IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/64325.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Releasing the grip of managerial domination: the role of communities of practice in tackling multiple exclusion homelessness

Author

Listed:
  • Clark, Michael
  • Cornes, Michelle
  • Manthorpe, Jill
  • Hennessy, Catherine
  • Anderson, Sarah

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to discuss “system transformation” in the context of different workforces and organisations seeking to support people experiencing multiple exclusion homelessness (MEH). From a relational and integrated care perspective it aims to identify barriers to achieving more effective ways of working in the prevailing context of “managerial domination”. Communities of practice (COPs) are evaluated to identify their potential to overcome some of these barriers. Design/methodology/approach – The paper presents a theoretical and conceptual discussion of a project in which a number of COPs were established and evaluated to ascertain their value in developing more relational ways of working in the context of MEH. Case studies of COPs operating in the context of MEH are explored and discussed. Findings – It is concluded that COPs have the potential to deliver small-scale changes (“little miracles”) which are characteristically more subversive than transformative. Nevertheless, the authors still see these small gains as significant when compared to the inertia that is often found in local systems of care where more traditional management techniques (such as “payment by results”) prevail. The authors also draw attention to the scope for much improved service quality which flows from moving beyond the “tick box” and into the realms of what it really takes to tackle homelessness and multiple exclusion. In other words, although often requiring considerable amounts of “craft and graft” to deliver seemingly very small amounts of change, these “little miracles” may actually be more conducive in the long run to delivering the kind of tangible “real” change that is often aspired to by both workers and service users and their carers. Research limitations/implications – The COPs project was limited in terms of time and scale and, hence, further research would be needed to, for example, ascertain their longer-term potential. Practical implications – There is merit in the theoretical perspectives discussed and, from these, of understanding how best to establish and operate COPs as a vehicle for achieving better outcomes through integrated or collaborative working. Social implications – There is much scope for better integrated or more collaborative working in the context of MEH and this paper draws attention to how COPs could be one means of achieving better outcomes for people experiencing MEH. Originality/value – This is the first paper to set out the theoretical analysis of COPs as a means of achieving better integrated or collaborative working.

Suggested Citation

  • Clark, Michael & Cornes, Michelle & Manthorpe, Jill & Hennessy, Catherine & Anderson, Sarah, 2015. "Releasing the grip of managerial domination: the role of communities of practice in tackling multiple exclusion homelessness," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64325, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:64325
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/64325/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alessia Contu & Hugh Willmott, 2003. "Re-Embedding Situatedness: The Importance of Power Relations in Learning Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 283-296, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michael Kaethler, 2019. "Curating creative communities of practice: the role of ambiguity," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 8(1), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Emmanuelle Vaast & Geoff Walsham, 2009. "Trans-Situated Learning: Supporting a Network of Practice with an Information Infrastructure," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 547-564, December.
    3. Andrew J. Rosman, 2011. "Auditors' going‐concern judgments: rigid, adaptive, or both?," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 10(1), pages 30-45, February.
    4. Simon Turner, 2013. "Absorptive Capacity: The Role of Communities of Practice," Working Papers wp444, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    5. Laurie Field, 2017. "Interest Differences and Organizational Learning," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-14, August.
    6. Raissa Ulbrich & Claudia Pahl-Wostl, 2019. "The German Permaculture Community from a Community of Practice Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-21, February.
    7. Anne Kokkonen & Pauli Alin, 2015. "Practice-based learning in construction projects: a literature review," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(7), pages 513-530, July.
    8. Sandra A. Slaughter & Laurie J. Kirsch, 2006. "The Effectiveness of Knowledge Transfer Portfolios in Software Process Improvement: A Field Study," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 301-320, September.
    9. Miguel Pina e Cunha, 2005. "Bricolage in organizations," Nova SBE Working Paper Series wp474, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Nova School of Business and Economics.
    10. Nathalie Duval-Couetil & Michael Ladisch & Soohyun Yi, 2021. "Addressing academic researcher priorities through science and technology entrepreneurship education," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 288-318, April.
    11. Nooteboom, B., 2007. "Cognitive Distance in and Between COP’s and Firms : Where do Exploitation and Exploration take Place, and How are they Connected?," Discussion Paper 2007-4, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    12. Davide Nicolini, 2011. "Practice as the Site of Knowing: Insights from the Field of Telemedicine," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 602-620, June.
    13. Alex Osei‐Kojo & Paul Lawer Kenney & Clement Mensah Damoah & Albert Ahenkan, 2022. "Collective learning and COVID‐19 mitigation in Ghana," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(3), pages 255-281, May.
    14. Shelly Meyers & David Lester, 2013. "The Effects of Situated Learning Through a Community Partnership in a Teacher Preparation Program," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(3), pages 21582440134, August.
    15. Ferguson, J.E. & Huysman, M.H., 2009. "Between ambition and approach: towards sustainable knowledge management in development organizations," Serie Research Memoranda 0003, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    16. Papadopoulos, Thanos & Stamati, Teta & Nopparuch, Pawit, 2013. "Exploring the determinants of knowledge sharing via employee weblogs," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 133-146.
    17. Robyn Thomas & Leisa D. Sargent & Cynthia Hardy, 2011. "Managing Organizational Change: Negotiating Meaning and Power-Resistance Relations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 22-41, February.
    18. Mark J. Zbaracki & Mark Bergen, 2010. "When Truces Collapse: A Longitudinal Study of Price-Adjustment Routines," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 955-972, October.
    19. Kuok Kei Law & Andrew Chan, 2017. "Managing knowledge work in Asia Pacific contexts: case studies of Hong Kong SMEs," Asia Pacific Business Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 475-492, August.
    20. Paul Vallance, 2011. "Relational and Dialectical Spaces of Knowing: Knowledge, Practice, and Work in Economic Geography," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 43(5), pages 1098-1117, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    managerial domination; integration; multiple exclusion homelessness; communities of practice; relational perspective;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J50 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor-Management Relations, Trade Unions, and Collective Bargaining - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:64325. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.