I've never really respected Wikipedia as a viable source for information. Sure, it can be useful for finding the years that Justin Timberlake was on "The Mickey Mouse Club" or the name of the actress who played Sloane in "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" (Mia Sara), but I would never specifically go to it for serious information. (On the other hand, I have a friend who is an orthopedic surgeon who says he occasionally refers to Wikipedia while on the job for relevant info. Do not use him as your orthopedic surgeon.) However, having read the article and learning that Wikipedia's structure and governance is pretty robust, I have a little more respect for it. I was previously unaware that there was even a way for articles to be deleted, so this fact also adds to its legitimacy.
Conversely, I think there is real value to having wikis in the workplace. My former company set up wikis for the international supply chain department, where I worked. Because of time zone differences and language barriers, the wikis proved to be a very useful central repository for processes, standard operating procedures, and frequently-used forms. It was a great way for business partners across the world to share information and get questions answered quickly and efficiently. As mentioned in the "Wikis at DrKW" article, when giving unrestricted editing access to employees across the company, you have to trust that the wikis will be used and respected for their intended purpose. If that is a significant concern for your company, I think the strategy that needs to be revisited lies within recruiting, hiring and managing; not within information-sharing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment