An evaluation of Wiki sites According to the assignment, the Team BDGMNR spent many hours searching wiki sites before making its final selection. In its search, members familiarized themselves with all the attributes of wiki, so much so, that two (2) members created their own wiki sites, http://infosystems.wikidot.com/ and https://prmg6002yr2012.wikispaces.com/, the latter of which was designated as the site of Team BDGMNR. The search netted a number of sites including, Basecamp, Trac, Twiki, CentralDesktop, Wikidot, Wikia, and Wikispaces to name a few. While all the sites found and investigated were extremely interesting, for the purposes of the assignment, some of the sites identified above, were eliminated largely because they were seen as too complicated for our exercise and more appropriate to full-scale companies or there was a cost attached to use. The three (3) sites selected were Wikispaces, Wikidot, and Wikia.
Method for Evaluation and Standardization
The team was sub-divided into three (3) groups of two (2) each, the object being, that each sub-team would manipulate the allocated site to evaluate its ability to support project management processes and project communications. Further information relevant to a critical assessment of a wiki site was also used in the evaluation. Each sub-team made a report, attached in Additional Documentation. Based on these reports, Team BDGMNR and since it had been communicating in Wikispaces, the Team selected Wikispaces as it wiki of choice for completion of Assignment 2. User Experience
All of us had used wikis previously for general research and entertainment so that one of its attributes becomes the fact that a wiki site can be used worldwide. Getting intimate with Wiki was a challenging exercise if not an exciting one, under the condition of time constraint. It allowed us to see the opportunities it gives to the average individual to put almost anything of interest on the net. The fact that the collaboration can be in real time is one of its greatest assets and allowed the team to complete its work expeditiously. Wikis provide more flexibility than word processors in terms of editing and sorting of documents. Its contents can be shared and edited by many, albeit that editing can only be carried out by one person at a time. This obviously made the editing process more difficult and time-consuming. There was some degree of difficulty in sharing documents created in other software but it did mean that creativity had to be revealed in finding solutions to effect sharing. Information created in a Wiki can be archived which allows for ease of retrieval. Having all information open to the public seemed a bit intimidating, although anonymity is the essence of the internet so the disconcerting feelings were quickly dissipated. Some of the negativities experienced included the need for collaboration; it is a system which speaks to team work so there is need for acceptance by all involved for good communication to occur. Manipulation of a wiki can be a bit intimidating for new users and does require a bit of time in learning depending on which site is selected.
Conclusion of Wiki evaluations
Having to consider a new tool while under intense study conditions limited the immediate learning, nevertheless it has awakened our curiosities to the various ways the tool may be used. In hindsight, it has been a good experience since real-life work activities may put team members into similar learning environments.