Building a New Model for Government and its Citizens The Colorado Open Communications Standards Interface

By Thomas B. Cross @techtionary

Note: This approach can be applied to any state, government or corporate organization. Click here for PDF version.

What if, technologies developed at the state level are available at the local level with an open source architecture to allow for customization? What if, training in one Colorado city can be accepted by another other city in Colorado? How are trucking, vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians and others going to interface smart streets/highways and transportation management systems such as traffic lights, public safety, and traffic control? What if, training on one level in one place can be used in other places in Colorado? What if, there was a common “standards” approach to using technology, building applications and learning now and in the future? What if, citizens and business in Colorado could talk a common language in the way they build solutions for government, business and others?

Solutions to these “what if’s” are possible with an open standards approach similar to approach used by the internet today to communicate with accepted protocols. What the State of Colorado developed a concept for technology and education that would evolve and keep the citizens and employers on the forefront rather than lagging farther behind?

In this paper, we explore the various issues that are performs within each layer of Colorado Open Communications Standards protocol. Government and business leaders have long recognized “standards” for power, internet, plugs, tires, health, gasoline, medical and thousands of other concepts. One example is worth exploring as it is the basis of everything, we do every day – the internet. The internet uses the OSI-open systems interconnection model which is a global recognized approach to building standards, quasi-standards for software, hardware, interfaces and common language protocols which are vital to the growth of any system including the internet. The internet 7-Layer OSI model breaks each layer provides unique functions that:

– Breaks issues into distinct activities – separates the functions from one another

– Simplifies processes – provide unique functions at each layer with linkages to other layers

– Provides the means to create standards accepted by the members not dictated by anyone business or government and allows different companies new and old to work together

– Enhances the means for compatibility – at least gives it a chance – that is, how “common” internet communications protocols are used by staff such as fundamentals of management, supervisory skills, communications skills, regulatory compliance, etc.

– Recognizes that you don’t have to do everything at once – solves singular and often very complex issues

– Allows for overview, error checks, audit, security and management checks at each layer

– Provides for management view and consensus building

– Gives insights into how future concepts and ideas can be integrated.

There are many organizations that work on private and public standards but few where the standards are built by volunteers. The IETF or Internet Engineering Task Force https://ietf.org  The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) is an organized volunteer activity of the Internet Society (ISOC). ISOC is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1992 to provide leadership in Internet related standards, education, and policy. ISOC is supported by more than 90 organizational members and 26,000 individual members. The point is that the IETF is a global organization devoted to expanding the use of the internet and since we all use the internet every day and will increasingly do so, it may be a relevant model to consider as a standards organization.

With the Colorado open communications standards interface model, we can explore a framework for use in government, business, education, citizens and others. 

In order for everyone to encourage cooperation and collaboration and then begin to build standards, breaking key elements into identifiable areas needs to occur. By combining the collaborative approach of the IETF and the OSI model, we can begin. Of course, this can be modified and debated going forward; however, we need to start somewhere.

Layer 1 or Physical Layer is where humans touch, lift, sit, drive, turn, open/close, move a mouse, talk, listen or interface systems other humans, equipment, tools or even observe. The point of this graphic is that one of the greatest challenges to the Physical Layer is to reduce/eliminate injuries and worse but also increase safety beyond the minimums. Safety is a great concept; however, as you will see that unless safety is addressed at the highest levels including public policy, then Physical Layer activities are at risk. Physical Layer 1 standards could be as simple as the processes for lifting a box or as complex as flying an airplane.

Layer 2 is where Communications Interfaces begins. That is, many Physical Layer 1 activities can occur without human interaction and interface such as in machine-to-machine communication and IoT-internet of things. At Layer 2, language, communications and response takes place. That is, you need to direct the activities of another human or retrieve/enter information from a computer or cloud database. In many industries, training on how to use a computer/software program is the principal form of staff/user training. All of us have entered the wrong information or control functions causing errors. Reducing keyboard errors or verbal instructions is the “standards” goal of Layer 2. We all know the common problem of “communications will always fail, except by chance.” This is a humorous but telling challenge for all of us to overcome the often mistakes made because the person receiving the direction did not understand what was being said.  That is, what is said, is not what is heard, nor what is acted upon.  This approach may bring reduced errors, but also insights into issues and other problems which could lead to benefits to anyone involved in safety. Certainly, considerable standards can be built and maintained to reduce errors and even reduce the most common communication challenges we all encounter.

Layer 3 are Processes either internally or externally created. Often governmental regulations demand activities or standards in order to protect customers such as food safety, medical records privacy and financial accounting. That is, everyone in the company needs to know corporate policies for travel, payroll, OSHA, HIPAA, EEO and other corporate/government regulations. In addition, corporations have their own sales order, customer service, return merchandise, career promotion and hundreds of others. However, few organizations train the same standards way of training on these topics. Layer 3 standards for processes and procedures may be one of the easiest ways to approach standards between different organizations.

Layer 4 is Education Policy & Analysis increases collaboration and cooperation between public-private organizations. Most organizations provide learning their staff; however, they are often done very differently. Much can be written or said on this subject as each organization thinks the way they do it is often better than the next, but few ever look at the way other organizations perform this task to see if it’s better or worse than another. Similar to other key points is that a “standard” process can be shared between different organizations which from “great ideas” can be created together creating the opportunity to “lift all boats.”

Layer 5 is Legislative/Corporate Interfaces – Legislative, business, educational, nonprofit, and citizen interfaces can be found here. These interfaces are provided to accommodate different education, technologies, training and learning needs and goals. However, within each department there are specific needs. For example, customer service needs to be training on certain elements of CRM-customer relationship management software and sales on other parts of the same or sales tracking software. Manufacturing, repair, service delivery and driver training will interface other job specific functions. This means there is an opportunity to provide for industry standard training on many “core” functions while there may likely be proprietary corporate trade secret training on specific programs. That is, the concept of a standardized approach recognizes that probably 90% of all training programs are the same whether you work for a public or private organization. Word, PowerPoint and Windows are used by the majority of organizations, however, SalesForce.com is used by only those that sell goods or services.

Layer 6 is Leadership Layer – Leadership organizes data for presentation to top-level management decision-making. Training is often the first-to-go and last-to-come-back when there is financial pressure to increase financial ROI. This is where training fails to provide the C-Level with viable, proven means for ROI. However, without a standards approach to compare one organizations’ ROI against another organization’s ROI, there is no way for the C-level to measure its value. That is, until an “inch” is an inch which everyone can measure, then training or any technology will be perceived as little more than a waste of time. One of the other elements to this process is the concept of the public-corporate university. Tried by many with various levels of success and disbanded by others, the concept of a joint public-private training concept using a standards approach measured by other entities has merit. That is, course development, delivery, testing and auditing can be performed by a single entity (like the processes for auto/trunk/motorcycle licenses) but open standards allows for the widest possible sources. This reduces costs and provides C-level management with tools to measure and gauge ROI for training.

Layer 7 Strategic Layerlooks beyond the company to the horizon and global events and circumstances. However, whether a forest fire, bus, train, plane or product accident, companies are increasingly faced with public scrutiny for nearly every event. While government response is sometimes slow to react with legislation much less anticipate new technologies such as blockchain and fintech-financial technology/regulation due to concerns regarding a potential bank crisis or cybersecurity attack. In this way, the role of standards can have significant impact. Standards are not something that is an after-thought, however, with a standards approach it can be recognized as a critical part in the response to any crisis. One will never know but it is certainly possible that the many large-scale disasters be avoided but faster response to the initial and then long-term impacts might be found. In this case and others, a standards approach to performance management becomes integrated with every aspect of any organizations efforts.

Summary – This is “model” which works for the internet but may not for everything else. Indeed, federal, military and others need to be involved, however, this is proposed to start a discussion of making Colorado or any state the leading state in technology for the benefit of its citizens.

Humbly and respectfully submitted by: