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