POE 2003 Conference

The Perspective: Communities of Practice

Panel Organizer:
William M. Snyder, Executive Director, CPsquare

Panelists: 
Katerine Bielaczyc, Assistant Professor, Harvard Graduate School of Education

Brook Manville, Chief Learning Officer, Saba Software

George L. Roth, Research Associate, MIT Sloan School of Management

Michael F. Seelman, Policy Analyst, U.S. Department of Justice

Knowledge Broker:  
Michael Gonyeau, Assistant Clinical Specialist, Pharmacy Practice Northeastern University

Major Issues/Points Raised

Bill Snyder began the session by stating some of the practical uses of communities of practice. In essence, why do we form them? The bottom line according to him, and this seemed to be a consensus among the panelists and the audience, was that “Knowledge drives performance, which ultimately results in increased value.” Bill also commented that the desire to learn often comes from personal experiences in the field, or by stories told to you by those in the field. He then came up with three central questions for the panelists to discuss during their presentations:
1. What is the distinctive quality of learning that makes your community special?
2. How can you apply this to society?
3. How can we be more systematic about incorporating communities of practice?

In addition to these questions, Bill then asked the audience if there were any questions that they would like the panelists to comment on, and a number of other topics were raised:
1. “Story-telling” in core, versus peripheral, members of a community of practice.
2. How do you build confidence through communities? What is the context?
3. How do you ensure resources are available to support such communities?
4. How do you replicate a small community on a much larger sclae?
5. How do you build a culture based on communities of practice? What is the impact of culture on building communities?

After the introduction, Katerine Bielaczyc presented her project about a K-12 communities model. She emphasized the social aspect of learning, especially at this stage of development, and talked about the need for acquiring 21st Century skills along with the development of multiculturalism. She explained a technology-based tool used in some classrooms to create distinct learning/classroom communities, that provides different “scaffolds” to structure student notes about particular assignments/topics after they are divided into different communities. Each student has a particular role in the group, and each group has a particular role in the whole assignment.

The example showed students doing an assignment on the human body, with different communities, such as “brain” or “heart” or “circulation.” Each community found information about its particular organ/system, and input its data into the software. Links were then made between related communities, such as the “Eye-Brain” group, which raised questions and formed a new smaller community devoted to finding these answers. Also, because each student had a specific role in her community, communities were formed from each of these roles. So, for example, all of the historians formed a community to discuss their role in their groups. One of the goals of this project was to link the student communities to the professional world and professional communities, such as those in which their parents participate.

Brook Manville next spoke about his role in creating communities of customers of Saba, a learning management software company. He set up a network of customers to continually update products, get new ideas, and increase customer loyalty to improve service. He instituted continuous feedback as part of the culture of this community, and eventually created global and regional communities as the customer base expanded. The culture of these communities involves three conversations:
1. Listening by Saba (the software company)
2. Teaching by Saba
3. Learning together in an interactive format which recognizes business value

Brook stressed that the members of the community should be the “doers,” rather than the Saba managers who are removed from the day-to-day work. He also emphasized the importance of infrastructure to a community of practice, and underscored that although this piece can be easily overlooked, it can make or break your success. Brook emphasized that the creation of a candid, constructive atmosphere was important to maximize the utility of the group. When asked about how to replicate communities of practice, Brook asserted that many of the group facilitators from Saba have formed their own communities or sub-communities with customers, and that the use of technology dramatically increases the availability and feasibility of such practices.

Michael Seelman next spoke about his work in the government on a project entitled “Working Together to Decrease Gun Violence.” This project brought together leaders from different regions of the United States to try and develop new strategies for decreasing gun violence. Within the community, the government's role was primarily to facilitate (it was stressed that no funds were given to any state or community agencies through this work). The government group formed partnerships with cities on multiple levels —both federally and within each city’s political structure. Because there were funds available, this community employed “demand-driven innovation.”

Michael stated that they had to create a culture within this community even down to how to conduct meetings, but eventually, the participants directed the agenda. The purpose of the community was for each city to discuss strategies for decreasing gun violence, and how they have implemented programs to do so. Cities with higher rates of gun violence were exposed to those with lower rates so that they could learn from successful practices. The project has been a great success and has been continued despite the change in federal administration. Smaller geographical communities are being formed to replicate the activities and successes of the initial group.

Finally, George Roth spoke about his experience with communities of practice in his role as an educator at MIT. Above all, George stated that you must have a common purpose and shared principles to build a community. He stressed that the role of a community of practice is to facilitate learning, be it within the academic or business worlds. He then presented two examples of communities of practice. The first example he cited was an “explicit” or “expected” community of practice, and involved a partnership of MIT with a major auto-manufacturer on a particular new car model. “Learning labs” were created where managers taught learning principles to the workers, thereby combining work and learning. These discussions were designed to initiate dialogue between workers and managers, and to promote inquiry to develop skills in production/work and learning at the same time. It was very interesting to note that the production of this particular model was completed ahead of time and under budget.

When these results were presented to the upper management of the auto-maker, they were impressed; however, they wanted the process boiled down to a 3-day seminar that could be implemented with all employees. While the managers seemed to miss the entire point of building a culture to improve outcomes, it was still gratifying to see that such a premise could work in a professional setting. The second example represented a more implicit model of a community of practice and involved the redesign of the MIT Center for Organizational Learning into a non-profit organization. George stressed that the process of engaging and building the community is the most critical element.

Principal Themes

Across the panelists, some common ideas emerged: shared values, clear sponsorship, and the critical value of experience in learning. In summary:

1. A community should build shared values and then continually surface and update these values.
2. There is a need for clear sponsorship and facilitation in communities of practice.
3. Sponsors need to understand the concept, role, and design of communities of practice.
4. Members of a community of practice need to have defined roles and set common goals.
5. Ideally, knowledge should flow in multiple directions ­ from teachers to students, from students to teachers, from managers to workers, from workers to managers, and from all involved to the context of society.

• Return to Reports from the Panel Sessions