Interesting Discussion Using a Wiki to implement a Quality Management System (QMS)

[Le Chiffre]

Here's a good article on customizing MediaWiki:

Whether you're co-writing your NaNoWriMo novel, setting up a company intranet, or just want an easy-to-update web site, MediaWiki fits the bill.

http://lifehacker.com/5396832/customize-mediawiki-into-your-ultimate-collaborative-web-site

 

[vaalea]

ok, let me know if this is better for a separate-brand new thread.

Ever since I've found out about Geometrica using a WIKI to implement a QMS and gain their ISO 9001 certification I've been keen on taking the same route. I've been reading Panchobook's posts with great interest. I'd also love to see this business case worked on by harishankarpv.

I know that Panchobook's organization has used ProjectForum, and Le Chiffre MediaWiki and I found this thread elsewhere Wiki recommendations for QMS project documentation and I would basically like to repeat the thread here where I think there is more activity.

The poster on that forum, gregm, had created a list of features he thought were necessary for the project, being:

• Locally installed, not hosted
• Access controls
• Ability to edit documents and leave comments
• WYSIWYG editing, no code
• Good typographical tools
• Ability to export to either Word or PDF
• Change history (very important for audit trail)
• very good range of templates to help me built quickly (I'm not a coder)

Can we create our own list here, and are there more people than just Panchobook and Le Chiffre with their kind of experience?

Those who have used a wiki to post their favorite wiki features/most missed wiki features in the wiki software they chose?

Can we use this information to compile two lists,

Best features for optimal QMS implementation in compliance with ISO 9001
(login-ins/change history/roll backs/alerts of changes through email, ease of use for non-techies, great search feature etc-etc)
Using that to determine which wiki's are recommended

And an additional list with cool features that would be a bonus.
(For example I was wondering about a collaborative calendar that could be filtered... showed WHO made the edits, but allow for categories such as trade shows-travelling, company & dept meetings, various work schedules and vacation days of employees, bdays... allow for RSVPs.. much like outlook, but better. Perhaps considered social networking features...)
Determining from the recommended wikis, which may be the most desirable individually?

I know there are websites out there that do Wiki comparisons, but I'd like to get info from those who have personal experience in relation to building a QMS.

and/or, any comments on Jira by atlassian for such a project if anyone is familiar with it?
one of Panchobook's links Our Intranet, the Wiki: A Case Study of a Wiki Changing an Enterprise. They chose to use Confluence by atlassian...

Are there any more links such as the one's Panchobook has shared (including the Motorola using Twiki one too) that are of other company stories?

Thanks for any help!

 

[Pancho]

Can we create our own list here?

Here are a few I found. Most have not written too much about their experience, but it seems to me that the wiki chasm is about to be bridged (thanks for the link on Twitter, KerrieAnne).

• InfoTecna
• Fluidsignal Group
• RW Freight Services
• (undisclosed co)
• (a global life science co)
• Centro Internacional de la Papa

The first four are from TWiki's list of corporate users of their engine. Their Motorola case is listed but not as a QMS installation, so its likely that there are others also not naming that use even if they are.

As far as which wiki is "the best" for a QMS, I believe that almost any modern wiki engine will do. The most important component is the wiki gardener.

BTW today I saw a video that makes this plant analogy quite vivid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCLc6oB3Q3o&feature=player_embedded

(still can't figure out how to embed a video here, sorry. Would appreciate the help of a kind Cove Moderator...).

 

[Pancho]

any comments on Jira by atlassian for such a project if anyone is familiar with it?

We use Bugzilla to record and resolve CARs and PARs, but Jira looks very good. Haven't switched only because the conversion seems to involve more effort than I think we'd save.

 

[Le Chiffre]

Cool video!

This is a visualization of the evolution of wiki.tudelft.nl from the very beginning, 5 years ago. Each node is a page, links are connections between pages. Graph is laid out using a force-directed algorithm, where the edges (links between pages) pull the nodes (pages) together, and the nodes (pages) repel each other. This means that the more tightly connected nodes will be closer together than weakly connected ones, which are pushed to the outside. The entire thing is created using Prefuse (http://prefuse.org/), wiki is using the TWiki engine (http://twiki.org). The soundtrack is from DJ Cary's Eastern Grooves compilation from Magnatune.com. More info about this can be found at http://wiki.tudelft.nl/bin/view/Main/WikiGrowthOverTime

Panchobook: Add videos like this by putting the YouTube id between

 

[Le Chiffre]

Back on topic

I just came across this article discussing the differences in Wiki tools:
http://www.editme.com/Wiki-Tools-Where-EditMe-Fits

The site also has a Wiki Choice Wizard. I haven't tried it but it looks useful. It looks like the site is focusing on the hosted Wiki solutions hence the mention of $/mo.

 

[DrM2u]

I realy like the concept and is definetely 'thinking outside of the box'.

My company documented and implemented an ISO 9001:2008 compliant Quality Management System on a wiki.

The epiphany part is the realization of how incredibly, amazingly, unbelievably useful the wiki is to complete this process. In fact, it is so useful that I now feel this urge to evangelize. Hence my contribution here.

I would like some help and clarification on the concept, though. In my case, all procedures are in flowchart format and work instructions are visual. The organization diverted from the lengthy and boring 'text' approach because we wanted to have useful, concise, clear and comprehensive documents instead of 'dust collectors'. You can say that it is an organization of few words...

Anyway, would wiki be able to allow users to start/modify flow charts and add/delete pictures as processes change? I would like anyone's feedback on this.

 

[Pancho]

would wiki be able to allow users to start/modify flow charts and add/delete pictures as processes change?

A few wiki engines allow version-controlled editing of vector graphics. See:

* TWiki Draw Plugin
* JHotDraw (Foswiki)
* Gliffy (Confluence)

All wikis allow an alternative to editing the vector graphics on the wiki: Posting a pic with an accompanying source file. The editor downloads the source file, edits it, takes a screenshot, and re-uploads the pic and the source. This is the method we use for our graphics in the Geometrica wiki.

Good luck!
Pancho

 

[ShaneG]

Hi Pancho (and all the other people that have chimed in on this),

Very interesting thread, and very timely - we're just about to start moving to Confluence form Atlassian for our ISO 13485 quality and documentation systems. One question or concern that has come up; a fair chunk of our organisation is not technical staff and seem rather uncomfortable with the idea of writing wiki markup. Confluence does have a WYSIWYG editor, but you still need to drop into the markup at times. What has been people's experience with this cultural shift/learning curve? I can see it being possibly the largest hurdle we're going to have to get over in getting people to use it...

Cheers,
Shane

 

[Pancho]

One question or concern that has come up; a fair chunk of our organisation is not technical staff and seem rather uncomfortable with the idea of writing wiki markup. Confluence does have a WYSIWYG editor, but you still need to drop into the markup at times. What has been people's experience with this cultural shift/learning curve? I can see it being possibly the largest hurdle we're going to have to get over in getting people to use it...

Hi, Shane,

Yes, that was a bit of a hurdle for us too. We overcame it with the following:

1)
Got a small group enthused about the wiki first. Our first wiki application wasn't the management system, but project to-do lists. This involved less users and they were a bit more of early-adopters.

2)
Training. We had a couple of sessions of hands-on training for every employee.

3)
Network effects. Once the wiki got past a critical mass, its benefits became so strong that (almost) everyone wants to use it.

Despite the above, there will always be some folks that do not contribute all they could or should. Any new tool provides an excellent excuse for that. Just yesterday I read something quite appropriate: "Wikis show not only how much internal experts know, but how eager they are to share their knowledge." [source].

Our wiki engine supports both WYSIWIG and wiki markup, and our users' preferences are divided about equally.