This is from Ric Roberts of Swirrl, a company that offers a hosted online workspace for sharing knowledge. The Swirrl Blog is a good source of information on business collaboration and knowledge management. – Stewart

Email works great for short messages intended for one person, where you just want to alert the recipient to something, and no further discussion is required. But when you start to include more people, and they all start chipping in with their responses, email starts to break down as an efficient medium.

Say there are five other people in your team, and you want to get their feedback on a report that you intend to send to a client. If you send out an email to all of them, asking for their advice, you might get 3 or 4 responses back: some with revised versions of the report, some with notes at the end and some with comments interspersed within your original text. A couple of people might have ‘CC’d everyone else in your team when they replied, where others might have just replied directly to you.

I’m sure you can see where this is leading. Your team ends up with multiple conflicting versions of the report, some of which aren’t available to everyone involved. Holding a meaningful discussion over the content quickly becomes impossible. [Read more]

This is from Ric Roberts of Swirrl, a company that offers a hosted online workspace for sharing knowledge. The Swirrl Blog is a good source of information on business collaboration and knowledge management. – Stewart

If a question about general knowledge comes up in conversation, it’s easy to immediately look it up on the web on your laptop or phone.  If you’re watching a film and you can’t place where else you’ve seen one of the actors, you can instantly look it up on IMDB.  You can even use services like Shazam to identify songs.  Finding things out at work should also be this easy, but it normally isn’t. Although the information you want probably exists somewhere in your organization, it’s often scattered across multiple systems or you might not have access to the specific shared drive where it lives.

Being able to easily access the current knowledge in your workplace helps you do your job better.  It allows you to spend less time searching for information or tackling issues that others have already solved. [Read more]

Larry Cannell explains the inherent weakness in files as the primary container for information:

I don’t even want files. What I want is the information stored in a file. I have been thinking about files and documents lately and I have come to the conclusion that our reliance on the computer file as the primary structure for storing our digital “stuff” is hurting us in ways we cannot see. This is holding us back from realizing truly breakthrough capabilities.

Files must be pushed out to people, and each person makes changes in isolation from others. The resulting revisions must be combined – and differences resolved – which can lead to disagreements, misunderstandings, and corrections. This can prolong the development of critical products like proposals, reports, technical documentation, and anything else that needs to be produced by many people in a short time period.

A wiki pulls those same people in to work on information in a shared space where one always sees the most up to date version – the product of all previous revisions. This eliminates the reconciliation of competing or conflicting changes, since they’re dealt with during the revision process. That’s the part of collaboration that’s otherwise the least collaborative, least productive, and most damaging to the social fabric of work groups.

Janet Rae Dupree suggests that since computers are already doing left brain tasks so well, it’s time for us to focus more on our imaginative, creative right-brains:

…now that computers can emulate many of the sequential skills of the brain’s left hemisphere — the part that sees the individual trees in a forest — the author Daniel Pink argues that it’s time for our imaginative right brain, which sees the entire forest all at once, to take center stage.

Wikis are good for the right brain, and the creative process, since they don’t bog you down with complex steps and processes – the domain of the left brain. [Read more]

Rob Castaneda, Founder of CustomWare Asia Pacific, wrote Working the “Wiki” Way for the March 2008 issue of Octane, quarterly magazine of the Entrepreneurs’ Organization (EO).

In the article, he discusses how CustomWare uses a wiki internally to improve information flow between teams working on client projects:

The Pain Point

The biggest snag we experienced was transferring knowledge and context from the sales team to the delivery team. This muddled flow of information threatened our client projects.

Rob and his company decided they needed to improve communication, and decided to use a wiki as their collaboration platform. [Read more]

On Monday, I posted a reader poll asking how you use wikis. As of last night, 127 of you responded, and here’s what you had to say:

There were three respondents who chose “Other”, and here are their specific responses: Managing classroom information, garbage trash, and audits. Now, I can’t really say much about garbage trash, but I can comment on the other two “other” uses:

Managing classroom information is an excellent wiki use. In fact, I got started using wikis doing something very similar – building a wiki-based science curriculum.

Using a wiki for audits is a great use too – besides having all your information easily accessible in one place, the revision history the wiki maintains for every page is very audit-friendly since it shows a complete trail of who contributed information, when they did so, and what was added, changed and removed.

Jeffrey Keefer (Twitter) commented on the post and asked about a poll for education uses. That’s coming next week! He also asked for more information on some of the uses I included in the poll, like project management. Watch for that next week too.

Seventh in a series by guest author Vincenzo Cammarata.

Strictly linked with transparency concept, openness is at the base of the principle that people work better if they have access to the right information and possibility to assume that all over the organization.

The simple access to other group member data or the possibility to know activities scheduled also in other groups are normal operations in a mature context such as is allowed to look to other team solutions or results in order to decide something for the own team.

Related WIOWA Questions:

7.a Collaboration (support to effectiveness)

Is it possible to access other groups’ contact data?

7.b Openness to ideas (organizational services)

Is it possible to know when other groups meet and, if you want, participate?

7.c Decision Making (knowledge and collaborative support)

In order to take decisions, do you usually look to other groups’ or departments’ work results and choices?

7.d Communication (communication and socialization)

Have you ever participated in other groups’ or departments’ discussions?

Sixth in a series by guest author Vincenzo Cammarata.

A common element between Wiki philosophy and innovation successful case histories, is the partial or total absence of structure or, saying better, of hierarchy. The possibility, in fact, to contribute in the same way, indifferently at which level you are involved in the organization, is one of the first steps towards the reduction of barriers to collaboration, participation and involvement in the organizational life.

Peering is to intend in the two ways of organizational commitment: from both the perspective, the access to common information and the possibility to contribute to corporate knowledge.

Related WIOWA Questions:

6.a Supporting people (support to effectiveness)

Is everybody able to update useful information like telephone numbers or scheduled meetings?

6.b Resource Allocation (organizational services)

Is everybody able to book meeting room or, in general, common resources?

6.c Flexibility on process design (knowledge/collaborative support)

Is everybody able to recombine documents and then publish it?

6.d Communication (communication and socialization)

Is everybody free to publish (in the intranet or wiki) information useful for your colleagues?

Comment I just posted on today’s New York Times article about Wikipedia:

I have a reasonable amount of faith in Wikipedia articles. As with any source, it’s important to check the accuracy of anything you read to see if more than one other source can corroborate it.

It’s important to keep in mind that what you’re reading here about Wikipedia is a world away from wikis that are used in countless organizations around the world as a way to reduce email, collaborate more efficiently, organize knowledge, improve the response time of call centers, and provide a place for students and researchers to collaborate.

Wikipedia, or an encyclopedia built using a wiki, is but one example of how a wiki can be used, and some of the problems associated with a completely open wiki with a loosely tied community do not carry over into other wiki uses where an established community uses the tool to further its shared purpose.

Stewart Mader
Grow Your Wiki: http://www.ikiw.org

— Stewart, San Francisco, CA