1. Precise and/or rich language (30 pts) 2. Includes at least 2 outside sources (10 pts)
2.Depth and complexity of ideas supported by rich, engaging and/or pertinent details; evidence analysis, reflection and insight.
Case Study #2
Diplopedia: Managing State Department Knowledge with a Wiki
The U.S. State Department’s Diplopedia wiki started in 2006 with just a handful of articles. The project was driven partly by the need for improvements in collaboration and knowledge management at the department that the 9/11 Commission recommended.
U.S. diplomats and other State Department employees move frequently from country to country, and they needed a much better way to capture and transmit knowledge. They might take 6 months to a year to get up to speed when they were transferred to a new country. They could email or phone other department employees who had lived there, but the wiki solution is far superior.
The wiki is a rapidly mounting collection of constantly updated articles on subjects critical to diplomats. For instance, it contains the desk officer manual that helps newcomers decipher departmental jargon or tips on getting a newly nominated ambassador confirmed by the Senate. As an internal wiki, Diplopedia is only accessible to authorized employees.
The idea for the State Department’s wiki as a knowledge repository came from Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia. Diplopedia uses the same open source software and also follows many of its guidelines, as shown in Figure 9-25. Unlike Wikipedia, however, the State Department’s wiki requires strict governance, given that much of the information in it may be sensitive. Wikipedians rely on people behaving like adults, so their guidance to the department about governance was basically to tell employees: “Don’t be a jerk.”
► If something is wrong, change it.
► If something is missing, add it.
► Use plain language.
► Use the Discussion tab to discuss an article.
► Use a neutral point of view.
Figure 9-25 Strategies for KM success for Diplopedia. Diplopedia’s Guidelines.
The Office of eDiplomacy at the State Department oversees Diplopedia and provides clear guidelines for contributors. A founding principle of Diplopedia is to assume people’s good intentions. As a check, however, Diplopedia does not permit anonymous contributions, as Wikipedia does, and no “sock puppets” are allowed.
Disputes about content are also handled differently compared with Wikipedia. At the public encyclopedia, editing battles can erupt in which anonymous contributors keep changing one another’s posts, often until the controversy just dies down on its own or the contributors tire out. On rare occasions, Wikipedia’s administrators might freeze an article to prevent further editing. At Diplopedia, however, the Office of eDiplomacy might form a panel of experts to settle the dispute.
Diplopedia’s success surprised many observers because the department was not known for any pioneering IT initiatives. Chris Bronk, a professor at Rice University who studies the agency, remarked that “science and technology have a somewhat tarnished history at State.” Even though the department is fully wired, its communication patterns have changed little since the days of the telegraph and cable, although email is used instead.
Diplopedia is not open to the public, though its contents are unclassified. The site’s disclaimer reminds users that the articles may be informative, but they are not official government documents. Especially after WikiLeaks obtained and publicly released thousands of classified diplomatic documents in 2010, the security for online government documents receives considerable scrutiny, yet breaches still occur.
Diplopedia’s contributors must keep in mind that their contributions are not confidential. Leaks are not uncommon, and leakers are rarely prosecuted. Contributors must be careful what they post; nonetheless, the site still provides a valuable platform for information that helps diplomats adapt as they move from one country to another. The State Department encourages them to make contributions of enduring value, ones that will capture and document the richness of their experiences and expertise about their country. Most important, their knowledge will not be lost when their plane takes off for the next assignment. And it won’t go out of date, either, as newly assigned members of the diplomatic corps correct, expand, and enrich the wiki knowledge base.
Discussion Questions
9-21. In 2010, the website WikiLeaks posted more than 250,000 U.S. diplomatic cables. What are some potential implications of this posting for Diplopedia?
9-22. What key issues will need to be addressed for Diplopedia to be more widely used by diplomatic personnel?
9-23. How can the State Department benefit from Diplopedia?
9-24. What types of knowledge are appropriate for Diplopedia?
