In November 2004 policy planners at Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada (DFAIT) began running a series of eDiscussions. The eDiscussions are used as a means of informing the public about particular Canadian foreign policy issues, stimulating public debate around these issues and involving Canadians in policy development. The views of Canadians are solicited on key foreign policy issues and then reviewed by policy planners at DFAIT.

Following a review of the process used to manage the eDiscussions, we have identified several key lessons learned. These lessons will guide changes in our approach to the eDiscussions over the coming year. Below is a list of the most significant lessons, along with proposed steps to improve the eDiscussions process.

Difficulties encountered

1. The topics chosen for the previous eDiscussions were very broad. This allowed Canadians with a variety of expertise and interests to contribute to the discussions. However, it also resulted in discussions that were sometimes unfocused and not directly relevant to the policy process.

Decision: In order to balance the need for a focused discussion with the desire to ensure eDiscussions are accessible to a wide section of the Canadian public, the initial topic will be left broad, but will be supplemented with more specific sub-questions. The content of these sub-questions will be determined by the department’s key priorities (articulated in the recent International Policy Statement) and the relevance of these questions to policy development at DFAIT.

2. While many people posted substantive, thoughtful comments, the interaction between comments made by different participants was low and could be improved.

Decision: Sub-questions for each topic will help to direct participants to particular issues where disagreement may arise. In addition, the Moderator will provide a short summary of the discussion midway through the discussion period. This will highlight the main tensions and agreements in the discussion up to then, while flagging particular issues about which DFAIT would like to hear more. Mid-discussion summaries will help to stimulate interaction between participants, foster the emergence of new ideas and ensure the results of the discussion are policy relevant.

3. Participation from undergraduate students is low and could be improved.

Decision: Given the large number of students studying in fields relevant to the work of the department and the need for processes specifically targeting student input into policy development, university students are a natural constituency for the eDiscussions. With this in mind, we are currently contacting Canadian university professors to suggest including eDiscussion participation in their course syllabuses. We are also assessing opportunities to generate interest in eDiscussions among graduate students.

4. The Grad Student Communication and Advisory Committee was established to act as the contact point between the eDiscussion groups, the policy planners at DFAIT and university departments. However, the committee was unable to fully carry out its mandate during some of the eDiscussions. Reasons for this include a conflict of some eDiscussion official responses with the university exam period and (possibibly) a lack of incentives for committee members to participate.

Decision: Retention of this Committee will be evaluated between now and the next eDiscussion. We will explore other ideas for stimulating the involvement of the committee members, while considering potential alternatives to this body. A decision on whether to retain the committee will be made and a general strategy on how to better engage graduate students in the eDiscussions completed in early 2006.

5. The eDiscussion process is still not well-known by many within Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada. Greater awareness of the eDiscussions is critical to ensure key divisions at DFAIT are engaged during the drafting of official responses to eDiscussions and that the views expressed during the discussions are considered by policy planners within the department.

Decision: The eDiscussion Moderator will meet with relevant policy planners at DFAIT after each eDiscussion. The agenda for this meeting will be based on the summary of the eDiscussion and will, therefore be shaped by comments made by participants during the eDiscussion. The results of this meeting will then be used to inform the official response. These meetings will help to ensure more consistent sharing of eDiscussion findings with DFAIT policy planners.

6. There were cases in which a single person posted several times per day. While greater involvement is always welcome, a large number of messages can sometimes compromise the quality of the discussion as others do not have time to react. We therefore considered different means of avoiding this problem, while still respecting the right of participants to have their contributions read.

Decision: A statement will be added to the eDiscussion guidelines posted on the site asking participants not to comment more than once daily in order to give other participants a chance to present their ideas. The Moderator will post all messages which conform to the civil rules, but where necessary, will delay posting messages to ensure participants have the time to react to comments already made. As before, the Moderator will reserve the right to contact participants directly to inform them of a breach of discussion guidelines.

7. Quotes of comments made during the eDiscussion are sometimes used in the eDiscussion summaries and the Department’s official responses. These quotes are placed in quotation marks and translated, but not credited to a specific individual since policy planners are often unable to confirm the identity of participants. Given the potential ethical and legal implications of using quotations, we felt this policy should be reviewed, formalized and clearly posted on the site.

Decision: After some discussion, it was decided that this policy should remain the same. The civil rules will now include a sentence informing participants of our policy in this regard. Participation in the eDiscussions will therefore now imply consent to the use of direct quotations in the summary or official response and to the translation of these statements.

8. How do we draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable comments (racism, sexism, hate speech, etc.)? This was generally done well over the course of the last eDiscussions but required a great deal of judgement on the part of the Moderator.

Decision: It is necessary to minimize the subjectivity involved in deciding when messages should be excluded. Robust, clearly-defined civil rules are a key instrument in achieving this goal. The current rules will therefore be reviewed and supplemented, where necessary, to ensure offensive or inappropriate comments can quickly be screened out.

9. Many long submissions were received during eDiscussions. On the one hand, feedback received informally from students suggests that these longer submissions can be intimidating and effectively discourage participation from those who feel they have less to say. On the other hand, lowering the current 750 word limit could diminish the quality of the submissions and exclude complex ideas which might require the full 750 words to explain. This led us to review the current word limit for submissions to the eDiscussions.

Decision: The word limit will remain at 750. However, to encourage the participation of a broad cross-section of Canadians, we will take further steps to actively engage different sectors of the Canadian population. Our recent strategy for including eDiscussion topics in the syllabi of undergraduate university classes is a first example of this wider effort.

10. We have reviewed the eDiscussion format and identified certain minor technical problems. This prompted a review of the presentation format for comments received during the eDiscussion.

Decision: To date, these problems have not affected the flow or content of the eDiscussions. Given that the current format is simple and user-friendly, we have decided to retain the current display of the eDiscussion, while working with our technical support services to remedy existing glitches in the content management system.