Team 1 Tea 3 Team 2 Why is it worth joining a CoP? On a fund amental level a CoP pr ovides pr actitioners with access to; “real time help”, potentiall y powerful learning synergies, training, identification with other pr actitioners in the field, new connections, and best pr actices. At a broader level it allows organisations to dynamically develop a pr actice (way of doings things) ess ential to its survival and well being.
Can CoP be controll ed and managed by organisations? No, and they should not be – in fact too much control can destroy members’ sense of ownership of their comm un ity. However CoP often need to be cultivated for organic growth and should be given adequate time, resources, and mentorship to develop their pr actice and cultivate comm un ity spirit. Having said that, it is perfectly fine if an organisation expects certain specified results from the comm unity in exchange for given support and tru st.
Is it always a good idea for an organisation to sponsor CoP? Some practices, such as fire safety, are less dynamic in their nature and are more eff iciently sustained by providing formal training. While this type of training can bring stand ard isation, regularity and consistency, it is not always best suited to those pr actices crucial to an organisation but requiring dynamic development due to their complexity and changing nature. A CoP pr ovides the opportun ity to carefully select a knowledge domain (i.e. the themes upon which a commun ity wishes to concentrate its learning) that reflects pr actitioners’ interests and organisational objectives. CoP membership all ows dynamic development through bringing deep insight into the given domain, collective sharing (and hence co-creation) of knowledge and impr oved self-identification with the given pr actice.
Where can I get further Support? Add itional documents have been made avail able by the KSG team to help guide and develop commun ities;
• Comm un ities of Practice in NHS Scotland: hints and tips for engaging members and creating a “healthy” commun ity. • Comm un ities of Practice in NHS Scotland: developing your website.
The Example CoP pr ovides information on various widgets as well as a discuss ion forum hosted by the KSG team dedicated to providing a place for administrators and KSG trainers to come together and share knowledge and experiences. http:// www .knowledge.scot.nh s.uk/example.aspx
Fur ther guidance documents and support is available from the KSG team. Please contact [email protected] s.uk.
January 2013 2 Part 2: Structure of CoP and their fundamental roles
The currency of every CoP is knowledge and trust: • In every commun ity there will arise a group of core members – people who become actively and regularly involved in participation and contribution. In general these members have sufficient und erstanding of the given knowledge domain and are able to engage with the pr actice related to it. However, newcomers to the field and experts from other disciplines should feel able to contribute to selected discussions as occ asional or peripheral members – these types of interactions are ess ential as the core members do not constitute the whole comm unity. • What brings CoP members together is excitement about their domain and sharing knowledge with learning partners.
Figure 2: Levels of Participation in CoP
Core roles within a CoP Because of varying degrees of engagement, CoP membership is multi-layered: meaning that not all members are (nor should necess aril y be) regularly active. Nonetheless , the pr osperity of a CoP depend s upon the enthu siasm of its most active core group (who usually account for around 20% of its members).
Comm un ity coo rdinator(s). A central role within every CoP core group is Comm un ity coo rd inator(s): an individual who leads the community though their learn ing, especially during its early stages. The Coo rd inator usually adopts the following responsibili ties; planning the learn ing agenda (i.e. knowledge sharing activities), conn ecting people (including those outside of the comm un ity), building trust and evaluating the positive impact of the comm un ity on their members and organisation, documenting the learn ing that has taken place and organising open/closed space. Coo rd inators must also be knowledgeable about a given domain and widely respected by other pr actitioners, although (s)he does not have to January 2013 3 be a leading expert. As the coo rdinator develops the comm unity’s core group by conn ecting new active members, (s)he should then gradually begin to distribute some of her responsibilities among them. Please note that all of these roles, including that of coo rd inator, organically emerge and are primarily about serving the commun ity, not controlling or managing it.
Coo rd inators should attempt to involve relevant “thought leaders” (well respected experts) early on in the process to help with mentoring members, attracting new recru its and legitimizing the community. In best case scenario these experts participate within the core group but, they also have the opp ortun ity to act within the occ asion al group which consists of members mainly interested in selected projects or topics. Further ‘layers’ within the commun ity form periph eral members: who observe the CoP but rarely contribute in a direct way (perhaps due to a lack of time), and transaction al members consisting of extern al stakeholders who are affected by the comm un ity in a direct or indirect way (such as line managers or patients). Coo rd inators should avoid discouraging the presence of occasion al and periph eral groups as they form an ess ential substance of the comm un ity, particularly since levels of participation for individuals tends to change over time. Thus, succ ess ful CoPs welcome all levels of participation.
Member Support. The role of Member Support is concerned primarily with maintaining relationships and comm un ication. This is a very people-centred role that takes responsibili ty for the diss emination of key information relevant to members and support. Member Support administrators should attempt to pr ovide guidance for new members and welcome them to the community. They may be also responsible for several pr omotional aspects of the commun ity and should concern themselves with recru itment, maintaining relationships both within and out-with the comm un ity and commun icating intern al and external developments. Again, Members Supp ort act on behalf of the comm unity to help it proposer, but they do not control or manage its members.
Information Resour ce Administrator Since the maintenance and acc umulation of both tacit and explicit knowledge is often a key aspect to the aims of a CoP the role of Information Resour ce Administrator: a person who can identify and organise resources of benefit to the commun ity, is an important one. As well as being aware of the kinds of resources desired by your members, the Information Resource Administrator should themselves be confident in identifying reli able sources of information. They may also be concerned with compiling knowledge gathered from the comm unity itself through knowledge sharing and could consider not only the information “wants” of their members but also their “needs”. In this respect, the Information Resour ce Administrator can be seen as working toward the deli verance of vital Information Skill s.
Website Administrator The organisation and layout of an onli ne CoP has direct consequences on the fun ctionali ty and usability of their content. As such an important role is Website
January 2013 4 Administrator: a person responsible for the upkeep and planning of the website itself. This role involves learn ing the technological skills necessary to utili se an onli ne CoP to its full potential and being aware of the various tools and options avail able to comm un ities along with developing an understanding of the writing skills requ ired for the web.
Facili tator The final important role in the life of a commun ity is Comm un ity facili tator (or coach): a person trained in the methods of developing CoP, and who is often extern al to them. A facili tator is responsible for edu cating coord inators on how to lead CoP, links CoP to organisational needs, promotes CoP by acting as their voice within the organisation, and helps CoP leaders organise their resources (especially time, physical space, and IT support). Facilitators are typicall y dedicated towards spotting where natur al learn ing takes place within the organisation and where the potential resides for developing a succ ess ful CoP. They can frequ ently bu ild the foundations for new comm un ities by organising CoP-related events (e.g. learn ing workshops) and by informally raising awareness among potential CoP coo rdinators/leaders. Furthermore, facili tators try to understand the iss ues aff ecting existing CoP and hold problem-solving sess ions with coo rd inators and other members where they can openly discuss what may be going wrong and how that could be improved. The types of pr oblems encountered are sometimes grounded within the commun ity itself (e.g. dominating cliques or a high degree of isolation), practice (e.g. unwillingness to adopt change and to regularly document pr actice), or knowledge domain (e.g. lack of coherence in definitions of knowledge or ignoring outsider’s views). As facili tators try to ass ist comm un ities in solving these unique problems they bu il d their own too lkit for later use with other CoP.
January 2013 5 Part 3: Evidence for succ ess Several research papers have been publi shed on CoP since the concept of knowledge exchange thr ough social interaction was first explored by Lave and Wenger (Lave J. Wenger E.: 1991). In response to the rising use of CoP in both the private and public sectors many of these investigations have explored the dominant trends exhibited by succ ess ful and unsucc essful CoP. The key points from this research are highli ghted below along with a br ief description. For further information on “actions” that can be taken to achieve some of the aims highli ghted please see supporting KSG documents, particularly “Comm un ities of pr actice in NHS Scotland: What makes a healthy commun ity? Guidance for “Core Team” members.” Further resources can be found online at: http:// www .knowledge.scot.nh s.uk/developandsupportcommun ities/reading-li st.aspx.
What defines a succ ess ful CoP? Research undertaken in 2009 demonstrated that there are four key characteristics shared by all succ ess ful CoP to a varying extent;
• Social Interaction – Interaction of individuals in formal or informal sett ings, in person or thr ough the use of comm unication technologies. • Kno wledg e Sharing – The process of sharing information that is relevant to the individuals involved. • Kno wledg e Creation – The process of developing new ways to perform duties, complete a task, or solve a problem. • Identity Building – The process of acquiring a profess ional identity, or an identity of being an expert in the field.
(Li et al: 31: 2009)
The goal of any CoP is to encourage these characteristics and become a “matur e” comm un ity: one that typicall y demonstrates high levels of;
• Strategic Focus - Commun ity has an agreed charter, clearly defining the scope, vision and ways of working. Links to any strategic dr ivers/imperatives have been identified at a high level. • Structure and Membership - Good coverage of potential geographical/departmental participants, actions underway to fill any gaps. Governance has been considered and is in place if appr opriate. Members join and leave of their own volition - few "hangers on". • Kno wledg e Capture – “Core Team” members or subject experts create a FAQ from some discuss ions. Experienced members and /or administrators regularly summ arise discuss ion threads, endorse promoted learning and pr odu ce comm un ity “less ons learned”. • Interaction - Commun ity makes use of voice, video and data-sharing tools. Some qu estions receive responses, but some go unanswered. Contributions come from the full range of members.
January 2013 6
• Benefits - Comm un ity has shared understand ing of the value they add. Some senior managers acknowledge this. Examples exist which clearly demonstrate benefits.
(Cour tesy of Chris Coulson)
What are the key stumbli ng blocks? As well as identifying the key characteristics of succ ess ful CoP, many works have pointed to several re-occ urr ing barr iers to the success of a CoP.
• “Core Team” fatigue - Many CoP identify fatigue as something that can lead to their early demise (Li et al: 31: 2009). It is important to consider the roles highli ghted above and think about how responsibili ties can be divided between members of your “Core Team” so as to avoid this. • Lack of Information Skills (e.g. acc ess ing and appr aising evidence and resources) - Participants in a 2012 study highli ghted that one of their key barr iers to translating the research provided by their CoP into pr actice was the time and skill requ ired to pr operly analysis resources (Meagher-Stewart et al: 730: 2012). Many CoP contain a wealth of information but without proper organisation and thought the usefulness of these valuable resources can be lost through what is comm only termed “Information Overload”. • Low commitment to achieving community goals – Several factors can influence and add to a lack of comm itment to achieving comm unity goals. In the case of a web-based CoP, the preconception by some that onli ne activity is not the same as “real work” is highli ghted (Meagher-Stewart et al: 2012). Research has also found that poor support, both in terms of the parent organisation itself and in terms of infrastru ctur e, and the absence of a working cultur e that encourages profess ional development are major factors (Kislov et al: 2011, Meagher-Stewart et al: 2012). In order to combat this, a CoP must cover issues that members are enthu siastic about, encourage legitimacy through the creation and diss emination of their findings, clearly outli ne the benefits of joining a CoP, highlight successes and encourage high levels of transparency and visibility across the commun ity. • Lack of understanding and respect – Building comm un ication within a CoP is an ess ential requ irement and one that is linked to better relationships and an atmosphere of trust. These elements cannot be fostered where there is a lack of understand ing and respect. This lack often derives from cultur al diff erences in the workplace and the absence of clear member guidance (Kislov et al: 2011, Meagher- Stewart et al: 2012). This can be tackled by putt ing time and energy into member support and visibility, increasing transparency amongst the group and clearly outlining the rules and structure of your community. It is, however, ess ential that comm un ity coo rd inators strike the right balance. While guidance is requ ired, coo rd inators must remember that encouraging social interaction and br eaking down traditional organisational hierarchies are key elements of fostering trust and building a welcoming atmosphere. Members must not feel intimidated.
January 2013 7 Part 4: Cultivating a CoP throughout its li fe
The life of a CoP usually spans across five natur al stages (Figure 3):
• Potential - (recognising the possibility of engaging in shared learning partnerships) • Coalescing - (forming and launching a CoP), • Active - (engaged learn ing partnerships), • Dispersed - (reviewing and revising a CoP, and terminating its use where its objective has been met) • Memorable - (where a CoP no longer exists, but the outcomes of its past learn ing still contribute value).
Figure 3: Stages of CoP life
The po tential stage begins when a coo rdinator invites learn ing partners whom she/he is well networked with, or who are enthu siastic about a particular knowledge domain, to form a CoP. A new CoP should be bu ilt on existing relationships, common interests, knowledge needs, profess ional si tuations and the intention to learn from each other. Original members should try to plan well and consider the foll owing aspects, narr owing their scope where poss ible:
• Primary intent: helping each other? Best pr actices? Developing too ls? Innovative ideas? • Comm un ity: what types of members? A coo rd inator could interview prospective members first if desired or even consider invitation-only membership. • Kno wledg e domain: what topics and specific themes should be loo ked at? • Practice: how will people interact? What types of projects, activities, or events will be used? • Design shared space: how does one pr ovide a clear distinction between open and closed space, pr ovide clear pr ivacy/intell ectual ownership policy and design an equ al structure which avoids hierarchy? • Build a case for action: how best is a CoP’s potential contribution to an organisation and its members expr ess ed?
The life of a CoP is dynamic: as it grows, elements that reflect its requirements can be gradually add ed to its structure (e.g. new locations or frequ encies of meetings, events and various types of technology such as widgets). It is good to start simply, for example by implementing semi-formal or informal wee kly mee tings. In this way, coo rd inators are able to concentrate on encouraging interactions and recru iting new members. During this early stage it is important for coo rd inators to develop a comm un ity charter. This will enable all comm un ity stakeholders to understand clearly what their aims and purposes are and will pr ovide a useful too l for review. While recru iting members, coo rdinators can use edu cational materials discussing the concept of a CoP to support and aid their efforts. January 2013 8 Member’s guides are particularly useful for welcoming people to the group and supporting them through the early stages of their interaction.
The coalescing stage may begin with the official laun ch of the CoP. At this stage members are already aware of the vision underpinning a new comm un ity because of the existence of a comm unity charter and two considerations should take precedent:
• Build sufficient trust and good relationships in order to be able to share deep knowledge and discuss challenging problems. This could be done through welcoming both private and group discuss ions and encour aging members to learn from each other’s failur es: not only their succ ess s tories! In an onli ne environment it is important to plan how to organise open and closed spaces (i.e. what will be visible to others and what will be visible only to members) – you will always need to have a good balance of both types of spaces. • Provide “imm ediate value” to members. This can be acc ompli shed by developing a habit of consulting each other with regards to pr actice. One way of doing this could be by sugg esting useful and interesting knowledge sharing activities. Some examples of these activities includ e: monthly descriptions of selected members’ pr actice, help-in-real-time: a sub-forum for posting specific work-related pr oblems (with the option for a coo rd inator to contact people resour ces directly where a qu estion goes unanswered for a period of time), suggest learn ing projects for voluntary sub-groups, invite expert speakers and /or record their speeches on video, encourage coll aboration on pr odu cing new resources, pub lish a CoP’s official blog to the public (in the open space), combine off line and online (both synchronous and asynchronous) events etc. For purely online CoPs it may be an idea to organise occ asional face-to-face meetings. Try to maintain the “right” rhythm for activities – engaging but not overwhelming. This is something that the coo rd inator simply needs to learn for herself/himself but that might involve balancing familiarity with excitement. CoP core members could also think about providing value for peripheral members – perhaps by collecting stories of how they have translated new learning into their own pr actices.
During the active stage, the commun ity is already recognised in the organisation and hence it may be subject to quick growth. Coo rd inators and members should attempt to utili se the knowledge shared and created as a result of the CoP. This involves working toward improvements within an organisation and implementing dynamic development within the relevant knowledge domain. The members should by now have developed a regular practice of sharing knowledge and relying on each other. At this stage pr iorities are:
• Ass ess ing and demonstrating the value of the CoP within the organisation. • Systematically documenting CoP’s learn ing, inviting and/or “mentoring” new members, and looking for new topics and projects which can be undertaken by the potentiall y arising sub-groups within the comm un ity. • Receiving acknowledgment of the CoP’s achievements.
January 2013 9 Fur thermore; the commun ity may expand and redefine its membership, interests, and pr actice. As this happens, care must be taken to retain the CoP’s identity and intimacy and att ention should be paid to the foll owing:
• Maintain the focus on cutt ing-edge topics. • Mentor new members and standard ise entry requirements (e.g. by referral).
During the following dispersed stage, people gradually begin to review and revise their CoP. Using a table of CoP matur ity is a useful too l for planning activities and your next steps. It may be the case that the community’s focus has shifted over time or that the comm un ity has successfully met its learn ing purposes. Reviving a CoP whose central aim has changed could involve evolving your charter to meet your new needs, welcoming new members to the core group, changing the commun ities’ learn ing focus, holding renewal workshops, or redistribu ting leadership. However; it may be that the natur al lifespan of your CoP has come to an end or you feel that an entirely new CoP is required to meet your needs. In this case, a CoP can be considered as culminating in the memorable stage. In this final stage, the CoP is no longer actively used but past members continue to retain memories of the CoP and its heritage may still actively pr ovide value to various people through access to the knowledge gained. Whether a comm un ity has come to an end or not, it is important to acknowledge the successes and activities of your group. This places value on individual and group participation and ensures that members do not feel as if their work has been forgotten.
Final comm ent
The heart of every comm un ity rests with their core members with facili tators and coo rd inators playing a fund amental role in their success. These posts differ from those of traditional management: sub stituting rigidly controll ed activities for informal leadership where core members attempt to coord inate their pr actice, and moderate topics within their knowledge domain. Most of this work is not obvious and it requ ires observing and listening closing to the life of the commun ity. Ultimately, in today’s knowledge economy these learn ing leaders have the potential to exercise increasing influence on the pr oductivity of organisations by facilitating CoPs for organic growth and eff ective knowledge sharing, and dynamically developing and translating knowledge into pr actice.
January 2013 10 Related Reading
Systematic reviews
Li L C, Grimshaw J M, Nielsen C, Judd M, Coyte PC Use of communities of practice in business and health care sectors: A systematic review . Implementation Science 2009, 4:27
Ranmuthugala G, Plumb JJ, Cunningham FC, Georgiou A, Westbrook JI, Braithwaite J How and why are communities of practice established in the healthcare sector? A systematic review of the literature. BMC Health Services Research 2011, 11:273
Articles, books and websites
Ho K, Jarvis-Selinger S, Norman CD, Li LC et al (2010) Electronic communities of practice: guidelines from a project. The Journal Of Continuing Education In The Health Professions 30 (2):139-43.
Kislov R, Walshe K, Harvey G (2012) Managing boundaries in primary care service improvement: A developmental approach to communities of practice . Implementation Science, 7:97
Kislov, Harvey, Walshe. (2011). Coll aborations for leadership in appli ed health research and care: less ons from the theory of comm un ities of pr actice. Implementation Science, 6 (64).
Kothari A, Boyko JA, Conklin J, Stolee P Sibbald SL (2015) Communities of practice for supporting health systems change: a missed opportunity Health Research Policy and Systems, 13:33
McDermott, Richard. (2000). Knowing in Commun ity: 10 Critical Success Factors in Buil ding Communities of Practice. International Association for Human Resour ce Management, March 2000.
Meagher-Stewart, Solberg, Warner, MacDonald, McPherson, Seaman. (2012 ). Und erstanding the role of commun ities of pr actice in evidence informed decision making in publi c health. Quali tative Health Research, 22(6).
Thomson L, Schneider J, Wright N (2013) Developing communities of practice to support the implementation of research into clinical practice. Leadership in Health Services, 26 (1): 20 – 33
Wenger, E. (1998a). Commun ities of Practice: Learn ing, meaning and identity. Cambr idge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, E. (1998b). Commun ities of pr actice: learning as a social system. The Systems Thinker, 9(5).
Wenger, Etienne, McDermott, Richard, & Snyder, William M. (2002). Cultivating Comm un ities od Practice. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.
Wenger-Trayner, Beverly, & Wenger-Trayner, Etienn e. (2012). Leadership group s. Distributed leadership in social learning. Retrieved from www.wenger-trayner.com website: http:// wenger-trayner.com/blog/leadership-groups-for-social-learn ing/
Wenger-Trayner, Beverly, & Wenger-Trayner, Etienn e. (2015). Introduction to a comm un ity of practice Retrieved from Wenger-Trayner website: http://wenger- trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/
Reports
The Health Foundation. (2014) Effective networks for improvement Developing and managing effective networks to support quality improvement in healthcare Learning Report March 2014
Henley Forum for Organisational Learning and Knowledge Strategies (2015) Evaluating communities of practice: adopting learning-oriented approaches. Knowledge in Action - Issue 31 https://www.henley.ac.uk/files/pdf/research/research-centres/henley- forum/Knowledge_in_Action_-_issue_31.pdf
Reading list updated February 2016 11