Companies that want to convert from their current company wiki system to Confluence must overcome a few challenges: existing users are used to working with the platform, changing systems always involves trade-offs, and transferring existing content is complex and painful. In the previous article, we described these common challenges in detail. In this article, we will explain why the switch to Confluence is still a good idea and why the exhausting migration process is still worth the effort.
If you take a closer look at the various company wiki systems available on the market and objectively evaluate them, you will likely come to the conclusion that Confluence by Atlassian is the best and most sophisticated solution out there. Often, such comparisons are made when a company already uses another wiki – a system that grew organically beyond a department, an open-source system introduced as a trial run, or consciously chose the Wikipedia system MediaWiki because it’s the most successful software of its kind.
A crucial step in the implementation of a wiki within a company is the selection of the right wiki software. One must assess the major pros and cons of each system in order to make the best choice. In this article, we evaluate the open source software MediaWiki, and draw the conclusion that there is a better option.
In our article, “Enterprise Wikis: Criteria and important topics in the evaluation of wiki software” we discussed the diverse and unique requirements an enterprise wiki needs to meet. Decisions about choosing the right wiki system cannot be made using generalizations, but rather only by taking into account the specific needs of the company. In this article, we will draw a concrete comparison between the approaches of the Atlasssian Confluence commercial system and the open source systems Foswiki and MediaWiki. What are the strengths of Confluence compared to Foswiki and MediaWiki?
Wikis for intra-company usage are becoming well established as both commercial and open source applications. This article gives an overview of criteria and requirements involved in the decision making process, along with a comparison of our proprietary Wiki Confluence System and its open source competitors, Foswiki and MediaWiki.
All wiki systems have the same basic functions: opening, editing and saving documents. These functions can be covered in a single Wikipedia paragraph. The functions of a more advanced business wiki, however, are more complex. A business wiki is not simply a web lexicon, but rather is intended to systematically handle a variety of processes in the company.
If in the opening phase of a wiki adoption it should be difficult to activate employees to participate, this is often because employees haven’t been properly brought up to speed and misunderstand the whole idea of a wiki. One symptom of this is the fear of sharing knowledge.
Within a company there can be many approaches for the development of texts as well as the sharing of texts for further revision. We could, for example, write a text in Word and then load the final version into the enterprise wiki. We could also send around texts by e-mail, asking colleagues to read them and, if necessary, to make changes. But we could also develop a text directly within a wiki. What should we think of this particular work process?
We have already summarized 111 solid reasons for using an enterprise wiki. Now with the help of some concrete examples we are going to show you how an enterprise wiki can actually benefit your firm. Following in the footsteps of examples 1-22 and 23-44, we now close our series with 22 more concrete use examples.
We’ve already published 111 good reasons for enterprise wikis. Now we’d like to show through example use cases just what you can do with an enterprise wiki. //SEIBERT/MEDIA has distilled 66 examples for use cases: the first 22 can be found here; now, let’s move on to use cases 23 to 44.