This link has been bookmarked by 39 people . It was first bookmarked on 28 Jul 2007, by someone privately.
-
19 Jan 13
-
28 Sep 11
-
05 Apr 11
-
Anyone can submit or edit an article, which is why Wikipedia has been lampooned for high-profile inaccuracies
-
But Wikipedia also employs a series of consensus driven vetting processes that strive to ensure the information is accurate, is verifiable, is built on solid sources, and excludes personal opinion. Just as anyone can submit an article, anyone can also start an "Article for Deletion" (AfD) review process if they believe the piece does not live up to those standards. After online debate about the worthiness of the piece, a Wikipedia administrator reviews the arguments and decides the fate of the article.
-
From the outside, Wikipedia may look like chaos barely contained.
-
-
26 Mar 09
-
02 Dec 08
Joachim NiemeierHBS professor Andy McAfee had his doubts about Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia created and maintained by volunteers. "I just didn't think it could yield a good outcome or a good encyclopedia. But I started consulting it and reading the entries, and I said, 'This is amazing.' "
wikipedia web2.0 governance enterprise2.0 social collaboration
-
23 May 08
-
05 Feb 08
-
20 Jan 08
-
09 Jan 08
-
23 Dec 07
-
In late 2005, the scientific journal Nature conducted a study comparing 42 science articles in Wikipedia with the online version of Encyclopaedia Britannica. The survey revealed that Encyclopaedia Britannica had 123 errors while Wikipedia had 162 (for averages of 2.9 and 3.9 errors per article, respectively.)
-
From the outside, Wikipedia may look like chaos barely contained. "When people look at these sorts of phenomenon at Wikipedia, they misread the anarchy," Lakhani says. "All these people, thousands of people, there must be no rules! But there is a very ornate and well-defined structure of participation. One of our big learnings was to actually dive into the structure: What is the structure that enables these guys to produce this great resource?"
-
An ongoing tension within Wikipedia is characterized as the inclusionists versus the exclusionists. The inclusionists argue that one of Wikipedia's core values is that it should be open to all ideas, that truth emerges from a variety of directions. Better to include than exclude. The exclusionists see Wikipedia's utilitarianism diminished if too much froth clouds the valuable information inside.
-
What Wikipedia has shown is that self-selection is critical. Peer review is critical. So there is a challenge for firms that are used to managing employees and allocating the resources in a very top-down kind of way. Now we have a technology that enables self-selection, transparency, openness—how does a manager or management deal with the technology? Do they implement it in a way that's true to the spirit, or is it top-down? And, again, there are some very successful examples and some not so successful examples.
-
-
24 Oct 07
Hans Henrik H HemingArtikel fra Harvard om hvordan Wikipedia virker (og ikke virker)
adoption article business case_study collaboration collective_intelligence community culture enterprise2.0 McAfee Research socialmedia socialsoftware wikipedia wiki wikis
-
09 Sep 07
Michel Bauwensan HBS case study, written with professor Karim R. Lakhani, on how Wikipedia governs itself and faces controversial challenges.
-
05 Sep 07
-
11 Aug 07
-
02 Aug 07
-
29 Jul 07
-
26 Jul 07
R GrassbergerHBS case study, written with professor Karim R. Lakhani, on how Wikipedia governs itself and faces controversial challenges.
-
Martin LindnerPorousity and openness vs. ossification and exclusionism: McAfee's concept of "Enterprise 2.0" as discussed on Wikipedia - case study of wikipedia policy. what wikis ca do within an enterprise.
-
Tom Hemingwayissues such as how online cultures are made and maintained, the power of self-policing organizations, the question of whether the service is drifting from its core principles, and whether a Wikipedia-like concept can work in a business setting
-
24 Jul 07
-
23 Jul 07
-
-
Rotkapchen .One of the best pieces to understand 2.0 governance (or the stuff that Kevin Kelly was espousing years ago).
Page Comments
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.