IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/8708.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Communities of Practice and Virtual Learning Communities: Benefits, barriers and success factors

Author

Listed:
  • Fontainha, Elsa
  • Gannon-Leary, Pat

Abstract

A virtual Community of Practice (CoP) is a network of individuals who share a domain of interest about which they communicate online. The practitioners share resources (for example experiences, problems and solutions, tools, methodologies). Such communication results in the improvement of the knowledge of each participant in the community and contributes to the development of the knowledge within the domain. A virtual learning community may involve the conduct of original research but it is more likely that its main purpose is to increase the knowledge of participants, via formal education or professional development. Virtual learning communities could have learning as their main goal or the elearning could be generated as a side effect. Virtual communities of practice (CoPs) and virtual learning communities are becoming widespread within higher education institutions (HEIs) thanks to technological developments which enable increased communication, interactivity among participants and incorporation of collaborative pedagogical models, specifically through information communications technologies (ICTs) They afford the potential for the combination of synchronous and asynchronous communication, access to -and from- geographically isolated communities and international information sharing. Clearly there are benefits to be derived from sharing and learning within and out with HEIs. There is a sense of connectedness, of shared passion and a deepening of knowledge to be derived from ongoing interaction. Knowledge development can be continuous, cyclical and fluid. However, barriers exist in virtual CoPs and these are defined by the authors and illustrated with quotes from academic staff who have been involved in CoPs.Critical success factors (CSFs) for a virtual CoP are discussed. These include usability of technology; trust in, and acceptance of, ICTs in communication; a sense of belonging among members; paying attention to cross-national and cross-cultural dimensions of the CoP; shared understandings; a common sense of purpose; use of netiquette and user-friendly language and longevity. The authors recognise the enormous potential for the development of CoPs through e-mail discussion lists and discussion boards but have themselves experienced the difficulties inherent in initiating such a community. These are corroborated and illustrated with text from interviews with academic staff. Much of the literature on CoPs emanates from outside Europe, despite the fact that e-learning articles have a large diffusion around Europe. The authors suggest further exploration of this topic by identifying and studying CoPs and virtual learning communities across EU countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Fontainha, Elsa & Gannon-Leary, Pat, 2008. "Communities of Practice and Virtual Learning Communities: Benefits, barriers and success factors," MPRA Paper 8708, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:8708
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/8708/1/MPRA_paper_8708.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa & Dorothy E. Leidner, 1999. "Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(6), pages 791-815, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Haradhan Kumar MOHAJAN, 2017. "Roles Of Communities Of Practice For The Development Of The Society," Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, Alliance of Central-Eastern European Universities, vol. 6(3), pages 27-46, September.
    2. repec:sph:rjedep:v:3:y:2017:i:6:p:27-46 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. S. Nkuna & A. S. A. du Toit, 2014. "Knowledge Sharing Through Communities of Practice in a Financial Institution," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(01), pages 1-14.
    4. Beth Siegel, 2016. "Best practices in the design and implementation of learning communities," Community Development Working Paper 2016-1, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
    5. Naim Ahmad & Noorulhasan Naveed Quadri & Mohamed Rafik N. Qureshi & Mohammad Mahtab Alam, 2018. "Relationship Modeling of Critical Success Factors for Enhancing Sustainability and Performance in E-Learning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.

    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. Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa & Ann Majchrzak, 2010. "Research Commentary ---Vigilant Interaction in Knowledge Collaboration: Challenges of Online User Participation Under Ambivalence," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 773-784, December.
    2. Ale Ebrahim, Nader & Ahmed Shamsuddin & Abdul Rashid, Salwa Hanim & Taha, Zahari, 2012. "Effective Virtual Teams for New Product Development," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 7(21), pages 1971-1985.
    3. Ofir Turel & Catherine E. Connelly, 2012. "Team Spirit: The Influence of Psychological Collectivism on the Usage of E-Collaboration Tools," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 703-725, September.
    4. Zhewei Zhang & Youngjin Yoo & Kalle Lyytinen & Aron Lindberg, 2021. "The Unknowability of Autonomous Tools and the Liminal Experience of Their Use," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(4), pages 1192-1213, December.
    5. Pamela J. Hinds & Diane E. Bailey, 2003. "Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 615-632, December.
    6. repec:ipg:wpaper:40 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Anca Metiu, 2006. "Owning the Code: Status Closure in Distributed Groups," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 418-435, August.
    8. Chris Kimble, 2010. "Building effective virtual teams: How to overcome the problems of trust and identity in virtual teams," Post-Print halshs-00550219, HAL.
    9. Julia Darby & Stuart McIntyre & Graeme Roy, 2022. "What can analysis of 47 million job advertisements tell us about how opportunities for homeworking are evolving in the United Kingdom?," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 281-302, July.
    10. Mei-Ling Wang & Bi-Fen Hsu, 2012. "A Study to Explore the Team Virtualization Level and Team Effectiveness from the Team Personality Composition," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 3(2), pages 199-216, June.
    11. Catherine Durnell Cramton, 2001. "The Mutual Knowledge Problem and Its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 346-371, June.
    12. Pamela J. Hinds & Mark Mortensen, 2005. "Understanding Conflict in Geographically Distributed Teams: The Moderating Effects of Shared Identity, Shared Context, and Spontaneous Communication," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(3), pages 290-307, June.
    13. Gaowen Kong & T. Dongmin Kong & Ni Qin & Li Yu, 2023. "Ethnic Diversity, Trust and Corporate Social Responsibility: The Moderating Effects of Marketization and Language," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 187(3), pages 449-471, October.
    14. Vaida Zemlickienė & Indrė Lapinskaitė & Zenonas Turskis, 2022. "Internal Communication in R&D: Decision-Making Methods Based on Expert Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-13, September.
    15. Sumita Raghuram & Philipp Tuertscher & Raghu Garud, 2010. "Research Note ---Mapping the Field of Virtual Work: A Cocitation Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 983-999, December.
    16. Kirs, Peeter & Bagchi, Kallol, 2012. "The impact of trust and changes in trust: A national comparison of individual adoptions of information and communication technologies and related phenomenon," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 431-441.
    17. Martha L. Maznevski & Nicholas A. Athanassiou, 2006. "Guest editors’ introduction to the focused issue: A new direction for global teams research," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 631-646, December.
    18. Sumeet Gupta & Haejung Yun & Heng Xu & Hee-Woong Kim, 2017. "An exploratory study on mobile banking adoption in Indian metropolitan and urban areas: a scenario-based experiment," Information Technology for Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 127-152, January.
    19. Ambos, Tina C. & Ambos, Björn & Eich, Katharina J. & Puck, Jonas, 2016. "Imbalance and Isolation: How Team Configurations Affect Global Knowledge Sharing," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 316-332.
    20. Corgnet, Brice & Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael, 2013. "Are you a good employee or simply a good guy? Influence costs and contract design," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 259-272.
    21. Xiaojun Wu & Jiabin Shen, 2018. "A Study on Airbnb’s Trust Mechanism and the Effects of Cultural Values—Based on a Survey of Chinese Consumers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Communities of practice; collaborative; informal learning; interactivity; usability; e-learning;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A20 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - General
    • Z13 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Economic Sociology; Economic Anthropology; Language; Social and Economic Stratification

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:pra:mprapa:8708. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.