Communities of Practice for Knowledge Sharing

Andriessen, Jerry; Veld, M. Huis in 't; Soekijad, M.

doi:10.1016/b978-008044349-2/50011-9

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is increasing recognition that if organisations are to be seen as communities of communities, they contain many different types, not just communities of practice (eg Andriessen et al 2001, Andriessen and Verburg 2004, Ruuska and Vartianinen 2003.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What are communities of practice? A comparative review of four seminal works

Cox

2005

Journal of Information Science

483

357

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is a comparative review of four seminal works on communities of practice (Lave and Wenger 1991, Brown and Duguid 1991, Wenger 1998, Wenger, McDermott and Snyder 2002. It is argued that the ambiguities of the terms community and practice are a source of the concept's reusability allowing it to be reappropriated for different purposes, academic and practical. However it is potentially confusing that the works differ so markedly in their conceptualisations of community, learning, power and change, diversity and informality. The three earlier works are underpinned by a common epistemological view, but Lave and Wenger (1991) is often read as primarily about the socialisation of new-comers into knowledge by a form of apprenticeship, while the focus in Brown and Duguid (1991) is, in contrast, on improvising new knowledge in a interstitial group that forms in resistance to management. Wenger (1998) 1 IntroductionThe concept of communities of practice has become popular in several academic fields including organisational studies (particularly the topics of knowledge management and organisational learning) and education. Information scientists interested in knowledge and learning are also using the term (witnessed, for example, by bibliographic reviews in the it is a conceptual lens through which to examine the situated social construction of meaning. At other times it is used to refer to a virtual community or informal group sponsored by an organisation to facilitate knowledge sharing or learning. This paper does not attempt to prescribe one definition, rather it aims to clarify for the reader variations in usage and comment critically on the different conceptions.A particular cause of confusion is significant divergences between three earlier seminal works; one or all of which are cited by almost every author who uses the concept. These are: Having considered the four works, a summary section draws together the discussion foregrounding their differences and particular contributions. The conclusion points to a major distinction between direct and indirect social relations as the foundation of communities. Lave and Wenger (1991)The dominant reading of Lave and Wenger (1991) has been that it proposes a new approach to understanding learning, including that which takes place in the workplace.This approach focuses on informal and situated social interaction, rather than on a planned mechanistic process of cognitive transmission. Such interaction achieves authentic, motivated learning of what is needed to be known about the complexities of real practice. It is a central proposition that learning is more than simply acquiring knowledge, it is about an identity change. Peripheral participation, active involvement in the practice, is identified as a key process in learning. Table 1 summarises some features of this new account, set against the rejected orthodoxies (as the authors themselves construct them). Referring to a community of practice is not a way to postulate the existence of a new informal grouping...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What are communities of practice? A comparative review of four seminal works

Cox

2005

Journal of Information Science

483

357

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The 38 networks under study were selected on the basis of their descriptions in the current literature. In the past few years, many in depth studies of knowledge networks, both intra‐company and inter‐company were published and presented at conferences by a variety of authors (Andriessen et al ., 2004; Corso and Giacobbe, 2005; Hustad and Teigland, 2005; Ruuska and Vartiainen, 2003; Sardone, 2006). The authors were approached and asked to apply our scoring method to their networks reported in the literature.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The issue of contract value is related to what Andriessen et al . (2004) call purpose. On the basis of various case studies they concluded that all knowledge networks exist for knowledge sharing, but that this knowledge sharing appears to serve several purposes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(2004) point to (inter‐)organizational membership as an important determinant of reciprocity and identity, other authors (e.g. Andriessen et al ., 2004; Kimble et al ., 2000; Ruuska and Vartiainen, 2003) regard geographical distribution and mode of interaction to be major determining factors in interaction and identity building. Some knowledge networks consist of members working relatively close together with mainly face to face meetings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A typology of knowledge sharing networks in practice

Verburg

Andriessen

2011

Knowl Process Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge intensive organizations often rely on knowledge sharing networks. Such networks, often called 'communities of practice' are found in many organizations but their forms and functions appear to be quite diverse. In this article we determine and discuss a number of basic types of knowledge networks. A literature analysis and a study of 38 networks in large organizations yielded two dimensions of networks, institutionalization and proximity. On the basis of these dimensions four basic types of knowledge networks were discerned: strategic networks, informal networks, question and answer networks, and on-line strategic networks. The recognition of this variety of knowledge networks highlights the different ways in which knowledge sharing and creating can be organized and shows that these different forms of organizing require different technological and organizational support.

show abstract

“…There is also a distinction between different types of Communities. The typical distinguishing features are orientation on a task (focus) (Botkin, 1999), size, degree of interaction, orientation during collaboration, objects of work (Borghoff, Koch, Lacher, Schlichter, & Weisser, 2001), purpose, cohesion, borders (open/closed), duration of existence (Wenger & Snyder, 2000), formalization (of formation, leadership, coordination) (McDermott, 1999;Collison, 1999), and composition (degree of expertise) (Andriessen, Huis in 't Veld, & Soekijad, 2004). However, the typical values of the characteristic features of the collaboration types are neither viewed uniformly nor defined consistently.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

An integrated Collaboration Environment for Various Types of Collaborative Knowledge Work

Fuchs-Kittowski

Siegeris²

2010

International Journal of E-Collaboration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In knowledge work, different types of collaboration can be distinguished. Because of close relationships between these collaboration types, it is necessary to support them together in an integrated collaboration environment. Using case studies, in this paper, the authors describe various types of collaboration practice and demonstrate the necessity of their integrated support. Based on this work, the concept of the incorporation of different types of collaboration in an integrated environment is presented. Furthermore, a prototype implementation of such an integrated environment is offered.

show abstract

Communities of Practice for Knowledge Sharing

Cited by 7 publications

References 8 publications

What are communities of practice? A comparative review of four seminal works

What are communities of practice? A comparative review of four seminal works

A typology of knowledge sharing networks in practice

An integrated Collaboration Environment for Various Types of Collaborative Knowledge Work

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About