Wenger's CoP structure from http://www.ssdd.bcu.ac.uk/esdu/cops/default.htm |
With the importance of communities of practice in organization being established, organizations now should turn
their attention to ensuring that their IT infrastructure enable COPs. A simple folder on a corporate server
is not sufficient. Allocating a space on corporate intranet for
synchronous and asynchronous collaboration, discussion, and
content management (Lewis, 2002) may help as long as the host organization has moved from the static intranet to social intranet. Virtual communities of practice can not be sustainable and flourish in organizations with dispersed population of employees if communication tools do not match main processes that are happening in a CoP. As organizations decide how
to support COPs, they should know more about COP. What elements or components should be present in order for this type of community function? What does differentiate a community of practice from a network of practice? The most accepted framework for a CoP is the one that has been developed by Lave
and Wenger (1991) and Brown and Duguid (1991). You may read more about this framework at the Wenger's blog.
However, there are
different interpretations of the CoP and researchers can't agree on the components and characteristics of the community. It make it challenging for people who develop a portal for VCoP. It
is also difficult to objectively evaluate the effectiveness of these groups as
there is no consensus on what is, or is not, a true CoP group.
References:
Lewis, B. (2002) On-Demand KM: A Two-Tier Architecture.
IT Professional, Jan.-Feb., 27-33
Pentland, A.
(2012). Social Efficiency: Rules for Designing Social Networks and Social Media . Signal Processing
Magazine, IEEE, 29(2), 146-147. doi: 10.1109/msp.2011.943659
No comments:
Post a Comment