In LO22124, Keith Cowan <keith.cowan@eXcape.net> writes:
> Lesson No. 1 for instituting a community of practice (CoP) is: Don't.
It seems to me that there is some real wisdome in that comment and
although it slightly misses the point.
*==> The WISDOM is that, as Keith later points out (quoting from his
article in Automotive Manufacturing & Production June 1999?)
> they are not designable units or a new kind of organizational
> module to be implemented; they can't be legislated or defined by decree.
I've seen attempts to formalize the informal, to provide corporate
"support", and otherwise mess with CoPs that ultimately cause harm
because, when corporate support is withdrawn (for reasons of distraction
or new imperatives, or whatever), the community has a tough time going
back to a more natural (less hot-house) life style. In the case that I'm
thinking of, the community of engineers never achieved the kind of
reflectivity that would be needed to deliberately re-design itself as a
community.
*==> THE MISSING POINT is that CoPs are there anyway, whether we notice
them or not. Many a learning intervention succeeds or fails because of the
rich politics of communities of practice. For an example of success, I
would argue that the story about the "harmony buck" (to stay with the
automobile industry theme) in the AutoCo learning history is about a
community that already exists, that is strengthened by the learning
initiative, and that carries the learning forward across projects. See
George Roth and Art Kleiner, The Learning Initiative at the AutoCo Epsilon
Program, 1991-1994 (Cambridge, MA: MIT Sloan School, Center for
Organizational Learning, 1996). Each one of us can probably provide an
example of a "dark" community of practice that rejects new thinking,
members, or artifacts because they don't fit with the community's
practice.
My question to Fred Nickols (LO LO22051) would be: do you think that the
work reported in the AutoCo learning history qualifies as an instance
where a company has successfully initiated a community of practice? They
weren't using the term "community of practice," but the harmony buck
clearly brought a larger community into existence in terms of enterprise,
engagement, and repertoire.
What seems so humbling and powerful about the way Etienne Wenger talks
about CoPs is that we have to think of ourselves as INSIDE the system
(i.e., the given community), even though we may seek to enrich it and help
it grow. That fundamentally subverts conventional notions of "managing"
(e.g., "at a distance") and some of our tacit assumptions about ourselves
as "change agents."
John
--* John D. Smith, (503) 245-4993
--* 1025 SE Elliott Ave., Portland OR 97214-5339
--* We could never learn to be brave and patient,
--* if there were only joy in the world. -Helen Keller (1880-1968)
--"John D. Smith" <smithjd@teleport.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>