Team

1 Tea

Team 3

2

An overview of Communities of Practice

For additional information contact: knowledge@nes.scot.nhs.uk

Part 1: General questions about Communities of Practice

Who is this document for? This document is aimed at potential coordinators of Communities of Practice (CoP). It

provides essential background reading as to the nature of CoP in general. It covers; what

they are, how they work and how they can be cultivated and provides a bibliography for

those who wish or need to find more information.

What are CoP? CoP are self-governed groups of people who regularly interact with each other because

they see these relationships as beneficial to their learning and work. This could be

described as acting as learning partners with the principal purpose of sharing knowledge.

In this sense CoP differ from formal teams whose main goal is usually a well-defined and

job-related task: although team members can simultaneously form CoP if they wish (see

Figure 1: CoPs and teams). Tools such as; Twitter, Facebook, Skype and online flora, can be

utilised as platforms for developing and sustaining learning partnerships. As use of these

tools is restricted in the NHS, NHS Education for Scotland, and its associated Knowledge

Services Group (KSG), has developed tools for use within the NHS. These tools can make

communication much easier and more convenient and may enable useful knowledge

sharing: however, a comfortable room to talk and some free time can be enough when

starting a CoP.

Organisation A Organisation B

m

Figure 1: CoPs and teams *The orange field indicates scope of a given CoP spanning across teams and organizations.

If I regularly share knowledge with a colleague does it mean that we should

form a CoP? From the CoP perspective, one-on-one learning interactions are called private spaces of

learning (which can in fact be very fruitful on their own). Distinct private spaces can then

be synthesised together by opening a common public space between them (this could be

a room or an online forum). The origin of a CoP is when people regularly participating in a

shared public space begin to identify each other as learning partners.

Why is it worth joining a CoP? On a fundamental level a CoP provides practitioners with access to; “real time help”,

potentially powerful learning synergies, training, identification with other practitioners in

the field, new connections, and best practices. At a broader level it allows organisations to

dynamically develop a practice (way of doings things) essential to its survival and

wellbeing.

Can CoP be controlled and managed by organisations? No, and they should not be – in fact too much control can destroy members’ sense of

ownership of their community. However CoP often need to be cultivated for organic

growth and should be given adequate time, resources, and mentorship to develop their

practice and cultivate community spirit. Having said that, it is perfectly fine if an

organisation expects certain specified results from the community in exchange for given

support and trust.

Is it always a good idea for an organisation to sponsor CoP? Some practices, such as fire safety, are less dynamic in their nature and are more

efficiently sustained by providing formal training. While this type of training can bring

standardisation, regularity and consistency, it is not always best suited to those practices

crucial to an organisation but requiring dynamic development due to their complexity and

changing nature. A CoP provides the opportunity to carefully select a knowledge domain

(i.e. the themes upon which a community wishes to concentrate its learning) that reflects

practitioners’ interests and organisational objectives. CoP membership allows dynamic

development through bringing deep insight into the given domain, collective sharing (and

hence co-creation) of knowledge and improved self-identification with the given practice.

Where can I get further Support? Additional documents have been made available by the KSG team to help guide and

develop communities;

• Communities of Practice in NHS Scotland: hints and tips for engaging members and

creating a “healthy” community.

• Communities of Practice in NHS Scotland: developing your website.

The Example CoP provides information on various widgets as well as a discussion forum

hosted by the KSG team dedicated to providing a place for administrators and KSG trainers

to come together and share knowledge and experiences.

http://www.knowledge.scot.nhs.uk/example.aspx

Further guidance documents and support is available from the KSG team. Please contact

knowledge@nes.scot.nhs.uk.

January 2013 2

Part 2: Structure of CoP and their fundamental roles

The currency of every CoP is knowledge and trust:

• In every community there will arise a group of core members – people who

become actively and regularly involved in participation and contribution. In general

these members have sufficient understanding of the given knowledge domain and

are able to engage with the practice related to it. However, newcomers to the field

and experts from other disciplines should feel able to contribute to selected

discussions as occasional or peripheral members – these types of interactions are

essential as the core members do not constitute the whole community.

• What brings CoP members together is excitement about their domain and sharing

knowledge with learning partners.

Figure 2: Levels of Participation in CoP

Core roles within a CoP Because of varying degrees of engagement, CoP membership is multi-layered: meaning

that not all members are (nor should necessarily be) regularly active. Nonetheless, the

prosperity of a CoP depends upon the enthusiasm of its most active core group (who

usually account for around 20% of its members).

Community coordinator(s).

A central role within every CoP core group is Community coordinator(s): an individual

who leads the community though their learning, especially during its early stages. The

Coordinator usually adopts the following responsibilities; planning the learning agenda

(i.e. knowledge sharing activities), connecting people (including those outside of the

community), building trust and evaluating the positive impact of the community on

their members and organisation, documenting the learning that has taken place and

organising open/closed space. Coordinators must also be knowledgeable about a given

domain and widely respected by other practitioners, although (s)he does not have to

January 2013 3

be a leading expert. As the coordinator develops the community’s core group by

connecting new active members, (s)he should then gradually begin to distribute some

of her responsibilities among them. Please note that all of these roles, including that of

coordinator, organically emerge and are primarily about serving the community, not

controlling or managing it.

Coordinators should attempt to involve relevant “thought leaders” (well respected

experts) early on in the process to help with mentoring members, attracting new

recruits and legitimizing the community. In best case scenario these experts

participate within the core group but, they also have the opportunity to act within the

occasional group which consists of members mainly interested in selected projects or

topics. Further ‘layers’ within the community form peripheral members: who observe

the CoP but rarely contribute in a direct way (perhaps due to a lack of time), and

transactional members consisting of external stakeholders who are affected by the

community in a direct or indirect way (such as line managers or patients).

Coordinators should avoid discouraging the presence of occasional and peripheral

groups as they form an essential substance of the community, particularly since levels

of participation for individuals tends to change over time. Thus, successful CoPs

welcome all levels of participation.

Member Support.

The role of Member Support is concerned primarily with maintaining relationships and

communication. This is a very people-centred role that takes responsibility for the

dissemination of key information relevant to members and support. Member Support

administrators should attempt to provide guidance for new members and welcome

them to the community. They may be also responsible for several promotional aspects

of the community and should concern themselves with recruitment, maintaining

relationships both within and out-with the community and communicating internal

and external developments. Again, Members Support act on behalf of the community

to help it proposer, but they do not control or manage its members.

Information Resource Administrator

Since the maintenance and accumulation of both tacit and explicit knowledge is often

a key aspect to the aims of a CoP the role of Information Resource Administrator: a

person who can identify and organise resources of benefit to the community, is an

important one. As well as being aware of the kinds of resources desired by your

members, the Information Resource Administrator should themselves be confident in

identifying reliable sources of information. They may also be concerned with compiling

knowledge gathered from the community itself through knowledge sharing and could

consider not only the information “wants” of their members but also their “needs”. In

this respect, the Information Resource Administrator can be seen as working toward

the deliverance of vital Information Skills.

Website Administrator

The organisation and layout of an online CoP has direct consequences on the

functionality and usability of their content. As such an important role is Website

January 2013 4

Administrator: a person responsible for the upkeep and planning of the website itself.

This role involves learning the technological skills necessary to utilise an online CoP to

its full potential and being aware of the various tools and options available to

communities along with developing an understanding of the writing skills required for

the web.

Facilitator

The final important role in the life of a community is Community facilitator (or coach):

a person trained in the methods of developing CoP, and who is often external to them.

A facilitator is responsible for educating coordinators on how to lead CoP, links CoP to

organisational needs, promotes CoP by acting as their voice within the organisation,

and helps CoP leaders organise their resources (especially time, physical space, and IT

support). Facilitators are typically dedicated towards spotting where natural learning

takes place within the organisation and where the potential resides for developing a

successful CoP. They can frequently build the foundations for new communities by

organising CoP-related events (e.g. learning workshops) and by informally raising

awareness among potential CoP coordinators/leaders. Furthermore, facilitators try to

understand the issues affecting existing CoP and hold problem-solving sessions with

coordinators and other members where they can openly discuss what may be going

wrong and how that could be improved. The types of problems encountered are

sometimes grounded within the community itself (e.g. dominating cliques or a high

degree of isolation), practice (e.g. unwillingness to adopt change and to regularly

document practice), or knowledge domain (e.g. lack of coherence in definitions of

knowledge or ignoring outsider’s views). As facilitators try to assist communities in

solving these unique problems they build their own toolkit for later use with other

CoP.

January 2013 5

Part 3: Evidence for success Several research papers have been published on CoP since the concept of knowledge

exchange through social interaction was first explored by Lave and Wenger (Lave J.

Wenger E.: 1991). In response to the rising use of CoP in both the private and public

sectors many of these investigations have explored the dominant trends exhibited by

successful and unsuccessful CoP. The key points from this research are highlighted below

along with a brief description. For further information on “actions” that can be taken to

achieve some of the aims highlighted please see supporting KSG documents, particularly

“Communities of practice in NHS Scotland: What makes a healthy community? Guidance

for “Core Team” members.” Further resources can be found online at:

http://www.knowledge.scot.nhs.uk/developandsupportcommunities/reading-list.aspx.

What defines a successful CoP? Research undertaken in 2009 demonstrated that there are four key characteristics shared

by all successful CoP to a varying extent;

• Social Interaction – Interaction of individuals in formal or informal settings, in

person or through the use of communication technologies.

• Knowledge Sharing – The process of sharing information that is relevant to the

individuals involved.

• Knowledge Creation – The process of developing new ways to perform duties,

complete a task, or solve a problem.

• Identity Building – The process of acquiring a professional identity, or an identity

of being an expert in the field.

(Li et al: 31: 2009)

The goal of any CoP is to encourage these characteristics and become a “mature”

community: one that typically demonstrates high levels of;

• Strategic Focus - Community has an agreed charter, clearly defining the scope,

vision and ways of working. Links to any strategic drivers/imperatives have been

identified at a high level.

• Structure and Membership - Good coverage of potential

geographical/departmental participants, actions underway to fill any gaps.

Governance has been considered and is in place if appropriate. Members join and

leave of their own volition - few "hangers on".

• Knowledge Capture – “Core Team” members or subject experts create a FAQ from

some discussions. Experienced members and/or administrators regularly

summarise discussion threads, endorse promoted learning and produce

community “lessons learned”.

• Interaction - Community makes use of voice, video and data-sharing tools. Some

questions receive responses, but some go unanswered. Contributions come from

the full range of members.

January 2013 6

• Benefits - Community has shared understanding of the value they add. Some

senior managers acknowledge this. Examples exist which clearly demonstrate

benefits.

(Courtesy of Chris Coulson)

What are the key stumbling blocks? As well as identifying the key characteristics of successful CoP, many works have pointed

to several re-occurring barriers to the success of a CoP.

• “Core Team” fatigue - Many CoP identify fatigue as something that can lead to

their early demise (Li et al: 31: 2009). It is important to consider the roles

highlighted above and think about how responsibilities can be divided between

members of your “Core Team” so as to avoid this.

• Lack of Information Skills (e.g. accessing and appraising evidence and resources) -

Participants in a 2012 study highlighted that one of their key barriers to translating

the research provided by their CoP into practice was the time and skill required to

properly analysis resources (Meagher-Stewart et al: 730: 2012). Many CoP contain

a wealth of information but without proper organisation and thought the

usefulness of these valuable resources can be lost through what is commonly

termed “Information Overload”.

• Low commitment to achieving community goals – Several factors can influence

and add to a lack of commitment to achieving community goals. In the case of a

web-based CoP, the preconception by some that online activity is not the same as

“real work” is highlighted (Meagher-Stewart et al: 2012). Research has also found

that poor support, both in terms of the parent organisation itself and in terms of

infrastructure, and the absence of a working culture that encourages professional

development are major factors (Kislov et al: 2011, Meagher-Stewart et al: 2012). In

order to combat this, a CoP must cover issues that members are enthusiastic

about, encourage legitimacy through the creation and dissemination of their

findings, clearly outline the benefits of joining a CoP, highlight successes and

encourage high levels of transparency and visibility across the community.

• Lack of understanding and respect – Building communication within a CoP is an

essential requirement and one that is linked to better relationships and an

atmosphere of trust. These elements cannot be fostered where there is a lack of

understanding and respect. This lack often derives from cultural differences in the

workplace and the absence of clear member guidance (Kislov et al: 2011, Meagher-

Stewart et al: 2012). This can be tackled by putting time and energy into member

support and visibility, increasing transparency amongst the group and clearly

outlining the rules and structure of your community. It is, however, essential that

community coordinators strike the right balance. While guidance is required,

coordinators must remember that encouraging social interaction and breaking

down traditional organisational hierarchies are key elements of fostering trust and

building a welcoming atmosphere. Members must not feel intimidated.

January 2013 7

Part 4: Cultivating a CoP throughout its life

The life of a CoP usually spans across five natural stages (Figure 3):

• Potential - (recognising the possibility of engaging in shared learning partnerships)

• Coalescing - (forming and launching a CoP),

• Active - (engaged learning partnerships),

• Dispersed - (reviewing and revising a CoP, and terminating its use where its

objective has been met)

• Memorable - (where a CoP no longer exists, but the outcomes of its past learning

still contribute value).

Figure 3: Stages of CoP life

The potential stage begins when a coordinator invites learning partners whom she/he is

well networked with, or who are enthusiastic about a particular knowledge domain, to

form a CoP. A new CoP should be built on existing relationships, common interests,

knowledge needs, professional situations and the intention to learn from each other.

Original members should try to plan well and consider the following aspects, narrowing

their scope where possible:

• Primary intent: helping each other? Best practices? Developing tools? Innovative

ideas?

• Community: what types of members? A coordinator could interview prospective

members first if desired or even consider invitation-only membership.

• Knowledge domain: what topics and specific themes should be looked at?

• Practice: how will people interact? What types of projects, activities, or events will

be used?

• Design shared space: how does one provide a clear distinction between open and

closed space, provide clear privacy/intellectual ownership policy and design an

equal structure which avoids hierarchy?

• Build a case for action: how best is a CoP’s potential contribution to an

organisation and its members expressed?

The life of a CoP is dynamic: as it grows, elements that reflect its requirements can be

gradually added to its structure (e.g. new locations or frequencies of meetings, events and

various types of technology such as widgets). It is good to start simply, for example by

implementing semi-formal or informal weekly meetings. In this way, coordinators are able

to concentrate on encouraging interactions and recruiting new members. During this early

stage it is important for coordinators to develop a community charter. This will enable all

community stakeholders to understand clearly what their aims and purposes are and will

provide a useful tool for review. While recruiting members, coordinators can use

educational materials discussing the concept of a CoP to support and aid their efforts.

January 2013 8

Member’s guides are particularly useful for welcoming people to the group and

supporting them through the early stages of their interaction.

The coalescing stage may begin with the official launch of the CoP. At this stage members

are already aware of the vision underpinning a new community because of the existence

of a community charter and two considerations should take precedent:

• Build sufficient trust and good relationships in order to be able to share deep

knowledge and discuss challenging problems. This could be done through

welcoming both private and group discussions and encouraging members to learn

from each other’s failures: not only their success stories! In an online environment

it is important to plan how to organise open and closed spaces (i.e. what will be

visible to others and what will be visible only to members) – you will always need

to have a good balance of both types of spaces.

• Provide “immediate value” to members. This can be accomplished by developing a

habit of consulting each other with regards to practice. One way of doing this

could be by suggesting useful and interesting knowledge sharing activities. Some

examples of these activities include: monthly descriptions of selected members’

practice, help-in-real-time: a sub-forum for posting specific work-related problems

(with the option for a coordinator to contact people resources directly where a

question goes unanswered for a period of time), suggest learning projects for

voluntary sub-groups, invite expert speakers and/or record their speeches on

video, encourage collaboration on producing new resources, publish a CoP’s

official blog to the public (in the open space), combine offline and online (both

synchronous and asynchronous) events etc. For purely online CoPs it may be an

idea to organise occasional face-to-face meetings. Try to maintain the “right”

rhythm for activities – engaging but not overwhelming. This is something that the

coordinator simply needs to learn for herself/himself but that might involve

balancing familiarity with excitement. CoP core members could also think about

providing value for peripheral members – perhaps by collecting stories of how they

have translated new learning into their own practices.

During the active stage, the community is already recognised in the organisation and

hence it may be subject to quick growth. Coordinators and members should attempt to

utilise the knowledge shared and created as a result of the CoP. This involves working

toward improvements within an organisation and implementing dynamic development

within the relevant knowledge domain. The members should by now have developed a

regular practice of sharing knowledge and relying on each other. At this stage priorities

are:

• Assessing and demonstrating the value of the CoP within the organisation.

• Systematically documenting CoP’s learning, inviting and/or “mentoring” new

members, and looking for new topics and projects which can be undertaken by the

potentially arising sub-groups within the community.

• Receiving acknowledgment of the CoP’s achievements.

January 2013 9

Furthermore; the community may expand and redefine its membership, interests, and

practice. As this happens, care must be taken to retain the CoP’s identity and intimacy and

attention should be paid to the following:

• Maintain the focus on cutting-edge topics.

• Mentor new members and standardise entry requirements (e.g. by referral).

During the following dispersed stage, people gradually begin to review and revise their

CoP. Using a table of CoP maturity is a useful tool for planning activities and your next

steps. It may be the case that the community’s focus has shifted over time or that the

community has successfully met its learning purposes. Reviving a CoP whose central aim

has changed could involve evolving your charter to meet your new needs, welcoming new

members to the core group, changing the communities’ learning focus, holding renewal

workshops, or redistributing leadership. However; it may be that the natural lifespan of

your CoP has come to an end or you feel that an entirely new CoP is required to meet your

needs. In this case, a CoP can be considered as culminating in the memorable stage. In this

final stage, the CoP is no longer actively used but past members continue to retain

memories of the CoP and its heritage may still actively provide value to various people

through access to the knowledge gained. Whether a community has come to an end or

not, it is important to acknowledge the successes and activities of your group. This places

value on individual and group participation and ensures that members do not feel as if

their work has been forgotten.

Final comment

The heart of every community rests with their core members with facilitators and

coordinators playing a fundamental role in their success. These posts differ from those of

traditional management: substituting rigidly controlled activities for informal leadership

where core members attempt to coordinate their practice, and moderate topics within

their knowledge domain. Most of this work is not obvious and it requires observing and

listening closing to the life of the community. Ultimately, in today’s knowledge economy

these learning leaders have the potential to exercise increasing influence on the

productivity of organisations by facilitating CoPs for organic growth and effective

knowledge sharing, and dynamically developing and translating knowledge into practice.

January 2013 10

Related Reading

Systematic reviews

Li L C, Grimshaw J M, Nielsen C, Judd M, Coyte PC Use of communities of practice in

business and health care sectors: A systematic review. Implementation Science 2009, 4:27

Ranmuthugala G, Plumb JJ, Cunningham FC, Georgiou A, Westbrook JI, Braithwaite

J How and why are communities of practice established in the healthcare sector? A

systematic review of the literature. BMC Health Services Research 2011, 11:273

Articles, books and websites

Ho K, Jarvis-Selinger S, Norman CD, Li LC et al (2010) Electronic communities of practice:

guidelines from a project. The Journal Of Continuing Education In The Health Professions

30 (2):139-43.

Kislov R, Walshe K, Harvey G (2012) Managing boundaries in primary care service

improvement: A developmental approach to communities of practice. Implementation

Science, 7:97

Kislov, Harvey, Walshe. (2011). Collaborations for leadership in applied health research

and care: lessons from the theory of communities of practice. Implementation Science,

6 (64).

Kothari A, Boyko JA, Conklin J, Stolee P Sibbald SL (2015) Communities of practice for

supporting health systems change: a missed opportunity Health Research Policy and Systems,

13:33

McDermott, Richard. (2000). Knowing in Community: 10 Critical Success Factors in Building

Communities of Practice. International Association for Human Resource Management,

March 2000.

Meagher-Stewart, Solberg, Warner, MacDonald, McPherson, Seaman. (2012).

Understanding the role of communities of practice in evidence informed decision making

in public health. Qualitative Health Research, 22(6).

Thomson L, Schneider J, Wright N (2013) Developing communities of practice to support

the implementation of research into clinical practice. Leadership in Health Services, 26 (1):

20 – 33

Wenger, E. (1998a). Communities of Practice: Learning, meaning and identity.

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Wenger, E. (1998b). Communities of practice: learning as a social system. The

Systems Thinker, 9(5).

Wenger, Etienne, McDermott, Richard, & Snyder, William M. (2002). Cultivating

Communities od Practice. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.

Wenger-Trayner, Beverly, & Wenger-Trayner, Etienne. (2012). Leadership groups.

Distributed leadership in social learning. Retrieved from www.wenger-trayner.com website:

http://wenger-trayner.com/blog/leadership-groups-for-social-learning/

Wenger-Trayner, Beverly, & Wenger-Trayner, Etienne. (2015). Introduction to a

community of practice Retrieved from Wenger-Trayner website: http://wenger-

trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/

Reports

The Health Foundation. (2014)Effective networks for improvement Developing and

managing effective networks to support quality improvement in healthcare Learning Report

March 2014

Henley Forum for Organisational Learning and Knowledge Strategies (2015) Evaluating communities

of practice: adopting learning-oriented approaches. Knowledge in Action - Issue 31

https://www.henley.ac.uk/files/pdf/research/research-centres/henley-

forum/Knowledge_in_Action_-_issue_31.pdf

Reading list updated February 2016 11