1

CRGH Medical Library Wiki: Improving staff communication and

interaction

Julia Philips and Kaye LeeConcord Repatriation General Hospital Medical

LibraryNovember 2007

2

Background – CRGH Medical Library

• Library clientelle– Hospital staff (a principal teaching hospital of the

University of Sydney)– Sydney South West Area Health Service staff– Students from a variety of other tertiary institutions.

• Four full-time staff members:– Library Manager– Reference Librarian– Document Delivery Officer– Library Officer

• Staff meetings held every two months

3

Catalyst for action

• Two new staff members late 2006 / early 2007

• Need to develop strong communication lines in new team to support customer services

• Interest in utilising Web 2.0 / Library 2.0 tools, in particular, the wiki, and its collaborative characteristics – defined as “a collaborative website which can be directly edited by anyone with access to it” (Wiktionary) – just the thing to enhance communication.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/wiki accessed 29 October 2007

4

What is a Wiki?

• “A wiki is a freely expandable collection of interlinked Web “pages”, a hypertext system for storing and modifying information – a database, where each page is easily editable by any user with a forms-capable Web browser client” (Leuf & Cunningham, 2001)

• “A wiki is a server-based collaborative tool that allows any authorised user to edit Web pages and create newer ones using nothing more than a Web browser and a text entry form on a Web page… Wikis make it possible for people to collaborate in a Web environment by creating, organising, and maintaining a Web site of automatically linked pages (Chawner & Lewis, 2006)

Leuf B, Cunningham W. (2001) The Wiki way: quick collaboration on the web. Boston: Addison-Wesley, 14Chawner B, Lewis PH. (2006) WikiWikiWebs: New ways to communicate in a web environment. Information Technology and Libraries, 25, 33-43.

6

Our Objective

To enhance staff communication and interaction within the Library through

development and use of a library-oriented wiki

7

Methodology

1. Develop criteria for wiki selection

2. Identify suitable wiki applications

3. Select best option and implement

4. Introduce to staff

5. Survey staff

6. Gather and analyse survey results

7. Review corporate policy affecting wiki use

8. Draw conclusions as to usefulness of wiki as an aid to communication and interaction in the Library at Concord, and its usefulness in other settings

8

1. Develop criteria• Freely available

• Authentication to prevent unauthorised access

• Easy to use (WYSIWYG editing)

• RSS and email updates for changes made

• No extra software required to run the application

• Runs on Windows

• Stable and upgradeable

• File based storage

• Page Preview

• Comments

• Complex tables

• HTML tag support

• File attachments• Potential wiki applications

were identified using http://www.wikimatrix.org/

9

2. Identify potential wiki applications

• Two categories of wikis were identified:

Externally hosted applications

o BrainKeeper

o CentralDesktop

o Metadot Wiki

o PBwiki

o SamePage

o Socialtext

o Wikispaces

Internally hosted applications

o MoniWiki

o Oddmuse

o PhpWiki

o PmWiki

o PukiWiki

o Twiki

10

3. Select best option and implement

a. Selection –

– Do we download and host a wiki application onsite?

OR– Do we choose an externally hosted wiki?

Externally hosted solution chosen –

PBwiki - one of four likely candidates

11

3. Select best option and implement

b. Implementation - Carried out at http://pbwiki.com/

• Name chosen & free account set up• Basic settings adjusted (eg public/private access)• Welcome message added to front page• Preset ‘How it works’ and tutorial links left in place• Calendar added & new pages created –

– Website Changes– Newsletter Ideas – Potential Resources to add to the Website– Interesting articles and other resources– Library Objectives (added a little later)

• Links to pages added to SideBar (wiki’s navigation bar) and the wiki looked like this

12

13

14

15

16

4. Introduce to Staff

• Formally introduced at staff meeting of 6th March 2007• Overview of wikis provided• Existing pages were shown

– Calendar– Website Updates– Potential resources to add to the website– Newsletter Ideas– Library Objectives– Interesting articles and other Resources

• URL and password provided• Noted that the wiki could be edited and accessed by all Library staff • Help was provided on an ‘as needed’ basis

17

5. Survey Staff

• After some six months of use a questionnaire was developed

• Distributed to Library staff on 26 September 2007 with all completed forms returned by 3 October 2007

– 100% response rate

• Thirteen questions were posed to try to ascertain:

– If and how the wiki was being used

– Whether or not the wiki was proving useful for staff communication

– Possible improvements

– Comfort levels and difficulties in integrating wiki into practice

18

Survey Results

Q.1 Have you accessed the Concord Medical Library wiki?

• All library staff have accessed the wiki.

• Access was not enforced but was encouraged through the formal introduction of the wiki at a staff meeting and the use of the wiki as an information repository.

• First impressions were generally positive:

– “Useful”

– “Informative”

• There was one reservation about the external location of the wiki.

19

Survey Results

Q.2 Which page/s do you visit?

• All pages have been viewed by at least 50% of library staff.

• Although there have been no known discussions relating to posted interesting articles, it is hoped that some articles will have been accessed and read.

100% 75% 50%

Interesting articles

Front page

Calendar

Website updates

Newsletter

Sidebar

Library objectives

URLs to add to proxy

Potential resources to add to the website

NSWHLF wiki paper

20

Survey Results

Q.3 Have you used the wiki Help function?

• Is the use of the Help function reflective of what different staff members are trying to do with the wiki?

– Help may not be required if pages are being read but not added or edited.

– Staff may be more likely to look at the Help if they want to understand how the wiki works in more detail.

• It could also be suggested that the lack of use of the Help function supports the ease of use and intuitiveness of the wiki for the less experienced users.

21

Survey Results

Q.4 How do you keep aware of changes to the wiki?

• All staff use the automatic email alerts to keep aware of changes to the wiki, but other methods are also used.

• RSS is problematic as RSS readers like Bloglines are blocked by the proxy at this stage.

22

Survey Results

Q.5 Which page/s have you edited/changed?

• No page has been edited/changed by all staff members.

• Most pages have been read but not interacted with in any other way.

• Most pages have been edited/changed by one person only.

75% 50% 25%

Calendar Newsletter ideas

Library objectives

URLs to add to the proxy

Front page

Website updates

Potential resources to add to the website

Sidebar

Interesting articles

NSWHLF wiki page

23

Survey Results

Q.6 Which page/s have you created/added?

• Pages have been created/added by two staff members only.

– This reflects the read/edit pattern found in the previous responses.

• Other staff members appear to be happy to use the wiki and interact with the calendar. May not be adding content because:

– They may not want to add anything

– They may not be used to providing input in this collaborative way

– They may need more encouragement and training to use the interactive options

24

they had not

All

• All staff answered in the negative

Have you deleted any pages?

Survey Results

25

Survey results

Q.7 Has the wiki been of benefit to you in terms of communication regarding

Library activities?

• “Calendar is handy for proposed events”

• “Without Wiki, I would be less aware of projects that I am not involved in”

• “Finding out new newsletter ideas”

• “Provides a quick easy way to share ideas”

• “…publicise and promote library objectives + strategic planning”

26

Survey results

Q.8 Any changes that could be made to make the wiki more useful

and/or usable?

– New project pages

– More control over editing/access

– Improved design and layout of email alerts

27

Survey Results

Q.9 Have you needed to make any changes to the way you work to

integrate the wiki?

• Again, mapping the results for this question against the results of the question dealing with editing/changing suggests that those who have been making changes to the content have had to change the way they work to integrate the wiki.

– Remembering to check the wiki for relevant information

– Sharing more information

28

Q.10 Is there something else you would prefer to use to stay informed instead of the wiki?

• All staff indicated in the negative

Survey Results

29

Survey results

Q.11 Are you comfortable using the wiki?

• All staff indicated comfort in using the wiki and don’t have anything they would prefer to use instead.

• This suggests possibilities for on-going extended use.

– Project management

- Patron resource hub

• This also supports the ease of use of the wiki (reflected in the Help function usage pattern).

If you have any further wiki-related comments to make please add them

here• Is there a limit to the kinds of things we can do with the wiki? ie do we hit

security concerns or comfort constraints…

• The wiki concept seems to be a great project management tool, as interested parties can interact + share easily + with immediacy. Useful not just for libraries, but any planning group.

• Having the software sitting on an internally located wiki server would ensure security + privacy issues …

Survey Results

6. Analysis of results

Analysis filters :

1. Is the wiki being used?

2. How is it being used?

3. Is the wiki proving useful for staff communication?

4. Possible improvements

5. Comfort levels and changes needed in integrating the wiki into practice

Is the wiki being used?

• All pages have been viewed (echoes Leuf and Cunningham comment re “dropping by”)

• Most pages have been viewed by most staff (although not all)

• First impressions reveal staff feel it is useful and easy to use

Yes!

How is it being used ?

• Most users appear happy to view pages

• ‘Interesting Articles’ the most popular with all staff viewing it

• The Calendar (viewed by 75%) and receiving comments such as handy and useful

• ‘Front Page’, ‘Website Updates’, ‘Newsletter’, ‘SideBar’, ‘Library Objectives’, and ‘Urls to add to proxy’ all viewed by 75% of staff,

• Potential resources to add to the website and NSWHLF wiki page was viewed by only 50%

• All 4 staff continued to receive the automatic email alerts (cancellable)

• All staff appear to be happy to use the wiki, with different staff accessing different pages – possibly because of their different interests, approaches, and workplace roles.

Is the wiki proving useful for staff communication?

• Yes – All 4 staff answered affirmatively to Question 8 re usefulness

• Supporting comments reflected this outlook, including –

• Being kept informed

• Awareness

• New ideas

• Sharing ideas

• Active role in planning

• Developing ideas

• Empowering

• Interest shown by staff in visiting and editing also supports usefulness of the tool

• In terms of editing, the Calendar was a hit with 75% of staff changing and adding information.

• Only 50% had edited the ‘Newsletter’, ‘Library Objectives’ and ‘Urls to add to the proxy’ pages, with just just one person (25%), the developer, editing all 10 pages.

• In terms of creating new pages, 50% of staff indicated that had not created any pages, one respondent had created one page, and one respondent or 25%, had created 9 pages (in developing the site).

• In terms of deleting pages, all indicated they had not done so.

Most staff are using the wiki to view information, rather than interactively edit or create pages (with the exception of the Calendar. Perhaps staff don’t yet have an understanding of the potential of the wiki, feel they have nothing to add, may be hesitant in providing input in this collaborative way, or simply

need more training and encouragement.

Possible Improvements

• 50% of staff did not have any suggestions for improvement

• Balance of staff offered the following:

– More pages for new projects

– Increased control over editing/deletion

– Improvements in email alert layout

Comfort levels and changes needed to integrate wiki into work

practices• 100% of staff indicated they were comfortable in using the wiki, with

accompanying comments highlight ease of using the wiki

• 50% of staff indicated they did not make any changes to their work practices

• The balance mentioned the following:

– Handling email alerts/RSS feeds through filtering

– Despite alerts, need still exists to consult actual pages

– Changing paper-based habits to a wiki orientation

– Need to be comfortable about sharing ideas and working collaboratively

38

7. Corporate policy requirements

• Policy governing use of wikis sought from IM&T, and existing policy consulted to identify requirements

• Official IM&T policy under review, and no definitive information yet available

• Statutory requirements to maintain records for scrutiny questioned – given wiki open-edit characteristics

– Wiki documents seen as temporary, of a planning nature

– Any document that needs to be retained, should be held elsewhere also, for scrutiny and legal discovery purposes

• Confidentiality requirement may have a bearing –

– We chose externally hosted wiki, accessible by user name and password, with 128-bit SSL encryption, but better solution may be needed to reduce risk

– Alternatives lie in stronger encryption (eg PBwiki enterprise-grade encryption) or downloading software to a local server.

Conclusions• Have we been successful in enhancing communications and

interaction in the Library at Concord through our wiki intervention?

• All staff have viewed a majority of available pages, so the wiki provides a good bulletin board for information. This certainly enhances one-way communication so we have achieved out object in part, but the collaborative effect that a wiki can provide when used to full potential has yet to be fully achieved.

• Use of the calendar is more tangible evidence of interaction, with most staff adding their ADOs, appointments, etc. so that others will be more aware, but again it’s one way communication - someone adds something, someone else reads it

• With 50% of staff yet to create or edit a page, there is a perceived need for additional training and encouragement to stimulate staff to contribute to, comment on and edit (where permitted) to enhance interaction and collaboration, and to get the best out of the wiki.

40

Conclusions

Additional requirements identified for use -

– High level encryption or internal hosting

– Access control that allows authority over editing and deleting of pages

– Greater design capacity for layout of pages and alerts

– Means of capturing statistics on page usage – for papers like this

• Be mindful of corporate requirements

Other library uses for wikis• “Can become true community resources that position the library as an online

hub” (Farkas, 2005)

• Possible library uses according to Stephens include

– Subject guides

– policy manuals

– Resource listings

– Project planning

• Library supported hospital use

– departmental journal clubs

– collaborative research projects

– Inservices

– Grand rounds

• Cross-Area Health Service Library use

Farkas, M. (2005) Using Wikis to Create Online Communities 2005 http://webjunction.org/do accessed on 17 September 2007Stephens, M. (2006) Wikis Part 1:Wikis & Libraries in Library Technology Reports Chapter 5 : Academic Research Library, 52

42

More Uses

• Multi-user, collaborative wiki applications can include (Leuf & Cunningham, 2001):

– Resource collections (content and links)

– Collaborative FAQs

– Project management

– Web site management

– Discussion and review

– Shared bulletin board postings

– Online guestbook

– Free-form database

Leuf B, Cunningham W. (2001) The Wiki way: quick collaboration on the web. Boston: Addison-Wesley, 34-35

43

Finally

• The wiki has indeed proved useful in improving communications within the library at Concord, although it has not yet achieved its full collaborative potential.

• With the various additional criteria addressed, it should continue to be a valuable communications tool – be that as a simple bulletin board, or a collaborative and dynamic information resource.

• There is great potential for the wiki to be used in a host of different ways in the hospital system - what’s more, it’s fun and easy to use!

• Wiki wiki!