The collective ownership of the wiki the content, aside from sounding “too liberal” for many managers I know, has a limitation that you should be aware of. In an XP development team there are some factors that help collective ownership being effective.
- Team size is relatively small, often sharing the same space: clarifying or correcting a published information is a quick action, involving no ceremony.
- Teams have a well defined common goal, meaning that the concept of “what is good for the team” is close enough to “what is good for the individual”. Frequent role switching help enforce this perspective also;
- Development teams are constructing a system. Crafting, and seeing something growing, with everybody’s contribution, helps feeling part of a greater whole, enforcing the community feeling.
Users and contributors
Yet, the wikipedia success story might make things look too easy, when in fact they’re not. The underlying model sounds like this:
- some pioneer contributor start writing on some known topics
- readers benefit from the information, and if they have something to add to make the information more complete, they are invited to contribute.
On a smaller scale you won’t get the same result, unless you really have a shared “vision” and/or a common “goal” and you actively push for it.
Tags: Wiki, Project management, Agile