Thus, shouldn't one of the most important metrics be how much what we draw from the e20 environment is improving our work? Hard to measure, but a lot more meaningful than number of edits or number of authorings.

Andrew, would love to have you moderate a chat at http://KMers.org on this topic. Slots are open for Tuesdays in April.

Swan

Find more jobs: http://www.staffingpower.com/

Our own personal incentive derives from the participation in internal Wikis. However, this is not the sole reason for the participation. In addition to this, we enjoy sharing and spreading our own knowledge, and we see this as advantageous for our reputation.

For us, who actively participate in the company Wiki out of conviction, the ranking is not a disadvantage, instead we consider this a confirmation of our position.

On the other hand, what about employees who only participate in ESSPs for the ranking? We consider this a “mechanical” participation, and this brings up the question on whether time will transform it into conviction.

We believe that currently these ESSPs are still in an early phase considering their use in the industry, and that therefore they need certain degrees of freedom regarding the measurment / ranking of the employees. As mentioned before, a change in culture is required, which can be reached, in our opinion, rather by convincing people than forcing them into participation. One way to do this is to present successes achieved by using ESSPs to the employees.

Once such a change of culture has begun, it may make sense to implement a ranking. The presented 6-point radar chart, generated automatically, would allow each employee to check their status and to determine, which aspects can still be “improved”.

Not least, such a chart will reflect the methods and the social competence of the employees.

One issue not considered is the following: what happens to an employee who has reached the maximum in all six dimensions? Will they continue their participation or rest on their laurels? Hence, measurement and ranking can serve as a personal determination of the status, but not as a comparison to co-workers.

However, such ratings show great promise for reviewing the general use of the available infrastructure as well as tendencies amongst employees. Social software is most likely not adopted at the same speed everywhere. Improvements to the software and specific training can be offered to those groups of employees that have not yet adopted new possibilities.

The diagrams do have another potential weakness. As a power law distribution will most likely always be present, most of the rating charts will consist of a mere blip in the very center. The graphs will possibly need to be improved, so that the lower percentages account for more space on the chart.

Ways to make money