- Group File and Document Handling (GFDH) Tools: they support the management of files and documents that are handled by groups. It includes shared-view, synchronous or asynchronous editing, and notification mechanisms when files are altered (see [1]).
- Computer Conferencing (CC) Tools: they allow synchronous and asynchronous communication via text, audio, or/and video. Shared desktop or whiteboards as well as protocols for send and receiving files are common functionalities for these kinds of tools (see [1]).
- Electronic Meeting System (EMS) Tools: usually used by private corporations, they facilitate brainstorming, problem solving, decision-making by voting, action planning, surveys, production of documentation, among other functionalities (see [1]).
- Electronic Workspace (EW) Tools: they provide groups with virtual working spaces where documents and files can be centrally stored. In addition, those platforms can support to-do lists, calendars, address books, and workspaces for specific projects (see [1]).
- Online Social Network Systems (OSN) Tools: they connect users and facilitate “sharing and finding of content, and disseminating information” [2]. Popular social network sites are examples for this category, which also provide bulleting boards, synchronous/asynchronous messaging, among other functionalities, such as voting and the creation of events.
The free-content encyclopedia Wikipedia is a successful
example of a GFDH tool based on an openly editable model that came from the
open source experience, which sees the users as potential contributors. Wikipedia
covers an enormous amount of subjects. More than 22,000,000 articles were
written so far in 285 languages. As in open source software projects, the
outcome of the collaborative process lead to the creation of articles “of
remarkably high quality“ [3, p. 21]. This large number of
publications and quality were only possible due to its approximately 77,000
active contributors[1].
Originally, Wikipedia was proposed as a complementary
project for its predecessor Nupedia as a mean to generate faster and larger
amounts of content. Although also thought to be collaborative, Nupedia was not
able to release consistent amount of articles during its existence. The main
problems Nupedia had were its highly bureaucratic publication procedure, elitist
selection of contributors, and non-wiki platform. Nupedia’s content approval
process had seven complicated steps that encompassed editing, fact-checking,
and peer reviewing. In addition, most of its articles were written by experts
with PhD. Although non-expert individuals could also contribute with articles,
they would most likely be vetted with only few cases of exception.
Therefore, Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger[2]
decided to run Wikipedia to facilitate the productions of articles that later
would go for the Nupedia’s reviewing process. Basically, the idea was to find a
way that “uncredentialed people could
participate more easily” [4]. The differential of
Wikipedia relied on its deep open-source philosophies, which considers
everything as a “draft in progress, open to revision. A centralized authority
does not approve projects before they are launched, but rather decentralized
authority improves them constantly.” [5]. Impressively, the quality of
the articles and the fact the Wikipedia is not prone to amateurism and
vandalism is due to the community that is “passionate about the topics they
know and care about”, and “tends to
trump both inaccuracy and vandalism over time” [5].
The success of Wikipedia relies on its wiki architecture,
and clear policy and guidelines. A wiki (from Hawaiian “quick”) is a type of
Content Management System (CMS) application that allows individuals to add,
edit, or delete content in a cooperative manner. Individuals are driven to
cooperate if not with writing totally new publications, then with linking
keywords among articles, fixing spelling and grammar mistakes, or improving
clarity of sentences (see Figure 2).
Figure 2 Welcome page of Wikipedia
Nothing else holds Wikipedia from being just a wiki than its
policies and guidelines. According to Sanger [4], Wikipedia has a different
culture from regular wikis, because “it’s pretty singlemindedly aimed at
creating an encyclopedia.” [4]. Although the architecture of
wiki software encourages openness and de-centralization allowing deviant
content being fed into Wikipedia, the community of wikipedians is compliant with
the Wikipedia’s five fundamental pillars. The rules that define the principles
of the project are[3]:
- Wikipedia is an encyclopedia.
- Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view.
- Anyone can edit, use, modify, and distribute.
- Editors should treat each other in a respectful and civil manner.
- Wikipedia does not have clear rules.
Before being Wikipedia, the project was launched as
Nupedia’s wiki branch, but soon it received criticism for being too informal
and unstructured. The advisory board did not want to have a wiki as part of
Nupedia, therefore Wikipedia was re-launched as an independent project in
January 15, 2001[4].
In comparison, Wikipedia’s flexibility and dynamism helped it to reach 18,000 published
articles in its first year. Nupedia released only 21 articles during its first
year. As Rettberg [6] points out, Nupedia “failed to trust
the collective intelligence of the network.“ [6, p. 199].
[1]
Data extracted from www.wikipedia.com. Accessed on September 2013.
[2]
Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger were the founders of both Nupedia and Wikipedia
projects.
[3]
Data taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars
[4]
Data from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About#Wikipedia_history
References
[1] G.
Bafoutsou and G. Mentzas, “Review and functional classification of
collaborative systems,” Int. J. Inf. Manag. 22, 2002.
[2] J.
Moreno-Llorena, C. Iván, R. Martín, R. Cobos, J. de Lara, and E. Guerra,
“Towards a Functional Characterization of Collaborative Systems,” in Cooperative
Design, Visualization, and Engineering, pp. 182–185.
[3] T. W.
Malone, R. Laubacher, and C. Dellarocas, “The Collective Intelligence Genome,” Mit
Sloan Manag. Rev. Spring, vol. 51, no. 3, 2010.
[4] L.
Sanger, “The Early History of Nupedia and Wikipedia: A Memoir - Slashdot.”
[Online]. Available:
http://features.slashdot.org/story/05/04/18/164213/the-early-history-of-nupedia-and-wikipedia-a-memoir.
[Accessed: 13-Sep-2013].
[5] S.
Rettberg, “All together now: Collective knowledge, collective narratives, and
architectures of participation,” Digit. Arts Cult., 2005.
[6] New
narratives: stories and storytelling in the digital age. Lincoln:
University of Nebraska Press, 2011.
Hey guys good article thanks for sharing.
ReplyDeleteWebsite Development Company in Bangalore