Assignment paper

Conference paper

Code of Ethics for a Community of Practice (CoP)

Why a code of ethics?

As a professional, I have a Code of Ethics to guide me in relationship to Others. I have a personal code of ethics and code of interaction with others and when I join a new group of friends or professionals or a CoP I have to compare and contrast the ethical position of each to adjust and find my way around. If I am to discuss tacit knowledge, provide information, resources and support, I want to know what the rules of engagement are. I want to know that respect, privacy and ownership, are decided up-front and that the things we are going to do are culturally and ethically acceptable to me.
I have not seen any implicit or explicit ethics for CoPs as yet and that is a bit like the spider inviting me into his den. If it is a CoP of like minded professionals there are some basic rules, professional codes of practice. I also understand the UN charter of human rights, but Australia does not have a constitutional charter of human rights. Legal issues pertaining to the CoP are rarely discussed before the initial stages an you are well and truly into the middle of it, perhaps facing a dawning ethical problem before you realise that there are no rules and no boundaries.

Can a CoP have a moral responsibility?
Only humans can have moral agency because they alone have the capacity to think,choose and experience emotions. Thus CoPs are amoral even though they are responsible to the law economic forces and government control. You have to watch that individuals don't project moral responsibility onto the CoP and that the CoP doesn't shirk responsibility by blaming individuals. To separate individual from the collective is probably a reflection of western philosophical thought. This atomic individualism is reflected in our language, community structure and relationships. Holistically the CoP and the individual are one indivisible construct. Despite this individuals can enter and leave the CoP and this does not alter the moral responsibility of the CoP. Thus a CoP is a dynamic construct with shared responsibility. Individuals within a CoP vary as to their moral responsibility dependent upon age, experience, education, development and level of self control. CoPs will also vary in their ethical positions dependent upon such variables as for-profit, not- for-profit, government, NGOs, cultural norms, history, investment horizons, dynamism, heterogeneity and hostility patterns.
The ecological fallacy states that the CoP does not extrapolate to an individuals ethics due to Groupthink, the Hawthorne effect, pragmatics and utilitarianism. Although the individual is still making the choices, they may be coerced or altered by the CoP culture.
The Individual fallacy implies that individuals do not equal the collective ethic. Each person has free will, choice and intention and therefore other members of the CoP are not responsible for their actions. It follows the line of the fallacy of False Reification, the CoP is not overriding the individual, it is a tool for the welfare and sustainability of people.
The Association fallacy implies that the CoP is the sum total of the collective of all individual ethics overriding individual ethics. The Autonomy fallacy treats the CoP as indivisible so that the individual acts as agent for the CoP but accepts no individual responsibility.
There is a dynamic nature of multiple factors implying a complexity theory approach. Using a systems theory, each party takes responsibility as does the CoP. Using a blame and punishment model creates this dichotomy. Perhaps it is more reasonable to accept that mistakes happen and we can learn from them.

What kind of Code of Ethics
I would prefer a code that it real, not a list of fancy words and lofty ideals that take a dictionary to understand. I would like the ethics to be embedded in all the frameworks used and all the goals of the CoP. I have taken part in business based CoPs that may have different goals than my health lobby CoP or my art CoP. Are universal rules, absolute moral codes or relativistic( culturally, socially, philosophical, historical and personal)ones better?
There are Philosophical, social and psychological aspects to most codes of ethics

Philosophy theories
Justice (Distributory ethics Non-maleficence;Beneficence; freedom of choice/ liberty)
Rights, for example, free speech, free consent, privacy, free conscience. And the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.
Duties ( duty to elders, God)
Virtues ( Aristotle talked about thought and emotions being in balance, like Kelly's construct theory). For example- respect, distributive justice, truthfulness, friendliness, gentleness, equality, modesty and self control.

Social theories
values
culture, social contract theory, Rousseau, relationship theory, Buber, Foucault, Richoeu
law
the prisoner's dilemma
political
globalisation/ the global village
religions

Psychological theories
behavior theories, Pavlov, Skinner.
reasoning, logical and otherwise, Descartes, Habermas, Hegel, Spinoza, Kant, Descartes, Pragmatics , James, Dewey.
emotional brain functioning, humanism, feminisms, intuitive theories
epistemology or learning
development theories, Piaget, Kohlberg, Vygotsky

Again we see a complex set of theories and ideas to choose from and this is by no means a complete picture. Theories can detract from ethics. Prescriptive approaches require no thinking but descriptive approaches offer no practical solutions. A code implies dichotomies and paternalism. It also implies argumentation and single positions Codes lead to exclusion rather than inclusions. I prefer a non-code, anti-theory, feminisms approach.

Feminist virtues include narrative approaches to diversity, caring, respect, valuing, nurturing and networking. This is about not only the Other people but also the environment and history- past and future. It is about consciousness raising rather than rigidity. It respects people to be equal adult sand I think that if you treat people as adults they will more likely act as adults.

Feminist Ethics in a CoP.
In a Cop, the feminist values of diversity, care and networking are integral to collaborative work. This is not a prescriptive or rigid set of morals. It implies virtues, in balance.
Diversity
A CoP that contains a homogeneity offers no alternate thoughts, resources or challenges and creates the category error. Admittedly, too much diversity means that there is little attachment between participants, but six degrees of separation in the world means that I have never found it hard to find something in common.
Care
If you use care for others, this implies respect, support, assistance, collaboration and listening for, culture, gender, race, religions and sex differences. Thee are competing values however, allowing for diversity, that mean one needs to have a balanced view of care.
Care implies an emotional attachment to members of the CoP. It also implies an intuitive capacity to understand other people and empathy.
Networking
It goes without saying that this is the basic structure of a CoP. One is not just networking with the participants but with the network of each individual member of the CoP. The boundaries become somewhat blurred in this model. Collaboration is not just for the CoP but for the outcomes which is for the betterment of others. This gives us the positive liberty to acknowledge the needs of others as well as our own.

Problems for discussion
1.
Can we make it simple?
Would the universalist, monotheory-
Do unto others as you would have done unto you,
suffice?
What potential problems are there with this adage?
2.
How do ethics relate to the designed, fast paced innovative profit-driven CoP?

Case-study- software designers CoPs create programs and to launch them so that they can grab marketshare, get some profit before free shareware pirates the program and move onto the next idea.
What about the consumer that has to find all the bugs and report them and do the research for the company at their expense?

Would this be acceptable for a pharmaceutical company?

3
Someone talks about their unethical/illegal behavior outside the Cop within in the privacy of the CoP .
Case studies- all true ones I might add.

They are having an affair with the boss.

They bought a large number of shares in a rival company.

They tell you that their brother, well known community member and driver of the school bus is a pedophile

What do we do?

Is there a slippery slope?

4
What do men do in a CoP with feminist ethics? ]
What do we do if someone in the CoP doesn't want to embrace such ethics?

5
Someone leaves our CoP , takes all the shared soft knowledge and plans for future research and development and gos to a rival company. What ethical principles apply?
For a full discussion on the ethical issues relating to 'who owns knowledge' see our next module.

Bibliography

Allsopp, J. (2000). A Dao of Web Design. A List Apart, 58. Retrieved 13/12/2007
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/dao/

Anderson, S. (2007). Its our web not theirs [Electronic Version]. COA News Retrieved 12/12/2007 from http://search.creativecommons.org/#.

Anon, E. (2007). Map@syst Code of Ethics [Electronic Version]. Retrieved 20/12/2007 from http://collaborate.extension.org/wiki/Map@syst_Code_of_Ethics.

Ardichvili, A., MaurerM, Li, W., & Wentling, T. (2006). Cultural influences on knowledge sharing through online communities of practice. Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(1), 94-107 Retrieved 21/12/2007 from EmeraldInsight Database USQ Library Services

Atkinson-Grosjean, J., & Young, W. M. (2007). Closing the ethics gap in research PPPs: a role for translational science and 'proximal ethicality'? . Retrieved 16/12/2007, from
http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/34736.html

Atkinsson, A. (2007). A Code of Ethics for Sustainability Professionals. Worldchaning Retrieved 24/12/2007, from http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/007512.


Bittner, P., & Hornecker, E. (2005). A Micro-Ethical View On Computing Practice. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 4th decennial conference on Critical computing: between sense and sensibility CC '05, January 2005 Retrieved 23/12/2007 from ACM Data Provider, USQ Library Multiple Database

Burton, B.K. & Dunn, C.P. (1996). Stakeholders interests and Community groups: a new view International Association for Business and Society Annual Meeting Retrieved 22/6/2006 Ebscohost USQ Library
www.rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/dunnweb/pubslabs96html

Collier, J., & Esteban, R. (1999). Governance in the Participative Organisation: Freedom, Creativity and Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 21, 173-188, Retrieved 16/12/2007 EbscoHost database USQ Library

Connolly, J. (2007). The Place of Ethics in the Spatial Information Sciences: an Australasian Perspective [Electronic Version]. The Global Geospatial Magazine , GIS Development Retrieved 23/12/2007 from http://www.gisdevelopment.net/magazine/global/2007/august/26.htm.

Cooper, T. (1997). Building an Ethical Community: Queensland University of Technology Press
Dube, J. (2003). A Blogger's Code of Ethics [Electronic Version]. Retrieved 23/12/2007 from http://www.cyberjournalist.net/news/000215.php.

Elshtan, J.B. ( 1992) Meditations on modern Political Thought U.S.A. Pennsylvania University Press.

Goodall, G. (2003). Shelving the Code of Ethics:Bend it like Bentham [Electronic Version] Retrieved Googlesearch 23/12/2007 from
http://72.14.235.104/searchq=cache834yt4GjDYQJ:www.deregulo.com/facetation/pdfs/shelvingCodeOfEthics.pdf+code+of+ethics,+Communities+of+Practice&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=21&gl=au.

Harten, N. (2006) The Cry for Ethical Leadership Philosophy Pathways 25, Retrieved 20/12/2007
www.isfp.co.uk/businesspathways

Hayward, L. M., Blackmer, B., & Markowski, A. (2006). Standardized Patients and Communities of Practice:A Realistic Strategy for Integrating the Core Values in a Physical Therapist Education Program. Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 20(2).Retrieved 16/12/2007 EbscoHost, USQ Library
.
Iske, P. L. Practicing what you preach. In S. Lelic & J. Scofield (Eds.), Communities of Practice: Lessons from Leading Collaborative Enterprises: Ark Group.

Jagger, A.M. ( 2002) Feminist Ethics: Some Issues for the Nineties in Robert A. Larmer ed , Ethics in the Workplace, U.S.A., Wandsworth Group.

James, S. (2000) Feminism in Philosophy of Mind , Miranda Flicker & Jennifer Hornsby, Feminism in Philosophy UK. Cambridge University Press.

Kuhn, M. (2005). COBE A proposed code for blogging ethics. Paper presented at the Blogging, Journalism and Credibility Conference. Retrieved 24/12/2007, from
http://72.14.235.104/search?q=cache:fa5EcS7twdwJ:rconversation.blogs.com/COBE-Blog%2520Ethics.pdf+communities+of+practice+and+ethics&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=214.

Kolb, R.W.,Le Clair,D., Pelton, L., Swanson, D. & Windsor, D., (2004). Role of Ethics in Business Curricula. Paper presented at the Teaching Business Ethics Conference, Tampa. Retrieved 23/12/2007
http://www.aacsb.edu/eerc/TBEConference/index.asp

Lennick, D. & Kiel, F. ( 2005) Moral Intelligence Pearson Education Inc , U.S.A. Wharton School Publishing

McDaniel, C. ( 2004) Organisational Ethics-research and ethical environments England, Ashgate Publishing Ltd

Nielson, R.P. (1996) The Politics of ethics Oxford, The Oxford University Press

Noddings, N. (1984). Caring. A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education. London, USA: University of California Press.

Plumwood, V., (1998) Inequality, eco-justice and ecological rationality in John S Dryzek & David Schosberg Eds, Debating the Earth, The environmental politics reader, U.K. Oxford University Press.

Price, M(2004) Evolutionary Psychology and Ethics Retrieved 26/11/2007 from
www.isp.couk/businesspathways/issue5.html

Razin, A( 2006) Models of Moral Activity. Philosophy Now, 54.

Rodda, A. (1994) Women and the Environment Australia, Zeal Books Ltd.

Singer, P.(2002) One world- the ethics of globalisation Australia, The Text Publishing Company

Tronto, J.C.(1993) Moral Boundaries: a political argument for an ethics of care Great Britain, Routledge, Chapman & Hall Inc.

Veenswijk, M., & Chisalita, C., M,. (2007). The importance of power and ideology in communities of practice :The case of a de-marginalized user interface design team in a failing multi-national design company Information Technology & People 29(1), 32-52.Retrieved 21/12/2007 Emerald Group Publishing, USQ Library

Velaquez, M. (2003) Debunking Corporate Moral Responsibility, Tome L. Beauchamp & Norman E.Bowie Eds Ethical Theory and Business 7th Edition U.S.A. Pearson Prentice Hall.

Villenas, S. (2006). Latina/Chicana feminist postcolonialities: un/tracking educational actors’ interventions. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 19(5), 659–672. Retrieved 16/12/2007 EbscoHost USQ Library

Weathersby, R. & White, J. (2004). Ethics and Community in Management Education [Electronic Version]. Academic Exchange Quarterly 8 (1) Retrieved 16/12/2007from http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/5jun2616w4.htm.

Slideshow

Slides

Slide 1
Code of Ethics for a Community of Practice (CoP)

by Joyce Arnold

Slide 2
Why a code of ethics?

Safety

Respect

Trust

Professional behaviour

Slide 3

Can a CoP have a moral responsibility?

The CoP has collective responsibility?

Each individual is responsible for their own ethical behaviour?

Does each individual have to take collective repsonibility for the CoP?

Slide 4

What kind of Code of Ethics ?

Philosophical ethics

Social theories

Psychological theories

Mono-theory/pluralism/relativism/deontological

pragmatic/post-modern

Feminisms

Slide 5
Feminist Ethics in a​ CoP ?

Diversity
Care
Networking

Slide 6

Problems for discussion.

Please comment and debate these issues and any others you wish to add.

Slide 7

1.Can we make it simple? Would the universalist, monotheory-

Do unto others as you would have done unto you,

suffice?

What potential problems are there with this adage?


Slide 8

2.How do ethics relate to the designed, fast paced innovative profit-driven CoP?

Case-study

Software designers CoPs create programs and to launch them so that they can grab marketshare, get some profit before free shareware pirates the program and move onto the next idea.

What about the consumer that has to find all the bugs and report them and do the research for the company at their expense?

Would this be acceptable for a pharmaceutical company?

Slide 9

3 Someone talks about their unethical/illegal behavior outside the Cop within in the privacy of the CoP .

Case studies- all true ones I might add.

They are having an affair with the boss. What do we think, do?

They bought a large number of shares in a rival company. What would you do?

They tell you that their brother, well known community member and driver of the school bus is a pedophile. What would you do?

Is there a slippery slope?




Slide 10

4.What do men do in a CoP with feminist ethics?

What do we do if someone in the CoP doesn't want to embrace such ethics?

Slide 11

5. Someone leaves our CoP , takes all the shared soft knowledge and plans for future research

and development and gos to a rival company.

What ethical principles apply?

For a full discussion on the ethical issues relating to 'who owns knowledge' see our next module.

Slide 12

The End

A code for sustainable ethics

Here is a practical, easy to read code of ethics. It is for sustainable ethics but pertains to many aspects of practical ethics in other areas of lives, business and CoPs.
I will use Atkinsson's framework and add my own comments.

1. Walk your talk.
It is no use having a code of ethics collecting dust on a bookshelf somewhere. Ethics is a practice rather than merely a cognitive process. Modelling ethical behaviour and showing that it is possible is fundamental to practical ethics.

2. Keep up to date.
As information and knowledge is changing more rapidly, better, smarter, more ethical ways of going about business need to be made available and put into action. This is an important aspect of professional ethics

3. Tell the truth about the trends, as you see it.
Tell the truth anyway, saves having to remember and maintain the lie and may create a sense of trust

4. Share information, and credit, with other professionals.
This is the professional attitude that goes back to the Hippocratic oath. Knowledge locked away is irrelevant. One does need to respect confidentiality, as in medical practice and the laws of privacy.

5. Prioritize cooperation over competition, and impact over income.
This is the cornerstone of a CoP, knowledge organisations and learning communities.It is our evolutionary advantage.

6. Make referrals to other professionals whenever appropriate.
This is the networking option, makes for more fluid boundaries but also increases marketing outcomes.
7. Tithe to the volunteers.
Such an old fashioned concept, currently resurrected as Corporate Social Responsibility.

8. Explain your ethical choices.
Be transparent in all actions, have an ethical audit and ethical portfolio. Why not advertise good behaviour? Perhaps it is contagious, we know that it has a multiplier effect. The market for sustainable, green and ethical business and investments is ever increasing.
9. Consider the systemic impacts of your advice and actions.
Systemic thinking is important for professionals but stakeholder theory is also valuable from an economic and ethical point of view.
10. Seek to do no harm.
No harm versus minimal harm versus utilitarian principles of greatest good?Therein lies the crux of all ethical problems. If there was a no harm option then the decision would be too easy.

Reference

Atkinsson, A. (2007). A Code of Ethics for Sustainability Professionals. Worldchanging Retrieved 24/12/2007, from http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/007512.html

Code of Ethics

Here is a Code of Ethics for a CoP published, the discussion is available
Connolly, J. (2007). The Place of Ethics in the Spatial Information Sciences: an Australasian Perspective [Electronic Version]. The Global Geospatial Magazine , GIS Development from http://www.gisdevelopment.net/magazine/global/2007/august/26.htm.


They addressed
Professional ethics
Identifying ethical threats
Evaluating the causes of ethical threats
and Examining possible safeguards to minimise ethical threats.

Why not a code of ethics?

Enron was famed for having a strict code of ethics. The code of ethics was not externally consistent with the internal organisation and since then, cynicism about codes has a realistic ring.
Code of ethics need to be internally consistent, externally consistent and have face validity ( Goodsall, 2003).
A code needs to be written in such a way that it is part of praxis and not just collecting dust on a library shelf.
It needs to be written in words that can be understood and relate to daily practice.
What is happening internally needs to be reflected int he code and the code needs to be seen to be reliable between members of the community of practice, from one moment to the next and in dealings with people outside the CoP.
There is no point writing a code if it is not true. Perhaps there is no point to writing a code. Acting on a code would have more value.

Goodall, G. (2003). Shelving the Code of Ethics:Bend it like Bentham [Electronic Version] Retrieved 23/12/2007
http://72.14.235.104/searchq=cache:834yt4GjDYQJ:www.deregulo.com/facetation/pdfs/shelvingCodeOfEthics.pdf+code+of+ethics,+Communities+of+Practice&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=21&gl=au.

Why a code of ethics

One has to feel safe in order to work at higher levels than base drives and survival ( Maslow's Hierarchy of need). Most of us take some time to assess a community, particularly the safety, trust and ethical standard, before forming relationships and joining a community. Some communities have implied codes of ethics, eg schools, police, hospitals, other s make their code of ethics and code of conduct explicit ( University of Western Australia).
Some organisations use a code of ethics to protect themselves too. ( eg relationships with the media, the public, use of company property for personal use, working outside the enterprise, secrecy, confidentiality and accepting bribes).
Codes of ethics and conduct are mandatory for publication of research. Such codes may also be advisable in a CoP, particularly as research is an important factor in obtaining knowledge.
A code of ethics or conduct may define boundaries to a CoP where there may be no boundaries, fluid boundaries or may serve to enforce boundaries in prescribed groups.

University of Western Australia, (2007) Code of ethics Retrieved 23/12/2007
http://www.hr.uwa.edu.au/publications/code_of_ethics

A code of Ethics

Ethics -why?
Ethics provides a framework or platform for human activity, be it business, education, health or a CoP ( Pelton, 2004)
Ethical behaviour has a multiplier effect ( le Clair, 2004)
Ethics provides a basis for human interaction, collaboration and a way to deal witht he competitive self based drive and the evolutionary advantage to social , community living

Issues
Philosophy- justice, - distributory ( Rawls), non-malifiscience, beneficence, freedom of choice/liberty( Bentham)
rights, (The Rights of Man- UN, USA constitution, ? Australian constitution)
duties,
virtues (Aristotle, McIntyre)
( Swanson, 2004)

Social theories- values, culture,
- law

Psychological theories
Reasoning
Behaviour
Emotion ( Noddings)
However, a non-code code of ethics seems wisest. A code is paternalistic, too rigid, coercive, leads to exclusion rather than inclusion,
Virtues ( respect, caring, value diversity, networking ( eliminates boundaries and ownership issues) and post virtues narrative may have more consciousness raising effect.

Reference:
Robert W. Kolb, Dan LeClair, Lou Pelton, Diane Swanson, & Duane Windsor. (2004). Role of Ethics in Business Curricula. Paper presented at the Teaching Business Ethics Conference, Tampa. Retrieved 23/12/2007
http://www.aacsb.edu/eerc/TBEConference/index.asp

Self vs Other

There is nothing new about the Self/Other dichotomy, it has existed as long as man has existed. A CoP combines both self and Other although seems to parade as a collaboration. It must also serve Self, given choice. This implies a balance of choices and freedom to do so. Freedom means liberty. Berlin talks about two forms of liberty ( Berlin 1969; Warburton, 1999).
Negative liberty is the right for the individual to choose- an Individualist position.
Positive liberty is the paternalist position that protects individuals from giving into their base desires. It helps us achieve a higher level of ourselves, self determination and cooperative behaviour.
A CoP , as a collaborative enterprise, implies positive liberty to achieve higher levels of knowledge, behaviour and cooperation. It also implies negative freedom to address Individualist needs,. The two act in opposition and requires choice of dynamic balance. This balance is the kernel of the ethical dilemma for a CoP.

There are numerous variable that help us in the choice in this dilemma. Although there is evidence of prior learning, personality features and developmental, hierarchical phases of moral development as described by Piaget and Kohlberg, Vygotsky inferred that this was essentially culturally defined (Cheyne & Tartulli 1999).

I subscribe to the feminist philosophy of care, value in diversity and networking which balances a gender bias (Nucci 2002). Feminist philosophy is a-philosophical, post-modern, non-theory bound and expresses socially conceived narrative rather than analysis. Care pertains to all humans, animals and the environment and although modeled on the mothering approach, also values sustainability and the rights of future generations (Koslowski 1998; Warren 2000). Care is a practice not just theory and pertains to giving, receiving, taking care within the context of the ‘Other” or recipient (Haslanger 2000, Emberson-Bain 1994; Tronto 1993). Diversity is valued above the homogenization of dichotomous thought (Rufford & Noonan 2001; Mies & Shiva 1997; Jagger 2002; Plumwood 1993; Rodda 1994). Networking, social interaction and responsibility is a common value with the New Economy and is valued above individualism (Elshtan 1992). Although most feminists would argue that men are included in this philosophy, the term ‘feminism’ creates division. I prefer to use anima and animus to describe those stereotyped female and male unconscious parts of the person to avoid this schism (Jung 1968). It seems to me that no other philosophy provides the basic ethics for CoP than Feminist philosophy

References:

Berlin, I. (1969) Four essays in Liberty, UK, Oxford University Press


Cheyne, JA & Tartulli, D 1999, “Dialogue, Difference and the ‘Third Voice’ in the Zone of Proximal Development”, viewed 26th January 2007 www.arts.uwaterloo.ca/~acheyne/ZPD.html


Elshtan, J B 1992, Meditations on modern political thought, Pennsylvania University Press, USA.

Emmeron-Bain, A 1994, “Mining Development in the Pacific; are we sustaining the unsustainable?”, in W Harcourt( ed.), Feminist Perspectives on Sustainable Development, Zed Books Ltd and Society for International Development, Rome.

Haslanger, S 2000, “ Feminism in Metaphysics”, in Fritz Allhoff & Anand Vaidya (eds.), Feminism in Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, UK.


Jagger, AM 2002, “ Feminist Ethics: Some issues for the nineties”, in Robert A Larmer (ed), Ethics in the Workplace, Wandsworth Group, USA


Jung, C 1968, “ Concerning the Archetypes”, in Collected Works of C G Jung Vol 9 Part 1 2nd Edition, Princeton University Press, USA.


Koslowski, P., (1996), “Ecology and Ethics in the Economy” in F Neil Brady(ed.), Ethical universals in International Business, Springer-Verlag-Berlin-Heidelberg, Germany


Mies, M & Shiva, V 1997, “Ecofeminism” in Sandra Kemp & Judith Squires (eds.), Feminisms Oxford University Press, UK.


Nucci, L 2002, “Moral Development and Moral Education: an overview” viewed 26th January 2007, http://tigger.uic.edu/~lnucci/MotralEd/overview.html


Plumwood, V 1993, Feminism and mastery of nature, Routledge, Australia.


Rodda, A 1994, Women and the Environment, Zeal Books Ltd, Australia.


Rufford, J & Noonan, B, 2001, editorial Earth Born viewed 25th January 2007 www.womenandearth.org/fecofemizine1


Tronto, JC 1993, Moral Boundaries: a political argument for the ethic of care”, Routledge Chapman & Hall Inc, Great Britain.

Warburton, N. ( 1999) Philosophy: the Basics, Routledge.


Warren, K 2000, Ecofeminist Philosophy- a western perspective or what it is and why it matters, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc, USA.

Interesting to see some criticisms of the social theories of CoPs because they make sense. Rather than blame the person or the CoP, better to understand the issues. This paper addresses some important issues, particularly addressing online CoPs ability to be a real CoP.

1 prescriptive versus description distinction
This is a very important point that Wenger is misinterpreted. You can nurture and support a CoP but you cannot design or take a cookbook approach. CoPs are about content not form.
2 ready-made versus communities in the making;
People make their own CoPs. They will form their own subgroups if you try to design or control a CoP and the conversation on the side may be counterproductive, particularly if their is a profit goal, a power differential or an ethical issue at foot. Ignoring interpersonal relationships is unwise and fantasising that relationships are all productive and collaborative are just not true just because you design it that way.
3 knowledge of possession versus knowing in practice;
Can you really learn without doing. Can you really have a knowledge only CoP and thus an online CoP is not practice based so is it a CoP?
4 mid-level social theory versus micro learning theory; and
Both models are required
5 motivated members versus unwilling subjects.
Can you morally coerce someone to share and give and collaborate. Will you be able to do it? Will they sabotage?What kind of motivation.? Is internal motivation more likely to result in collaborative behaviour than externally motivated?

Reference

Schwen, T. M., & Hara, N. (2003). Community of Practice: A Metaphor for Online Design? The Information Society, 19, 257-270 Retrieved Googlescholar, 21/12/2007
http://scholar.google.com.au/scholarq=ethics,+communities+of+practice&hl=en&lr=&start=10&sa=N

Power and ideology

This paper offers a well designed research critically analysing the original positions o Lave and Wenger with respect to the CoP. They make some important points about analysis of the power differentials not only within a CoP but towards externals, such as stakeholders, management, customers.
Analysis of the cognitive backgrounds and ideological stance is also important with respect to the thought, emotions and praxis of a CoP.
I was relieved to see a balanced paper that doesn't take CoPs for granted or preach unattainable collectivist behaviour. A realistic approach is much better, particularly if we wish to manage a CoP, design one or take part in one. Understanding differences and their interrelationship is an ethical need with respect to a CoP.

Reference

Veenswijk, M., & Chisalita, C., M,. (2007). The importance of power and ideology in communities of practice :The case of a de-marginalized user interface design team in a failing multi-national design company Information Technology & People 29(1), 32-52. Retrieved 21/12/2007 Emerald, USQ Library

Cultural influences on CoPs.

Some of the issues raised by cultural differences include:
degree of collectivism, Attention to seniority, age, gender, wealth

competitiveness, more important in cultures like USA.

the importance of saving face, Sometimes saying the wrong thing or even seemingly boasting is deemed to be inappropriate socially.

in-group orientation, whether you are in the core group, newbie, in the in group or the out group
attention paid to power and hierarchy,

and culture-specific preferences for communication modes and cognitive styles different preferences for symbolic versus semantic learning and cognition, and for different forms of verbal and visual presentation of information and learning content

four distinct cultural patterns, namely, vertical and horizontal collectivism, and vertical and horizontal individualism relate to power distance and achievement models
The authors end by suggesting that one needs to have a cultural audit of a CoP and address differences.

Ardichvili, A., MaurerM, Li, W., & Wentling, T. (2006). Cultural influences on knowledge sharing through online communities of practice. Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(1), 94-107 Retrieved EmeraldInsight, USQ library 21/12/2007.

A code of ethics

This CoP has produced a written code of ethics, based on virtues of honesty, courtesy, commitment, sharing, active participation and aiming towards achieving excellence.

The importance here is the governance- a formal process put to majority rule by the CoP and guidelines for response, such as temporary suspension of membership or removal from the CoP.

The code includes
professionalism and faithful agent for all stakeholders. Each member of a CoP is there by the very fact that they have expertise in a specific area and professional behaviour is a code of behaviour within itself. This part of the code is more action oriented.

credit and integrity to the CoP This relates to internal consistency.

Not exert undue influence due to payments, or publicly criticise a member or process of CoP. At one level this relates to outside influences in and out of the CoP

Work to strengthen personal and CoP knowledge and expertise. This is fundamentally important to stop stagnation or groupthink.

Undertake only those projects that one is qualified or experienced to do. Protection and security for the CoP and the individual

Give appropriate credit where due to others Mutual support and interdependence is vital to a CoP and positive reinforcement is an important motivational agent as most members of a CoP are internally motivated. This also protects intellectual property

Recognize the proprietary, privacy, legal, and ethical interests and rights of others- This requires moral control of the social dilemma- self versus Other.

This code was created by the CoP I understand so it is a mutually acceptable code but it is based on logical thought and behaviour. It does not address emotional , caring or cultural issues specifically. There is no mention of diversity or respect for the social/emotional respect of Other. I suspect that it assumes this aspect as a normal component of human interaction.


anon, Extension. (2007). Map@syst Code of Ethics [Electronic Version]. Retrieved 20/12/2007 from http://collaborate.extension.org/wiki/Map@syst_Code_of_Ethics.

Heuristics

This article discusses the heuristics from a participant point of view, particulalry addressing emotional connectivity within a cycle of face to face and online CoPs across the life cycle of a CoP.It is well organised but also raises the emotional responisbility of a CoP, from the leaders perspective as well as the individual participants.Anxiety and paranoia seem to be the two most important emotional states, until terminating a CoP when loss and sadness become important.People with an active social life outside the Internet and work will cope relatively well but as people become more addicted to the net and reliant on technology for social communication, this becomes a significant factor for individuals.

Smith, J. & Trayner,B.,(nd) elearn-Best Practice-Online Course Design from a Communities of Practice perspectivehttp://www.elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=best_practices&article=34-1

Creative Commons

To overcome copyright restrictions and issues of intellectual ownership/property rights, the globalised CoP , called Web2.o on the Internet, required a way of assigning rights and responsibilities. The Creative Commons, created by L. Lessing, H. Abelson, J.Boyle, E. Eldred & E. Saltzman, in 2001 allows three forms of copyright

1. -human readers
2. lawyer readers
3. computer readers

and choice of level of ownership

1. attribution, that is that the work can be used but needs to be referenced and attributed to the original owner
2. non-commercial, self explanatory
3. no derivatives, this means that you cannot change the original
4. share alike, allows free access. In this way knowledge can be built, in a collectivist constructionist way via Web connectivity.

Do you think we can ever arrive at position in which all knowledge belongs to all people? We used to see the environment as a commons, free for all people to use, all the sky, air, water, trees etc but then some people were acting irresponsibly so we needed to control it. The environment became a global commodity item with a price tag attached. However the grass roots, commons philosophy was more powerful that the economic position. Is it possible that the grass roots creative commons will triumph over economic and corporate/government philosophies?

Reference

Quinn, M., 2006 Ethics for the Information Age, 2nd edition. U.S.A. Pearson Addison Wesley

A CoP in academia towards ethics teaching

This paper talks about many CoPs for students, in academia, academic institutions and the global academic community. If ethics, caring, responsibility is embedded in these CoPs and academic administration pays heed to the informal CoPs, we will tend towards ethical behaviour and teaching ethical behaviour. We will treat others with ethical behaviour if they are part of our community, thus communities are basic to the construction of ethics.


Weathersby, R., & White, J. (2004). Ethics and Community in Management Education [Electronic Version]. Academic Exchange Quarterly 8(1) Retrieved 18/12/2007 from http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/5jun2616w4.htm.

The ethics of chaos and CoP

In summary, this paper:
Using different models of organisation and governance can lead to different outcomes. Moving from linear to non-linear, pragmatic and chaos models provides a more relevant model for changing environments and knowledge using an open participative design. At the edge of the boundary of the organisation or community is the interchange of ideas, anxiety of the unknown and the essence of creativity and innovation. Using a cybernetic metaphor, an adaptive community meets the challenge of change management. Freedom becomes opportunity via networks and connectivity. Responsibility becomes the ethical standard. Virtue is the qualities, both personal and collective, which are necessary to sustain collaboration within communities of practice. Using Habermas's discourse ethics, requires judgment to do what is morally right for individual and community, as well as practice. This ethics of responsibility is the glue of a community of practice.
Reference

Collier, J., & Esteban, R. (1999). Governance in the Participative Organisation: Freedom, Creativity and Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 21, 173-188.

CoP to teach ethical practice

This research uses multiple pedagogys within a CoP. It researches the capacity to use the CoP and the pedagogys to teach,
'empathy, integrity, compassion, caring, and communication within a patient–provider
model '
within
'core values: accountability, altruism, compassion and caring, excellence, integrity,professional duty, social responsibility'.
It also used an online distributed methodology, authentic learning, authentic assessment and assessment rubrics. It used individual reflective practice and collective discussion. The article make the interesting point that CoPs maintain individualist perspective whilst building collectivist positions, unlike teams or projects.

Reference

Hayward, L. M., Blackmer, B., & Markowski, A. (2006). Standardized Patients and Communities of Practice:A Realistic Strategy for Integrating the Core Values in a Physical Therapist Education Program. Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 20(2). Retrieved 16/1`2/2007, Ebscohost.

Leadership roles for Facilitators of CoP

The American Health Information Management Association has an interesting website calling for volunteers for leadership as facilitators of health CoPs. The list of roles is interesting- sounds a bit like chat or web hosting.

• Starting discussions
• Polling community members
• Ensuring up-to-date content
• Keeping an eye on community links
• Making sure member questions are answered
• Coordinating member communication
• Identifying and utilizing experts
• Scheduling and hosting chat sessions
• Managing and organizing Community Resources
• Planning face to face community events
• Collecting Frequently Asked Questions

This also sounds like a huge workload, especially for a volunteer. Rewards are not always material and facilitation as part of a job description, may suitably recompense someone's time and expertise.

Do you need expertise in health care , or whatever the topic may be, to facilitate? Is experience in facilitating enough?

Reference

A.H.I.M.A. (2007). American Health Information Management Association Call for Volunteers, Retrieved 16/12/2007 http://www.ahima.org/directory/call_for_vols.asp

Ethics-hybrid CoPs

Traditional CoPs vs Innovative CoPs
the Innovative CoP exists in a constantly changing environment, are designed to build knowledge and innovation rather than practical tasks, constantly selecting newcomers to enrich the environment, constantly seek information for progressive problem solving.
A hybrid CoP, translational science, between public and private research has new ethics to think about in the areas of
ownership
funding
control
role
dimensions
core values.
Proposing 'proximal ethicality' based on Vygotsky and an apprenticeship model of learning.
Strange bedfellows, public research and CoPs , although providing information for the benefit of the public and allowing commercialisation of knowledge and product for public benefit. This sits with difficulty when individuals are profiting financially without inputting R&D funds. It does mean however that new discoveries are rapidly made available. Perhaps the capitalist philosophy needs this softening of approach to make it more user friendly, the the benefit of the greater public. Using a utilitarian approach, for the greater good for the greatest number of people, a balanced approach seems more viable. This fits in well with feminist philosophy, ie diversity of approaches rather than a dichotomised or homogenised viewpoint

Reference
Atkinson-Grosjean, J., & Young, W. M. (2007). Closing the ethics gap in research PPPs: a role for translational science and 'proximal ethicality'? . Retrieved 16/12/2007, from http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/34736.html

Fallability

Putting a CoP model into practice with children , in a school may not be quite as easy as a CoP in business. This study highlights some of the inherent fallabilities of CoPs particularly when there is inadequate training and support.
In this school, there were problems of -
'preserve the status quo
naturally resistant to change
the social influence of the communities prevented individual reflection.
Members’ gatekeeping prevents some cases and issues from
coming under discussion and allows others to pass through.
The communities’ lack of adherence to the work of each of the stages yielded the
practice of a school-based problem-solving model that strongly resembled the previous,
compliance-oriented student support model.
This conflict between framing the model as ecologically-based while permitting
deficit attributions highlights a conceptual weakness within the model that can easily and
unintentionally be distorted by communities.'
Interesting food for thought

Benn, A. L. (2004). COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE: STUDY OF ONE SCHOOL’S FIRST YEAR OF IMPLEMENTATION OF A NEW PROBLEM-SOLVING MODEL. retrieved 14/12/2007 OAIster database
https://drum.umd.edu/dspace/bitstream/1903/2313/1/umi-umd-1969.pdf

Online ? virtual? community?

Leug follows the evolution of Communities of practice into the virtual, online sphere. He questions the possibility that true connectivity occurs and in what space it occurs. He compares three communities across much of the past literature pertaining to CoPs.

What do you think about his challenges to authenticity?

Lueg, C. (2000). Where is the Action in Virtual Communities of Practice?

ftp://ftp.ifi.unizh.ch/pub/institute/ailab/papers/lueg/commdcscw00.ps

Global Drivers

Internationalisation and globalisation are the catchcry words of business for the last decade. This has pushed the global, online community of practice to the forefront. People are learning to make social presence in virtual space, learning the rules of netiquette, managing to socially connect despite distance, culture and time zones, differences. Face to face meeting is no longer required for affective connectivity.

This makes good business sense. Online , globalised communities of practice are also rapidly making good business sense. This paper analyses the concept of online globalised communities of practice, showing social drivers and good outcomes.

Facilitating such a CoP requires multiple skills such as
Group facilitation skills
Cybrarianship -web-savvy research; strong organizational bent; love of learning and information
Passion for community
Ability to facilitate facilitative behaviors within the community
Help Desk-technical understanding, patience, clear communication skills
The Referee-thick skin and a slow fuse; Internet experience familiarity with common netiquette The Janitor
Co-Facilitating
Facilitators as Role Models

as well as numerous others in the papers.

References

Hildred, P., Kimble, C., & Wright, P. (2000). Communities of practice in the distributed international environment [Electronic Version]. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4, 27-38 from http://arxiv.org/ftp/cs/papers/0101/0101012.pdf.

White, N., (2004) Facilitating and Hosting a Virtual Community, Retrieved 12/12/2007

http://www.fullcirc.com/community/communityfacilitation.htm

Social networking

'But with Nielsen Online's Netview finding 2,039,000 Australian users clicking onto Facebook, 3,074,000 surfing MySpace and 4,602,000 using MSN Messenger during October, the urge to frequently maintain social life online is putting a strain on workplace enforcements.'

People communicate and network, for better or worse, no matter what you do. Adding a restriction may even increase networking. Most of it thus seems to be non-work related, however, the little things that people use social networking for- I know someone who can...., find that number, get a good price for, fix a problem, introduce me to... etc can often imperceptibly make workplaces run more smoothly.

For example, my secretary knows everyone in this town. I took MSN messenger off the computer because she spent so much time chatting to people, but she easily found someone to fix the plumbing , do some carpentry, provide paper needs, collect the mail while we were on holidays, found lots of clients and referrals, inside information about important clients, etc which made life run smoothly at work.

People's need to communicate is thus inherent. Technology makes it easier. A balance between social loafing and productive practice is not easy to find.

Asher, J., (2007) Social networkers turn to hacking at work

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=336632

Flexibility and adaptability?

I would like to share this article. Having met John Allsopp and listened to one of his speeches at a conference in Brisbane, I know that he is some-one worth listening to.
He claims to have invented the word Web 2.0.
His book on microformatting is in essence Web 2.0 design.
I include his article here as it reflects the process of the Web Standards Design and Internet software design, particularly Web 2.0.
Essentially technology is flexible and adaptable to people's needs. People and their learning / knowledge needs are the drivers for technology.
You can also see from his blogs and bios that he is in many CoPs and uses these for his practice.
Anderson's paper, and video, also reminds us of people power and the anit-authoritarian/anti-commercialisation social drivers for Web learning and CoPs.

Allsopp, J. (2000). A Dao of Web Design. A List Apart, 58.Retrieved 9/12/2007 from
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/dao/

Anderson, S. (2007). Its our web not theirs [Electronic Version]. COA News from http://search.creativecommons.org/#.

Social drivers /music industry

Some of the interesting social drivers have not been about cutting edge profit maximisation for business communities. In the music business, the Indie music and downloading industry have risen from the ashes of the Big Five Music labels. This is driven , not only by the technology , but by an anti-corporate feeling by young people who view this as payback for long term greed and oligarchic monopolies. This antiauthoritanism is part of the social driver towards Online communities of practice.

Reference:

Fox, M., & (2002). Technological and Social Drivers of Change in the Online Music Industry. First Monday, 7(2). Retrieved 9/12/2007 from http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue7_2/fox/#f3

The organisational push

Are organisations the drivers for CoP? This paper seems to present evidence that the integrated, co-ordinated top-down CoP does better in all assessments, including

-sharing,

-retention,

- sustaining,

-pro-active work

The author suggests

• Formal structure
• Process driven
• Dynamic memory
• CoP is part of BPs
• Engagement of key players

is the way to operationalise a CoP. There is no evidence however of how he arrived at these conclusions.

There is a model to facilitate an integrated network of communities of practice — the VISION network is based on the expectation of the VISION process

(Verify the problem or challenge,

Investigate the true root cause,

Standardize the solution,

Integrate the solution enterprise wide,

Optimize the process and

No recurrence shall ever occur).

He is also a Chief of the Army I think so that may explain the different social drivers.

The paper is of more interesting when you read the description of the U.S.Army CoP programme. Originally some NCOs got together to learn, discuss support. As the group got larger they moved to Internet based groups. The Army hierarchy discovered this clandestine operations and formalised it as Battle Command Knowledge System-( BCKS ).

There are now 60 forums each with hundreds of CoPs. The programme has expanded from 20,000 members to to 80,000 in under 3 years.

People become involved when they see value.

I am not sure that the process needs such organisation.

Perhaps in the evolution of a CoP, a grassroots community begins but it soon outgrows its capacity and leadership, management needs to occur at different levels.

As the world realises that knowledge and learning are the assets, tapping CoPs , informally or not, growth occurs.

Dreikorn, M. J. (2007). Operationalizing Communities of Practice. Chief Learning Officer, 6(10), 42-48. Retrieved 8/12/2007 from Ebscohost, Charles Sturt Universuity

VCoP

The Virtual Community of Practice was said to not be able to occur. Murillo and Spicer have searched Internet based learning groups to see if they fit the CoP model and found that they did. They looked for Wenger's

Essential traits

Mutual engagement,- collective problem solving, Debating domain-related issues
Shared repertoire, shared criteria and practices
Joint enterprise
Community- Shared sense of professional community, members knowledge of each other
Learning/Identity acquisition.- Improving professional skill, acquiring new knowledge, Identifying with the profession

and also

Exemplary Traits

high quality institutional documents,

mid-size group,

non-conflictive,

focused on professional issues

focused on discussion,

high volume of interactions,

core-periphery structure

They summarize that finding extra-organisational CoPs affirms Wenger's model of the CoP as a naturally occurring social structure. They also imply that the virtual space works like any other space to set up a CoP.

It seems to me that a new humanism has been created by the Internet and web technology. People are now able to communicate across traditional boundaries. Knowledge is a freely available commodity. Participatory democracy is more possible. The basic unit in this new social/political design is the CoP.

MURILLO, E., & SPICER, D. (2007). Searching the Usenet network for Virtual Communities of Practice. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1-6. Retrieved 6/12/2007 Ebscohost,Charles Sturt University.

Community is the driver

In summary this paper states that the traditional Kantian view of knowledge was that it was an object that existed outside of humans. It was divided into typologies -'tacit, explicit, universal, local, declarative,procedural, or sticky and fluid.'

The social theory of knowledge is that it is embedded in minds and collectivist communities of practice ( Marxist, Wenger, Lave). People take part because they choose to. The motivation varies from seeking knowledge, support, networks, connectivity, fun, enjoyable, keep abreast of current ideas and innovations and brings satisfaction in helping others. Thus a community's need for knowledge, networking, care and diversity, rather than an individual needs , are the driver for a CoP.

I think that complexity theory assists in understanding the various viewpoints as to what are the drivers towards this social revolution. Although communities may drive practice, they do not exist without individuals. Technology makes it easier. Rewards both push and pull motivation. The Internet is a fine example however that the rewards are not always monetary.

McLure Wasko, M., & Faraj, S. (2000). "It is what one does": why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9, 155-173. Retrieved 7/12/2007 from GoogleScholar http://www.sceco.univnantes.fr/~tvallee/memoire/pratique/why%20people%20participate.pdf

Bottom - up approach

The original CoP was a self devised community that worked outside the management. Gradually the learning and knowledge organisation took hold- using cognitive theory first. Social theory is now the approach being used acknowledging the role of social drivers for learning , creativity and knowledge sharing. Tapping tacit knowledge, training new staff, creating social networks and allowing a knowledge worker to sort out problems were best left to the CoP rather than IT programmes or top down management.

Cynically, management has measured the CoP output and calculated the cost benefit ration of the CoP. Managements are creating top- down CoPs. These CoPs are formally structured, use formal communication processes, defines community roles, sets agendas and sets tools for measuring effectiveness.This is so that knowledge is share and not confined to the members of the CoP only and staff who leave do not take knowledge with them.

This also stifles creativity and does not respond to individual needs.

Some staff found that they were expected to spend their out of work hours on CoPs and had been coerced into the roles. This is a problem when the CoP is one of mal practice, with difficulties with trust, relationships, explosive emotions, coercive CoPs and power issues.

These top-down CoP's seem to have blurred the boundaries of teams, project groups and CoPs.

The five degrees of managerial acceptance of the CoP , by Wenger, move from the invisible CoP which some of the team members are not even aware they are involved in, to the Bootlegged team which are only known to those who are in them and then the visible CoPs , from non-acceptance, to acceptance to promoting to created CoPs from a a management perspective.

This research found that the Bootlegged CoP had better acceptance by staff and were more productive.

Pastoors, K. (2007). Consultants love-hate relationships with communities of practice. In J. Pemberton (Ed.), Communities of practice- one size fits all (pp. 21-): Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.

Attachment theory and CoP

Online CoPs need to attract and keep members by invitation rather than organisation or leadership. There are two main reasons people join communities,

• Common identity (social categorization, interdependence, and intergroup
  comparisons)



• Common Bond, requires some homogeneity of group membership.

People may feel, an identity with the community and its causes and/or attachment to individual members with whom they share similarities.
Size of a community is thus important, design for personal messaging may increase bond and not identity. Subgroups and core members of a group have different roles to play in the community.
Larger groups have larger turnover of members. This can be reduce by having neighbourhoods, where sub-groups can congregate.

Reviewing psychoanalytic literature, attachment and inter-dependency are survival issues for humans. Separation from the original parental attachments can only be achieved by transference of attachment to Others. Attachment's counterpart- Bonding, is equally as important in group behaviour.

Cultural issues, language, religious differences and different ethical standards provides potential conflict zones if one is not aware of them. They can provide stimulation towards learning, acceptance, diversity and growth as well.

The issue here for me is that the collective consciousness may be greater than the sum of the individual minds but that there is a clear barrier between individual and collective consciousness. Hence Vygotsky created a potential interchange space, the Zone of Proximal Development. Ignoring the processes in individual inner spaces is courting with danger. Acknowledging that individuals drive CoPs for many and varied reasons means that it is wisest to capitalise on their inner needs rather than imposing collective community needs.

Bibliography:

Blunden, A (2001). The Vygotsky school Spirit, Money and Modernity Seminar retrieved 6/5/2007 http://home.mira.net/~andy/seminars/chat.htm

Cheyne, A.C. & Tarulli, D. (1999) Dialogue, Difference, and the "Third Voice" in the
Zone of Proximal Development. Theory and Psychology, 9, 5-28. Retrieved 9/12/2007

http://watarts.uwaterloo.ca/~acheyne/ZPD.html

Ren, Y., Kraut, R., & Kiesler, S. (2007). Applying Common Identity and Bond Theory to
Design of Online Communities. Organization Studies, 28(3), 377-408. Retrieved Sage Database, USQ Library, 4/12/2007 from
http://ft.csa.com.ezproxy.usq.edu.au/ids70/resolver.php?sessid=c0c66ea55d02ff1f6fb28d2bdfe4d293&server=www-mi4.csa.com&check=368577ac9d1615c3f2e09fea46fec769&db=sageman-set-c&key=0170-8406%2F10.1177_0170840607076007&mode=pdf

Shimazu, A, Kawakami, N, Irimajiri, H, Sakamoto, M & Amano, S (2005) The effects of web-based psychoeducation on self-efficacy, problem solving behaviour, stress responses and job satisfaction among workers: a controlled trial, Journal of Occupational Health 47 (5) pps 405-413, retrieved 21/4/2007 http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/joh/47/5/47_405/_article

Wiley, D.A. & Erin K. Edwards , E.K., (2002). Online self-organizing social systems: The decentralized future of online learning Retrieved 9/10/2007
http://opencontent.org//docs/ososs.pdf

CoP as driver for research knowledge

This dissertation is interesting as it combines research methodology with a focus of getting new research into a community of practice so that they can implement the knowledge as learning, thereby bypassing commercialisation factors.
Identifying the literature of CoP is useful particularly with this list of important factors, which are all people/community related

1. time


2. value adding


3. learning


4. self-policing and responsibility


5. content rather than form

CoPs are stated to be 'undefinable and not designable', which is refreshing with respect to business management literature on CoPs.

It is interesting in an age where universities are expected to self fund. One technique used is to move the learning organisation into a business model, taking new research and implementing it with business partners into new products and services. In this way the university capitalises on the knowledge value it creates and deems to own. Many people are not happy with this commercialisation factor. On the other hand, the community stands to gain from new research with little lag period. One needs to be cautious the academic/research freedom is not curtailed by commerce drivers.

Culatta, R. E. (2006). EXTENDING THE REACH OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH: APPLYING PRODUCT COMMERCIALIZATION PROCESSES TO COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE. Thesis Retrieved 2/12/2007 from OAIster databases

http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/ETD/image/etd1799.pdf