Wiki Culture

[Neill]

Today was the first day of a new experiment.
I set up the first few pages of a departmental Wiki.
I have already used Wikis in a variety of projects and environments but this is the first attempt at using it within the company.
Our department is entirely composed of "knowledge workers" and they know an awful lot. This is an attempt to get some of this knowledge out of their heads and on to the server.
I have read a lot on the subject and about how "knowledge is power" and how the "flat" Wiki power structure is at odds with the "hierarchical company structure".
Some say it can't work. Some that it is fantastic.
I'll keep you posted.
Neill

[scootrider]

Hi Neill,

This seems like a really useful experiment. I would be interested in your experiences on the uptake of this, from the perspective of the staff using it, but especially from your IT staff and managers who implemented and sanctioned its use. (I,m sorry but I can't recall your exact role, so you could be one of those managers). I'm neither in IT nor management so the need to convince both is my first hurdle.

As a secondary project, I'm considering some ideas for a new/ filing system for my current department (on secondment for six months) and I was thinking about a wiki type intranet system for use in the section I am working in, to update other staff on progress with ongoing tasks / jobs. I thought it my form a record ( notes on meetings and phone calls notes etc.) and also update the rest of the section on progress. Currently there is a system of bi-weekly meeting.

Any update on the first couple of weeks, and your previous experiences from use in projects would be very helpful.

Many thanks

Richard

[Neill]

Hello Richard!

This seems like a really useful experiment. I would be interested in your experiences on the uptake of this, from the perspective of the staff using it, ...

I will keep you informed but the actual "going live" is in September. At the moment there are just a few of us experimenting. I think that it will be useful to have some information there before people are faced with an empty sheet and say "so what!"

...but especially from your IT staff and managers who implemented and sanctioned its use. (I,m sorry but I can't recall your exact role, so you could be one of those managers). I'm neither in IT nor management so the need to convince both is my first hurdle.

The systems has been made available by corporate headquarters. I guess that a few IT types are going to be a little worried about it because it smacks of information anarchy. A plus is that we already have a system of grading information as public (anyone), internal (any one working for the company) and confidential (only those named). As the Wiki is available to any employee but not externally, then it follows that anything internal is OK "on line". I think that senior management is waiting to see what happens. Hopefully the Wiki is established and working before any one notices.

Any update on the first couple of weeks, and your previous experiences from use in projects would be very helpful.

I last used a Wiki for a project to make a list of mountain bike routes with GPS data available.
http://www.oy-mittelberg.de/mountainbike
This was a collaborative effort by three local councils and three mountain bike groups. We met irregularly and the Wiki was the main point of data collection and organization. I used PBWorks and it worked well. Many people had not experienced a Wiki so there was a bit of a learning curve to begin with but I was on hand to help and encouraged people to do it wrong before they didn't try at all.

I am currently collecting information for a planned research degree next year and I am also using a PBWiki for this.

Neill

[jim_lewis1]

I tried to set up a Wiki here at work.

Unfortunately it was somewhat hobbled from the outset as no space was given for storing files, (screenshots etc can be quite large)
As a result you had to first publish material to another location, then put the link to it in the Wiki.
This extra step complicated involvement with the Wiki, (it stopped being quick, which is where the word Wiki came from).
Consequently only a few colleagues contributed to it over a couple of months and the project just died.

I don't think I made the case of the value for contributors of the resource very well either. Management seemed more interested in using the information to keep tabs on people and their activities.

From my experience:

Contributing should be quick, and ideally easy, people are not likely to contribute unless they see real value in the information being available to them and others

Many people store information privately for their own use, so doing the same on a Wiki adds workload, (they are unlikely to immediately start using the Wiki as storage in case it is lost or ceases to be supported), and has a learning curve.

I think initially at least a weekly meeting to discuss the material that has been contributed and the value to everyone of it being there would do a lot to ensure people habitually contributed to it.
Unless people understand that others do need to see their material they will not contribute it.
You also need to be a bit careful not to use material posted on the Wiki to police people's activities, that will certainly discourage them from contributing.

[Neill]

Contributing should be quick, and ideally easy,

I agree that this is the most important factor. People start wanting some where to keep notes and those notes should be easy to write.

Today at lunch three of the "test users" were discussing the Wiki and a fourth asked what this was all about.
We told him and he said "can I play?"
maybe we should not do any advertising - just let it grow virally. That is how Google always start their products.

Neill

[Andrea]

Would love to see how this evolves over time and what kind of issues are raised by the project.

Technological issues are significant (accessibility; usability; reliability; security; etc.) and, as Jim points out, can make the project a nonstarter. However, I am impressed by what I've seen of PBWorks so far.

The other big issue, of course, is cultural. A wiki is an "enabling technology", but having a perfect tool available doesn't necessarily mean that it will be used. A wiki-culture requires a high level of altruism (with people putting in significant amounts of work which rarely delivers immediate personal returns, but does benefit the "whole" in the long term).

If there is a mismatch between an organisation's culture e.g. a culture which is highly hierarchical and/or individualistic, then, at best, a wiki can serve as an "underground" tool to undermine the hierarchical and individualistic culture. And those individuals supporting this underground tool will need to be ready for quite a lot of antagonism and obstruction from those that are quite comfortable with the status quo. To give an example, it is quite possible that issues will be raised in a wiki which will openly question decisions which are being made by people at the top of the hierarchy. It takes managers that are already open to a more egalitarian form of organisation who will use this questioning positively. Others may feel very threatened.

Then, there is the more mundane task of facilitating the organisation of information within the wiki. Too much analysis without enough synthesis will result in a Babel Tower of seemingly useless information. Integrating information into a coherent whole is a thankless task, unless this is recognised, and supported, officially. Of course, Neill is the perfect person for spearheading this role, or, at the very least, building up the capacity within the organisation for others to take on this role

Here's a nice quote for you:

if specialised knowledge acts as bright torches probing around in the dark cave, then systems thinking provides the overall site map showing the extent and general features of the cave itself

[scootrider]

Thanks Neill, Jim and Andrea for these replies.

I have a meeting with one of our IT girls on Friday afternoon, so the timing is good.

I'm on secondment at this department at the moment and it is the least hierarchical place I have ever worked so I am hopeful that that side of things will not be too much of an issue (but I guess you can never tell).

I think the IT policy will be the biggest hurdle to start with.

Will update when I have a bit more news.

KR

Richard

[scootrider]

My original meeting was delayed.

It seems that a wiki would be against IT policy and at present there is little appetite to push this point. Other knowledge/data software can be used and is being rolled out to those users (in other departments) who want it (Sharepoint, I think), but licenses are quite expensive.

Also trying to get IT to locate some software to auto file and retrieve e-mails and reports with some kind tagging system (like del.icio.us). This seems more palatable and in a way I see it as a start to or more equitable data sharing model, within the department. (To be fair I don't think it is the staff who are unwilling to share knowledge/data, its just finding a format that is easy to use and IT policy compliant).

Ongoing !

[Neill]

Hi!
You wrote "It seems that a wiki would be against IT policy".
Did they explain why?

My experience is that IT policy is designed to be as restrictive as possible.
I am sure that Andrea can offer us an explanation about the restrictive IT policy mirroring a restrictive information policy in an organization.
But I think that IT types are paid to "keep data safe" rather than make it easily available.
If you can not find data you will complain but they keep their jobs.
If your data turns up on the Internet, heads will roll.

We are already in the first discussion about what should be posted in a Wiki and what should not.
But I now have three weeks holiday (TMA05) so I will wait to see the situation when I get back.

Neill

[Teiana]

why can't a wiki contain the names of people that know the answer, rather than the answer.. that way, no 'secrets' can be blown..

eg, someone posts a question/subject area, and people can add their names if they are a relevant expert.. so if you went to the wiki looking for something, you'd come away knowing exactly who to ask and how to contact them.. and perhaps what other information they are likely to need to answer your question..