportunity to work with the rash of “Free Conference Call” or “Discounted Conference Call” providers to discuss using these services to discuss topics and issues of relevance to the Diepsloot community. We also feel that this will provide a perfect segue to a more robust longer-term solution such as a hotline or “311” style number that can be used to address and answer questions (in an unwritten form). Anecdotally, we believe this has high potential as we view the large community of hair salons and barbershops as a great place for people to listen to these calls together, potentially even on their cell phone’s speakerphone.

 

d.   Socialized Communication Efforts – Part of this exercise is building a process so people in the community know where they can go to get their questions answered and to share information they feel is important to the broader community. An example is hosting informal town hall sessions every time the Government’s Message Board is updated (information, calendar) where public officials answer questions as the boards are being updated. These can be in response to questions posted on the board, captured via text message or submitted for consideration right their at the town hall session. Security at such events is crucial, so it is important that the public officials feel comfortable with this approach, and that efforts are made to keep such events “safe” for all parties involved. This approach helps to address the issues inherent to “written” communication in a community that has a large, mixed, immigrant population, and a high illiteracy rate. To further develop these socialized communication efforts, one option is to create smaller township-based message boards and events run by local community leaders which can then be used to feed the larger, Diepsloot-wide meetings and postings.

 

3) Have an agenda when you interview members of the community. Time is one of the team’s biggest constraints, so a true immersive exploration is not an option here. Instead, it is our recommendation that the GS team begin its efforts with a number of conversations with key stakeholders identified during last year’s visit (public officials, formal and informal community officials), and then capture feedback on a number of solutions the team has already thought through and discussed (using the recommendations proposed in “2″ as a starting point). This approach will allow the GS team to capture immediate feedback and involve key community stakeholders in the design and development of an effective communication system.

 

Part of this approach will require the development of a “script” to ensure the right questions are answered. Some potential questions for this script, though simple, must include:

• What type of information the interviewee would like to receive more of or feels they are not receiving at all.
• What type of information the interviewee would like the opportunity to communicate more broadly.
• Where the interviewee currently goes to get information (place? person?) 

Our recommendation is to approach the conversation with no more than 3-4 high-level questions, and allow the conversation to evolve and take its own course while still getting those questions answered. This approach is important because the unknowns currently greatly outweigh the knowns for the GS team, which means the GS team will benefit from allowing the interviewee greater leniency and flexibility in their response.

  

4) Implement, test, and learn. We have outlined how we would approach the problem with the members of the Diepsloot community if we were on the ground with them. It is our assumption that a few new ideas will arise based on feedback from the community directly, but it behooves the team to walk into each situation prepared to provide their own answers if/when called upon. Once the dialogue begins, it will be up to the GS team to identify what can be speedily implemented, and which systems will be effective.

Next Steps

SS is committed to helping the GS team analyze whatever information they capture after their meetings with key stakeholders in the community. Regardless, we feel it is important that the GS team launch some part of its strategy and have the opportunity to see the event in action at least once so they can help address the issues that will undoubtedly arise after a “beta” launch.

 

Social Symmetry has also identified a series of longer-term solutions (one, the “hotline”, was mentioned above) which will be provided under separate cover so as not to distract from the immediate term needs of the community and capabilities of the team.