Noam Cohen writes in the New York Times about a three-month pilot underway to collectively rewrite seven of the U.S. Army’s field manuals:

Under the three-month pilot program, the current version of each guide can be edited by anyone around the world who has been issued the ID card that allows access to the Army Internet system. About 200 other highly practical field manuals that will be renamed Army Tactics, Techniques and Procedures, or A.T.T.P., will be candidates for wikification.

Cohen writes that with 140,000 members of the Army’s online forums, there’s a large pool of potential contributors who can offer a wide range of experiences and examples to illustrate the procedures and techniques outlined in field manuals:

“For a couple hundred years, the Army has been writing doctrine in a particular way, and for a couple months, we have been doing it online in this wiki,” said Col. Charles J. Burnett, the director of the Army’s Battle Command Knowledge System. “The only ones who could write doctrine were the select few. Now, imagine the challenge in accepting that anybody can go on the wiki and make a change — that is a big challenge, culturally.”

That cultural challenge is reflected in the slow rate of contributions to the manuals so far:

Still, the reaction of the rank and file thus far has been tepid. A visit to the site hosting the seven wikified guides shows that there has been little editing over the first six weeks. In part, this slow acceptance reflects the different priorities between Army theorists and the working Army, according to Mr. Paparone, a retired colonel with a Ph.D. in public administration.

Here are three techniques the Army can use to help people get past their initial reluctance to contribute:

1. Assemble small groups of people with knowledge on specific techniques and procedures, and ask them to make the first few contributions. Once others see activity, they’ll be more likely to join in.
2. Reward those who contribute by giving perhaps an extra day or two of leave to the person who makes the most valuable contributions to each field manual during the pilot. (Don’t base rewards on the number of edits; this just encourages people to focus on numbers instead of quality).
3. De-emphasize the cultural shift of using the wiki. When people hear that something is different and requires a major shift in thinking, they’re more likely to focus on the perceived differences and dangers. Instead, present the concept of contributing to the field manuals as part of daily routine, just like answering emails. The pilot will be successful when people focus on what to do with it and how they’ll benefit (see #2).