I think the key is not to try and replace the existing systems (eg, the Knowledge Base) but to implement solutions that allow different stuctures - so that the wiki is managed by the users, not the gatekeepers. What you could then do, over time, is migrate wiki pages into the KB, once they have reached a level of stability, for example.

Wikis won’t solve every problem. They will alow you to deploy a lightweight, usable solution for a range of different situations, many of which are currently poorly managed via email or workspaces. And because they are lightweight & cheap, you can afford to install them at the project level and see how they work for an agency…

what i mean by that is ‘gatekeeping’ of information within organisations.

we also floated the idea at the IRD, on account of their highly complex information structure, but were deflated by the presence of the Knowledge Base (a page-based intraweb containing much of the current versions of practice, procedures, rules, etc), and the amount of knowledge floating around in the heads of subject-matter experts.

you could get the wiki going, but you’d have to move the Knowledge Base people into manage competeing interpretations of contemporary information, and resource constraint meant this was unlikely to happen. so, what you would end up with is a user-defined system that is actually defined by gatekeeping-tasked non-users!

so, while the system might work here at DoL, because it is a vastly smaller organisation, the gatekeeping issue is likely to remain, IMHO.

i should really ask someone about the idea tho.

I think the points you raise are good ones (for the most part). The tools don’t have to be unstructured, they just allow for different kinds of structures, including ones we are not that confident with yet.

But, hey, anything to improve communications…

Wiki = shared workspace. As you note, don’t confuse a particular product for the generic service of which it is a subset. You can structure wikis in a number of ways, with security, user privileges, locked areas etc. all you want. It doesn’t have to be wide open as a default. It’s really about management more than it’s about a tool. To work cooperatively requires buy-in to the concept of working together. We seem notoriously wedded to the concept of working individually and putting stuff out for review, which is not the same thing.

Blogs - so-o-o-o-o 2005 Could be useful but, again, it’s a matter of mindset and easing up of restictions. They could be hella useful internally though. Go on, prototype!

RSS - can be useful, but can also be the biggest timewaster.

The thing about all these tools is that they are, by default, unstructured. Corporate bodies of a certain size or responsibility NEED structure to function. They don’t necessarily need hierarchy the way the public sector has it, but that’s a result of poor management, imho.

and, finally…
all this from a man who used to IM me when we sat 10 feet from and facing each other! It is to smile ruefully…