The Potential to Build Collective Capacity for Organisational Learning in the Context of Teachers’ Use of Digital Technology for School Improvement

This article considers how digital spaces focused on whole school improvement combined with supportive leadership may be mobilised towards building collective capacity for evidence-informed practice and organisational learning. This topic originated from a qualitative, multi-method design-based research (DBR) project that studied practitioners’ use of an online resource for primary school practitioners called Pathways for school improvement, designed by Oxford University Press (OUP). Semi-structured interviews, participant observations and a documentary analysis were conducted with teachers and senior leaders in five primary schools across England between 2014 and 2016. Connections were made with the dynamic approach to school improvement (DASI) that encourages practitioners to systematically engage with a variety of evidence in their reflections and efforts to design school and classroom improvement strategies. Pathways’ four-step system and series of systematised tasks under each step seemed to provide opportunities for practitioners to explore elements of theory and practice in conjunction with empirical and pupil performance data, and potentially guide them through how to collaborate with others in developing specific whole school approaches to improvement. Opportunities and challenges in developing collective capacity for improvement are also explored.

Human-Centric Functional Modeling and the Convergence of Science

This paper explores Human-Centric Functional Modeling as a universal modeling methodology with the potential to be used for representing all systems both conceptually and functionally, and it explores what capacity for convergence in our understanding of systems means in terms of Human-Centric Functional Modeling, how that capacity might be quantified, and why Human-Centric Functional Modeling as a methodology might maximize our collective capacity to achieve convergence in our understanding across all sciences and across the systems that those sciences study.

Developing organizational knowledge in schools: The role of theory and theorizing in collective capacity building

Developing knowledge in education systems is essential in capacity building. When the intention is to build collective capacity and sustain the capacity in schools, we claim there is a need to understand how organizational knowledge is developed and what form this knowledge may take in the school as an organization. However, theory seems to have put little weight on the development of organizational knowledge. In this article, we draw on two cases to discuss why there is a need for theoretical perspectives that may help conceptualize and aid knowledge development in capacity building. Our contribution is a theoretical model that builds on a graded theory concept, in which theory and practice are understood as entangled in process rather than as dichotomous and static categories. We hope to contribute to an understanding of capacity building that avoids the tyranny of theory and the tyranny of practice, and where teachers’ and school leaders’ professional theorizing is seen as essential for success.

Resilient Micropolitan Areas in the Face of Econ. Shocks:Stakeholder Collective Capacity Perspective

Micropolitan areas (between 10,000 and 50,000 people) are not immune to economic shocks that threaten their vitality. Factors related to economic shocks can range from local companies leaving a town or national economic crises affecting local economies. Using the perspective of local micropolitan area stakeholders, this research seeks to identify why certain micropolitan areas recover from an economic shock while others do not. The research included the case study of two micropolitan areas in the U.S. Midwest (one resilient and one vulnerable), based on 22 interviews with key stakeholders representing diverse for-profit and government organizations. Our results reveal differences in the collective capacity and its underlying practices in the two micropolitan areas. We found that stakeholders built collective capacity by aligning effort, interacting face-to-face, supporting participation, sharing identity and building organizational capacity. Collective capacity ultimately enhanced the resilient micropolitan area’s ability to adopt place-based, or localized, strategies at a higher rate and larger scale than the vulnerable micropolitan area. The results contribute to theory of constitutive collaboration and help policy makers and stakeholders make informed decisions regarding practices to promote economic resilience.

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

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.

Strengthening digital collaboration to enhance social innovation capital: an analysis of Italian small innovative enterprises

PurposeThe study aims to investigate whether and how digital transformation, in terms of digital collaboration, joint efforts with internal/external partners to achieve common goals and the adoption of digital tools supporting this practice, affect social innovation capital in the context of small innovative enterprises (SIEs).Design/methodology/approachThe research hypotheses derived from the analysis of the literature, evaluating how sharing resources, sharing intensity and digital patterns affect the collective capacity of SIEs to innovate, were investigated by applying multiple regression analysis. Data were retrieved from a sample of Italian SIEs through an online survey.FindingsThe main findings suggest that the propensity to spread resources and the sharing intensity positively affect the collective capacity of SIEs to innovate. Also, the effect of resources sharing on collective innovation increases as more digital patterns are used as tools. The connection is weaker for the intensity of resources sharing.Research limitations/implicationsThe study is conducted on Italian SIEs, a particular cluster of small and medium enterprises (SMEs). It would be interesting to compare and contrast the results of an analysis of a large sample of international companies, of different sizes and belonging to digital and non-digital sectors.Originality/valueThe results enrich the existing literature on social innovation capital, by clarifying its competitive benefits on the characteristic context of the SIEs and underlining the mediating role of the digital patterns.

重讀涂爾幹：社會認識論與記憶社會學間的系譜學考察

<p>本文旨趣有二，其一乃透過法國思考脈絡與法文閱讀來對涂爾幹進行重新耙梳。關於宗教研究的探討，筆者認為涂氏對之具有終身連續的「一貫關懷」，而與既有研究中指出的「中途轉向」說不同。另外，涂氏系列宗教研究中提出的核心命題如「神聖性之起源」及「群體之分類認識能力」，實乃導源於「社會」這個根源等見解，正是一種「知識社會學」的進路。此種特有的「集體思維」學說建立在「社會事實說」等基本預設上並開展出法式結構主義的思想風格。建立在上述對涂氏社會認識論的考察，本文欲探討涂爾幹與「涂爾幹學派」中阿部瓦克思(M. Halbwachs)之間的思想接續。作為「記憶社會學」的開創者，學界慣常指稱阿氏乃涂氏門生。但本文卻將兩人的「師徒關係」重新置疑：阿氏身上是否承襲涂氏思維的「學術DNA」？如果是，又是在那些點上有所關連？此應透過嚴謹的學術考據加以證成。透過兩人學術上核心概念的比對、基本假設的對照以及邏輯推演的相互參照，本文指出其在思想系譜上的繼承性。由此，不只反省涂氏與「涂派成員」間之關連，同時也回過頭重估涂氏學說對後世記憶研究與相關文化研究等開展之貢獻。</p> <p>&nbsp;</p><p>This article clarifies the specificity of Durkheim&rsquo;s social epistemology, particularly his study of religion. Durkheim held that both &ldquo;divine nature&rdquo;and the collective capacity for classification are derived from &ldquo;the Society.&rdquo;This approach, as well as his research on &ldquo;social facts&rdquo; and &ldquo;the dualism of human nature,&rdquo; considerably influenced later sociologists. Specifically, Maurice Halbwachs inherited Durkheim&rsquo;s ideas to develop his theory on the sociology of memory from a social psychology perspective. By comparing their core concepts, theoretical assumptions, and inferences, this article identifies the theoretical genealogy between Durkheim and Halbwachs. Additionally, it highlights the contributions of some Durkheimian perspectives to the development of cultural studies.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p>

Postscript: How We Learn Is How We SEE

The Problem Workplace learning is even more important today as organizations face complex, rapid, and unprecedented change. Reflection is critical to learning; yet, it is too often rote, haphazard, or assumed to happen, limiting an organization’s ability to adapt. The Solution HRD scholar-practitioners need to (re)examine how they and their organizations reflect. By engaging in an ongoing practice of reflexivity, they can become more aware of how their perspectives affect not only what they see, but also what they learn and vice versa. The Stakeholders HRD scholar-practitioners, including researchers, faculty, consultants, managers, students, and all who care about workplace learning and reflective practice, will benefit by reflecting on how they can develop individual and collective capacity.