Role of Community of Practice - Essay Example

Knowledge Management The Role of Community of practice Introduction Communities of practice play a great role in the transfer of knowledge and creation process. Community of practice is a term that describes a group of persons who have a common interest, a craft, and a profession. The group can emerge naturally as a result of the member’s common interest in a specific domain or it can be established specifically with the intention of gaining knowledge related to a particular field or rather their field. It is during the process of sharing information and experiences with the group members whereby the members share information and opportunities open to them. This sharing assists the members develop each other both at the personal level and also professionally. Communities of practice can be created in the internet through links such as discussion boards and news groups or in real life situations like lunchrooms at places of work, in a field setting on a plant floor or any other appropriate place in the environment. The communities of practice require a leader, the members, and a facilitator to operate and achieve its objectives. The facilitator performs the role of guiding the group into realizing its objectives, a role which the particular person should be trained on (Harman & Brelade, 2003). For an organization to keep a reasonable competitive advantage over others in the particular industry it operates, it is necessary that it fosters and manages knowledge within the firm. Organizations struggle to search for optimal means of facilitating the flow and transfer of the firm’s knowledge to individual persons and to incorporate every person’s unique knowledge into the firm’s knowledge bank. The search fro a more comprehensive understanding of the means and methods of efficiently exploiting knowledge has resulted to a wave of research emphasizing on the knowledge transfer process, particularly within organizations and teams. Several issues work in collaboration in the transfer of knowledge through communities of practice (Argote &Ingram, 2000). From its definition community of practice can be illustrated as a component of for main and distinct sub-components. These include the degree to which there is alleged to be a shared vocabulary with the members involved, the level to which education from others within the community is considered a goal of the community, the level to which there is alleged to be free communication within the community, and the level to which the community is regarded as a means of recalling previous lessons. The four components of community of practice can be illustrated in form of a model that clearly depicts the role played by community of practice in the transfer of knowledge (Argote &Ingram, 2000). Shared vocabulary is one of the components of community of practice. Within the community of practice, the members of create a common language to interact with each of them and enhance the process of transfer of information. Additionally, having the common vocabulary may also be a means for the group to create a bit of uniqueness. Having this uniqueness adds to the value and motivation for a professional to attend and offer some aid to the group. Learning from each other is another aspect of the group. In fact, this is one o the reasons as to why the communities of practice is created. The community of practice is created with the intention of learning from the interactions with individuals possessing the same interests. The main focus of the community of practice is to share and consider every members opinion and experience on the matters they have interest in. community of practice not only offer a place where the team members can benefit from prior experiences but the new information may also enhance new methods of utilizing the information for their benefit (Holland, 1999). The community o practice operates in the form of an open communication. Creation of trust and incentive to share information are crucial to the operations of a triumphant community of practice. Open communications can also be equated to free communication which can be created through face-to-face interaction of the team members as well as via virtual techniques of interactions like e-mail communication , message boards, group mail aliases and other electronic methods of communication. This sub-component- open communication has the objective of assessing whether or not trust exists among the team members in the community of practice, in terms off sharing of information to enhance interactions. The last sub-component of a community of practice is the recall of previous lessons. This is not only a sub-component of a community of practice but also one of the objectives as to why the group was established. The community of practice was established to create a place where most preferred practices and lesson can be shared and passed on to other members of the team in order to gain from the new set of information. In addition, standards and processes can be created within a community of practice to permit newly recruited members of the community of practice to benefit by learning from each other through sharing of new information. Getting access of the expertise and previous lessons experience form other team members leads to a reduced possibility of relearning. All these sub-components of community of practice facilitate the success of the group (Chen & Hung, 2010). Community of practice in organizations Communities of practice are found in almost every organization. Since membership is founded on the basis of participation as opposed to official status or recognition, these communities are not restricted by organizational affiliation, rather thy can span institutional systems and hierarchies. Communities of practice can be found within the organizations whereby people address recurring sets of challenges as a group. An example is the claims processors community of practice within an office in which the members handle the constant flow of information eligible for procession as a group. By taking part in such a communal memory, the members can accomplish their duties without necessarily having to recall everything by themselves. The communities of practices can also exist across business units. In this case important knowledge is often disseminated in various business units. Individuals working in cross-functional groups therefore create communities of practice to be in contact with their colleagues in different departments of the organization and uphold their expertise (Roberts, 2000). When communities of practice transverse across business units, they can develop strategic viewpoints that surpass the disintegration of product lines. For example, a community of practice may recommend a strategy for equipment purchase that no other business unit could have thought of on its own. Finally, communities of practice may be created across company or organizational boundaries. These are formed in situations where a group of people associated with various companies feel the need to form a community of practice. An example is where engineers working for suppliers or customers in a fast-moving industry create a community of practice to keep in touch with constant technological changes. Though communities of practice are not a new form of organizational unit, they are a unique cut on the organization’s constitution that focuses on knowledge that individuals have acquired together instead of the unit they report to, the project underway, or the people they are acquainted with. Communities of practice are different from any other form of arrangement in the organization in terms of their description of their enterprise, boundaries and the duration of time they remain in existence (Birkinshaw et al, 2010). Benefits of Face-to-face interaction community of practice Creation of a specialized, shared vocabulary is a major social structure that facilitates learning from each other. This has been confirmed and approved by several researchers in different contexts. Attendance of live meetings offers an appropriate forum for shared information to be developed and advanced which establishes the basis of the social structure required to support future learning. In the illustration provided above, the particular words used by member A in his narration to Member B, will solidify the universal language of the community of practice. Thus attendance of face-to-face interactions in a community of practice gives the best opportunity to establish as shared vocabulary because the new vocabulary is not only launched but also accorded a contextual meaning which is established through live interactions and discussions. It has also been noted that there is a positive relationship between the level to which specialized vocabulary is perceived and the attendance of face-to-face community of practice interactions. Thus there is a recursive connection between social and technological structures (Kane et al, 2005). The impact of technology of the community of practice progress is influenced by the structural potential of the technology, the contextual appropriateness of technology and creation of new social structures over time. As a community of practice socially adapts to emerging technology, differential effects between the social structures adopted and the technology structure on which the community of practice is founded would be realized. It is normally perceived that open communication and the capacity of the community of practice to support the recall of previous lessons are more likely to be associated with technological abilities rather than social structures. Access to community of practice-related structures, websites, and other tools offers the opportunities to apply open communication practice across an internationally circulated community of practice. In short, the properly aligned electronic alliance structure should be favorable for open communication. If the members of a particular community of practice feel that they have access to several means of communicating among themselves electronically and the communication methods are applied, this should affirm their perception that the community of practice sustains open communication (Nonaka &Takeuchi, 1995) Manager’s role in the creation and development of a Community of Practice Managers play a significant role in the creation and development of a Community of Practice. The process of creation and development of a community of practice follows a five step path. In the first step, what can be regarded as the ‘working potential’ that is, an informal network is established about an issue associated with a professional issue. A first community of interest is established with unclear objective, activity or organization. In regard to expended energy and visibility, the degree of the community is low. The first activity is to identify a particular domain and objectives and the initial activities. At this stage the manager can endorse the activities of the community of practice and also encourage them to progress. The second step is coalescing whereby the community of practice expands in terms of members and a feeling of belonging. The members fell related to each other through universal challenges and professional practice. The initial activities are organized in order to create the sense of belonging and the need to work together towards transfer of knowledge (Oerlemans & Knoben, 2010). The third step, which is maturing is characterized by various cycles of activities intended at clarifying the purpose of the community of practice. The function of the moderator and the borders of the faction concerning other professions or domains in this step involve confirming the particular activities of the community of practice. The community of practice also searches for new members in an attempt to arrive at a significant amount of interactions and variety among the members levels of proficiency. The forth step is stewardship in which the major challenge for the community of practice is to sustain its form and rhythm of activity in production, meditation and sharing. It also intends to diversify its activities at this step in order to realize the requirements and personal goals of its members. The function of the moderator is then to assess consistently the activities and suggest new insights from the outside in an attempt to develop the general practice that appears in the community of practice. The last step of the community of practice development is the transformation stage which can take various forms. The community of practice can cease from existing due o lack of members or activities to carry out or as a result of accomplishment of the initial objectives. The manager plays a role as a facilitator in each of the steps in the development of the community of practice (Oerlemans & Knoben, 2010). Development of a community of practice The development of a community of practice signals its success in the achievement of its objectives, the main being that of knowledge transfer. Some communities of practice evolve in a spontaneous manner while others must be supported or facilitated by a well laid down organizational action plan. In this case, the main issue of consideration is the practices and technology tools that provide the company employs to offer support to already established community of practice groups. The initial origin of the community of practice is not a major consideration at this point. The development of the community of practice at this stage is an important consideration in the analysis of the role played by the group in knowledge transfer because this determines its success as far as realizing its objects is concerned. The development of experienced community of practice groups becomes critical at this point. The four factors or sub-components of the community of practice will assume different orientations after the application of the appropriate technological tools in the development of the community of practice (Narteh, 2010). For instance, a community of practice can be developed by utilizing the face-to-face interaction strategy. This can be accomplished by employing for instance, organizational meetings or through virtual methods like the community of practice- established website or any other relevant communication method. Learning from each other within the community of practice and shared vocabulary are the main factors contributing towards the development of reasonable communal group. Communal sense-making is part of the underlying social structures that are considered as key to a functional community of practice. As a result, face-to-face interaction will be significant as an import support in the operations of a community of practice (Narteh, 2010). The degree to which learning regarded as the objective of the community and the level to which the group specializes in building of vocabulary are the main foundations of a successful community of practice. Learning from each other is also considered as a great motivation behind the establishment of a community of practice. Learning is regarded as having a collective and social structure. Situation learning theory formulated by Lave and Wenger proposes that learning is social construction where experience needs to be launched in appropriate contexts in which it can be relevant to the intended purpose. Face-to-face interaction offers an extremely efficient and robust medium for the perceived socialization constituent of learning. Face-to-face interaction is intrinsically synchronous which permits live deliberations, clarifications and ultimately, a clear comprehension of the knowledge being transferred to facilitate greater learning (Lee et al, 2010). The members of a community of practice that are co-located have the ability to offer a contextual constituent of communication focused on the utilization and practice of this marginal knowledge through story telling, narratives or any other reasonable form of literature. A simple illustration is where a member A, narrates to another member-B, of a unique method he applied in implementing a new technological component for a client. In this case, the member B learns both the functions and applications of the new technological feature as well as the method A, utilized in implementing the facility to the user. This would trigger the member towards the invention of additional uses of the new appliances and also new methods of implementing the plant in other users. Interaction and development thus move hand in hand towards the achievement of a community of practice objectives. This illustration indicates that virtually attending members of a community of practice may get varying opportunities to share narratives and other interaction techniques within the group. People are more likely to relate learning as an objective with the community of practice if they recognize dynamics of learning as they interact with the community of practice (Lu et al, 2010). Implementing knowledge management programs The manager of every organization has a role to play in the development and implementing of knowledge programs. A knowledge manager or chief knowledge officer should possess two principle design competencies: they are technologist and environmentalists. They encourage and launch investments in information communication technology and also in the social environment. The officials also posses marketing skills and be conversant with organization, financial skills to assess effectively the impacts of knowledge management systems or practices, project management capacity to guide complex initiatives. Knowledge managers are required to describe how the organization manages its intellectual assets which include factors such as creativity communication capacity, critical skill and perception (Lu et al, 2010). A manager has to support the social part of knowledge management and the creation of knowledge in an attempt to promote knowledge harmonization and integration. If knowledge is communally constructed or generated, this underlines the function of the knowledge to build up social knowledge management patterns. The knowledge manager also performs the role of an internal consultant in the promotion of knowledge management projects. This responsibility serves to avoid silos of information and has a trans-functional perspective of projects and executes the corporate knowledge management standards (McNichols, 2010). Development of tacit knowledge Managers have a role to play in the development of systems engineering tacit knowledge scale. Tacit knowledge at the personal level may be assessed as situational judgment. Several approaches have been put forward towards the conceptualization of tacit and explicit knowledge. The approaches point out that whereas tacit knowledge is domain specific there are some standard measures of tacit knowledge that can be established for relatively wider domains. An example is the Situational Judgment Test of management tasks that correlates with several measures of management performance found in the range of .38 to .46 (Emerson & Storey, 2010). Conclusion Communities of practice are significant to the functioning of any organization. These however become very important to those that recognize knowledge as a major asset. From this point of view an effective organization consists of a constellation of interrelated communities of practice, each handling a specific aspect of the organization’s competency from the peculiarities of a long-standing consumer, to manufacturing safety, to obscure technical inventions. Communities of practice assist in the accomplishment of several functions in regard to the creation, buildup, and dissemination of knowledge in an organization. They are links to the exchange and analysis of information. Communities of practice can steward competencies to sustain a firm at a cutting edge. References Argote, L.& Ingram, P. (2000). "Knowledge transfer: A Basis for Competitive Advantage in Firms". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 82 (1): 150–169.  Birkinshaw, J., Bresman, H., and Nobel, R. (2010). Knowledge transfer in international acquisitions: A retrospective. Journal of International Business Studies 41 (1):21- 26. Blackler, F. 1995. "Knowledge, Knowledge Work, and Organizations: An Overview and Interpretation". Organization Studies (6): 1021–1046.  Breschi, S., and C. Catalini. (2010). Tracing the links between science and technology: An exploratory analysis of scientists' and inventors' networks. Research Policy 39 (1):14- 26. Chen, C. , & Hung, S.. (2010). To give or to receive? Factors influencing members' knowledge sharing and community promotion in professional virtual communities. Information Management. Corredoira, R. and Rosenkopf, L. 2010. Should auld acquaintance be forgotten? The reverse transfer of knowledge through mobility ties. Strategic Management Journal 31 (2):159-181. Emerson, C., and J. Storey, J. (2010). The reconfiguration of practical knowledge in competitive alliances. International Journal of Knowledge Management Studies 4 (2):114-131. Harman, C.& Brelade, S. (2003). "Doing the Right Thing in a Knowledge Transfer". Knowledge Management Review (Melcrum Publishing) 6 (1): 28–31.  Herrera, L. and Nieto, M. (2010). Mobility of public researchers, scientific knowledge transfer, and the firm's innovation process. Journal of Business Research 63 (5):510-518.  Holland, G. (1999). "Foreword". In Gray, H.; the Society for Research into Higher Education; and Open University Press. University and the creation of wealth.  Holste, J., and Fields, D. (2010). Trust and tacit knowledge sharing and use. Journal of Knowledge Management 14 (1):128-140. Kane, A., Argote, L., & Levine, J. (2005). "Knowledge transfer between groups via personnel rotation: Effects of social identity and knowledge quality". Organizational Behavior And Human Decision Processes 96 (1): 56–71.  Lee, J. , MacMillan I. , and Choe, S. (2010). Technological Knowledge Transfer within Chaebols after the 1997-98 Crisis. Long Range Planning. Nonaka, I.& Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.  Lu, I. , Mao, C., and Wang, C. (2010). Intrafirm technology and knowledge transfer: A best practice perspective. International Journal of Technology Management 49 (4):338-356. McNichols, D. (2010). Optimal knowledge transfer methods: A generation X perspective. Journal of Knowledge Management 14 (1):24-37. Narteh, B. (2010). Knowledge transfer and performance in Danish-Ghanaian strategic alliances. International Journal of Knowledge Management Studies 4 (2):198-215. Oerlemans, G., and Knoben, J. (2010). Configurations of knowledge transfer relations: An empirically based taxonomy and its determinants. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management - JET-M. Roberts, J. (2000). "From Know-how to Show-how: Questioning the Role of Information and Communication Technologies in Knowledge Transfer". Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 12 (4): 429–443.  Szulanski G. (1996). "Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm". Strategic Management Journal 17: 27–43. Read More