Facilitating and Improving Organisational Community Life

2011 ◽  
pp. 2991-2996
Author(s):  
Angela Lacerda Nobre

The growth in importance of communities within organisational settings is a sign of a change in paradigm. When management and organisational theory introduce the critical notion of communities, in parallel to the concepts of collaborative work and of knowledge sharing, there is an internal revolution going on. Therefore, communities of practice theory (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1999; Wenger, McDermott & Snyder, 2002; Brown & Duguid, 1991) has a critical role to play in today’s development of management and organisation theory. At a broader level, there is an ongoing metamorphosis that is highly visible through the vertiginous development of technology, the globalisation of markets, and the acceleration of the increase in complexity. Equally important are the less visible, and thus harder to acknowledge, changes in the way we think, reason, communicate, and construct our image of ourselves and of the world. The changes brought by the knowledge society of the information age (Kearmally, 1999) triggered the development of theoretical approaches to management. Among these, knowledge management and organisational learning have developed. These theories have acknowledged the importance of information and communication technology within organisations, and have explored alternative insights into mainstream management approaches. The knowledge management and organisational learning sub-disciplines represent an innovation effort that affect areas of organisational life which had been marginalised or ignored under traditional management theory. Communities of practice is the single most important example. Therefore, communities of practice represent a critical aspect of the present understanding of the complexity of organisational life. Within the broad and varied development of organisational theories, semiotic learning emerges as a particular approach to organisational learning. Semiotic learning may be described as a dynamic practice. It incorporates theoretical contributions from social philosophy and adapts them to a specific approach to facilitate learning at the organisational level. It is a learning and development tool for action at the organisational level. The central aspect of the semiotic learning approach is the focus on the quality of community life at the organisational level. Through a semiotic learning approach to organisational learning and development, it is possible to intensify and to unleash the true potential of current challenges at personal, organisational, and societal levels. By focusing on the social practices, structures, and processes which underlay human interaction, and by calling attention to the way we construct ourselves and our image of the world through those interactions, it enables the development of a rationale that supports collaborative as well as transformative forms of work and learning.

Author(s):  
Angela Lacerda Nobre

The growth in importance of communities within organisational settings is a sign of a change in paradigm. When management and organisational theory introduce the critical notion of communities, in parallel to the concepts of collaborative work and of knowledge sharing, there is an internal revolution going on. Therefore, communities of practice theory (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1999; Wenger, McDermott & Snyder, 2002; Brown & Duguid, 1991) has a critical role to play in today’s development of management and organisation theory. At a broader level, there is an ongoing metamorphosis that is highly visible through the vertiginous development of technology, the globalisation of markets, and the acceleration of the increase in complexity. Equally important are the less visible, and thus harder to acknowledge, changes in the way we think, reason, communicate, and construct our image of ourselves and of the world. The changes brought by the knowledge society of the information age (Kearmally, 1999) triggered the development of theoretical approaches to management. Among these, knowledge management and organisational learning have developed. These theories have acknowledged the importance of information and communication technology within organisations, and have explored alternative insights into mainstream management approaches. The knowledge management and organisational learning sub-disciplines represent an innovation effort that affect areas of organisational life which had been marginalised or ignored under traditional management theory. Communities of practice is the single most important example. Therefore, communities of practice represent a critical aspect of the present understanding of the complexity of organisational life. Within the broad and varied development of organisational theories, semiotic learning emerges as a particular approach to organisational learning. Semiotic learning may be described as a dynamic practice. It incorporates theoretical contributions from social philosophy and adapts them to a specific approach to facilitate learning at the organisational level. It is a learning and development tool for action at the organisational level. The central aspect of the semiotic learning approach is the focus on the quality of community life at the organisational level. Through a semiotic learning approach to organisational learning and development, it is possible to intensify and to unleash the true potential of current challenges at personal, organisational, and societal levels. By focusing on the social practices, structures, and processes which underlay human interaction, and by calling attention to the way we construct ourselves and our image of the world through those interactions, it enables the development of a rationale that supports collaborative as well as transformative forms of work and learning.


2011 ◽  
pp. 202-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Kimball ◽  
Amy Ladd

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.


2013 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fang Zhao ◽  
Linzi Kemp

Web 2.0-based workplace learning is defined in this article as informal learning that takes place in the workplace through connections and collaborations mediated by Web 2.0 technology. Web 2.0-based workplace learning has the potential to enhance organisational learning and development. However, little systematic research has been published that explores how individual, social and organisational factors may influence Web 2.0-based workplace learning. This study aims to address this knowledge gap. Drawing on a selective review of the theories and research on social exchange, social capital, communities of practice and organisational support, we have developed a testable theoretical model for further empirical study.Keywords: Web 2.0; workplace learning; social exchange; social capital; communities of practice; organisational learning and development(Published: 11 September 2013)Citation: Research in Learning Technology 2013, 21: 19089 - http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v21i0.19089


Aporia ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
ERIKA BIDDLE

    For researchers working within a critique of capitalism and its relation to knowledge production, it is problematic to use traditional research methodologies endemic to the very system being critiqued unless they are somehow altered. This article investigates the potential of schizoanalysis to provide conceptual tools for such an approach. Developed through the collaborative work of Deleuze and Guattari, schizoanalysis operates from the organic principle that knowledge is an indivisible part of the way we live in the world. However, schizoanalysis is not a research methodology; it inserts itself into research methodologies, warpsthem, and reproduces itself through them.


Author(s):  
Diane-Gabrielle Tremblay

Over the past few decades, there has been much interest in various forms of participation in the workplace and in its impacts on learning from work for individuals and organisations. Teamwork has been the object of much attention in labour economics, in sociology of work, as well as in human resources management (Tremblay, Rolland & Davel, 2000; Davel, Gomez da Silva, Rolland & Tremblay, 2001). Collaborative work and learning have also been the object of much attention in HRM and organisational learning debates, as well as in education circles (Henri & Lundgren, 2000). Much of this interest stems from gains that organisations can expect to obtain from interaction between workers in terms of quality of products, innovation, productivity, and the like. Knowledge management has also spurred interest in recent years, partly on the basis of these expected gains from a better management of the knowledge hidden within organisations. More recently, the concept of communities of practice has been put forward as a form of knowledge management which paves the way to attainment of the various organisational objectives: productivity, quality, innovation, and so forth. In our view, this last concept is closely related to teamwork issues, and we will show how in the following pages.


1996 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 421-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus A Doel

What is space? What is spacing? And how does spacing itself hold together? The author pursues these questions, which continue to haunt and transfix geographers, by drawing upon the collaborative work of two exemplary thinkers: Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari. What emerges from such an encounter is a fundamental shift in the way space, place, and spacing are configured; a shift which will have enormous implications for anyone concerned with unfolding the relationship between society and space. Particular emphasis is placed on the radicalization of relations, of the spacing of relations, and of relational space. Such a radicalization effectively deconstructs the field of geography as we know it, and demands that we reconfigure both the world and our theoretical-practices ‘from the middle’. This yields a world of continuous variation, becoming, and chance, rather than one of constancy, being, and predictability; and it is populated solely by hæcceities, singularities, and events, strung together through joints, intervals, and folds. Accordingly, a fractal world of infinite disadjustment, destabilization, and disjointure is what is meant by the term ‘scrumpled geography’, and it constitutes the horizon on which one should situate deconstruction, postmodernism, and poststructuralism more generally. Unfolding the joints, intervals, and folds of such a world is precisely the task undertaken by Deleuze and Guattari. However, the author reworks their own undertaking by giving it a much more explicitly spatial inflexion and consistency. Thus, the paper not only clarifies the scrumpled geography embedded within the work of Deleuze and Guattari, it also demonstrates the revolutionary implications of a rigorously deconstructive and poststructuralist consideration of space, place, and spacing.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (60) ◽  
pp. 62-77
Author(s):  
Macarena Paz Barrientos-Díaz ◽  
Enrique José Nieto-Fernández

Questioning the ways in which we have understood architectural practice up until today, reconsidering this, is not a just a challenge for professional practices and the materialization of "other works". It is also the responsibility of the educational sphere, in the sense of broadening the way we teach and learn about architecture. Through a recent teaching experience, focused on some "communities of practice", located in the hills of Valparaíso, it is proposed in this article, to imagine a more relational, affective and inclusive future for the area, that perhaps is less "humanistic" and more human or even "much more than human". The wording of the workshop, The good arts of living "with" others "through" design, alluded to design as a set of practices that fundamentally affect our ways of being together, capable of articulating alternative and certainly local ways of living. The aim of the workshop was to make room in the debates on architecture, for those subjects not represented by the most common methodologies and knowledge inherited from Modernity. Faced with them, the course called for a more inclusive and relational type of "minor knowledge", capable of better interpreting the eco-dependent and interdependent condition that characterizes our radical being in the world. Therefore, it sought to problematize the present of architecture from a committed approach of design to these "communities of practice" and their "minor knowledges". Not because they are necessarily better, but because they include a greater quantity and diversity of forms of life.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document