Communities of practice: A concept to consider for CGIAR research programs
Sep 26th, 2011 | By Simone Staiger | Category: Knowledge Management, Tools & MethodsNotes from Etienne Wenger’s key note at the Share Fair in Rome
What about reading this post thinking about Communities of practice as a way of working within CGIAR research programs? Makes sense, right?
Ready for the Share Fair at Rome
Etienne starts his keynote about what he is learning and invites us to participate. “I don’t have any answers but I can engage with you in a conversation about what it means”.4 chairs are ready in the center of the room for us to jump in, ask, be part of his key note.
Communities of practice as a partnership
” My name is associated with CoPs.” CoP’s is only one aspect of Knowledge Sharing (KS) but I would claim that somehow the idea of a CoP is in the heart of KS. It has to do with a sense of partnership. It’s like the story of personal partnerships that lead to marriage: Find a person and over time, realize this is a partner for me. Like in a personnel relationship CoPs start slow. The first phase in CoPs is to recognize who we are to each other. This engenders the commitment to sustain the partnership, which is a place where you don’t have to hide the dark corners. Getting others to recognize the partnership, that’s what knowledge sharing is about
Communities of PRACTICE
It’s difficult to actually talk about the practice instead of how things should be. Practice is messy. In Cops, people ultimately recognize each other as learning partners in practice. Can I count on you to answer my question? Cops require to learn on your part and on the part of the community.
During Etienne Wenger's session pic by Neoluk
Key #1 factor of success: Have “social artists”
Organizations tend to “procedurize” things so processes are independent from the people who do the work. CoPs don’t work that way, they depend on the engagement and the art on how to create these learning spaces. Key success factor #1 is to have what I call “Social artist”. People who lead CoPs need the community for themselves. Train people to become a champion is difficult.
Key #2 factor of success : Have “transversal people”
Our R4D work requires passion. On the other side, politics and bureaucracy are present. There are tensions between the noble mission, the natural engagement of practitioners in the field and the bureaucracy and politics. CoPs are at the cross road of 2 systems of accountability: the horizontal system of partners in practice (peer to peer) and the vertical system. So, another key success factor is to have transversal people, who can live between the 2 systems. We have to learn how to get better at that. We need to create transversal conversation.
CoPs put strategies in practice
CoPs are at the heart of the strategic question of what are the key domains that will make our organization successful. CoPs do strategic work because they are a way of placing the development of strategy capabilities in the hand of practitioners. The question is: What is our strategy. Who are the communities who put it into practice? What do these communities need to get good at? What capabilities do they need to develop? You could do training, you can also create CoPs and have capabilities developed through conversations.
CoPs are not a knowledge sharing device. If they are considered a device, they are handled at low levels of management and not connected to the strategic thinking of an organization.
See also Sophie Alvarez’ post on the Communities of Practice Clinic session at the Share Fair
Hi Simone, a good post which in my view captures the most important elements of what we hear this morning from Ettienne. I will surely use your post to share it all with others.
Comment from Mark Lundy, CIAT, Agroenterprise and Learning Alliances
Simone, thanks for the updates from the Share Fair. I think that the three points that you highlight from Etienne’s talk are valid. My own limited experience in facilitating multi-stakeholder learning networks aligns well with these success factors.
For example, at the end of the first phase of the Central American Learning Alliance we had a wealth of social artists — at least one from each participating agency — fully committed to the idea of collective learning. Over time this wealth eroded as people were given promotions (the vast majority), different responsibilities or left the organization. One point of current discussion among learning alliance partners is how to develop a second and third line of social artists through participation and mentoring to step in when personal or organizational change takes its normal toll. Training people is difficult but perhaps a process of self-selection and mentoring is useful?
Tensions between noble mission and bureaucracy. I could not agree more with this. Engagement with partners is often seen as an afterthought since it is difficult to report on and mostly invisible in internal reporting / assessment forms. Perhaps we need space / structures to channel the passion of R4D practitioners and then a linked set of people who are good at the transversal side of things? Not everyone can or should do both.
Finally, CoPs as a strategic piece of work. This is something the CGIAR continues to struggle with. Are partnerships and CoPs strategic research or merely delivery mechanisms for upstream scientific outputs. Currently from my small perspective is seems that the later still dominates. Much of the difficulty in seeing CoPs as strategic lies in the tensions identified in Factor 2. How can you be accountable when you don’t know what your (general) outputs will be at the outset of a CoP? Not knowing is anathema to a bureaucracy that wants to measure everything a priori. As a result it is difficult to sell CoPs as anything but marginal activities even when evidence exists showing their strategic nature and results.
This kind of discussion should be taking place — and in all fairness probably is — in spaces within the CGIAR like ILAC and others. Despite this, it has not yet permeated the thinking at the level of CRPs.
[...] also Simone Staiger’s blog on Etienne Wenger’s key note at the Share Fair Share and [...]
[...] of this year Etienne and Nancy were discussing the same ideas in their presentation at the Share Fair in Rome – where the importance of social artists being able to work in both the vertical and [...]