Communities of Practice

Written by David Tebbutt in September 2004

Communities of practice (CoPs) are networks of practitioners who congregate around a topic of relevance to their day-to-day work. They are dynamic and the subject that starts the group off may not be what keeps it together. The group's focus at any time will shift according to interest and need. The benefits to the group members centre on learning, growing and belonging. The benefits to the organisation derive from a more effective and committed workforce and the retention of key knowledge within the organisation.

The individuals in a group will vary from a close-knit community of experts to one which might encourage participation from neighbouring disciplines. The organisational hierarchy is ignored and voluntary membership is determined by a profound interest in the subject at hand. The member's official rank is irrelevant, providing the organisation doesn't try to insert a 'spy'. A CoP is built on trust. People open up and share problems and issues and then mutually work towards a resolution. This kind of conversation can only take place when the participants know they are not going to be exposed to external scrutiny. Companies need to legitimise the CoP, provide necessary resources, permissions and funding, then keep out.

Resolutions to problems, when and if they come, will form part of the shared body of knowledge. Indeed, the discussions prior to the resolution, will shape the participants' thinking in the future. But, if anything is to be captured for posterity, it is likely to be the formal outcome, rather than the process through which it was achieved.

The CoP, therefore, has two outcomes, each of which is of value to the organisation. One is the improvement in understanding and insight on the part of practitioners, which leads to them doing a better job. The other is a document on best practice which will form part of the CoP's knowledge base. This could be incorporated into the organisation's knowledge base, depending on its relevance beyond the community.

Sometimes an output from a CoP will only make sense to its members or someone with similar expertise. At other times, the principles embodied may be either acceptable to, or adaptable for, a wider audience.

This is the point at which the CoP members might start to lose interest. All the time they are supporting and helping their colleagues within the community, they are willing to document their findings in order to share them. And, if they are communicating through a weblog or email, the proceedings are self-documenting anyway, although not in a very helpful form as far as the outside world is concerned.

Perhaps this is where an information professional like you might be able to step in and offer your services. You are, after all, expert at extracting, abstracting, searching and organising information. Initially, the CoP might be willing to let you help with the 'grunt work' of preparing its outputs and adapting its more public conversations for external consumption. From this position of trust, it is a short step to offering to organise the CoPs internal knowledge base.

As you become increasingly accepted, you may be admitted to the 'inner sanctum' where the embryonic discussions take place. From here you could offer other services such as searching for relevant materials from the outside world, which might inform their deliberations. You could become an indispensible source of support for the CoP.

As you work through these stages, you will gain expertise in the CoP way of working, and understand the assistance that you and your colleagues can offer. This would stand you in very good stead to offer similar services to other CoPs.