Kordia Blog

Regan Hughes: We've been reviewing our knowledge management strategy recently in an attempt to work smarter and more collaboratively.

After looking at common problems we face, turning them into requirements and investigating the tools we have at our disposal we've come up with two key platforms to move forward with - Microsoft SharePoint and Wikis.  This is where two 'world views' form along the lines of the system we're each most familiar with.

Background

As background, we currently run two Wikis - one is has been well used by engineers for a number of years (based on Moin Moin), the other is the Microsoft version that comes with SharePoint.  The latter version is not much use out-of-the-box, but we've found a promising package called SharePoint Wiki Plus, from Kwizcom that looks to turn it into something useful for an acceptable price tag. 

Why even consider MS you ask?  Because having our document management (SharePoint) and informal knowledge management (Wiki) on one searchable platform sounds like a knowledge management holy grail worth aiming for.

Square Pegs and Round Holes

Anyway, back to the two groups and the discussion of which knowledge should go which system.  We all agree that SharePoint is better at formal document management, with version control, metadata, etc; and that Wikis are better at collecting informal, collaborative knowledge like discussions, project notes and operational info that is subject to regular change. 

So that's all fine.  But when it comes to implementation, either group tends to try to do everything on the system they're most familiar with.  The SharePoint evangelists are creating discussion forums and operational 'quick guides', whilst the Wiki promoters are wanting to convert key Word documents into the Wiki format.  Trying to fit square pegs in round holes.

The Plan

Clearly this is going to be a major issue when we roll-out our new strategy to the wider organisation.  So the plan is to have our small group of experimenters try to understand enough of each system (and each other's perspectives) to find a healthy balance that draws on the strengths of the two platforms. 

Time will tell whether we can implement two seamlessly complimentary knowledge management systems, or whether we will split into two segments of knowledge worlds, with a privileged few fluent in both approaches.