Looking forward

What do we want FWD50 to be next year? We’ve spent some of the past month discussing content, growth, format, and audience. We know the 2017 conference gave many people in and out of government a chance to reconsider what was possible in a world fundamentally altered by digital tools, policies, and ways of designing. But what about the future?

Growth

We want to grow the conversation in three clear ways:

• All levels of government. We want to include municipalities, provinces, and the federal government. Digital means different things to different stakeholders—in particular, municipalities are having Smart Cities conversations about tactical issues like transportation, sanitation, and construction. But there are common threads: A city’s hospital, a province’s medical system, and a nation’s drug regulations, for example. We want to weave these three levels together better in coming years.
• A global dialogue. This year, we were fortunate enough to welcome participants from New Zealand, Estonia, the UK, the US, and beyond. We want to expand the international participation, both from speakers and audiences. Dozens more countries are on their own digital journeys, and many of this year’s participants are eager to return, bringing their colleagues and neighbours.
• Innovation between public and private sector. In the startup world, we speak of Business-to-Consumer (B2C) and Business-to-Business (B2B) but seldom of Business-to-Government (B2G.) That’s going to change as procurement becomes more about proposing solutions to problems than proposing delivery to solutions that have already been decided. Startups have plenty to offer, and digital channels mean that a company can create a niche offering worldwide rather than having to focus on mass markets. We want to find ways to bring together startup, corporate, and government innovation—because done right, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

Content

• More interaction. We had a lot of content. A lot of content. People were sitting in (fairly uncomfortable) chairs for a long time each day, and we want to break that up a bit. Attendees often told us they loved the chance to meet their peers working on parallel, related efforts during the breaks. So we want to formalize that more, creating breakouts, design sprints, and workshops throughout the event rather than just on the first day. That also means picking specific topics that appeal across national borders and governmental lines: Healthcare, automation, accessibility, taxation, energy, and so on.
• More case studies. Getting concrete takeaways and examples of what worked, and where the pitfalls lay, resulted in some of the best content at the conference. It was also a way to remain optimistic, showing that tech wasn’t all doom and gloom. We had examples from Revenue Canada, Health Canada and others showing that changes are happening, and delivering good results. Structuring these case studies in a specific format will make them easier to consume and mimic, too.
• A better innovation zone. We had a half-dozen organizations demonstrating technology we thought was worth showcasing—from video games built by indigenous youth to preserve their wisdom, to machine learning aimed at fixing malnourishment, to virtual reality for city planners, to social media analysis that informs policy. But we didn’t do a good job of making it clear what the zone was, or how participants had been selected. As a result, some people thought it was a vendor area; others walked by without stopping to see the amazing tech on display. We want to grow this zone with other “science fair”-like experiences—wearables, augmented reality, etc.—in coming years.

A broader vision

We set out to create a different kind of event. We wanted the intersection of technology and policy, partly because in the modern world technology is policy. Data informs policy; algorithms enforce it. We have to embrace digital culture—and the experimentation and continuous learning that comes with it—as a new way of working. To relegate digital to an tool, rather than the craft itself, is to scuttle the ship before it leaves port.

As a result, in 2017 our vision was to ask a simple question: How do we use technology to make a better society for all Canadians? We wanted to make it nonpartisan (neither left, nor right, but forward) and we wanted to include processes (50 days), platforms (50 months), and policies (50 years) under a single roof.

In 2018, we’re going to revise the question we asked. Or rather, we’re going to shorten it, by removing Canada, and asking: How do we use technology to make a better society for all?

As always, we hope you’ll join us. The outpouring of support, encouragement, and constructive feedback in the weeks around the conference has been overwhelming. We continue to learn a tremendous amount from everyone we’ve worked with, and we’re planning a number of events with various government organizations in the coming months around Ottawa and around the world to keep the fires burning.