findings.md

#Findings

* Cases of collaborative document writing in GitHub are rare.

* "Because it's there": primary text-based purpose is to post materials to GitHub, with passive consumption and few contributions (e.g., cases 4, 5).

* Very steep learning curve that limits contributions; difficult for new, non-technical users to learn; not well suited for text-based collaborations (e.g., case 7).

* Stewardship is vital; requires guidance from core leadership team (e.g., cases 1, 2)

* Requires an active contributor group to maintain momentum (e.g., cases 2, 6)

* Topic under consideration must be conducive to both the process and the platform (e.g., cases 1, 2, 6).

* Requires principles to guide participation and process (e.g., cases 1, 2, 3, 6, 7)

* Needs a clear incentive structure in order to promote group sustainability and individual contributions (e.g., cases 1, 2, 7).

* Approach to distributed workflows - centralized, integration manager, and Dictator and Lieutenants - has profound implications for quality, volume and sustainability of contributions (e.g., cases 1, 2, 7).

* Process for managing changes is crucial with asynchronous edits; editors require decision-making guidelines to merge conflicts (e.g., case 7).

* No automated ways of evaluating contributions in cases studied.