The Inside Scoop on Intellipedia

Here is a short rundown of Chris Dorobek's interview with Chris Rasmussen, one of the community managers for Intellipedia. Timing is approximate:

1. 6:00 - Chris Dorobek starts, talks about collaboration
2. 10:30 - Chris Rasmussen introduced, background
3. 12:00 - how the added value of the wiki collaboration comes more from the discussion pages than the article pages, which carry the traditional products
4. 17:30 - anecdotal evidence of how Intellipedia is useful
5. 18:30 - discusses how wiki collaboration differs from more conventional knowledge management in a "need to know culture"
6. 19:30 - Intellipedia is attributional, a disinfectant for [the abuses] of anonymous participation
7. 22:00 - Intellipedia is one of a number of different tools for different purposes, it boils down to "practice with the tools"
8. 26:00 - Mashups is the next step, not portals or websites
9. 26:30 - Chris Dorobek concluding remarks

Informative and enlightening!

What's in a Name, Part 1

As I was working through the references in a draft document recently, I ended up for the first time in a corner of Intelliepedia. Intellipedia is an open source, unclassified Wiki project hosted by the Intelligence Community, a diverse group of agencies with a common agenda. This seems to be a vital resource which supports some number of groups and it should be considered as an emerging community of practice. It is an interesting experiment, one that I hope will continue for a while and not, like most Government programs, be stifled by the misperceptions, internal politics and under-funding which are the nature of bureaucracy. Does anyone remember the fate of the “e-Gov” initiatives which were the darlings of the new administration just a few short years ago?

For deep background on Intellipedia and it’s leaders, see the “FCW Insider” story http://www.fcw.com/blogs/editor/153195-1.html

My First Post

A new debate about bureaucracy is desperately needed when we pause to consider the fundamental social shifts we are observing at the moment. I found a new and interesting blog on Business Week today under the heading of "Business At Work, Negotiating Bureaucracy." The title of the post, The Mechanistic Mindset and Bureaucracy pulled me in.

I firmly agree with all that John says, with the exception of two little things. Experience suggests that John suffers from a bit of wishful thinking when he says "And when organizations operate with a clear and well-aligned purpose, then they become great and influential." This is most highly desirable, but I'm afraid, impractical in the real world. The public sector in general, and all Government organizations in particular, operate with the utmost clarity and hundreds of years of as well-aligned purpose as any human endeavor. A career spent in public service is a calling, without the hope of the remunerations of our private sector partners. But do we, individually or collectively, consider public service to be great and influential. Unfortunately not. There are several disciplines of academic work that substantiate our perceptions on this paradox, and enough evidence to argue on any side.

John is spot on about unlearning, except where he says that "Unlearning is forgetting." If we forget as we unlearn, we lose sight of our purpose and values and reasons for our service, falling back into the paradox that a Mechanistic Mindset is blind to.