Virtual community of practice

To some a virtual community of practice is a misnomer as the original concept of a community of practice (CoP) was based around situated learning in a co-located setting. However, with increasing globalization and the continued growth of the Internet many now claim that virtual CoPs do exist (e.g. Dubé, Bourhis & Jacob, 2005; Murillo, 2006; Zarb, 2006; Hara & Hew, 2007; Murillo, 2008). For example, some claim that a wiki (such as wikipedia.org) is a virtual CoP (Bryant, Forte & Bruckman, 2005), others argue that the essence of a community is that it is place based - a community of place.

There is also debate on the very term VCoP since the community is real though the form of communication is mostly, if not entirely, computer-mediated. Few believe that a community of practice may be formed without any face to face meetings whatsoever. In fact many leading CoP thinkers stress the importance of such meetings. However some researchers argue that a VCoP's high use of ICT, changes some of its characteristics and introduces new complexities and ambiguities, thus justifying the creation of the term and area of study (Kim, 2004; Zarb, 2006).

Some of the other terms used have been (in chronological order) on-line (Cothrel & Williams 1999), computer-mediated (Etzioni & Etzioni, 1999), electronic (Wasko & Faraj, 2000) and distributed (Hildreth, Kimble & Wright, 1998). Wenger et al., 2002; Kimble & Hildreth, 2005. As the mode of communication can involve face-to-face, telephone and letter, and the defining feature is its distributed nature. For a comparison between Virtual Learning Communities (VLCs) with Distributed Communities of Practice (DCoP), see Couros & Kesten (2003).

Recent research has produced evidence that increases in the sharing of tacit knowledge, which is very much inherent within CoP theory, may take place, albeit to a lesser degree, in a VCoP scenario even though such systems make use of written word (Zarb, 2006). This is spurring interest in what is sometimes referred to as community-driven knowledge management or Community Based Knowledge Management, where CoP and VCoP theory is harnessed, nourished and supported within the broader organisational setting.

On-Line Communities of Practice

Communities of Practice like Sap’s SDN developer network, Adobe’s XMP forum, Sermo for physicians, or domain-specific corporate-internal communities such as those found at HP, revolve around people's professional or vocational needs for connections, information, identity, and sense of belonging. Communities of practice are about what people do for a living.

They address the needs that people have which can not easily be satisfied with traditional resources such as broadcast media, formal publications, academia, and ad-hoc associations or relationships. Online communities of practice run the gamut from forums, faqs, to email list serves. Offline communities of practice include user groups such as ASUG and eBay’s annual “Live” event.

Communities of practice provide a critical resource to professionals who want and need recommendations, pointers, tips and tricks, best practices, insights and innovations. Part of what makes a community practice strong is the aggregation of relevance; that is, people and information related to a coherent set of topics which certain people will find interesting, useful, and potentially profitable. Communities of practice lift us up to support us, to help us achieve our aspirations, reach our goals, and to be of service.

(Wenger, White & Smith 2009) argue that virtual communities change the way we think of community and that technology stewardship is a key element of virtual communities of practice by making virtual communities independent of any one technology.

See also

• Network of practice
• Online community of practice
• Online participation
• Virtual community
• Virtual Ethnography
• Virtual team

References

• Ackerman, & G. Mark, (Eds.), Proceedings of GROUP International Conference on Supporting Group Work. (pp. 11–20). New York: ACM Press.
• Bryant, S. L., Forte, A. & Bruckman, A. (2005). Becoming Wikipedian: transformation of participation in a collaborative online encyclopledia. In K. Schmidt, M. Pendergast, M.
• Cothrel, J.; Williams, R.L. (1999). "On-line communities: helping them form and grow". Journal of Knowledge Management 3 (1): 54–60. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewContentItem.do?contentType=Article&contentId=883669. 
• Dubé, L., Bourhis, A. & Jacob, R. (2005). The impact of structuring characteristics on the launching of virtual communities of practice. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 18(2): 145-166.
• Etzioni, A., & Etzioni, O. (1999). Face-to-face and computer-mediated communities, A comparative analysis. The Information Society, 15, 241-248.
• Hara, N. & Hew, K. H. (2007) Knowledge-sharing in an online community of health-care professionals. Information Technology & People, 20(3): 235-261.
• Kim, A.J. (2004). “Emergent Purpose.” Musings of a Social Architect. January 24, 2004. Retrieved April 4, 2006
• Murillo, E. (2006). Searching for virtual communities of practice in the Usenet discussion network: combining quantitative and qualitative methods to identify the constructs of Wenger's theory. PhD thesis. University of Bradford.
• Murillo, E. (2008). Searching Usenet for virtual Communities of Practice: using mixed methods to identify the constructs of Wenger's theory. Information Research, 13(4) paper 386.
• Wasko, M.M., & Faraj, S. (2000). “It is what one does”: why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9, 155-173.
• Wenger, E.; McDermott, R.; Snyder, W.M. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. pp. 304. http://hbswk.hbs.edu/archive/2855.html. 
• Wenger, E.; White, Nancy; Smith, John D. (2009). Digital Habitats; stewarding technology for communities. Portland: CPsquare. pp. 228. http://isbn.nu/9780982503607. 
• Zarb, M.P (2006). Modelling Participation in Virtual Communities-of-Practice. LSE MSc ADMIS Dissertation: Distinction, Accessed from http://lse.academia.edu.

External links

• Kimble, C.; Hildreth, P. (2004). Communities of Practice: Going One Step Too Far?. Evry, France: Proceedings 9e colloque de l'AIM, (May 2004). pp. 304. http://www.chris-kimble.com/Publications/Documents/Kimble_2004.pdf.  ( A critical review of virtual CoPs )
• Where is the Action in Virtual Communities of Practice? Another critical review of virtual CoPs
• Communities of Practice: Going Virtual
• Distributed Design Teams as Communities of Practice
• Virtual Communities of Practice: Differentiated Consequences for Individuals in Two Organisational Contexts
• Knowledge Networking: Structure and Performance in Networks of Practice
• Zarb, M.P (2006). Modelling Participation in Virtual Communities-of-Practice
• DARnet wiki - Action Research with Distributed Communities of Practice