There are numerous examples of successful open source wiki implementations throughout the internet. Wikipedia is the most well known of these, which is built on the MediaWiki open source software. Hoping to see the same type of viral adoption and enhanced collaboration in their organizations, more and more people are looking into wikis for a wide range of needs, and many of these people look at open source software as their first option. There are situations in which an open source wiki is right for an organization- but it also could be a big mistake.

There are several main reasons why open source software appeals to people (which tend to be more technical than the average employee). A large user community to help troubleshoot installation and configuration issues can be a big factor, as is having familiarity with the software if you are an active user of Wikipedia or other wiki-based sites. Most often, however, the biggest motivator is the fact that open source software is free- but is it really? Taking everything into consideration, could your open source wiki project actually end up costing you more money than subscribing to an online Wiki Software service?

Ultimately, you are interested in a wiki to centralize information, be it an intranet, a knowledge base, or a collaboration center- all with the goals of saving time to access information and answer critical questions. How much time would you spend to install, configure, backup, integrate, and maintain your own wiki? Add the cost of the hardware to run it and the extra strain on your infrastructure. Just compare the days of work and added costs of open source to the minutes it takes to get started with the BrainKeeper wiki- which has zero impact on your IT. We offer a 30-day free trial, so you can have a 60-day pilot for 10 people for only $35.

Something else to keep in mind with open source wikis is that if your wiki is a success, your entire company may want to have access to it. Will you have the time to teach everyone how to use wiki syntax? Will you be able to work around any quirks of the system until a new version comes out? Training, writing documentation, and developing workarounds all take even more time to keep your wiki running smoothly.

With an online enterprise wiki like the one offered by BrainKeeper, you get an ideal situation: you can try it out with very little risk, and if it becomes a success, you will have a provider that you can trust to deliver on your goals of knowledge sharing and enhanced collaboration.

See for yourself by signing up for a free trial: http://www.brainkeeper.com/free

Software as a Service continues to gain momentum in the area of collaboration and knowledge management as decision-makers become more comfortable with the ideas of having their information stored offsite, not having to worry about security or accessibility, and entrusting others with the overall performance of their mission-critical systems.  In this post we'll address that last one: performance.

A major problem with installed software when comparing it to hosted software is that it takes quite a while to develop new releases, and so new technologies, methodologies, and simple (yet brilliant) ideas may wait for two of those long release cycles (since the current release is already set) before they end up in the product.  Releases for hosted software can be days, rather than months.

Case in point, we are working on a few new features that are aimed at improving the overall performance of the BrainKeeper application.  By forging a partnership with the IT teams of our subscribers, we were able to focus on the areas that we wanted to target- and we have seen some great preliminary results.

Another point along these lines is that we were only able to develop these improvements quickly and get the desired performance boost because we developed our application from scratch.  Building an enterprise wiki on top of an open-source platform can work, but knowing every function has a number of great advantages.

This is why Software as a Service works as well as it does; by being a partner with your clients, having an environment where you can release enhancements when clients need them- not when it is convenient, and having improvements made by the same people who developed the core architecture- you are served much better than with traditional software.  Especially with a Web 2.0 application like an enterprise wiki, such as BrainKeeper.

We have accepted an invitation to speak at the "Wiki of Beauty & The Beast: Usability & Functionality" event in September, hosted by Silicon Valley Web Builder.  We will be providing some insights as to how we developed our interface, which we get compliments on regularly from our clients as well as prospects and industry analysts.

Interface design is a very tricky thing in general.  It is impossible to please everyone, but if you understand the people who use your product, and what their pain points are, you can work with them to develop a system that really matches their thought process.  We like to think that every task is a path, and the clearer the path, the easier it is to reach your goal.

We are also very careful in our software releases.  Most Application Service Providers and Software-as-a-Service companies release features faster than they can be effectively assimilated by the people who use them.  We do frequent releases as well, but we take the time to make sure that the interface is left alone whenever possible.  Change for the sake of change is an awful practice, but is done frequently nonetheless.

If you are in the Bay Area on September 26th, and are interested in hearing about some of our methods in more detail, we hope to see you at the conference!

When we started BrainKeeper, it was of critical importance to us to create a company that would be transparent in all aspects of the business where we felt our clients could help us.  Also, being a Software-as-a-Service company, it is essential that the value of our product be evident and obvious every single month.  Having to prove ourselves every month keeps us hungry, and being transparent makes the relationship with our clients more like a partnership than a vendor and a client.

We actively work with our clients to define new features and functionality.  When someone has a great idea, they get the benefit of having a seat at the product development table to make sure the feature meets with their needs, while our product managers can ensure that the overall product vision is kept intact.  When our employees get to hear directly from the people who use our system every day, and our clients get to hear how their ideas fit within the full product, both sides benefit enormously.

In addition to enhancement development, we also keep a full listing of Support Tickets that have been added by everyone in a company.  We don't try to hide our mistakes- we would rather get them out in the open so that they can be resolved quickly and completely.  The more people we have who help us diagnose and repair problems, the better the solution will be.

Seeing how defects are resolved and how enhancements are developed for BrainKeeper help us show our dedication to our clients.  There is nothing we love more than to hear about a client who has had great success because of an enhancement we were able to add that helped them get more value out of our product.

All corporations struggle to capture critical information in a way that can be easily maintained, digested and understood by the people who need it. This situation presents itself in every company, every department, and even within business teams of a notable size. Most of us have experienced the frustrating and time consuming processes of:

1. Sending out a document with 'tracked changes' turned on, and then reconciling all of the versions that come back to you- doing your best to resolve conflicts.
2. Looking through a large document (product user guide, development specification, market research, etc.), only to find that the content is completely out of date- with no plan or strategy to update it!
3. Writing a document to address questions that are asked over and over again, but knowing full well that the questions will keep coming.

By distributing the responsibility of managing your corporate knowledge, you give yourself the best chance to avoid these situations and actually achieve goals that you never thought you could.

As an example, we will look at the third item from the list: creating an FAQ document. Everyone in the process has a vested interest in having this document created and maintained:

• Product Managers, Analysts, and Developers: don't want to have to answer the same questions over and over again.

• Customer Service: don't want to have to wait on responses for answers to client questions, and want to ensure a consistent, accurate answer

• Management: wants all employees to be more productive by eliminating the unnecessary emails between employees.

• Clients: want to get their questions answered quickly and accurately!

So, instead of having a single person or group be responsible for updating a word document that sits on a network folder somewhere, which is not searchable, is difficult to locate, and can have multiple outstanding versions- create a BrainKeeper page that everyone can contribute to.

Now, you have a living knowledge repository that can be comprehensive and stay up to date. If a new product feature is released, a Product Manager can add questions that are likely to be asked, and review existing pertinent questions to see if existing answers should be updated. Developers or researchers can add questions that they receive from Customer Support. Anyone from Customer Support could add their own questions and answers as well.

Inaccuracies are resolved as they are found, by the person who finds them- rather than having to send an email to a document admin and wait for a response. New employees have a place to go to learn about the products they will be working on / supporting. Management can have peace of mind, knowing that clients are being serviced better than they had been.

Through distributed knowledge management, the entire company benefits. In this example, clients are also given a much better experience with the vendor. There is quite simply no better way to keep large documents relevant and accurate.