Scratching beneath the surface of communities of (mal)practice

Jon Pemberton · Sharon Anne Mavin · Brenda Stalker

105 citations0/0 files storedThe Learning Organization

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Knowledge Management and Sharing Organizational Learning and Leadership Innovative Education and Learning Practices

Abstract

Purpose This paper seeks to surface less positive aspects of communities of practice (CoPs), regardless of emergent or organisationally managed, grounded in political‐power interactions. Examples are provided from the authors' experiences of a research‐based CoP within UK higher education. Design/methodology/approach The paper is primarily theoretical with empirical examples drawn from a descriptive CoP case study. Findings The paper discusses the following themes: the impact of timing on CoP development; the impact of CoP leaders and managers in “managed” CoPs; the power‐political interrelationship between emergent CoPs and formal organisation; the impact of dominant actors with position power; emotional containment and emotion work within CoPs; power implications of novices and masters and the implications when CoP practices diverge from organisational practices. It finds that to ignore such issues of power within CoPs is to limit the knowledge creation process. Research limitations/implications Further empirical research is necessary to investigate micro and macro power‐political issues of CoPs. In particular, emotional containment and emotion work of CoP members and the impact of this on knowledge creation is worthy of future research. Practical implications The paper has significant implications for CoPs in practice as the quest for pragmatic mechanisms to develop individual and organisational learning and knowledge creation for competitive advantage. Originality/value While there is an implicit assumption that CoPs are “good” and benefit individuals and organisations, this paper highlights less positive power‐political issues relating to CoPs which are under researched in the extant literature.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 105 citations exist upstream.

References

1994Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation.1991Situated Learning 2006Communities of Practice: The Organizational Frontier 2003Motivation and barriers to participation in virtual knowledge‐sharing communities of practice 2001Knowledge management in organizations: examining the interaction between technologies, techniques, and people 2006Limits to Communities of Practice 2003Re-Embedding Situatedness: The Importance of Power Relations in Learning Theory 2006Within and Beyond Communities of Practice: Making Sense of Learning Through Participation, Identity and Practice*

Cited by

2008Limitations of Communities of Practice 2010Communities of Practice at an Academic Library: A New Approach to Mentoring at the University of Idaho 2015Managing tourism knowledge 2018Managing tourism knowledge: a review 2009A systematic framework for analysing the critical success factors of communities of practice 2019

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.