In the third and final part of Gavin's analysis into the US Federal Government's Reform Plan and its impact on digital Government to Business service delivery, he delves into the template for the Federal Government's digital front door strategy: Farmers.gov

The change in direction toward customer-centric digital front doors to government, coupled with a wide range of innovations and transparency set a new benchmark for not just US Federal Government to Business websites, but states, municipalities and even governments outside America.

Listen to the show here using our podcast player or Youtube:


Or download and subscribe to future episodes using iTunes or Stitcher for Android.

What direction is the US Federal government now taking for digital front doors?

Transcript:

Gavin: G'day folks, my name is Gavin Atkinson and welcome again to another episode of the Government to Business podcast.

This is part three in a three-part series where I've been looking at the US Government's federal reform plan, particularly in the context of the digital space and especially in the context of how it impacts to the Government to Business digital service delivery space.

Now last week I kind of left you a little bit of a cliffhanger and that had a lot to do with the fact that I discussed a number of the capabilities that were being developed that whilst not specific to Government to Business digital service delivery they obviously - because they apply to citizens and a whole range of other digital activities - but there are very, very much a core segment. And I really left you hanging there towards the end around that concept that was talked about a digital front door to government. And I gave the overarching view of what was expected, but I didn't actually talk about one of the examples that were mentioned and I will do that in a moment.

Now, one thing that I've also discussed in the last two episodes is probably some of the bipartisanship element that's trying to be channeled in this particular reform plan.

It's not necessarily out there, banging heads in a Republican versus Democrat type of knockdown contest. If anything it was very conciliatory.

It was a number of times talking about the the presidencies and the the precedents that have already been established by various administrations, whether there has been Republican or alternately Democrat. And one thing I really, really like about this particular document is the fact that it is putting that focus around what actually works?

What's the outcomes we're trying to achieve here? And just blows away the actual the political aspects. So as I mentioned before, regardless of what you happen to personally think around the Trump administration and about President Trump himself, the fact that this particular Reform plan is really, really focused around the nature of what works and let's go with whatever that happens to be.

How have government digital front doors been positioned until now?

So the concept of a digital front door for federal government is nothing new.

In fact, it was something that was originally written about in the usa.gov blog post all the way back actually in December 2015 towards the end of the Obama administration's last year or so of government. And the post by Colin MacArthur, Carolyn Dew and Michelle Chronister, I think was a really, really good one because it started setting the scenes for what is actually meant by a US federal government front door and it says:

"We think of the federal front door as the places that the public first interacts with their government. There are many front doors, so agency websites like benefits.gov, physical places like Social Security offices and contact centers where people start interacting with the government."

So that gives a bit of an overview about that. But what was interesting with this particular blog post and this is where some things have changed, is the focus around I guess what is meant to be achieved with that front door from an actual delivery perspective, an implementation perspective when it comes to the project management. And the blog post says, "With so many front doors to the federal government already, what does this project hope to do?"

So this was a particular project that was running out of the federal government at the time.

And it goes on to say this project, "Won't necessarily build new front doors, it's about learning ways to improve our existing ones. We won't be rolling out lots of new websites for interacting with government, but instead we'll be figuring out ways we can simplify, streamline and improve people's interactions with the current ones especially ones that interact with multiple agencies."

So the big change here when you compare and contrast this with the Office of Management and Budget's reform plan for the US Federal government is the fact that it has a very different focus around creating new front doors.

So the Obama administration in this particular previous project and focus was around about not creating new ones and in fact reusing and working on existing ones. Whilst the US Federal reform plan says, "One particular area focus would likely be the creation of user focused digital front doors, rebuilding government web properties to focus less on government structure and more on user experience."

So the focus here is really much around that whole creation, something new and also around that user focused element.

Now the big question here in my mind is what is meant by user focused within the US Federal reform plan?

Is it just better understanding the needs of customers from a Human Centered Design perspective or is it actually about that and joining up complementary and related customer journeys in an integrated package?

So is it just about the knowledge and what you can do with it or is it actually then that big follow-through? And restructuring the way things are actually organized?

So the former's good and that the latter is much, much, much better.

Now Code for America actually put out some excellent principles and advice for creating digital front doors, primarily aimed actually at local governments but it's still equally relevant today for both the Federal government or anyone else thinking about this, because this was back in 2014. And one thing that they talked about there when it came to digital front doors, so this would have obviously influenced some of the thinking in 2015 with the Obama administration, is the digital front doors are really user focused about the service or about the government entity being transformed digitally online.

There's not much in there at all around about taking that big next step around designing Government and its services around an actual customer-centric model.

How Farmers.gov acts as the template for customer-centric digital front doors

So as I said before the former approach is really good, but the customer-centric digital front door is much, much better. And that's exactly what we're talking about within the US Federal reform plan I think. So that's just spot on.

In the last episode I didn't say the example as I mentioned before in the Federal reform plan where the the US Federal government proposes going. And this really kind of gives that context around that customer-centric digital front door.

The example actually is mentioned as, "For example farmers.gov designed by the US Department of Agriculture delivers the information tools and firsthand advice built around the needs of the people who produce our food, fiber, flora and fuel."

So what we're talking about within the US Federal reform plan is customer-centric digital service delivery. Brilliant!

But the great thing here is it's also not just about cherry picking in like some type of, you know, smash-and-grab being run by the White House where they're going through and just raiding agency websites willy-nilly. In fact it's quite the opposite. The plan goes on to say:

"This capability will also serve as a central resource to better manage organizational change. Managing process improvements across organizations is complex especially given the legal structures, the size and cultures of federal agencies. It will partner with agency leadership to support interagency change management including project planning, convening interagency meetings and facilitating collaboration and sharing best practices on change management."

Now I've got I've got no reason whatsoever to question the legitimacy of what's being said. It's all well thought out, it's all straightforward and it's all there in black and white.

So on that basis, I think this is just a really excellent set of steps that have been proposed when it comes to the reorganization of that digital service delivery focus around the customer within the US Federal government.

So actually let's go and talk around that example that's provided, let's talk about farmers.gov.

Farmers.gov homepageThe homepage for this is particularly above the fold of the screen is is perfect in my view. It's not cluttered, it's clear and with its photos of tomatoes it resonates - or as Americans would say tomatoes - it resonates with the audience without being cliched I think. There was a real risk here that you have something like, you know, an actual guy in a check shirt with a big hat and next to a combine harvester or something.

It's just nice and simple and smack bang in the middle of the screen are a series of very clear trust factors: the site's positioning statement and also its primary call to action. Farmers.gov is what it says on the tin.

It's for farmers and it's government. It's not the department, so it's not about the US Department of Agriculture with its various stovepipes. It makes it perfectly clear, very, very plain and upfront that farmers.gov is about growing with us saying, "Together let's grow farmers.gov as a resource for farmers by farmers."

This is actually quite an interesting positioning statement. It's all around I guess from my perspective around about empowering your audience, learning from your peers and I've been involved in various jurisdictions around the world where I've seen customer research which has found over and over again that this concept of creating a community amongst that audience that you're trying to achieve, really, really has a significant benefit and a big impact as far as the trust factors, the sense of creating that community, the returning and actually growing again the outcomes that you want to try to achieve.

I guess the only real downside here is when it's mentioned it's by farmers, the focus then potentially impacts on the the trust that could be created also by having that customer focused services from government as well.

It almost sounds a little bit like it's going to be, you know, a community for farmers to come together and learn and share from each other where that is, obviously a key part of what's trying to be achieved, but that's only really half the story.

It's actually all very much around the the customer centricity of bringing together those services and integrating those customer journeys as far as an actual farmer audience is concerned. But the trust factors as I said before are there and clearly from government. The strong use of the .gov domain not just in the URL itself but the branding on the site: farmers.gov.

Farmers.gov USA flag

Plus it's got this really, I actually quite like how a number of US Federal government sites do this, is at the very, very top of the page they've got like a little icon, a little gif icon I suppose of the American flag and then the words next to it: "An official website of the United States government. Here's how you know." And the words, "here's how you know" actually go off to a little hyperlink saying the following, which I think is actually a really good way of positioning things if you don't necessarily have a very strong brand identity in the domain name space around a .gov, and in fact all too often sometimes jurisdictions have a very much a splintering around that if that's not the strongly managed.

But on this particular website, it goes onto say when it comes to here's how you know this is a federal government site:

"The.gov means it's official. Federal government websites always use a .gov or a .mil domain," that is of course a military domain for all of us who are outside of the US, and then it goes onto say, "Before sharing sensitive information online, make sure you're on a .gov or a .mil site by inspecting your browser's address or location bar. This site is also protected by SSL, Secure Sockets Layer certificate, that's been signed by the US Government. The HTTPS means all transmitted data is encrypted in other words any information or browsing history that you provide is transmitted securely."

Now so that gives you a very, very strong idea that yes, you're on a government website, and yes, you can kind of as a result have those trust factors that occur there . Just below the positioning statement which I mentioned before which was that idea about, you know, for farmers by farmers, there's also the main call to action, which says, "View our farmers.gov playbook."

Now this is something I'll get to a little bit later but I think it's important to note at this point how it's very, very prominently positioned as the call to action.

And obviously what I'll do is I'll create links throughout the I suppose the blog post for this particular podcast, just so you can kind of find this information or you can just go to farmers.gov and you'll see it there quite clearly. After this particular positioning statement it then goes on to provide two very prominent hunting boxes or maybe cards, might be a better way of putting it, highlighting key service offerings from the site. Now, the first is something near and dear to many, many farmers hearts.

It's the weather. So I guess what I was actually surprised at here was it's a real problem, probably a missed opportunity, because currently the way farmers.gov does this is you you pop in your zip code, so, you know, the way to identify where you are in United States and then it brings up data from the NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

So that's basically the weather bureau for the US. But what is the data that comes up once you actually take this step?

I was really surprised because it's just the day's forecast. Now, that's nice. Good enough.

Farmers.gov weather NOAAIt's going to be raining today or not, but I would have actually expected based on that Customer Experience Improvement Capability I discussed the other episode, that this really would have kind of broken down and identified in the customer journey that farmers are likely to consume different weather and forecast information that is beyond just, you know, what's the weather going to be like today? It's going to be very much around, you know what they need to know from a farming perspective.

That would be things such as, you know, forecast predictions about expected weather, so how that impacts on the timing for sowing or or when the first hard frost is expected so you can start planning when you're going to harvest those crops and maximize your yield.

So that's a bit of a missed opportunity I think there, but I guess it also depends at the end of the day, what type of data is available and how they can kind of package that up for local farmers.

The second hunting box promotes one of the recently launched services, the Market Facilitation Program and this is a good way of promoting a new service offering and also makes it a little bit easier when there's press releases going out to various media outlets, so where they can say, "Hey, just go to farmers.gov," and from there you can obviously and quickly find those particular services that are online. Provided that it's happening contextually around that time of the launch.

Next up is the site's vision and you know that's important, without a shadow of doubt but I think that's something that doesn't necessarily have to be on the homepage, so I think it's a bit of a waste of the space there.

Then the website recognizes the relevancy and ongoing importance of maintaining a face-to-face presence for farmers, which is something that within the digital space, it's interesting that we obviously usually put a very, very strong push around digital and moving away from other service delivery channels which are nowhere near as cost-effective.

Obviously within the farming environment, particularly for doing some elements where you've got some face-to-face interactions, you need to do some testing of various things, you actually need to be able to maintain that offline channel as well. So there's a very prominent find your local service center section where you can choose your state and when once you've done that it drops down for your local county and from there you get all the local centers. I kind of being in Australia I thought, "Okay, let's do something different, let's pop in a random county in the state of Idaho and it gave me the details as a result of that of the closest Farm Service Agency and Natural Resources Conservation Service, including both the counter's address and its phone numbers, so that's pretty good.

But then it gave me the center details for the Risk Management Agency in two totally different states in California and Washington state.

So America's quite a big place. And if you're in Idaho, you really wouldn't be kind of jumping in your pickup truck and driving across Montana and all those other states in between to get all the way over to, California or Washington.

Now normally I'd be questioning the actual customer journey at this point But what I found was actually quite smart was there's a short clear statement saying, "Please note that each RMA - so Risk Management Agency - service center both regional and compliance officers covers a large region and therefore multiple states. So your search results likely will include RMA service centers located in other states."

Now that's pretty good. Actually the fact that the way things have actually organized those RMA centers won't be in highly likely in your local state, but it's actually been quite up front and clear around why it's positioned in this way and why you'll get the results you get.

So the only thing I'd say about where this customer journey fails is the actual lack of integration with other customer journeys. And what do I mean by that?

Now remember I talked a little bit earlier about the weather service and when I tested it I didn't actually say when I was started doing it that I was in Idaho. I actually gave a zip code from the state of Montana. Now it would not be difficult at all to capture that zip code when someone's interacting with the weather service and then automatically pre-populate the local service center details on that page. And I have no idea why this hasn't happened.

It's like there's two separate little assets that are being managed within this particular website and the two of them just aren't talking to each other. And that's just crazy.

So, even its just weird the fact that, you know, you're using a zip code in one particular service and then the other one you're having to actually provide the county instead. Bit disappointing on that regards and I think there's there's opportunity definitely to improve that. The page then goes on to promote recent blog posts relating to farming, Twitter posts and features to promote recent services, and these are okay and they're positioned towards the bottom of the page - if you can't have it on the homepage its correct - the question though I guess is to what extent this is being used?

And as a result of that is it actually a suitable use of the screen real estate? But obviously as someone outside of Farmers.gov, without the internal analytics and insights, it's hard to actually know.

One area I haven't touched on for the home page and across the whole website is the information architecture, the IA and the navigation. And this runs prominently across the top of the site with the labels: Home, Fund, Manage,  Conserve, Recover, Connect.

Farmers.gov IA
So a very, very broad IA but really, really what's good from my point of view is it was very simple and very intuitive. I love websites like this where you can see that someone's actually spent a good amount of time engaging with customers to try to work out how can you collate all these various services that you've got within the website within the IA and do it in such a way that it's clear, but also uses as few words as possible.

Relatively simple and very, very effective. So well done to Farmers.gov on that one.

Now most of us also realize when you've been involved in this game long enough that the information architecture and when you're kind of collating and showing lists and ways of being able to go that next layer or two down, normally most people can only really kind of remember about seven different items at a time.

I mean that's got a lot to do with lists and so forth and there's plenty of psychology and research showing that.

But Farmers.gov does actually a really good job of bumping that up to about nine by visually displaying information in an easy-to-read and understanding three by three card grid.

Manage IA Farmers.gov cardsSo if you actually go to the Manage section of the website, you can see exactly what I'm talking about there. Yeah, I think that's a really good step.

No "big bang" - iterative improvement reigns

Now Farmers.gov is still young which is why each of the main navigation pages carries this little, well I'll say a warning, but basically it's a disclaimer saying:

"Farmers.gov doesn't deliver every agricultural resource tool or story for farmers, ranchers and foresters and it doesn't pretend to. Instead we're talking to our customers and field employees - many farmers and ranchers themselves - we're building Farmers.gov around these ideas, adding small content and features often for the greatest and immediate value.

Right now Farmers.gov has wide open space, a few fence posts and a little know-how. Check back often for new information and features on how you can manage your land equipment and business."

Actually the thing that's interesting here is, as I said before, that statement goes across each of those high level information architecture sections and every single time the word changes.

So instead of saying this time it's "Manage your land equipment and business," it might say, "Conserve your land equipment and business," and so forth.

And I guess this is the definitional limitation of a digital front door as opposed to a one-stop shop, it merely gets you in, before passing you over to elsewhere. And look, by all means have a look at the particular pages.

They'll often kind of have examples which, you know are four or five paragraphs and they'll be linking off as a result of that within the actual the body copy through to other websites.

So some of these, most of them actually, go to various USDA web sites, but there's also some other ones across government. And I think from that point of view, look, top marks for providing access and giving the ability for customers up front to be able to get to what they need, and to give the context for that and also kind of setting the overarching digital strategy, so your customer groups know what's happening and where it's going and what's trying to be achieved.

This type of stuff doesn't happen overnight, you know, we're actually trying to bring together resources across government it takes, it takes time. It takes a good amount of time. Even highly successful Government to Business one-stop shops have been progressively migrating content and services for five, six, seven, eight plus years and look they still haven't finished. And that itself isn't an issue to be honest because at the end of the day government obviously is always going to be constrained by the resources it's got and needs to be able to work within its means.

Transparency - a breath of fresh air

So relating to all this, I guess is that earlier call to action I mentioned on the home page, the Farmers.gov Playbook.

And this basically sets out a really open transparent process, outlining basically what the team is working on.

It's like taking that whole concept of having a live beta and just bumping it up to, you know, a level 10 or something like that. So on this particular Playbook it goes on to say, "As customers and employees engage with Farmers.gov and provide feedback, we will enhance and add features that continuously improve both the online and local in-person experience."

Now this particular section then kind of breaks down information into tools, education, self-service and engagement. And each area then flags at a high level the activities and then provides underneath this access to their status cards.

Playbook transparency Farmers.gov

It's incredibly open, it's incredibly refreshing, it's that level of transparency from government saying, "Look, this is what we're working on and this is where we're currently at and this is how we're kind of progressing towards achieving that."

Actually, the other thing that's really good about it is it's got, each of them have like a little progress bar highlighting how they're going.

It's incredibly agile. It's incredibly transparent. So there's also key tasks which highlight each activity and how it's progressing within a status bar and that level of transparency I think is really, really important and really lends itself to that agile project management approach.

Website Content status card Farmers.gov

And that's very much, I guess goes against the grain of the way that many governments traditionally have managed their digital service delivery projects, which are very much around that whole waterfall approach of you know, slowly building something out in the background and then like a magician "Tada!" a rabbit's pulled out of a hat, and everyone kind of goes, "Yeah! This is exactly what we wanted to deliver for the customers," which is great, but it's, you know, might have been 12 months, 18 months, two years until you've gone from the concept until the actual delivery.

As opposed to what's being done within the Farmers.gov space, that whole digital front door space, which is build small and build little incremental changes and it doesn't have to be right at day one.

It's around about trying to get things up and running and then building on it from there. And I think that's really a critical way that we need to be approaching our service delivery across government nowadays, and getting our projects up and running in the most timely fashion to meet customer requirements.

The service delivery approach to the Farmers.gov digital front door

So talking about customers, let's talk about the services that are currently in being delivered on Farmers.gov.

So, what they'll be able to use and access. And this is going to be very much as I said before, the Farmers.gov model is around a customer centric service delivery model for the US Federal government. So it's not necessarily looking at the individual services, it's around about joining them all up. And in the early days of that Farmers.gov site there's already three different types of services available. There's the transactional services, there's some diagnostic services and there's also informational content based services as well.

Now the transactional service I found very, very easily and I mentioned this is one of the features early on is the Market Facilitation Program. Now, this is a rather vaguely named program I must admit and I'm sure when you hear "market facilitation program" if you haven't fallen asleep and yawned straightaway, you're probably going to go, "What is that?

And what's a farmer going to think it's going to be? Is it about facilitating access to markets, I guess?"

Farmers.gov need to call a spade, a spade

But here's actually what the site describes the Market Facilitation Program as, "Are you a farmer or a rancher whose commodities have been directly impacted by unjustified foreign retaliatory tariffs, resulting in the loss of traditional export markets?"

So look basically, this is a subsidy that if you've been growing some particular farming commodities and then have been impacted by counter tariff retribution, pretty much in the American-Chinese trade war at the moment. There's a way that you can kind of be subsidized.

Now again, this podcast is non-political, were apolitical, so I'm not going to get into whether you're a fan of Trump trade policy or not.

But when I get into it, look, the naming, the positioning of the program is not the best.

As obviously when you're kind of trying to put a service out there, you want to actually make sure that your customers can use that service, a good way of doing so is making sure that you use language that makes perfect sense to them and resonates with them and describes exactly what it is, so that they know, "Yes, this relates to me or no, this doesn't relate to me."

So it's kind of taking that whole principle earlier on about Farmers.gov and what it's all around to, you know, a logical conclusion within the services themselves and clearly at the moment that does not happen with something called, you know, Market Facilitation Program. But putting that aside the rest of the serve is actually pretty good.

It describes simply and intuitively what you need to know. There are three cards on the page for what commodities are included, who's eligible and then additional resources and under each card it succinctly and clearly described what you need to know.

So for example it lists the commodities, the amount payable per commodity on the quantity and also provided basic easy-to-understand mathematic formulas for calculating your subsidy.

Now this could have easily been done or I guess as an online calculator tool. It wouldn't been difficult to do that and would have given you the ability to kind of get an indicative subsidy amount and I'm really surprised actually this again hasn't happened because I would have thought this would have been picked up as part of that Customer Experience Improvement Capability and user centered design.

So anyway, hopefully that's going to come down the pipeline.

They also kind of list there the key things you probably need to know as a farmer who might be interested in this particular payments subsidies, so key dates, payout amounts and so forth for you know a maximum amount. Who is eligible identifies some other criteria, so what records you need to have on hand to be able to apply, what certain regulations you need to be able to demonstrate that you've met and also information about an averaged annual tax rate that you'll need to have on hand, so you know, pretty much how much you've paid in taxes for the last three years and then averaged out.

So the final area, additional resources outlines other relevant programs the farmer may want to investigate further to see if they're eligible. The two other programs currently sit on different USDA websites so they're not part of the same user experience and to be honest, they look decidedly old-school, very dated in comparison. So sorry Agricultural Marketing Service and Foreign Agriculture Service.

Maybe you need to start looking at moving your services and re-engineering and bringing them across to Farmers.gov in the not-too near future.

But the best bit about the tariff subsidy is the process for applying. Now they provide a number of options all very clear and all very understandable from turning up at your local counter and I've heard farmers like a bit of a chat times when popping into town, so that might be an option that they want to do. If they want to and they're comfortable with downloading a fillable and printable PDF form and then sending that back via snail mail or email or fax - which I was surprised to read because I don't know anyone who has a fax machine anymore, anyway - and finally actually providing access to an authenticated portal. And once you're able to prove who you are and your role with that agriculture business within that you can basically then use that authenticated portal, you can access a dashboard of your activities.

So all in all that's a pretty good experience.

Diagnostic tools: very cool

The second type of service that's available within Farmers.gov is a diagnostic tool and this took me through five easy steps to identify my eligibility for disaster assistance.

So from previously writing about the 2017 hurricanes that affected the US, I knew enough details to successfully test this and got some pretty good results.

So I created a bit of a scenario where my livestock and cropping farming business in Aransas County in Texas had been impacted by hurricane and tidal surge in August 2017.

So that's Hurricane Harvey and as a result the tool presented the four relevant programs I may be eligible for and provided links to them on the various USDA pages. Again, not on Farmers.gov yet, but you know, that's okay. You've got access to the services and hopefully in the not too distant future they'll be brought across to continue to build on that customer journey.

It also explained that if I wasn't already involved with USDA programs what documents I'd need to provide to kind of,
well, basically to participate in this particular service.

Where I need to go for my local USDA service center again and any of those documents as I said before for the programs. So yes, while you can't currently actually apply for these programs online via Farmers.gov, they clearly have broken down the customer journey identifying what's needed and when and how they can be presented to the customer simply and easily. So again a really, really good job.

Multimodal content strategy - good initial steps

Finally, let's turn to an information based content offering around soil health. And this is again really well presented.

It's got a good blend of dialogue, infographics and also YouTube videos.

The content is clear, although maybe a little bit too simplistic. It summarizes things very much with an inverted pyramid approach when it comes to writing copy and content.

But if I could say one thing against their content approach, it doesn't go that just one more level down with the details that a farmer may actually need when it comes to soil health. So for example the infographics and the content dialogue explain at a high level why tilling soil, so you know those big discs that kind of get pulled behind plows, churning the soil up for planting. So they basically talk about how that's not recommended anymore. So instead going towards a no-till approach with mulching and other agricultural techniques to you know, reduce soil erosion.

So that's all very good and that kind of is important with the mulching it also it helps build up, you know, active bacteria in the soil, all those type of things.

Addressed at a very, very high level and I think that's essential when you're kind of introducing concepts, but I did expect a little bit more detail particularly maybe in the YouTube videos and it is touched on but I would have expected a little bit more guidance specifically on what to do and what not to do and how to do it to maximize the outcomes when it comes to minimizing soil erosion, improving the quality of these soils and so forth. The other thing I suppose that was really missing you is a clear call to action at the end of the page, or set of actions at the end so the pages is tailored basically with finding your local service center, which isn't actually relevant to this particular content information, the most recent blog posts, again not relevant and the latest Twitter posts which again, aren't relevant.

So I really did kind of think there's a missed opportunity within this content offering both two fold a little bit more detail so that if someone wants to go that next level down, to find out what they need to do and how to do it, they can get that information quickly and easily. And then, you know, anchoring that basically as part of that call to action towards the end of the page so you can take that step.

It's not just about educating and making them aware that look, you know tilling is bad, no till is much better. It's actually around about well, here's what you need to do and how to do it and let me show you exactly what to do or better yet if you're going to be using that concept of farmers learning from farmers, here's how other farmers do it.

And that's kind of captured at a high level again within the case studies in the YouTube videos, but I think there's an opportunity to kind of go that next level down.

Now don't take any of my advice today as being a negative commentary.

It's meant to be purely constructive. Farmers.gov appears to be developing a really great model which no doubt will evolve and get much better with time.

Why Farmers.gov is great for Government to Business digital delivery

So another great thing about farmers I suppose is they're intrinsically businesses.

So the Reform plan's recommendations by actually channeling Farmers.gov, making sure that's identified not only I suppose provides great opportunity for farmers, but also provides great opportunity to show how Government to Business digital service delivery can be implemented within the US government's approach towards digital front doors.

And fundamentally, that's what we all ultimately trying to see. You know, we want to be able to see businesses thriving, you know, having intuitive customer experience journeys that clearly answer their questions and deliver services in the way they want to receive them and makes it easier to start or grow their existing business.

So that's it for today, I hope you've learned a little bit about how the US federal government is currently approaching its digital front doors particularly with the example of Farmers.gov and also learned a little bit about how that can potentially be improved and how you can then actually apply that within your own government jurisdiction. My name is Gavin Atkinson, and I look forward to speaking to you soon on another episode of Government to Business. Bye.