scholarly journals Analysis of processes of cooperation and knowledge sharing in a community of practice with a diversity of actors

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 917-941 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane-Gabrielle Tremblay ◽  
Valéry Psyché
Keyword(s):  
Communities Of Practice ◽  
Knowledge Sharing ◽  
Community Of Practice ◽  
Knowledge Development ◽  
Research Network ◽  
Web 2.0 Tools ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Voluntary Initiative ◽  
Common Interests ◽  
Over Time

According to some literature, communities of practice should normally stem from a voluntary initiative within an organization, whose members share some knowledge or expertise they wish to improve. However, over time, we have seen that communities tend to be created within organizations, in order to attain objectives of learning and knowledge development. This represents a challenge in the context of a community of practice taking the form of a research network in partnership that brings together members with common interests certainly, but spread out in different organizations and even several countries in which they perform different types of work. Also, the community does not exist in a vacuum and the explanation for what happens within it does not lie solely within the way the group interacts; indeed the individuals are part of different organizations and thus have different priorities, in relation with these affiliations. In this context, our research objective was to determine the factors that facilitate or hinder cooperation within a community of practice composed by two groups of actors, community and university actors. We thus found that individuals? different work affiliations might not facilitate the work within the CoP and that ICT/web 2.0 tools are not always a solution to increase participation in a CoP. Although participants are somewhat familiar with the tools, they mostly seem content with receiving and accessing information, not searching for a more active participation. Some explications and solutions will be proposed.

Facilitator Toolkit for Building and Sustaining Virtual Communities of Practice

2011 ◽  
pp. 202-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Kimball ◽  
Amy Ladd
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Communities Of Practice ◽  
Community Of Practice ◽  
Virtual Communities ◽  
Collaborative Work ◽  
Work Training ◽  
Virtual Communities Of Practice ◽  
Over Time

The boundaries of a Community of Practice (CoP) have changed significantly because of changes in organizations and the nature of the work they do. Organizations have become more distributed across geography and across industries. Relationships between people inside an organization and those previously considered outside (customers, suppliers, managers of collaborating organizations, other stakeholders) are becoming more important. In addition, organizations have discovered the value of collaborative work due to the new emphasis on Knowledge Management—harvesting the learning and the experience of members of the organization so that it is available to the whole organization. This chapter offers a practical toolkit of best practices, tips and examples from the authors’ work training leaders to launch and sustain a virtual CoP, including tips for chartering the community, defining roles, and creating the culture that will sustain the community over time.

Collaborative Learning Strategies in Organizations

2019 ◽  
pp. 426-444
Author(s):  
Sandra Sanz Martos ◽  
Mario Pérez-Montoro
Keyword(s):  
Collaborative Learning ◽  
Communities Of Practice ◽  
Community Of Practice ◽  
Learning Strategies ◽  
Future Development ◽  
Learning Strategy ◽  
Work Groups ◽  
Organizational Structures ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Innovative Learning

Among the different types of innovative learning initiatives, organizations have been implementing communities of practice as a collaborative learning strategy. However, in many cases, one finds the term community of practice attributed to other types of communities or work groups. This chapter aims to define, identify, and characterize communities of practice and differentiate them from other organizational structures which are not such communities. It establishes a comparison among them and observes the benefits obtained from each structure, indicating which strategy to apply depending on the goal or challenge. Finally, a number of conclusions and guidelines on the future development of communities of practice are presented.

Boundaries in Communities

2011 ◽  
pp. 3285-3287
Author(s):  
José Cordoba
Keyword(s):  
Communities Of Practice ◽  
Community Of Practice ◽  
Boundary Objects ◽  
Different Types

This article suggests a way of complementing the notion of boundary objects from communities of practice to enable learning: That of extending the notion of boundary objects to account also for boundary people. There are some people whose participation in a community could provide benefits for them and the community. Although it has been suggested that in a community of practice there are different types of membership, little is mentioned about how learning could be fostered by developing inclusive membership. This could be a way of bringing relevant experience to the attention of a community.

Improving the Crisis to Crisis Learning Process

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 38-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eliot Rich ◽  
Josune Hernantes ◽  
Ana Laugé ◽  
Leire Labaka ◽  
Jose M. Sarriegi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Sharing ◽  
Community Of Practice ◽  
Crisis Management ◽  
Learning Process ◽  
Event Detection ◽  
Post Mortem ◽  
National Community ◽  
Crisis Preparation ◽  
Over Time ◽  
The Eu

While crises may appear to be event-driven, post-mortem accounts often identify factors that accumulate over time and increase the likelihood of failure. These factors are particularly difficult to anticipate when multiple organizations are involved in crisis preparation and event detection. Through the development of a systems-based model of crisis management, it was learned that knowledge sharing can be accelerated or inhibited by the development of trust among organizations through the management of events. Is it possible to operationalize this finding? This hypothesis is one of the findings of the SEMPOC project, which examined crisis preparation and mitigation in the hypothetical context of an extended failure in the EU power infrastructure. The knowledge-sharing hypothesis is being tested in the ELITE project, a second activity funded by the EU to develop a multi-national Community of Practice in disaster management.

No longer a wacky foreigner

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura C. Edwards
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Communities Of Practice ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Community Of Practice ◽  
Second Language Learning ◽  
Language Socialization ◽  
Legitimate Peripheral Participation ◽  
Host Family ◽  
French And English ◽  
Over Time

Abstract This study focuses on language socialization during study abroad and specifically second language learning in communities of practice. Based on oral interviews in French and English, written journals, and weekly surveys, this study examines one participant’s second language (L2) learning during a semester abroad during which he became a member of two communities of practice: his host family and a local gaming group. The participant negotiated and became more confident in his L2 identity and learning over time and increasingly solidified his membership within these groups. This study analyzes the steps taken by the participant using the framework of legitimate peripheral participation and considers identity and learning that develop within a community of practice.

Where Did That Community Go? Communities of Practice That "Disappear"

2011 ◽  
pp. 295-307 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia Gongla ◽  
Christine R. Rizzuto
Keyword(s):  
Communities Of Practice ◽  
Community Of Practice ◽  
Living Systems ◽  
The Past ◽  
Community Transition ◽  
General Guide ◽  
Over Time

Experience has been gained and a body of literature is building about how Communities of Practice (CoPs) within organizations are formed. We are learning about the progression of communities over time, how they evolve and mature, and about the factors that contribute to their sustainability. However, communities, being “living systems”, do not live forever, or even very long. That said, exactly why and how does any particular Community of Practice (CoP) disappear? This chapter will discuss the factors related to the ending of individual communities. Specifically, it will address three basic questions: 1) In what ways do CoPs disappear; what are the different paths and patterns? 2) Why do communities disappear? 3) What are ways to help a community transition? The material for this chapter is drawn primarily from observations of and experiences with CoPs in IBM Global Services. A number of these communities over the past years have “disappeared”, but they have not all “disappeared” in the same way. The authors will discuss patterns and variations that have emerged as these communities vanished from the organizational scene. In working with these communities, they have also developed a general guide to aid in the communities’ transitioning. The authors will very briefly describe the steps in this guide.

Boundaries in Communities

2011 ◽  
pp. 12-13
Author(s):  
José Cordoba
Keyword(s):  
Communities Of Practice ◽  
Community Of Practice ◽  
Boundary Objects ◽  
Different Types

This article suggests a way of complementing the notion of boundary objects from communities of practice to enable learning: That of extending the notion of boundary objects to account also for boundary people. There are some people whose participation in a community could provide benefits for them and the community. Although it has been suggested that in a community of practice there are different types of membership, little is mentioned about how learning could be fostered by developing inclusive membership. This could be a way of bringing relevant experience to the attention of a community.

DIVERSITY OF PERCEPTION OF THE DYNAMICS BETWEEN COLLECTIVE IDENTITY AND INNOVATION IN COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE

2021 ◽  
pp. 2150057
Author(s):  
SABINE CARTON ◽  
ISABELLE CORBETT-ETCHEVERS ◽  
ARMELLE FARASTIER ◽  
SANDRINE FINE-FALCY
Keyword(s):  
Communities Of Practice ◽  
Knowledge Sharing ◽  
Community Of Practice ◽  
Energy Management ◽  
Collective Identity ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Individual Factors ◽  
Innovation Capacity ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Collective Capacity

The paper explores how the collective identity of a community of practice contributes to the development of innovation capacity. Specifically, we question how members’ perception of collective identity influences their perception of individual and collective capacity to innovate, whether different dynamics are at work between collective identity and innovation capacity, and finally how individual factors can explain these different dynamics. Empirically, we studied the communities of practice at Schneider Electric, a world leading company in energy management and automation. We surveyed 672 members of communities of practice in order to understand their relationship to their community. Our findings highlight the relationship between the perception of CoP collective identity and innovation capacity and suggest that (1) the three dimensions of collective identity play a role on members’ perception of knowledge sharing and CoP contribution to innovation capacity and also that (2) this influence may act differently depending on members’ profiles.

Measuring Agency Change Across the Domain of Hypnosis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vince Polito ◽  
Amanda Barnier ◽  
Erik Woody
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Sense Of Agency ◽  
Pass Rates ◽  
Current Experiment ◽  
Multidimensional Construct ◽  
Time Points ◽  
Hypnotic Induction ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Over Time ◽  
Postexperimental Inquiry

Building on Hilgard’s (1965) classic work, the domain of hypnosis has been conceptualised by Barnier, Dienes, and Mitchell (2008) as comprising three levels: (1) classic hypnotic items, (2) responding between and within items, and (3) state and trait. The current experiment investigates sense of agency across each of these three levels. Forty-six high hypnotisable participants completed an ideomotor (arm levitation), a challenge (arm rigidity) and a cognitive (anosmia) item either following a hypnotic induction (hypnosis condition) or without a hypnotic induction (wake condition). In a postexperimental inquiry, participants rated their feelings of control at three time points for each item: during the suggestion, test and cancellation phases. They also completed the Sense of Agency Rating Scale (Polito, Barnier, & Woody, 2013) for each item. Pass rates, control ratings, and agency scores fluctuated across the different types of items and for the three phases of each item; also, control ratings and agency scores often differed across participants who passed versus failed each item. Interestingly, whereas a hypnotic induction influenced the likelihood of passing items, it had no direct effect on agentive experiences. These results suggest that altered sense of agency is not a unidimensional or static quality “switched on” by hypnotic induction, but a dynamic multidimensional construct that varies across items, over time and according to whether individuals pass or fail suggestions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document