You are on page 1of 123


Community of practice Discourse community Duality (CoPs) Explicit knowledge Knowledge management Knowledge transfer Tag (metadata) Learning community Legitimate peripheral participation Network of practice Online participation Online community of practice Organizational learning Personal network Professional learning community Situated cognition Situated learning Social capital Social network Tacit knowledge Value network Value network analysis Virtual community of practice 1 9 10 12 13 20 24 28 32 33 35 41 45 51 51 55 67 72 94 106 111 114 116

Article Sources and Contributors Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 119 121

Article Licenses
License 122

Community of practice

Community of practice
Part of a series on



Sense of community Social capital Perspectives

Community psychology Community studies Types

Community of interest Community of practice Community of place Development

Community development Community organizing See also

Outline Community portal WikiProject Community

A community of practice (CoP) is, according to cognitive anthropologists Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger, a group of people who share a craft and/or a profession. The group can evolve naturally because of the members' common interest in a particular domain or area, or it can be created specifically with the goal of gaining knowledge related to their field. It is through the process of sharing information and experiences with the group that the members learn from each other, and have an opportunity to develop themselves personally and professionally (Lave & Wenger 1991). CoPs can exist online, such as within discussion boards and newsgroups, or in real life, such as in a lunch room at work, in a field setting, on a factory floor, or elsewhere in the environment. Communities of practice are not new phenomena: this type of learning practice has existed for as long as people have been learning and sharing their experiences through storytelling. Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger coined the phrase in their 1991 book, 'Situated learning' (Lave & Wenger 1991), and Wenger then significantly expanded on the concept in his 1998 book, 'Communities of Practice' (Wenger 1998).

Community of practice

Origin and development
Since the publication of "situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation" (Lave & Wenger 1991) in 1991, communities of practice have been the focus of attention, first as a theory of learning and later as part of the field of knowledge management. See (Hildreth & Kimble 2004) for a review of how the concept has changed over the years. Cox (2005) offers a more critical view of the different ways in which the term communities of practice can be interpreted. Early years To understand how learning occurs outside the classroom while at the Institute for Research on Learning, Lave and Wenger studied how newcomers or novices to informal groups become established members of those groups (Lave & Wenger 1991). Lave and Wenger first used the term communities of practice to describe learning through practice and participation, which they named situated learning. The structure of the community was created over time through a process of legitimate peripheral participation. Legitimation and participation together define the characteristic ways of belonging to a community whereas peripherality and participation are concerned with location and identity in the social world (Lave & Wenger 1991, p.29). Lave and Wenger's research looked at how apprenticeships help people learn. They found that when newcomers join an established group or community, they spend some time initially observing and perhaps performing simple tasks in basic roles as they learn how the group works and how they can participate (an apprentice electrician, for example would watch and learn before actually doing any electrical work; initially taking on small simple jobs and eventually more complicated ones). Lave and Wenger described this socialization process as legitimate peripheral participation. The term "community of practice" is that group that Lave and Wenger referred to, who share a common interest and a desire to learn from and contribute to the community with their variety of experiences (Lave & Wenger 1991). Later years In his later work (Wenger 1998), Wenger abandoned the concept of legitimate peripheral participation and used the idea of an inherent tension in a duality instead. He identifies four dualities that exist in communities of practice, participation-reification, designed-emergent, identification-negotiability and local-global, although the participation-reification duality has been the focus of particular interest because of its links to knowledge management. He describes the structure of a CoP as consisting of three interrelated terms: 'mutual engagement', 'joint enterprise' and 'shared repertoire' (Wenger 1998, pp.7273). Mutual Engagement: Firstly, through participation in the community, members establish norms and build collaborative relationships; this is termed mutual engagement. These relationships are the ties that bind the members of the community together as a social entity. Joint Enterprise: Secondly, through their interactions, they create a shared understanding of what binds them together; this is termed the joint enterprise. The joint enterprise is (re)negotiated by its members and is sometimes referred to as the 'domain' of the community. Shared Repertoire: Finally, as part of its practice, the community produces a set of communal resources, which is termed their shared repertoire; this is used in the pursuit of their joint enterprise and can include both literal and symbolic meanings.

Community of practice Present work For Etienne Wenger, learning is central to human identity. A primary focus of Wengers more recent work is on learning as social participation the individual as an active participant in the practices of social communities, and in the construction of his/her identity through these communities (Wenger et. al 2002). In this context, a community of practice is a group of individuals participating in communal activity, and experiencing/continuously creating their shared identity through engaging in and contributing to the practices of their communities. The structural characteristics of a community of practice are again redefined to a domain of knowledge, a notion of community and a practice (Wenger et. al & 2002 pp 27 - 29). Domain A domain of knowledge creates common ground, inspires members to participate, guides their learning and gives meaning to their actions. Community The notion of a community creates the social fabric for that learning. A strong community fosters interactions and encourages a willingness to share ideas. Practice While the domain provides the general area of interest for the community, the practice is the specific focus around which the community develops, shares and maintains its core of knowledge. In many organizations, communities of practice have become an integral part of the organization structure (McDermott & Archibald 2010). These communities take on knowledge stewarding tasks that were formerly covered by more formal organizational structures. In some organizations there are both formal and informal communities of practice. There is a great deal of interest within organizations to encourage, support, and sponsor communities of practice in order to benefit from shared knowledge that may lead to higher productivity (Wenger 2004). Communities of practice are now viewed by many in the business setting as a means to capturing the tacit knowledge, or the know-how that is not so easily articulated. An important aspect and function of communities of practice is increasing organization performance. Lesser & Storck (2001, p.836) identify four areas of organizational performance that can be affected by communities of practice: Decreasing the learning curve of new employees Responding more rapidly to customer needs and inquiries Reducing rework and preventing "reinvention of the wheel" Spawning new ideas for products and services

Examples of communities of practice

The communities Lave and Wenger studied were naturally forming as practitioners of craft and skill-based activities met to share experiences and insights (Lave & Wenger 1991). Lave and Wenger observed situated learning within a community of practice among Yucatn midwives, native tailors, navy quartermasters and meat cutters (Lave & Wenger 1991) as well as insurance claims processors. (Wenger 1998). Other fields have made use of the concept of CoPs. Examples include education (Grossman 2001), sociolinguistics, material anthropology, and second language acquisition (Kimble, Hildreth & Bourdon 2008). A famous example of a community of practice within an organization is that which developed around the Xerox customer service representatives who repaired the machines in the field (Brown & Duguid 2000). The Xerox reps began exchanging tips and tricks over informal meetings over breakfast or lunch and eventually Xerox saw the value of these interactions and created the Eureka project to allow these interactions to be shared across the global network of representatives. The Eureka database has been estimated to have saved the corporation $100 million.

Community of practice

Communities of practice compared to functional or project teams

A project team differs from a community of practice in several significant ways (McDermott, 1999). A project team is driven by deliverables with shared goals, milestones and results. A project team meets to share and exchange information and experiences just as the community of practice does, but team membership is defined by task. A project team typically has designated members who remain consistent in their roles during the project. A project team is dissolved once its mission is accomplished. By contrast, A community of practice is often organically created, with as many objectives as members of that community. Community membership is defined by the knowledge of the members. CoP membership changes and members may take on new roles within the community as interests and needs arise. A community of practice can exist as long as the members believe they have something to contribute to it, or gain from it.

Communities of Practice versus Communities of Interest

In addition to the distinction between CoP and other types of organizational groupings found in the workplace, in some cases it is useful to differentiate CoP from Communities of Interest (CoI). Community of Interest A group of people interested in sharing information and discussing a particular topic that interests them. Members are not necessarily experts or practitioners of the topic around which the CoI has formed. The purpose of the CoI is to provide a place where people who share a common interest can go and exchange information, ask questions, and express their opinions about the topic. Membership in a CoI is not dependent upon expertise - one only needs to be interested in the subject. Community of Practice A CoP, in contrast, is a group of people who are active practitioners. CoP participation is not appropriate for non-practitioners. The purpose of a CoP, as discussed above, is to provide a way for practitioners to share tips and best practices, ask questions of their colleagues, and provide support for each other. Membership is dependent on expertise - one should have at least some recent experience performing in the role or subject area of the CoP. Example: Someone who is interested in photography and has some background/training in it finds an online CoP for working photojournalists, who use it to discuss various aspects of their work. Since this community is focused on working photojournalists, it would not be appropriate for an amateur photographer to contribute to the CoP discussions there. Depending on the CoPs structure non-CoP members may have access to reading the discussions and accessing other materials of the community.

Communities of practice and knowledge management

Wasko and Faraj (2000) describe three kinds of knowledge: "knowledge as object", "knowledge embedded within individuals", and "knowledge embedded in a community". Communities of Practice have become associated with finding, sharing, transferring, and archiving knowledge, as well as making explicit "expertise", or tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge is considered to be those valuable context-based experiences that cannot easily be captured, codified and stored (Davenport & Prusak 2000), also (Hildreth & Kimble 2002). Because knowledge management is seen "primarily as a problem of capturing, organizing, and retrieving information, evoking notions of databases, documents, query languages, and data mining" (Thomas, Kellogg & Erickson 2001), the community of practice, collectively and individually, is considered a rich potential source of

Community of practice helpful information in the form of actual experiences; in other words, best practices. Thus, for knowledge management, a community of practice is one source of content and context that if codified, documented and archived can be accessed for later use.

Benefit of community of practice

Social capital
Social capital is said to be a multi-dimensional concept, with both public and private facets Template:(Bourdieu, 1991). That is, social capital may provide value to both the individual and the group as a whole. Through informal connections that participants build in their community of practice, and in the process of sharing their expertise, learning from others, and participating in the group, members are said to be acquiring social capital - especially those members who demonstrate expertise and experience.

Factors of a successful community of practice

Individuals in communities of practice
Members of communities of practice are thought to be more efficient and effective conduits of information and experiences. While organizations tend to provide manuals to meet the training needs of their employees, CoP's help foster the process of storytelling among colleagues which, in turn, helps them strengthen their skills on the job. (Seely Brown & Duguid 1991) Studies have shown that workers spend a third of their time looking for information and are five times more likely to turn to a co-worker rather than an explicit source of information (book, manual, or database) (Davenport & Prusak 2000). Time is saved by conferring with members of a CoP. Members of the community have tacit knowledge, which can be difficult to store and retrieve outside. For example, one person can share the best way to handle a situation based on his experiences, which may enable the other person to avoid mistakes and shorten the learning curve. In a CoP, members can openly discuss and brainstorm about a project, which can lead to new capabilities. The type of information that is shared and learned in a CoP is boundless (Dalkir 2005). Duguid (2005) clarifies the difference between tacit knowledge, or knowing how, and explicit knowledge, or knowing what. Performing optimally in a job requires being able to convert theory into practice. Communities of practice help the individual bridge the gap between knowing what and knowing how. (Duguid 2005) As members of communities of practice, individuals report increased communication with people (professionals, interested parties, hobbyists), less dependence on geographic proximity, and the generation of new knowledge. (Ardichvilli, Page & Wentling 2003) Social presence Communicating with others in a community of practice involves creating social presence. Tu (2002) defines social presence as "the degree of salience of another person in an interaction and the consequent salience of an interpersonal relationship" (p.38). It is believed that social presence affects how likely an individual is of participating in a COP (especially in online environments). (Tu 2002) Management of a community of practice often faces many barriers that inhibit individuals from engaging in knowledge exchange. Some of the reasons for these barriers are egos and personal attacks, large overwhelming COP's, and time constraints (Wasko & Faraj 2000)

Community of practice Motivation Motivation to share knowledge is critical to success in communities of practice. Studies show that members are motivated to become active participants in a CoP when they view knowledge as meant for the public good, a moral obligation and/or as a community interest (Ardichvilli, Page & Wentling 2003). Members of a community of practice can also be motivated to participate by using methods such as tangible returns (promotion, raises or bonuses), intangible returns (reputation, self-esteem) and community interest (exchange of practice related knowledge, interaction). Collaboration Collaboration is essential to ensuring that communities of practice thrive. Research has found that certain factors can indicate a higher level of collaboration in knowledge exchange in a business network (Sveiby & Simon 2002). Sveiby and Simons found that more seasoned colleagues tend to foster a more collaborative culture. Additionally they noted that a higher educational level also predicts a tendency to favor collaboration.

Actions to cultivate a successful community of practice

What makes a community of practice succeed depends on the purpose and objective of the community as well as the interests and resources of the members of that community. Wenger identified seven actions that could be taken in order to cultivate communities of practice: 1. Design the community to evolve naturally - Because the nature of a Community of Practice is dynamic, in that the interests, goals, and members are subject to change, CoP forums should be designed to support shifts in focus. 2. Create opportunities for open dialog within and with outside perspectives - While the members and their knowledge are the CoP's most valuable resource, it is also beneficial to look outside of the CoP to understand the different possibilities for achieving their learning goals. 3. Welcome and allow different levels of participation - Wenger identifies 3 main levels of participation. 1) The core group who participate intensely in the community through discussions and projects. This group typically takes on leadership roles in guiding the group 2) The active group who attend and participate regularly, but not to the level of the leaders. 3) The peripheral group who, while they are passive participants in the community, still learn from their level of involvement. Wenger notes the third group typically represents the majority of the community. 4. Develop both public and private community spaces - While CoP's typically operate in public spaces where all members share, discuss and explore ideas, they should also offer private exchanges. Different members of the CoP could coordinate relationships among members and resources in an individualized approach based on specific needs. 5. Focus on the value of the community - CoP's should create opportunities for participants to explicitly discuss the value and productivity of their participation in the group. 6. Combine familiarity and excitement - CoP's should offer the expected learning opportunities as part of their structure, and opportunities for members to shape their learning experience together by brainstorming and examining the conventional and radical wisdom related to their topic. 7. Find and nurture a regular rhythm for the community - CoP's should coordinate a thriving cycle of activities and events that allow for the members to regularly meet, reflect, and evolve. The rhythm, or pace, should maintain an anticipated level of engagement to sustain the vibrancy of the community, yet not be so fast-paced that it becomes unwieldy and overwhelming in its intensity. (Wenger, McDermott & Snyder 2002)

Community of practice

Dalton, R.A (2011). Knowledge Transfer for the Military Leader [1]. pp.Chapter 5. Ardichvilli, Alexander; Page, Vaughn; Wentling, Tim (2003). "Motivation and barriers to participation in virtual knowledge sharing in communities of practice". Journal of knowledge management 7 (1): 6477. doi:10.1108/13673270310463626 [2]. Cox, Andrew (2005). "What are communities of practice? A comparative review of four seminal works.". Journal of Information Science 31 (6): 527540. doi:10.1177/0165551505057016 [3]. Brown, John Seely; Duguid, Paul (2000). "Balancing act: How to capture knowledge without killing it" [4]. Harvard Business Review. Dalkir, K. (2005). Knowledge Management in Theory and Practice. Burlington: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. ISBN0-7506-7864-X. Davenport, Thomas H.; Prusak, Lawrence (2000). Working knowledge. How organizations manage what they know, 2nd Edition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. ISBN1-57851-301-4. Duguid, Paul (2005). "The Art of Knowing: Social and Tacit Dimensions of Knowledge and the Limits of the Community of Practice". The Information Society (Taylor & Francis Inc.): 109118. Grossman, P. (2001). Toward a theory of teacher community.. 103, 9421012.: Teachers College Record,. ISBN0-7506-7864-X. Hildreth, Paul; Kimble, Chris (2002). "The duality of knowledge" [5]. Information Research 8 (1). Hildreth, Paul; Kimble, Chris (2004). Knowledge Networks: Innovation through Communities of Practice [6]. London / Hershey: Idea Group Inc. ISBN1-59140-200-X. Kimble, Chris; Hildreth, Paul; Bourdon, Isabelle (2008). Communities of Practice: Creating Learning Environments for Educators [7]. Information Age Publishing. ISBN1-59311-863-5. Lave, Jean; Wenger, Etienne (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation [8]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN0-521-42374-0.; first published in 1990 as Institute for Research on Learning report 90-0013 Lesser, L.E.; Storck, J. (2001). Communities of Practice and organizational performance [9] 40 (4). IBM Systems Journal. McDermott, Richard; Archibald, Douglas (2010). Harnessing Your Staff's Informal Networks [10] 88 (3). Harvard Business Review. Polyani, Michael; Sen, Amartya (2009). The Tacit Dimension. University Of Chicago Press; Reissue edition. ISBN0-226-67298-0. Putnam, Robert (2001). "Social Capital: Measurement and Consequences". ISUMA (spring): 4151. Seely Brown, John; Duguid, Paul (1991). "Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning and innovation". Organization Science 2 (1). JSTOR2634938 [11]. Sveiby, Karl-Erik; Simon, Roland (2002). "Collaborative climate and effectiveness of knowledge work - an empirical study" [12]. Journal of Knowledge Management 6 (5): 420433. doi:10.1108/13673270210450388 [13]. ISBN1367-3270. Thomas, J.C.; Kellogg, W.A; Erickson, T. (2001). "The knowledge management puzzle: Human and social factors in knowledge management" [14]. IBM Systems Journal 40 (4): 863884. doi:10.1147/sj.404.0863 [15]. Tu, Chih-Hsiung (2002). "The management of social presence in an online learning environment". International Journal on E-learning. AprilJune: 3445. Wasko, 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 (2-3): 155173. doi:10.1016/S0963-8687(00)00045-7 [16]. Wenger, Etienne (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity [17]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN978-0-521-66363-2.

Community of practice Wenger, Etienne; McDermott, Richard; Snyder, William M. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice (Hardcover) [18]. Harvard Business Press; 1 edition. ISBN978-1-57851-330-7.

Further reading
Barton, T & Tursting, K (2005). Beyond Communities of Practice: Language Power and Social Context. Cambridge University Press. ISBN978-0-521-83643-2. Chua, Alton (October 2002). "Book Review: Cultivating Communities of Practice * Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press." [19]. Journal of Knowledge Management Practice. Duguid, Paul (2005). The Art of Knowing: Social and Tacit Dimensions of Knowledge and the Limits of the Community of Practice, University of California Duguid, Paul (2005). The information Society 21. Taylor & Francis Inc. pp.109118. Gannon-Leary, P.M. & Fontainha, E. "Communities of Practice and virtual learning communities: benefits, barriers and success factors" [20] ELearning Papers 26 Sept 2007 [Accessed Nov 2007] Lesser, E.L., Fontaine, M.A. & Slusher J.A., Knowledge and Communities, Butterworth-Heinemann, 2000 Nonaka, Ikujiro (1991). "The knowledge creating company" [21]. Harvard Business Review 69 (6 Nov-Dec): 96104. Roberts, Joanne (2006). "Limits to Communities of Practice" [22]. Journal of Management Studies (Wiley-Blackwell.) 43 (3): 623639. Saint-Onge, H & Wallace, D, Leveraging Communities of Practice, Butterworth Heinemann, 2003. Smith, M.K. (2003). "Communities of practice" [23]. The Encyclopedia of Informal Education. van Winkelen, Christine. "Inter-Organizational Communities of Practice" [24].

External links
Etienne Wenger: Communities of practice: a brief introduction [25] A Workshop on Accounting Education as part of a Community of Practice at the World Bank [26] Implementing Best Practices (IBP) Knowledge Gateway [27]: a tool for virtual Communities of Practice. Communities of Practice in Agricultural domain [28], supported by FAO.

[1] http:/ / rdalton. biz/ [2] http:/ / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1108%2F13673270310463626 [3] http:/ / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1177%2F0165551505057016 [4] http:/ / lymabe. edublogs. org/ files/ 2007/ 04/ balancing-act. doc [5] http:/ / informationr. net/ ir/ 8-1/ paper142. html [6] http:/ / www. chris-kimble. com/ KNICOP/ Chapters/ Introduction. html [7] http:/ / www. chris-kimble. com/ CLEE/ ToC. html [8] http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=CAVIOrW3vYAC [9] http:/ / www. providersedge. com/ docs/ km_articles/ CoP_and_Organizational_Performance. pdf [10] http:/ / hbr. org/ 2010/ 03/ harnessing-your-staffs-informal-networks/ ar/ 1 [11] http:/ / www. jstor. org/ stable/ 2634938 [12] http:/ / www. thestep. gr/ trainmor/ dat/ %7B79fa8960-b459-4522-9166-adcb853b6322%7D/ article. pdf [13] http:/ / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1108%2F13673270210450388 [14] http:/ / alumni. media. mit. edu/ ~brooks/ storybiz/ thomas. pdf [15] http:/ / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1147%2Fsj. 404. 0863 [16] http:/ / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1016%2FS0963-8687%2800%2900045-7 [17] http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=heBZpgYUKdAC& dq=Communities+ of+ Practice:+ Learning,+ Meaning,+ and+ Identity& printsec=frontcover& q= [18] http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=m1xZuNq9RygC& dq=cultivating+ communities+ of+ practice& printsec=frontcover& q= [19] http:/ / www. tlainc. com/ articl45. htm

Community of practice
[20] http:/ / www. elearningpapers. eu/ index. php?page=doc& vol=5& doc_id=10219& doclng=6 [21] http:/ / hbr. harvardbusiness. org/ 2007/ 07/ the-knowledge-creating-company/ es [22] http:/ / onlinelibrary. wiley. com/ doi/ 10. 1111/ j. 1467-6486. 2006. 00618. x/ abstract [23] http:/ / www. infed. org/ biblio/ communities_of_practice. htm [24] http:/ / www. elearningeuropa. info/ doc. php?id=1483& lng=1& doclng=1 [25] http:/ / www. ewenger. com/ theory/ index. htm [26] http:/ / web. worldbank. org/ WBSITE/ EXTERNAL/ COUNTRIES/ ECAEXT/ EXTCENFINREPREF/ 0,,contentMDK:22545734~pagePK:64168445~piPK:64168309~theSitePK:4152118,00. html [27] http:/ / my. ibpinitiative. org/ [28] http:/ / www. fao. org/ knowledge/ networksandcommunities/ knbrowse/ en/

Discourse community
A discourse community' is a group of people who share a set of discourses, understood as basic values and assumptions, and ways of communicating about those goals. Linguist, John Swales defined discourse communities as "groups that have goals or purposes, and use communication to achieve these goals".[1] Some examples of a discourse community might be those who read and/or contribute to a particular academic journal, or members of an email list for Madonna fans. Each discourse community has its own unwritten rules about what can be said and how it can be said: for instance, the journal will not accept an article with the claim that Discourse is the coolest concept; on the other hand, members of the email list may or may not appreciate a Freudian analysis of Madonnas latest single. Most people move within and between different discourse communities every day. Since the discourse community itself is intangible, it is easier to imagine discourse communities in terms of the fora in which they operate. The hypothetical journal and email list can each be seen as an example of a forum, or a "concrete, local manifestation of the operation of the discourse community".[2] The term was first used by sociolinguist Martin Nystrand in 1982,[3] and further developed by American linguist John Swales.[4] Writing about the acquisition of academic writing styles of those who are learning English as an additional language, Swales presents six defining characteristics: A discourse community: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. has a broadly agreed set of common public goals. has mechanisms of intercommunication among its members. uses its participatory mechanisms primarily to provide information and feedback. utilizes and hence possesses one or more genres in the communicative furtherance of its aims. in addition to owning genres, it has acquired some specific lexis. has a threshold level of members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discoursal expertise.

James Porter defined the discourse community as: a local and temporary constraining system, defined by a body of texts (or more generally, practices) that are unified by a common focus. A discourse community is a textual system with stated and unstated conventions, a vital history, mechanisms for wielding power, institutional hierarchies, vested interests, and so on. [2] Chaim Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyceta offer the following statement on the conditioned nature of all discourse, which has applicability to the concept of discourse community: "All language is the language of community, be this a community bound by biological ties, or by the practice of a common discipline or technique. The terms used, their meaning, their definition, can only be understood in the context of the habits, ways of thought, methods, external circumstances, and tradition known to the users of those terms. A deviation from usage requires justification ..." [5] "Producing text within a discourse community," according to Patricia Bizzell, "cannot take place unless the writer can define her goals in terms of the community's interpretive conventions."[6] In other words, one cannot simply

Discourse community produce any text it must fit the standards of the discourse community to which it is appealing. If one wants to become a member of a certain discourse community, it requires more than learning the lingo. It requires understanding concepts and expectations set up within that community. The language used by discourse communities can be described as a register or diatype, and members generally join a discourse community through training or personal persuasion. This is in contrast to the speech community (or the 'native discourse community', to use Patricia Bizzell's term), who speak a language or dialect inherited by birth or adoption.


[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Borg, Erik. Discourse communities (ELT Journal 57:4) (http:/ / eltj. oxfordjournals. org/ content/ 57/ 4/ 398. full. pdf+ html) Porter, J. (1992). Audience and Rhetoric: An Archaeological Composition of the Discourse Community. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Nystrand, M. (1982) What Writers Know: The Language, Process, and Structure of Written Discourse. New York: Academic Swales, J. M. (1990) Genre Analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Perelman, Chaim and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyceta (1969) The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Trans. John Wilkinson and Purcell Weaver. [6] Bizzell, P. (1992) Academic Discourse and Critical Consciousness. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Duality (CoPs)
This article is about "Dualities in Communities of practice". For other uses of Duality, see Duality (disambiguation). In the context of a Community of practice the notion of a duality is used to capture the idea of the tension between two opposing forces which become a driving force for change and creativity. Wenger (Wenger 1998) uses the concept of dualities to examine the forces that create and sustain a Community of Practice. He describes a duality thus: '... a single conceptual unit that is formed by two inseparable and mutually constitutive elements whose inherent tensions and complementarity give the concept richness and dynamism' (Wenger 1998, p.66). Some compare the concept of a duality to that of Yin and Yang, i.e. two mutually defining opposites.

Figure 1 adapted from

Duality (CoPs) The opposing entities in a duality need to be viewed from a perspective of balance rather than opposition. The term implies a dynamism, continual change and mutual adjustment as the tensions that are inherent in dualities can be both creative and constraining. (Wenger 1998) identifies four dualities that exist in Communities of Practice: participation-reification, designed-emergent, identification-negotiability and local-global.


The Participation-Reification duality is concerned with meaning. Meaning is created through participation and active involvement in some practice. Reification is a way of making an abstract and concise representation of what is often a complex and frequently messy practice, thus making it easier to share within the community. Because of its obvious links to knowledge management, the participation-reification duality has been the focus of particular interest in this field (Hildreth & Kimble 2002).

The Designed-Emergent duality focuses on time and captures the tension between pre-planned and emergent activities. Designers can plan an activity that is designed to achieve a particular purpose however, some activities emerge through interaction and participation of the community; these are unplanned and may be contrary to what the designers intended. These give participants the opportunity to (re)negotiate existing meaning. The Designed-Emergent duality is often mentioned in relation to the design of on-line leaning environments e.g. (Barab, MaKinster & Scheckler 2003)

The Identification-Negotiability duality is concerned with how the power to define, adapt, or interpret the design is distributed (Wenger 1998, p.235). Identification is the process through which individuals build their identities. This can include not only how an individual perceives themselves but also their right to contribute to and shape the direction of a community as a whole. Thus, this duality serves to combine both power and belonging in the shaping of the community.

The Local-Global duality concerns how one CoP relates to another. The challenge is to share local knowledge the meets the needs of a particular domain in a way that will be of relevance to others who are not involved in it. Wenger uses the notion of a boundary object, brokerage (Wenger 1998, p.106) and boundary encounters (Wenger, McDermott & Snyder 2002, p.84) to explain how individuals can establish relationships and learn from other communities.

Barab, Sasha; MaKinster, James; Scheckler, Rebecca (2003). "Designing System Dualities: Characterizing a Web-Supported Professional Development Community". The Information Society 19: 237256. Hildreth, Paul; Kimble, Chris (2002). "The duality of knowledge" [5]. Information Research 8 (1). Lave, Jean; Wenger, Etienne (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation [1]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN0-521-42374-0. Wenger, Etienne (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity [2]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN978-0-521-66363-2. Wenger, Etienne; McDermott, Richard; Snyder, William M. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice (Hardcover) [3]. Harvard Business Press; 1 edition. ISBN978-1-57851-330-7.

Duality (CoPs)


[1] http:/ / books. google. ca/ books?id=CAVIOrW3vYAC [2] http:/ / books. google. ca/ books?id=heBZpgYUKdAC& dq=Communities+ of+ Practice:+ Learning,+ Meaning,+ and+ Identity& printsec=frontcover& source=bn& hl=en& ei=R4TcSoKDG4PclAeUhoCiAQ& sa=X& oi=book_result& ct=result& resnum=4& ved=0CBwQ6AEwAw#v=onepage& q=& f=false [3] http:/ / books. google. ca/ books?id=m1xZuNq9RygC& dq=cultivating+ communities+ of+ practice& printsec=frontcover& source=bn& hl=en& ei=o37cSrraN4zKlAe6lKmhAQ& sa=X& oi=book_result& ct=result& resnum=4& ved=0CCAQ6AEwAw#v=onepage& q=& f=false

Explicit knowledge
Explicit knowledge is knowledge that has been articulated, codified, and stored in certain media. It can be readily transmitted to others. The information contained in encyclopedias (including Wikipedia) are good examples of explicit knowledge.

The most common forms of explicit knowledge are manuals, documents, procedures, and how-to videos. Knowledge also can be audio-visual. Works of art and product design can be seen as other forms of explicit knowledge where human skills, motives and knowledge are externalized.

External links
National Library for Health Knowledge Management Specialist Library [1] - collection of resources about auditing intellectual capital.

[1] http:/ / www. library. nhs. uk/ KnowledgeManagement/ SearchResults. aspx?tabID=289& catID=10397

Knowledge management


Knowledge management
Knowledge management (KM) comprises a range of strategies and practices used in an organization to identify, create, represent, distribute, and enable adoption of insights and experiences. Such insights and experiences comprise knowledge, either embodied in individuals or embedded in organizations as processes or practices. An established discipline since 1991 (see Nonaka 1991), KM includes courses taught in the fields of business administration, information systems, management, and library and information sciences (Alavi & Leidner 1999). More recently, other fields have started contributing to KM research; these include information and media, computer science, public health, and public policy. Many large companies and non-profit organizations have resources dedicated to internal KM efforts, often as a part of their business strategy, information technology, or human resource management departments (Addicott, McGivern & Ferlie 2006). Several consulting companies also exist that provide strategy and advice regarding KM to these organizations. Knowledge management efforts typically focus on organizational objectives such as improved performance, competitive advantage, innovation, the sharing of lessons learned, integration and continuous improvement of the organization. KM efforts overlap with organizational learning, and may be distinguished from that by a greater focus on the management of knowledge as a strategic asset and a focus on encouraging the sharing of knowledge. It is seen as an enabler of organisational learning[1] and a more concrete mechanism than the previous abstract research.

KM efforts have a long history, to include on-the-job discussions, formal apprenticeship, discussion forums, corporate libraries, professional training and mentoring programs. More recently, with increased use of computers in the second half of the 20th century, specific adaptations of technologies such as knowledge bases, expert systems, knowledge repositories, group decision support systems, intranets, and computer-supported cooperative work have been introduced to further enhance such efforts.[2] In 1999, the term personal knowledge management was introduced which refers to the management of knowledge at the individual level (Wright 2005). In terms of the enterprise, early collections of case studies recognized the importance of knowledge management dimensions of strategy, process, and measurement (Morey, Maybury & Thuraisingham 2002). Key lessons learned included: people and the cultural norms which influence their behaviors are the most critical resources for successful knowledge creation, dissemination, and application; cognitive, social, and organizational learning processes are essential to the success of a knowledge management strategy; and measurement, benchmarking, and incentives are essential to accelerate the learning process and to drive cultural change. In short, knowledge management programs can yield impressive benefits to individuals and organizations if they are purposeful, concrete, and action-oriented. More recently with the advent of the Web 2.0, the concept of Knowledge Management has evolved towards a vision more based on people participation and emergence. This line of evolution is termed Enterprise 2.0 (McAfee 2006). However, there is an ongoing debate and discussions (Lakhani & McAfee 2007) as to whether Enterprise 2.0 is just a fad that does not bring anything new or useful or whether it is, indeed, the future of knowledge management (Davenport 2008).

Knowledge management


KM emerged as a scientific discipline in the earlier 1990s. It was initially supported solely by practitioners, when Skandia hired Leif Edvinsson of Sweden as the worlds first Chief Knowledge Officer (CKO). Hubert Saint-Onge (formerly of CIBC, Canada), started investigating various sides of KM long before that. The objective of CKOs is to manage and maximize the intangible assets of their organizations. Gradually, CKOs became interested in not only practical but also theoretical aspects of KM, and the new research field was formed. The KM ideas taken up by academics, such as Ikujiro Nonaka (Hitotsubashi University), Hirotaka Takeuchi (Hitotsubashi University), Thomas H. Davenport (Babson College) and Baruch Lev (New York University). In 2001, Thomas A. Stewart, former editor at FORTUNE Magazine and subsequently the editor of Harvard Business Review, published a cover story highlighting the importance of intellectual capital of organizations. Since its establishment, the KM discipline has been gradually moving towards academic maturity. First, there is a trend towards higher cooperation among academics; particularly, there has been a drop in single-authored publications. Second, the role of practitioners has changed. Their contribution to academic research has been dramatically declining from 30% of overall contributions up to 2002, to only 10% by 2009 (Serenko et al. 2010). A broad range of thoughts on the KM discipline exist; approaches vary by author and school. As the discipline matures, academic debates have increased regarding both the theory and practice of KM, to include the following perspectives [citation needed]: Techno-centric with a focus on technology, ideally those that enhance knowledge sharing and creation. Organizational with a focus on how an organization can be designed to facilitate knowledge processes best. Ecological with a focus on the interaction of people, identity, knowledge, and environmental factors as a complex adaptive system akin to a natural ecosystem. Regardless of the school of thought, core components of KM include people, processes, technology (or) culture, structure, technology, depending on the specific perspective (Spender & Scherer 2007). Different KM schools of thought include various lenses through which KM can be viewed and explained, to include: community of practice (Wenger, McDermott & Synder 2001)[3] social network analysis[4] intellectual capital (Bontis & Choo 2002)[5] information theory[6] (McInerney 2002) complexity science[7][8] constructivism[9] (Nanjappa & Grant 2003)

The practical relevance of academic research in KM has been questioned (Ferguson 2005) with action research suggested as having more relevance (Andriessen 2004) and the need to translate the findings presented in academic journals to a practice (Booker, Bontis & Serenko 2008).

Different frameworks for distinguishing between different 'types of' knowledge exist. One proposed framework for categorizing the dimensions of knowledge distinguishes between tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge. Tacit knowledge represents internalized knowledge that an individual may not be consciously aware of, such as how he or she accomplishes particular tasks. At the opposite end of the spectrum, explicit knowledge represents knowledge that the individual holds consciously in mental focus, in a form that can easily be communicated to others.[10] (Alavi & Leidner 2001). Similarly, Hayes and Walsham (2003) describe content and relational perspectives of knowledge and knowledge management as two fundamentally different epistemological perspectives. The content perspective suggest that knowledge is easily stored because it may be codified, while the relational perspective recognizes the contextual and relational aspects of knowledge which can make knowledge difficult to share outside of the specific location where the knowledge is developed.[11]

Knowledge management


Early research suggested that a successful KM effort needs to convert internalized tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge in order to share it, but the same effort must also permit individuals to internalize and make personally meaningful any codified knowledge retrieved from the KM effort. Subsequent research into KM suggested that a distinction between tacit knowledge and explicit The Knowledge Spiral as described by Nonaka & Takeuchi. knowledge represented an oversimplification and that the notion of explicit knowledge is self-contradictory. Specifically, for knowledge to be made explicit, it must be translated into information (i.e., symbols outside of our heads) (Serenko & Bontis 2004). Later on, Ikujiro Nonaka proposed a model (SECI for Socialization, Externalization, Combination, Internalization) which considers a spiraling knowledge process interaction between explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995). In this model, knowledge follows a cycle in which implicit knowledge is 'extracted' to become explicit knowledge, and explicit knowledge is 're-internalized' into implicit knowledge. More recently, together with Georg von Krogh, Nonaka returned to his earlier work in an attempt to move the debate about knowledge conversion forwards (Nonaka & von Krogh 2009). A second proposed framework for categorizing the dimensions of knowledge distinguishes between embedded knowledge of a system outside of a human individual (e.g., an information system may have knowledge embedded into its design) and embodied knowledge representing a learned capability of a human bodys nervous and endocrine systems (Sensky 2002). A third proposed framework for categorizing the dimensions of knowledge distinguishes between the exploratory creation of "new knowledge" (i.e., innovation) vs. the transfer or exploitation of "established knowledge" within a group, organization, or community. Collaborative environments such as communities of practice or the use of social computing tools can be used for both knowledge creation and transfer.[12]

Knowledge may be accessed at three stages: before, during, or after KM-related activities. Different organizations have tried various knowledge capture incentives, including making content submission mandatory and incorporating rewards into performance measurement plans. Considerable controversy exists over whether incentives work or not in this field and no consensus has emerged. One strategy to KM involves actively managing knowledge (push strategy). In such an instance, individuals strive to explicitly encode their knowledge into a shared knowledge repository, such as a database, as well as retrieving knowledge they need that other individuals have provided to the repository.[13] This is also commonly known as the Codification approach to KM. Another strategy to KM involves individuals making knowledge requests of experts associated with a particular subject on an ad hoc basis (pull strategy). In such an instance, expert individual(s) can provide their insights to the particular person or people needing this (Snowden 2002). This is also commonly known as the Personalization approach to KM. Other knowledge management strategies and instruments for companies include: rewards (as a means of motivating for knowledge sharing)

Knowledge management storytelling (as a means of transferring tacit knowledge) cross-project learning after action reviews knowledge mapping (a map of knowledge repositories within a company accessible by all) communities of practice expert directories (to enable knowledge seeker to reach to the experts) best practice transfer knowledge fairs competence management (systematic evaluation and planning of competences of individual organization members) proximity & architecture (the physical situation of employees can be either conducive or obstructive to knowledge sharing) master-apprentice relationship collaborative technologies (groupware, etc.) knowledge repositories (databases, bookmarking engines, etc.) measuring and reporting intellectual capital (a way of making explicit knowledge for companies)


knowledge brokers (some organizational members take on responsibility for a specific "field" and act as first reference on whom to talk about a specific subject) social software (wikis, social bookmarking, blogs, etc.) Inter-project knowledge transfer

A number of claims exist as to the motivations leading organizations to undertake a KM effort.[14] Typical considerations driving a KM effort include: Making available increased knowledge content in the development and provision of products and services Achieving shorter new product development cycles Facilitating and managing innovation and organizational learning Leveraging the expertise of people across the organization Increasing network connectivity between internal and external individuals Managing business environments and allowing employees to obtain relevant insights and ideas appropriate to their work Solving intractable or wicked problems Managing intellectual capital and intellectual assets in the workforce (such as the expertise and know-how possessed by key individuals) Debate exists whether KM is more than a passing fad, though increasing amount of research in this field may hopefully help to answer this question, as well as create consensus on what elements of KM help determine the success or failure of such efforts (Wilson 2002).[15] Knowledge Sharing remains a challenging issue for knowledge management, and while there is no clear agreement barriers may include time issues for knowledge works, the level of trust, lack of effective support technologies and culture (Jennex 2008).

Early KM technologies included online corporate yellow pages as expertise locators and document management systems. Combined with the early development of collaborative technologies (in particular Lotus Notes), KM technologies expanded in the mid-1990s. Subsequent KM efforts leveraged semantic technologies for search and retrieval and the development of e-learning tools for communities of practice[16] (Capozzi 2007). Knowledge management systems can thus be categorized as falling into one or more of the following groups: Groupware,

Knowledge management document management systems, expert systems, semantic networks, relational and object oriented databases, simulation tools, and artificial intelligence [17] (Gupta & Sharma 2004) More recently, development of social computing tools (such as bookmarks, blogs, and wikis) have allowed more unstructured, self-governing or ecosystem approaches to the transfer, capture and creation of knowledge, including the development of new forms of communities, networks, or matrixed organizations. However such tools for the most part are still based on text and code, and thus represent explicit knowledge transfer. These tools face challenges in distilling meaningful re-usable knowledge and ensuring that their content is transmissible through diverse channels[18](Andrus 2005). Software tools in knowledge management are a collection of technologies and are not necessarily acquired as a single software solution. Furthermore, these knowledge management software tools have the advantage of using the organization existing information technology infrastructure. Organizations and business decision makers spend a great deal of resources and make significant investments in the latest technology, systems and infrastructure to support knowledge management. It is imperative that these investments are validated properly, made wisely and that the most appropriate technologies and software tools are selected or combined to facilitate knowledge management. Knowledge management has also become a cornerstone in emerging business strategies such as Service Lifecycle Management (SLM) with companies increasingly turning to software vendors to enhance their efficiency in industries including, but not limited to, the aviation industry.[19]


[1] Sanchez, R (1996) Strategic Learning and Knowledge Management, Wiley, Chichester [7] Snowden, Dave (2002). "Complex Acts of Knowing Paradox and Descriptive Self Awareness". Journal of Knowledge Management, Special Issue 6 (2): 100 111. [9] http:/ / citeseer. ist. psu. edu/ wyssusek02sociopragmatic. html [14] http:/ / tecom. cox. smu. edu/ abasu/ itom6032/ kmlect. pdf [19] Aviation Industry Group. "Service life-cycle management" (http:/ / www. avioxi. com/ downloads/ ATEMv74_SLM_Reprint_Final. pdf), Aircraft Technology: Engineering & Maintenance, FebruaryMarch, 2005.

This article is based on material taken from the Free On-line Dictionary of Computing prior to 1 November 2008 and incorporated under the "relicensing" terms of the GFDL, version 1.3 or later. Addicott, Rachael; McGivern, Gerry; Ferlie, Ewan (2006). "Networks, Organizational Learning and Knowledge Management: NHS Cancer Networks" ( Public Money & Management 26 (2): 8794. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9302.2006.00506.x ( 1467-9302.2006.00506.x). Alavi, Maryam; Leidner, Dorothy E. (1999). "Knowledge management systems: issues, challenges, and benefits" ( Communications of the AIS 1 (2). Alavi, Maryam; Leidner, Dorothy E. (2001). "Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues" ( Alavi-MISQ-2001.pdf). MIS Quarterly 25 (1): 107136. doi: 10.2307/3250961 ( 3250961). JSTOR 3250961 ( Andriessen, Daniel (2004). "Reconciling the rigor-relevance dilemma in intellectual capital research". The Learning Organization 11 (4/5): 393401. doi: 10.1108/09696470410538288 ( 09696470410538288). Andrus, D. Calvin (2005). "The Wiki and the Blog: Toward a Complex Adaptive Intelligence Community". Studies in Intelligence 49 (3). SSRN 755904 ( Benbasat, Izak; Zmud, Robert (1999). "Empirical research in information systems: The practice of relevance". MIS Quarterly 23 (1): 316. doi: 10.2307/249403 ( JSTOR 249403 (http:/

Knowledge management / Bontis, Nick; Choo, Chun Wei (2002). The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge ( New York:Oxford University Press. ISBN0-19-513866-X. Booker, Lorne; Bontis, Nick; Serenko, Alexander (2008). "The relevance of knowledge management and intellectual capital research" ( Knowledge and Process Management 15 (4): 235246. doi: 10.1002/kpm.314 ( kpm.314). Capozzi, Marla M. (2007). "Knowledge Management Architectures Beyond Technology" (http://firstmonday. org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1871/1754). First Monday 12 (6). Davenport, Tom (2008). "Enterprise 2.0: The New, New Knowledge Management?" (http://discussionleader. Harvard Business Online, Feb. 19, 2008. Ferguson, J (2005). "Bridging the gap between research and practice". Knowledge Management for Development Journal 1 (3): 4654. Gupta, Jatinder; Sharma, Sushil (2004). Creating Knowledge Based Organizations. Boston: Idea Group Publishing. ISBN1-59140-163-1.


Lakhani, Karim R.; McAfee (2007). "Case study on deleting "Enterprise 2.0" article" (http://courseware.hbs. edu/public/cases/wikipedia/). Courseware #9-607-712, Harvard Business School. Liebowitz, Jay (2006). What they didn't tell you about knowledge management. pp.23. McAdam, Rodney; McCreedy, Sandra (2000). "A Critique Of Knowledge Management: Using A Social Constructionist Model" ( New Technology, Work and Employment 15 (2). McAfee, Andrew P. (2006). "Enterprise 2.0: The Dawn of Emergent Collaboration" ( edu/the-magazine/articles/2006/spring/47306/enterprise-the-dawn-of-emergent-collaboration/). Sloan Management Review 47 (3): 2128. McInerney, Claire (2002). "Knowledge Management and the Dynamic Nature of Knowledge" (http://www. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 53 (12): 10091018. doi: 10.1002/asi.10109 ( Morey, Daryl; Maybury, Mark; Thuraisingham, Bhavani (2002). Knowledge Management: Classic and Contemporary Works ( Cambridge: MIT Press. p.451. ISBN0-262-13384-9. Nanjappa, Aloka; Grant, Michael M. (2003). "Constructing on constructivism: The role of technology" (http:// Electronic Journal for the Integration of Technology in Education 2 (1). Nonaka, Ikujiro (1991). "The knowledge creating company" ( the-knowledge-creating-company/es). Harvard Business Review 69 (6 NovDec): 96104. Nonaka, Ikujiro; Takeuchi, Hirotaka (1995). The knowledge creating company: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation ( New York: Oxford University Press. p.284. ISBN978-0-19-509269-1. Nonaka, Ikujiro; von Krogh, Georg (2009). "Tacit Knowledge and Knowledge Conversion: Controversy and Advancement in Organizational Knowledge Creation Theory" ( H2010-1-2241390. S2-TacitKnowledgeandKnowledgeConversion-ControversyandAdvancementinOrganizationalKnowledgeCreation. pdf). Organization Science 20 (3): 635652. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1080.0412 ( 1080.0412). Sensky, Tom (2002). "Knowledge Management" ( Advances in Psychiatric Treatment 8 (5): 387395. doi: 10.1192/apt.8.5.387 (

Knowledge management Snowden, Dave (2002). "Complex Acts of Knowing Paradox and Descriptive Self Awareness" (http://www. Journal of Knowledge Management, Special Issue 6 (2): 100111. doi: 10.1108/13673270210424639 ( Spender, J.-C.; Scherer, Andreas Georg (2007). "The Philosophical Foundations of Knowledge Management: Editors' Introduction". Organization 14 (1): 528. doi: 10.1177/1350508407071858 ( 1177/1350508407071858). SSRN 958768 ( Serenko, Alexander; Bontis, Nick (2004). "Meta-review of knowledge management and intellectual capital literature: citation impact and research productivity rankings" ( nbontis//ic/publications/KPMSerenkoBontis.pdf). Knowledge and Process Management 11 (3): 185198. doi: 10.1002/kpm.203 ( Serenko, Alexander; Bontis, Nick; Booker, Lorne; Sadeddin, Khaled; Hardie, Timothy (2010). "A scientometric analysis of knowledge management and intellectual capital academic literature (19942008)" (http://www. Journal of Knowledge Management 14 (1): 1323. doi: 10.1108/13673271011015534 ( 13673271011015534). Thompson, Mark P. A.; Walsham, Geoff (2004). "Placing Knowledge Management in Context" (http://papers. Journal of Management Studies 41 (5): 725747. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00451.x ( Wenger, Etienne; McDermott, Richard; Synder, Richard (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge Seven Principles for Cultivating Communities of Practice ( archive/2855.html). Boston: Harvard Business School Press. pp.107136. ISBN1-57851-330-8. Wilson, T.D. (2002). "The nonsense of 'knowledge management'" ( html). Information Research 8 (1). Wright, Kirby (2005). "Personal knowledge management: supporting individual knowledge worker performance". Knowledge Management Research and Practice 3 (3): 156165. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500061 (http://dx. Akscyn, Robert M., Donald L. McCracken and Elise A. Yoder (1988). "KMS: A distributed hypermedia system for managing knowledge in organizations". Communications of the ACM 31 (7): 820835. Benbya, H (2008). Knowledge Management Systems Implementation: Lessons from the Silicon Valley. Oxford, Chandos Publishing. Langton, N & Robbins, S. (2006). Organizational Behaviour (Fourth Canadian Edition). Toronto, Ontario: Pearson Prentice Hall. Maier, R (2007): Knowledge Management Systems: Information And Communication Technologies for Knowledge Management. 3rd edition, Berlin: Springer. Rhetorical Structure Theory (assumed from the reference of RST Theory above) W01/W01-1605.pdf Rosner, D.., Grote, B., Hartman, K, Hofling, B, Guericke, O. (1998) From natural language documents to sharable product knowledge: a knowledge engineering approach. in Borghoff Uwe M., and Pareschi, Remo (Eds.). Information technology for knowledge management. Springer Verlag, pp 3551. The RST site at by Bill Mann Jennex, M. E. (2008). Knowledge Management: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp.13808).


Knowledge management


External links
Knowledge management ( at the Open Directory Project Knowledge@work community (

Knowledge transfer
In organizational theory, knowledge transfer is the practical problem of transferring knowledge from one part of the organization to another. Like knowledge management, knowledge transfer seeks to organize, create, capture or distribute knowledge and ensure its availability for future users. It is considered to be more than just a communication problem. If it were merely that, then a memorandum, an e-mail or a meeting would accomplish the knowledge transfer. Knowledge transfer is more complex because (1) knowledge resides in organizational members, tools, tasks, and their subnetworks[] and (2) much knowledge in organizations is tacit or hard to articulate.[] The subject has been taken up under the title of knowledge management since the 1990s.

Argote & Ingram (2000) define knowledge transfer as "the process through which one unit (e.g., group, department, or division) is affected by the experience of another"[] (p.151). They further point out the transfer of organizational knowledge (i.e., routine or best practices) can be observed through changes in the knowledge or performance of recipient units. The transfer of organizational knowledge, such as best practices, can be quite difficult to achieve. Szulanski's doctoral dissertation ("Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm") proposed that knowledge transfer within a firm is inhibited by factors other than a lack of incentive. How well knowledge about best practices remains broadly accessible within a firm depends upon the nature of that knowledge, from where (or whom) it comes, who gets it, and the organizational context within which any transfer occurs. "Stickiness" is a metaphor that comes from the difficulty of circulating fluid around an oil refinery (including effects of the fluid's native viscosity). It is worth noting that his analysis does not apply to scientific theories, where a different set of dynamics and rewards apply.[] Three related concepts are "knowledge utilization", "research utilization" and "implementation", which are used in the health sciences to describe the process of bringing a new idea, practice or technology into consistent and appropriate use in a clinical setting.[] The study of knowledge utilization/implementation (KU/I) is a direct outgrowth of the movement toward evidence-based medicine and research concluding that health care practices with demonstrated efficacy are not consistently used in practice settings. Knowledge transfer within organisations and between nations also raises ethical considerations particularly where there is an imbalance in power relationships (e.g. employer and employee) or in the levels of relative need for knowledge resources (e.g. developed and developing worlds)[] Knowledge transfer includes, but encompasses more than, technology transfer.

Knowledge transfer


Knowledge transfer between public and private domains

With the move of advanced economies from a resource-based to a knowledge-based production,[1] many national governments have increasingly recognised "knowledge" and "innovation" as significant driving forces of economic growth, social development, and job creation. In this context the promotion of 'knowledge transfer' has increasingly become a subject of public and economic policy. The underlying assumption that there is a potential for increased collaboration between industry and universities is also underlined in much of the current innovation literature. In particular the Open Innovation [2] approach to developing business value is explicitly based on an assumption that Universities are a "vital source for accessing external ideas". Moreover Universities have been deemed to be "the great, largely unknown, and certainly underexploited, resource contributing to the creation of wealth and economic competitiveness."[] Universities and other public sector research organisations (PSROs) have accumulated much practical experience over the years in the transfer of knowledge across the divide between the domains of publicly produced knowledge and the private exploitation of it. Many colleges and PSROs have developed processes and policies to discover, protect and exploit intellectual property (IP) rights, and to ensure that IP is successfully transferred to private corporations, or vested in new companies formed for the purposes of exploitation. Routes to commercialisation of IP produced by PSROs and colleges include licensing, joint venture, new company formation and royalty-based assignments. Organisations such as AUTM in the US, The Institute of Knowledge Transfer [3] in the UK, SNITTS [4] in Sweden and the Association of European Science and Technology Transfer Professionals in Europe have provided a conduit for knowledge transfer professionals across the public and private sectors to identify best practice and develop effective tools and techniques for the management of PSRO/college produced IP. On-line Communities of Practice for knowledge transfer practitioners are also emerging to facilitate connectivity (such as The Global Innovation Network [5] and the knowledgePool). Business-University Collaboration was the subject of the Lambert Review in the UK in 2003.

Knowledge transfer in landscape ecology

By knowledge transfer in landscape ecology, means a group of activities that increase the understanding of landscape ecology with the goal of encouraging application of this knowledge. Five factors will influence knowledge transfer from the view of forest landscape ecology: the generation of research capacity, the potential for application, the users of the knowledge, the infrastructure capacity, and the process by which knowledge is transferrd (Turner, 2006).

Types of knowledge
Knowledge is a dominant feature in our post-industrial society, and knowledge workers comprise an enterprise. If knowledge is the basis for all that we do these days, then gaining an understanding of what types of knowledge exist within an organization may allow us to foster internal social structures that will facilitate and support learning in all organizational domains. Blackler[] expands on a categorization of knowledge types that were suggested by Collins (1993), being: embrained, embodied, encultured, embedded and encoded. It is important to note that these knowledge types could be indicative of any organization, not just those that are knowledge-based heavy. Embrained knowledge is that which is dependent on conceptual skills and cognitive abilities. We could consider this to be practical, high-level knowledge, where objectives are met through perpetual recognition and revamping. Tacit knowledge may also be embrained, even though it is mainly subconscious. Embodied knowledge is action oriented and consists of contextual practices. It is more of a social acquisition, as how individuals interact in and interpret their environment creates this non-explicit type of knowledge.

Knowledge transfer Encultured knowledge is the process of achieving shared understandings through socialization and acculturation. Language and negotiation become the discourse of this type of knowledge in an enterprise. Embedded knowledge is tacit and resides within systematic routines. It relates to the relationships between roles, technologies, formal procedures and emergent routines within a complex system. Inorder to initiate any specific line of business knowledge transition helps a lot. Encoded knowledge is information that is conveyed in signs and symbols (books, manuals, data bases, etc.) and decontextualized into codes of practice. Rather than being a specific type of knowledge, it deals more with the transmission, storage and interrogation of knowledge.


What complicates knowledge transfer? There are many factors, including: The inability to recognize & articulate "compiled" or highly intuitive competenciestacit knowledge idea[] Geography or distance[] Limitations of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs)[] Lack of a shared/superordinate social identity[] Language Areas of expertise Internal conflicts (for example, professional territoriality) Generational differences Union-management relations Incentives The use of visual representations to transfer knowledge (Knowledge visualization) Problems with sharing beliefs, assumptions, heuristics and cultural norms. Previous exposure or experience with something. Misconceptions Faulty information Organizational culture non-conducive to knowledge sharing (the "Knowledge is power" culture) Motivational issues Lack of trust Capability

Everett Rogers pioneered diffusion of innovations theory, presenting a research-based model for how and why individuals and social networks adopt new ideas, practices and products. In anthropology, the concept of diffusion also explores the spread of ideas among cultures.

Identifying the knowledge holders within the organization Motivating them to share Designing a sharing mechanism to facilitate the transfer Executing the transfer plan Measuring to ensure the transfer Applying the knowledge transferred

Knowledge transfer


Mentorship Guided experience Simulation Guided experimentation Work shadowing Paired work Community of practice Narrative transfer Practices

Incorrect usage
Knowledge transfer is often used as a synonym for training. Furthermore information should not be confused with knowledge, nor is it, strictly speaking, possible to "transfer" experiential knowledge to other people.[] Information might be thought of as facts or understood data; however, knowledge has to do with flexible and adaptable skillsa person's unique ability to wield and apply information. This fluency of application is in part what differentiates information from knowledge. Knowledge tends to be both tacit and personal; the knowledge one person has is difficult to quantify, store, and retrieve for someone else to use.

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] OECD (1999), Managing national innovation systems, OECD publications service, Paris http:/ / www. openinnovation. eu http:/ / www. ikt. org. uk http:/ / www. snitts. se http:/ / www. ginnn. com

Further reading
Fan, Y. (1998) "The Transfer of Western Management to China: Context, Content and Constraints" (http://bura., Management Learning, 29:2, 201221 Argote, L. et al. (2000). "Knowledge Transfer in Organizations: Learning from the Experience of Others", Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1) (May): 18 Castells, M. (1996). Conclusion, The Rise of the Network Society. The Information Age: Economy, Society & Culture, Volume 1. (pp.469478). Oxford: Blackwell Leonard, D.; and Swap, W. (2005) Deep Smarts: How to cultivate and transfer enduring business wisdom, HBSP. ISBN 1-59139-528-3 Lipphardt, Veronika / Ludwig, David: Knowledge Transfer and Science Transfer ( urn:nbn:de:0159-2011121229), European History Online, Mainz: Institute of European History, 2011, retrieved: January 11, 2012 Shaw, M. (2001). "Integrating Learning Technologies: The social-cultural, pragmatic and technology design contexts" (, Teaching and Learning with Technology, (6) Trautman, Steve (2006). "Teach What You Know: A Practical Leader's Guide to Knowledge Transfer" (http://, Addison-Wesley Davenport, Thomas H.; and Prusak, Laurence (2000). Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know, Boston Massachusetts, Havard Business School Press Turner, (2006). Knowledge Transfer in Forest Landscape Ecology: A Primer. In: Forest landscape ecology, transferring knowledge to practice. Perera. A.H., Buse, L.J. and Crow, T.R.(Eds), New York, Springer, 1-2.

Knowledge transfer


External links
Project of knowledge transfer of the CIPRA "Future in the Alps" ( "Knowledge Transfer Study - 2 Year study project for the European Commission" (http://

Tag (metadata)
In information systems, a tag is a non-hierarchical keyword or term assigned to a piece of information (such as an Internet bookmark, digital image, or computer file). This kind of metadata helps describe an item and allows it to be found again by browsing or searching. Tags are generally chosen informally and personally by the item's creator or by its viewer, depending on the system. Tagging was popularized by websites associated with Web 2.0 and is an important feature of many Web 2.0 services. It is now also part of some desktop software.
A tag cloud with terms related to Web 2.0

History and context

Labeling and tagging are carried out to perform functions such as aiding in classification, marking ownership, noting boundaries, and indicating online identity. They may take the form of words, images, or other identifying marks. An analogous example of tags in the physical world is museum object tagging. In the organization of information and objects, the use of textual keywords as part of identification and classification long predates computers. However, computer based searching made the use of keywords a rapid way of exploring records. Online and Internet databases and early websites deployed them as a way for publishers to help users find content. In 2003, the social bookmarking website Delicious provided a way for its users to add "tags" to their bookmarks (as a way to help find them later); Delicious also provided browseable aggregated views of the bookmarks of all users featuring a particular tag.[1] Flickr allowed its users to add their own text tags to each of their pictures, constructing flexible and easy metadata that made the pictures highly searchable.[2] The success of Flickr and the influence of Delicious popularized the concept,[3] and other social software websites such as YouTube, Technorati, and also implemented tagging. "Labels" in Gmail are similar to tags. Tagging has gained wide popularity due to the growth of social networking, photography sharing and bookmarking sites. These sites allow users to create and manage labels (or tags) that categorize content using simple keywords. The use of keywords as part of an identification and classification system long predates computers. In the early days of the web keywords meta tags were used by web page designers to tell search engines what the web page was about. Today's tagging takes the meta keywords concept and re-uses it. The users add the tags. The tags are clearly visible, and are themselves links to other items that share that keyword tag. The social bookmarking site Delicious, in 2003, provided a way for its users to add "tags" to their bookmarks that enabled them to share webpages with other users and to search based on the particular tags. Flickr allowed its users to add free-form tags to each of their pictures, enabling a bottom-up user driven approach that made the pictures easily discoverable.[4] The success of Flickr and the influence of Delicious popularized the concept, and other social software websites such as YouTube, Technorati, and StumbleUpon also implemented tagging. Most media player programs, such as iTunes or Winamp, allow users to manually add and edit tags.

Tag (metadata) Knowledge tags are an extension of keyword tags. They were first used by Jumper 2.0, an open source Web 2.0 software platform released by Jumper Networks on 29 September 2008.[5] Jumper 2.0 was the first collaborative search engine platform to use a method of expanded tagging for knowledge capture. Websites that include tags often display collections of tags as tag clouds. A user's tags are useful both to them and to the larger community of the website's users. Tags may be a "bottom-up" type of classification, compared to hierarchies, which are "top-down". In a traditional hierarchical system (taxonomy), the designer sets out a limited number of terms to use for classification, and there is one correct way to classify each item. In a tagging system, there are an unlimited number of ways to classify an item, and there is no "wrong" choice. Instead of belonging to one category, an item may have several different tags. Some researchers and applications have experimented with combining structured hierarchy and "flat" tagging to aid in information retrieval.[6]


Within a blog
Many blog systems allow authors to add free-form tags to a post, along with (or instead of) placing the post into categories. For example, a post may display that it has been tagged with baseball and tickets. Each of those tags is usually a web link leading to an index page listing all of the posts associated with that tag. The blog may have a sidebar listing all the tags in use on that blog, with each tag leading to an index page. To reclassify a post, an author edits its list of tags. All connections between posts are automatically tracked and updated by the blog software; there is no need to relocate the page within a complex hierarchy of categories.

For an event
An official tag is a keyword adopted by events and conferences for participants to use in their web publications, such as blog entries, photos of the event, and presentation slides. Search engines can then index them to make relevant materials related to the event searchable in a uniform way. In this case, the tag is part of a controlled vocabulary.

In research
A researcher may work with a large collection of items (e.g. press quotes, a bibliography, images) in digital form. If he/she wishes to associate each with a small number of themes (e.g. to chapters of a book, or to sub-themes of the overall subject), then a group of tags for these themes can be attached to each of the items in the larger collection. In this way, free form classification allows the author to manage what would otherwise be unwieldy amounts of information. Commercial, as well as some free computer applications are readily available to do this.

Special types
Triple tags
A triple tag or machine tag uses a special syntax to define extra semantic information about the tag, making it easier or more meaningful for interpretation by a computer program. Triple tags comprise three parts: a namespace, a predicate, and a value. For example, "geo:long=50.123456" is a tag for the geographical longitude coordinate whose value is 50.123456. This triple structure is similar to the Resource Description Framework model for information. The triple tag format was first devised for geolicious[7] in November 2004, to map Delicious bookmarks, and gained wider acceptance after its adoption by Mappr [8] and GeoBloggers[9] to map Flickr photos. In January 2007, Aaron Straup Cope at Flickr introduced the term machine tag as an alternative name for the triple tag, adding some questions and answers on purpose, syntax, and use.[10]

Tag (metadata) Specialized metadata for geographical identification is known as geotagging; machine tags are also used for other purposes, such as identifying photos taken at a specific event or naming species using binomial nomenclature.[11]


Knowledge tags
A knowledge tag is a type of meta-information that describes or defines some aspect of an information resource (such as a document, digital image, relational table, or web page). Knowledge tags are more than traditional non-hierarchical keywords or terms. They are a type of metadata that captures knowledge in the form of descriptions, categorizations, classifications, semantics, comments, notes, annotations, hyperdata, hyperlinks, or references that are collected in tag profiles. These tag profiles reference an information resource that resides in a distributed, and often heterogeneous, storage repository. Knowledge tags are a knowledge management discipline that leverages Enterprise 2.0 methodologies for users to capture insights, expertise, attributes, dependencies, or relationships associated with a data resource. It generally allows greater flexibility than other knowledge management classification systems. Capturing knowledge in tags takes many different forms, there is factual knowledge (that found in books and data), conceptual knowledge (found in perspectives and concepts), expectational knowledge (needed to make judgments and hypothesis), and methodological knowledge (derived from reasoning and strategies).[12] These forms of knowledge often exist outside the data itself and are derived from personal experience, insight, or expertise. Knowledge tags manifest themselves in any number of ways conceptual knowledge tags describe procedures, lessons learned, and facts that are related to the information resource. Tacit knowledge tags, manifests itself through skills, habits or learning by doing and represent experience or organizational intelligence. Anecdotal knowledge, is a memory of a particular case or event that may not surface without context.[13] Knowledge can best be defined as information possessed in the mind of an individual: it is personalized or subjective information related to facts, procedures, concepts, interpretations, ideas, observations and judgments (which may or may not be unique, useful, accurate, or structurable). Knowledge tags are considered an expansion of the information itself that adds additional value, context, and meaning to the information. Knowledge tags are valuable for preserving organizational intelligence that is often lost due to turn-over, for sharing knowledge stored in the minds of individuals that is typically isolated and unharnessed by the organization, and for connecting knowledge that is often lost or disconnected from an information resource.[14]

Advantages and disadvantages

In a typical tagging system, there is no explicit information about the meaning or semantics of each tag, and a user can apply new tags to an item as easily as applying older tags. Hierarchical classification systems can be slow to change, and are rooted in the culture and era that created them.[15] The flexibility of tagging allows users to classify their collections of items in the ways that they find useful, but the personalized variety of terms can present challenges when searching and browsing. When users can freely choose tags (creating a folksonomy, as opposed to selecting terms from a controlled vocabulary), the resulting metadata can include homonyms (the same tags used with different meanings) and synonyms (multiple tags for the same concept), which may lead to inappropriate connections between items and inefficient searches for information about a subject.[16] For example, the tag "orange" may refer to the fruit or the color, and items related to a version of the Linux kernel may be tagged "Linux", "kernel", "Penguin", "software", or a variety of other terms. Users can also choose tags that are different inflections of words (such as singular and plural),[17] which can contribute to navigation difficulties if the system does not include stemming of tags when searching or browsing. Larger-scale folksonomies address some of the problems of tagging, in that users of tagging systems tend to notice the current use of "tag terms" within these systems, and thus use existing tags in order to easily form connections to related items. In this way, folksonomies collectively develop a partial set of tagging conventions.

Tag (metadata)


Complex system dynamics

Despite the apparent lack of control, research has shown that a simple form of shared vocabularies emerges in social bookmarking systems. Collaborative tagging exhibits a form of complex systems dynamics,[18] (or self organizing dynamics). Thus, even if no central controlled vocabulary constrains the actions of individual users, the distribution of tags that describe different resources (e.g., websites) converges over time to stable power law distributions.[18] Once such stable distributions form, simple vocabularies can be extracted by examining the correlations that form between different tags. This informal collaborative system of tag creation and management has been called a folksonomy.

Tagging systems open to the public are also open to tag spam, in which people apply an excessive number of tags or unrelated tags to an item (such as a YouTube video) in order to attract viewers. This abuse can be mitigated using human or statistical identification of spam items.[19] The number of tags allowed may also be limited to reduce spam.

Some tagging systems provide a single text box to enter tags, so to be able to tokenize the string, a separator must be used. Two popular separators are the space character and the comma. To enable the use of separators in the tags, a system may allow for higher-level separators (such as quotation marks) or escape characters. Systems can avoid the use of separators by allowing only one tag to be added to each input widget at a time, although this makes adding multiple tags more time-consuming. A syntax for use within HTML is to use the rel-tag microformat which uses the rel attribute with value "tag" (i.e., rel="tag") to indicate that the linked-to page acts as a tag for the current context.[20]

[1] Screenshot of tags on (http:/ / flickr. com/ photos/ joshu/ 765809051/ in/ set-72157600740166824/ ) in 2004 and Screenshot of a tag page on (http:/ / flickr. com/ photos/ joshu/ 765817375/ in/ set-72157600740166824/ ), also in 2004, both published by Joshua Schachter on July 9, 2007. [2] "An Interview with Flickr's Eric Costello" (http:/ / www. adaptivepath. com/ ideas/ essays/ archives/ 000519. php) by Jesse James Garrett, published on August 4, 2005. Quote: "Tags were not in the initial version of Flickr. Stewart Butterfield...liked the way they worked on, the social bookmarking application. We added very simple tagging functionality, so you could tag your photos, and then look at all your photos with a particular tag, or any one persons photos with a particular tag." [3] An example is "Folksonomies - Cooperative Classification and Communication Through Shared Metadata" (http:/ / www. adammathes. com/ academic/ computer-mediated-communication/ folksonomies. html) by Adam Mathes, December 2004. It focuses on tagging in Delicious and Flickr. [4] "An Interview with Flickr's Eric Costello" (http:/ / www. adaptivepath. com/ ideas/ essays/ archives/ 000519. php) by Jesse James Garrett, published on August 4, 2005. Quote: [6] Tag Hierarchies (http:/ / infolab. stanford. edu/ ~heymann/ taghierarchy. html), research notes by Paul Heymann. [7] : geotagging hosted services (http:/ / brainoff. com/ weblog/ 2004/ 11/ 05/ 124) by Mikel Maron, November 5, 2004. [8] http:/ / stamen. com/ projects/ mappr [9] Advanced Tagging and TripleTags (http:/ / geobloggers. com/ archives/ 2006/ 01/ 11/ advanced-tagging-and-tripletags/ ) by Reverend Dan Catt, Geobloggers, January 11, 2006. [10] Machine tags (http:/ / www. flickr. com/ groups/ api/ discuss/ 72157594497877875/ ), a post by Aaron Straup Cope in the Flickr API group, January 24, 2007. [11] Encyclopedia of Life use of machine tag (http:/ / www. flickr. com/ groups/ encyclopedia_of_life/ rules/ ), The Encyclopedia of Life project rules including the required use of a taxonomy machine tag, September 19, 2009. [15] Smith, Gene (2008). Tagging: People-Powered Metadata for the Social Web. Berkeley, CA: New Riders. ISBN 0-321-52917-0 [16] Golder, Scott A. Huberman, Bernardo A. (2005). " The Structure of Collaborative Tagging Systems (http:/ / arxiv. org/ abs/ cs. DL/ 0508082)." Information Dynamics Lab, HP Labs. Visited November 24, 2005. [17] Singular vs. plural tags in a tag-based categorization system (http:/ / keithdevens. com/ weblog/ archive/ 2004/ Dec/ 24/ SvP. tags) by Keith Devens, December 24, 2004.

Tag (metadata)
[18] Harry Halpin, Valentin Robu, Hana Shepherd The Complex Dynamics of Collaborative Tagging (http:/ / portal. acm. org/ citation. cfm?id=1242572. 1242602), Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on the World Wide Web (WWW'07), Banff, Canada, pp. 211-220, ACM Press, 2007. Downloadable on the conference's website (http:/ / www2007. org/ papers/ paper635. pdf) [19] Tag Spam (http:/ / heymann. stanford. edu/ tagspam. html), research notes by Paul Heymann. [20] rel tag microformat specification (http:/ / microformats. org/ wiki/ rel-tag), Microformats Wiki, January 10, 2005.


Nonaka, Ikujiro (1994), "A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation" ( sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=889992), ORGANIZATION SCIENCE/ Vol. 5, No. 1, February 1994: 1437 Wigg, Karl M (1993), "Knowledge Management Foundations: Thinking About Thinking: How People and Organizations Create, Represent and Use Knowledge" ( cfm?abstract_id=889992), Arlington: Schema Press: 153 Alavi, Maryam; Leidner, Dorothy E. (1999), "Knowledge management systems: issues, challenges, and benefits" (, Communications of the AIS 1 (2) Sandy, Kemsley (2009), "Models, Social Tagging and Knowledge Management #BPM2009 #BPMS209" (http://, BPM, Enterprise 2.0 and technology trends in business

External links
Hashtag Techniques for Businesses ( html), Curt Finch. Inc Magazine. May 26, 2011. A Uniform Resource Name (URN) Namespace for Tag Metadata ( Tim Bray. Internet draft, expires August 5, 2007.

Learning community
A learning community is a group of people who share common emotions, values or beliefs, are actively engaged in learning together from each other, and by habituation. Such communities have become the template for a cohort-based, interdisciplinary approach to higher education. This may be based on an advanced kind of educational or 'pedagogical' design.[1] Community psychologists such as McMillan and Chavis (1986) state that there are four key factors that defined a sense of community: (1) membership, (2) influence, (3) fulfillment of individuals needs and (4) shared events and emotional connections. So, the participants of learning community must feel some sense of loyalty and belonging to the group (membership) that drive their desire to keep working and helping others, also the things that the participant do in must affect what happened in the community, that means, an active and not just a reactive performance (influence). Besides a learning community must give the chance to the participants to meet particular needs (fulfillment) by expressing personal opinions, asking for help or specific information and share stories of events with particular issue included (emotional connections) emotional experiences[2]. Learning communities are now fairly common to American colleges and universities, and are also found in Europe.

In a summary of the history of the concept of learning communities, Wolff-Michael Roth and Lee Yew Jin suggest that until the early 1990s, and consistent with (until then) dominant Piagetian constructivist and information processing paradigms in education, the individual was seen as the "unit of instruction" and the focus of research[3]. Roth and Lee claim this as watershed period when, influenced by the work of Jean Lave[4], and Lave and Etienne Wenger[5] among others, researchers and practitioners switched to the idea that knowing and knowledgeability are better thought of as cultural practices that are exhibited by practitioners belonging to various communities[6][7][8][9] which, following Lave and Wenger's early work[5], are often termed Communities of practice[10][11].

Learning community Roth and Lee claim that this led to forms of praxis (learning and teaching designs implemented in the classroom, and influenced by these ideas) in which students were encouraged to share their ways of doing mathematics, history, science, etc. with each other. In other words, that students take part in the construction of consensual domains, and "participate in the negotiation and institutionalisation of ...meaning". In effect, they are participating in learning communities. Roth and Lee go on to analyse the contradictions inherent in this as a theoretically informed practice in education. Roth and Lee are concerned with learning community as a theoretical and analytical category; they critique the way in which some educators use the notion to design learning environments without taking into account the fundamental structures implied in the category. Their analysis does not take account of the appearance of learning communities in the United States in the early 1980s. For example, The Evergreen State College, which is widely considered a pioneer in this area,[12] established an intercollegiate learning community in 1984. In 1985, this same college established the Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education, which focuses on collaborative education approaches, including learning communities as one of its centerpieces. Learning communities began to gain popularity at other U.S. colleges and universities during the late 80s and throughout the 90s.[13] The Washington Center's National Learning Commons Directory has over 250 learning community initiatives in colleges and universities throughout the nation.[14]


Learning community models

Learning communities can take many forms. According to Barbara Leigh Smith of The Evergreen State College,[15] The learning community approach fundamentally restructures the curriculum, and the time and space of students. Many different curricular restructuring models are being used, but all of the learning community models intentionally link together courses or coursework to provide greater curricular coherence, more opportunities for active teaming, and interaction between students and faculty. Experts frequently describe five basic nonresidential learning community models:[16][12] 1. Linked courses: Students take two connected courses, usually one disciplinary course such as history or biology and one skills course such as writing, speech, or information literacy. 2. Learning clusters: Students take three or more connected courses, usually with a common interdisciplinary theme uniting them. 3. Freshman interest groups: Similar to learning clusters, but the students share the same major, and they often receive academic advising as part of the learning community. 4. Federated learning communities: Similar to a learning cluster, but with an additional seminar course taught by a "Master Learner," a faculty member who enrolls in the other courses and takes them alongside the students. The Master Learner's course draws connections between the other courses. 5. Coordinated studies: This model blurs the lines between individual courses. The learning community functions as a single, giant course that the students and faculty members work on full-time for an entire semester or academic year. Residential learning communities, or living-learning programs, range from theme-based halls on a college dormitory to degree-granting residential colleges.[17] What these programs share is the integration of academic content with daily interactions among students, faculty, and staff living and working in these programs[18].

Learning community


Results of learning communities

Universities are often drawn to learning communities because research has shown that they improve student retention rates. Emily Lardner and Gillies Malnarich of the Washington Center at The Evergreen State College note that a learning community can have a much greater impact on students:[19] The camaraderie of co-enrollment may help students stay in school longer, but learning communities can offer more: curricular coherence; integrative, high-quality learning; collaborative knowledge-construction; and skills and knowledge relevant to living in a complex, messy, diverse world. Studies show that enrollment in a learning community has a powerful effect on student learning and achievement.[20][21] There are also criticism on learning in groups. According to Armstrong (2012), people put in groups lose their sense of individual responsibility. And typically the things learned through taking individual responsibility are the things remembered by adults.[22]

Online learning community Intergenerational equity Youth/adult partnerships

Angehrn, Albert A.; Gibbert, Michael (2008). "Learning Networks - Introduction, Background, Shift from bureaucracies to networks, Shift from training and development to learning, Shift from competitive to collaborative thinking, The three key challenges in learning networks" [23]. Gabelnick, Faith; MacGregor, Jean; Matthews, Roberta S.; Smith, Barbara Leigh (1990). Learning Communities: Creating Connections Among Students, Faculty, and Disciplines [24]. New Directions for Teaching and Learning. 41. Jossey-Bass. ISBN978-1-55542-838-9. Smith, Barbara Leigh; McCann, J., eds. (2001). Reinventing Ourselves: Interdiciplinary Education, Collaborative Learning, and Experimentation in Higher Education [25]. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing.

[1] Goodyear, P., De Laat, M., and Lally, V. (2006) Using Pattern Languages to Mediate Theory-Praxis Conversations in Designs for Networked Learning. ALT-J, Research in Learning Technology, 14,(3), pp211-223. [2] Bonk, C. J, Wisher, R & Nigrelli, M. (2004) Chapter 12. Learning Communities, Communities of practices: principles, technologies and examples in Littlton, Karen, Learning to Collaborate. Nova. USA. [3] Roth, W-M. and Lee, Y-J. (2006) Contradictions in theorising and implementing communities in education. Educational Research Review, 1, (1), pp27-40. [4] Lave, J. (1988) Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [5] Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [6] Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989) Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), pp3242. [7] Roth, W.-M., & Bowen, G. M. (1995) Knowing and interacting: A study of culture, practices, and resources in a grade 8 open-inquiry science classroom guided by a cognitive apprenticeship metaphor. Cognition and Instruction, 13, 73128. [8] Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, pp265283. [9] The Cognition and Technology Group (1994). From visual word problems to learning communities: Changing conceptions of cognitive research. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 157200). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [10] Bos-Ciussi. M, Augier. M, and Rosner, G. (2008), Learning Communities Are Not Mushrooms - or - How to Cultivate Learning Communities in Higher Education (http:/ / www. chris-kimble. com/ CLEE/ Book_2/ Chapters/ Chapter_14. html) in Communities of Practice: Creating Learning Environments for Educators, C. Kimble, P. Hildreth and I. Bourdon (Eds), Information Age Publishing. Vol 2, Ch

Learning community
14, pp. 287-308.. [11] Habhab. S. (2008), Workplace Learning in a Community of Practice: How do Schoolteachers Learn? (http:/ / www. chris-kimble. com/ CLEE/ Book_1/ Chapters/ Chapter_11. html) in Communities of Practice: Creating Learning Environments for Educators, C. Kimble, P. Hildreth and I. Bourdon (Eds), Information Age Publishing. Vol 1, Ch 11, pp. 213-232. [12] Tinto, V. (2003). Learning Better Together: The Impact of Learning Communities on Student Success. In Promoting Student Success in College, Higher Education Monograph Series (pp. 1-8). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University. Retrieved September 22, 2009, from http:/ / faculty. soe. syr. edu/ vtinto/ Files/ Learning%20Better%20Together. pdf. [13] Smith, B.L. (2001, Fall). Challenge of Learning Communities as a Growing National Movement. Peer Review, 4(1). Retrieved September 22, 2009, from http:/ / www. aacu. org/ peerreview/ pr-fa01/ pr-fa01feature1. cfm. [14] National Learning Communities Directory Search (http:/ / www. evergreen. edu/ washcenter/ Directory. asp) [15] Smith, B. L. (1993). Creating Learning Communities. Liberal Education, 79(4), 32-39. [16] Kellog, K. (1999) Learning Communities. ERIC Digest. Washington, D.C.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education. (ED430512). Retrieved on September 21, 2009 from ERIC database: http:/ / eric. ed. gov/ ERICWebPortal/ recordDetail?accno=ED430512 [17] http:/ / livelearnstudy. net/ [18] Brower, A.M. & Dettinger, K. (1998) What is a learning community? Towards a comprehensive model. About Campus, (Nov/Dec), 15-21. [19] Lardner, Emily, and Gillies Malnarich. (2008, July-August). New Era in Learning-Community Work: Why The Pedagogy of Intentional Integration Matters. Change Magazine Retrieved September 25, 2009 from http:/ / www. changemag. org/ Archives/ Back%20Issues/ July-August%202008/ full-new-era. html. [20] Taylor, Kathe, William S. Moore, Jean MacGregor, and Jerri Lindblad. (2003). Executive Summary. Learning Community Research and Assessment: What We Know Now. Washington Center for Improving Higher Education. Retrieved on September 15, 2009 from http:/ / www. evergreen. edu/ washcenter/ resources/ upload/ Pages_from_ImpactLC. pdf. [21] Price, Derek V., (2005). Learning Communities and Student Success in Postsecondary Education: A Background Paper. MDRC. Retrieved September 22, 2009 from http:/ / www. mdrc. org/ publications/ 418/ full. pdf. [23] http:/ / encyclopedia. jrank. org/ articles/ pages/ 6655/ Learning-Networks. html [24] http:/ / books. google. fr/ books?id=cCefAAAAMAAJ [25] http:/ / www. eric. ed. gov/ ERICWebPortal/ custom/ portlets/ recordDetails/ detailmini. jsp?accno=ED448646


External links
Center: National Learning Commons (|Washington) National Study of Living-Learning Programs ( Free Learning Community Portal ( Educational Programs built on the Learning Community model of Education: The Evergreen State College Olympia, WA ( Bainbridge Graduate Institute Bainbridge Island, WA ( OLP, UK (

Legitimate peripheral participation


Legitimate peripheral participation

Legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) describes how newcomers become experienced members and eventually old timers of a community of practice or collaborative project (Lave & Wenger 1991). According to LPP, newcomers become members of a community initially by participating in simple and low-risk tasks that are nonetheless productive and necessary and further the goals of the community. Through peripheral activities, novices become acquainted with the tasks, vocabulary, and organizing principles of the community. Gradually, as newcomers become old timers, their participation takes forms that are more and more central to the functioning of the community. LPP suggests that membership in a community of practice is mediated by the possible forms of participation to which newcomers have access, both physically and socially. If newcomers can directly observe the practices of experts, they understand the broader context into which their own efforts fit. Conversely LPP suggests that newcomers who are separated from the experts have limited access to their tools and community and therefore have limited growth. As participation increases, situations arise that allow the participant to assess how well they are contributing through their efforts, thus legitimate peripheral participation provides a means for self-evaluation (Lave & Wenger 1991). LPP is not reserved for descriptions of membership in formal organizations or professions whose practices are highly defined. For example, O'Donovan and Kirk [1] (Kimble & Hildreth 2008) suggest that young people's participation in sport can be compared to a Community of Practice related to physical education. In his later work (Wenger 1998) on communities of practice Wenger abandoned the concept of legitimate peripheral participation and introduced the idea of a duality instead, however the term is still widely used in relation to situated learning.

Lave, Jean; Wenger, Etienne (1991), Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation [2], Cambridge University Press, ISBN0-521-42374-0 Kimble, Chris; Hildreth, Paul (2008), Communities of Practice: Creating Learning Environments for Educators [7] , Information Age Publishing, ISBN1-59311-863-5 Wenger, Etienne (1998), Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN978-0-521-66363-2

Further reading
Bryant, Susan, Andrea Forte and Amy Bruckman, Becoming Wikipedian: Transformation of participation in a collaborative online encyclopedia, Proceedings of GROUP International Conference on Supporting Group Work, 2005. pp 1.-10 [3]

[1] http:/ / www. chris-kimble. com/ CLEE/ Book_1/ Chapters/ Chapter_19. html [2] http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=CAVIOrW3vYAC& dq=Situated+ Learning:+ Legitimate+ Peripheral+ Participation [3] http:/ / citeseerx. ist. psu. edu/ viewdoc/ download?doi=10. 1. 1. 62. 5337& rep=rep1& type=pdf

Network of practice


Network of practice
Network of Practice is a concept originated by John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid (often abbreviated as NoPs).[1] This concept, related to the work on communities of practice by Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger,[2] refers to the overall set of various types of informal, emergent social networks that facilitate information exchange between individuals with practice-related goals. In other words, networks of practice range from communities of practice where learning occurs to electronic networks of practice (often referred to as virtual or electronic communities).

Basic concepts
To further define the concept, first the term network implies a set of individuals who are connected through social relationships, whether they be strong or weak. Terms such as community tend to denote a stronger form of relationship, but networks refer to all networks of social relationships, be they weak or strong. Second, the term practice represents the substrate that connects individuals in their networks. The principal ideas are that practice implies the actions of individuals and groups when conducting their work, e.g., the practice of software engineers, journalists, educators, etc., and that practice involves interaction among individuals.[3] What distinguishes a network of practice from other networks is that the primary reason for the emergence of relationships within a network of practice is that individuals interact through information exchange in order to perform their work, asking for and sharing knowledge with each other. A network of practice can be distinguished from other networks that emerge due to other factors, such as interests in common hobbies or discussing sports while taking the same bus to work, etc. Finally, practice need not necessarily be restricted to include those within one occupation or functional discipline. Rather it may include individuals from a variety of occupations; thus, the term, practice, is more appropriate than others such as occupation. As indicated above, networks of practice incorporate a range of informal, emergent networks, from communities of practice to electronic networks of practice. In line with Lave & Wengers original work (1991), Brown & Duguid propose that communities of practice are a localized and specialized subset of networks of practice, typically consisting of strong ties linking individuals engaged in a shared practice who typically interact in face-to-face situations.[4] At the opposite end of the spectrum are electronic networks of practice, which are often referred to as virtual or electronic communities and consisting of weak ties.[5] In electronic networks of practice, individuals may never get to know one another or meet face-to-face, and they generally coordinate through means such as blogs, electronic mailing lists, or bulletin boards.

Distinguishing NoPs from Formal Work Groups such as Project Teams

In contrast to the use of formal controls to support knowledge exchange often used in formal work groups, such as contractual obligation, organizational hierarchies, monetary incentives, or mandated rules, networks of practice promote knowledge flows along lines of practice through informal social networks. Therefore, one way to distinguish between networks of practice and work groups created through formal organizational mandate is by the nature of the control mechanisms. A second group of distinguishing properties refers to their composition. Networks of practice and formal work groups vary in terms of their size since networks of practice may range from a few select individuals to very large, open electronic networks consisting of thousands of participants while groups are generally smaller. They also vary in terms of who can participate. Work groups and virtual teams typically consist of members who are formally designated and assigned. In contrast, networks of practice consist of volunteers without formal restrictions placed on membership. Finally, networks of practice and formal work groups vary in terms of expectations about participation. In formal work groups and virtual teams, participation is jointly determined and members are expected to achieve a specific

Network of practice work goal. Participation in communities of practice is jointly determined, such that individuals generally approach specific others for help. In electronic networks of practice, participation is individually determined; knowledge seekers have no control over who responds to their questions or the quality of the responses. In turn, knowledge contributors have no assurances that seekers will understand the answer provided or be willing to reciprocate the favor.


[3] Lave, Jean, Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics and Culture in Everyday Life, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. [4] Brown, J S & Duguid, P, Knowledge and organization: A social-practice perspective. Organization Science (http:/ / web. gsia. cmu. edu/ orgsci/ index. htm), 12, 2: 198-213, 2001. [5] Vaast E. The Use of Intranets: The Missing Link between Communities of Practice and Networks of Practice? (http:/ / www. chris-kimble. com/ KNICOP/ Chapters/ Chapter_18. html) Chapter 18 in Hildreth, P & Kimble, C (eds.), Knowledge Networks: Innovation Through Communities of Practice, London: Idea Group Inc., 2004

Further reading
Teigland, Robin, Knowledge Networking: Structure and Performance in Networks of Practice (http://www.hhs. se/NR/rdonlyres/4165BDC8-C42C-43CF-8EEF-57DCEB0939BC/0/TeiglandthesisKnowledgeNetworking. pdf), Stockholm: Stockholm School of Economics, 2003. Teigland, Robin and Wasko, M. M. Extending Richness with Reach: Participation and Knowledge Exchange in Electronic Networks of Practice. ( Chapter 19 in Hildreth, P & Kimble, C (eds.), Knowledge Networks: Innovation Through Communities of Practice, London: Idea Group Inc., 2004. Wasko, M M, Faraj, S, & Teigland, Robin, Collective Action and Knowledge Contribution in Electronic Networks of Practice (, Journal of the Association for Information Systems (JAIS) , Special Issue on Theory Development, 5, 11-12, 2004. Whelan, E. Knowledge Exchange in Electronic Networks of Practice ( journal/v22/n1/abs/2000089a.html) , "Journal of Information Technology (JIT)", 22, 5-13, 2007. Takhteyev, Y. Networks of Practice as Actor-Networks (, Information, Communication and Society, 12 (4), 566-583, June 2009.

Online participation


Online participation
Online participation is used to describe the interaction between users and online communities on the web. Online community often involve members to provide content to the website and/or contribute in some way. Examples of such include wikis, blogs, online multiplayer games, and other types of social platforms. Online participation is currently a heavily researched field. It provides insight into fields such as web design, online marketing, crowdsourcing, and many areas of psychology. Some subcategories that fall under online participation are: commitment to online communities, coordination & interaction, and member recruitment.

Knowledge sharing infrastructures

Some key examples of online knowledge sharing infrastructures include the following: Wikipedia: An online, publicly editable encyclopaedia with hundreds of thousands of editors Slashdot: A popular technology-related forum, with articles and comments from readers. Slashdot subculture has become well known in Internet circles. Users accumulate a "karma score" and volunteer moderators are selected from those with high scores. Usenet: Established in 1980, as a "distributed Internet discussion system,"[citation needed] it became the first medium for Internet communities. Volunteer moderators and votetakers contribute to the community. Etc. (the Web2.0 is also referred to as the writable web for indicating that many people participate to the creation of its content) In the past important online knowledge sharing infrastructures included: AOL: The largest of the online service providers, with chat rooms which for years were voluntarily moderated by community leaders. It should be noted that rooms and most message boards are no longer moderated, however. The WELL: A pioneering online community established in 1985. The WELL's culture has been the subject of several books and articles. Many users voluntarily contribute to community building and maintenance (e.g., as conference hosts).

Promoting Online Participation

Many online communities (i.e. Blogs, Chat rooms, Electronic mailing lists, Internet forums, Wikis), are not only knowledge-sharing resources but also fads. Studies have shown that committed members of online communities have reasons to remain active. As long as members feel the need to contribute, there is a mutual dependence between the community and the member. Although many researchers have come up with several motivational factors behind online contribution, these theories can all be categorized under instrinsic and extrinsic motivations. Intrinsic motivation refers to an action that is driven by personal interests and internal emotions in the task itself while extrinsic motivation refers to an action that is influenced by external factors, often for a certain outcome, reward or recognition. The two types of motivation contradict each other but often go hand-in-hand in cases where continual contribution is observed. Several motivational factors lead people to continue their participation to these online communities and remain loyal. Peter Kollock researched motivations for contributing to online communities. Kollock (1999, p.227) outlines three motivations that do not rely on altruistic behavior on the part of the contributor: anticipated reciprocity; increased recognition; and sense of efficacy. Another motivation, in which Marc Smith mentions in his 1992 thesis: Voices from the WELL: The Logic of the Virtual Commons: "Communion", is "sense of community" as it is referred to in social psychology.

Online participation


Anticipated reciprocity
A person is motivated to contribute valuable information to the group in the expectation that one will receive useful help and information in return. Indeed, there is evidence that active participants in online communities get more responses faster to questions than unknown participants.[1] The higher the expectation of reciprocity, the greater the chance of there being high knowledge contribution intent in an online community. Reciprocity represents a sense of fairness where individuals usually reciprocate the positive feedback they receive from others so that they can in return get more useful knowledge from others in the future. Research has shown that self esteem needs of recognition from others lead to expectations of reciprocity.[2] Self esteem plays such an important role in the need for reciprocity because contributing to online communities can be an ego booster for many types of users. The more positive feedback contributors get from other members of their community, the closer they may feel to being considered an expert in the knowledge they are sharing. Because of this, contributing to online communities can lead to a sense of self-value and respect, based on the level of positive feedback reciprocated from the community In addition, there is evidence that active participants in online communities get more responses faster to questions than unknown participants.[3] A study on the participation in eBays reputation system demonstrated that the expectation of reciprocal behavior from partners increases participation from self-interested eBay buyers and sellers. Standard economic theory predicts that people are not inclined to contribute voluntarily to the provision of such public goods but, rather, they tend to free ride on the contributions of others.[4] Nevertheless, empirical results from eBay show that buyers submit ratings to more than 50% of transactions.[5][6] The main takeaways from their conclusion were that they found that experienced users tend to rate more frequently, and motivation for leaving comments is not strongly motivated by pure altruism targeted towards the specific transaction partner, but from self interest and reciprocity to warm glow feeling of contribution. Some theories support altruism as being a key motivator in online participation and reciprocity. Although evidence from sociology, economics, political science, and social psychology shows that altruism is part of human nature, recent research reveals that the pure altruism model lacks predictive power in many situations. Several authors have proposed combining a joy-of-giving (sometimes also referred to as warm glow) motive with altruism to create a model of impure altruism.[7][8] Different from altruism, reciprocity represents a pattern of behavior where people respond to friendly or hostile actions with similar actions even if no material gains are expected.[9] Voluntary participation in online feedback mechanisms seems to be largely motivated by self-interest. Because their reputation is on the line, the eBay study showed that some partners using eBays feedback mechanism had selfish motivations to rate others. For example, data showed that some eBay users exhibited reciprocity towards partners who rated them first. This caused them to only rate partners with hopes the increase the probability of eliciting a reciprocal response.[10]

Increased recognition
Recognition is important to online contributors such that, in general, individuals want recognition for their contributions. Some have called this Egoboo. Kollock outlines the importance of reputation online: Rheingold (1993) in his discussion of the WELL (an early online community) lists the desire for prestige as one of the key motivations of individuals contributions to the group. To the extent this is the concern of an individual, contributions will likely be increased to the degree that the contribution is visible to the community as a whole and to the extent there is some recognition of the persons contributions. ... the powerful effects of seemingly trivial markers of recognition (e.g. being designated as an official helper) has been commented on in a number of online communities... One of the key ingredients of encouraging a reputation is to allow contributors to be known or not to be anonymous. The following example, from Meyers (1989) study of the computer underground illustrates the power of reputation. When involved in illegal activities, computer hackers must protect their personal identities with pseudonyms. If

Online participation hackers use the same nicknames repeatedly, this can help the authorities to trace them. Nevertheless, hackers are reluctant to change their pseudonyms regularly because the status associated with a particular nickname would be lost. On the importance of online identity: Profiles and reputation are clearly evident in online communities today. is a case in point, as all contributors are allowed to create profiles about themselves and as their contributions are measured by the community, their reputation increases. encourages elaborate profiles for members where they can share all kinds of information about themselves including what music they like, their heroes, etc. Displaying photos and information about individual members and their recent activities on social networking websites can promote bonds-based commitment. Because social interaction is the primary basis for building and maintaining social bonds, we can gain appreciation for other users once we. This appreciation turns into increased recognition for the contributors, which would in turn give them the incentive to contribute more. In addition to this, many communities give incentives for contributing. For example, many forums award Members points for posting. Members can spend these points in a virtual store. eBay is an example of an online marketplace where reputation is very important because it is used to measure the trustworthiness of someone you potentially will do business with. This type of community is known as a reputation system, which is a type of collaborative filtering algorithm which attempts to collect, distribute, and aggregate ratings about all users past behavior within an online community in an effort to strike a balance between the democratic principles of open publishing and maintaining standards of quality.[11] These systems, like eBays, promote the idea of trust that relates to expectations of reciprocity which can help increase the sense of reputation for each member. With eBay, you have the opportunity to rate your experience with someone and they, likewise, can rate you. This has an effect on the reputation score. The participants may therefore be encouraged to manage their online identity in order to make a good impression on the other members of the community. Other successful online communities have point systems that do not exactly provide any concrete incentive. For example, Reddit is an online social news community that has users submit text, photo, link, or video posts under sometimes ambiguous usernames. There is a point system used to rate the quality of points and comments. This point system generally is not of any value to the users, but having the reputation of anonymously stacking up points is something of significance for members of the reddit community. Users that have a perceived reputation of submitting popular posts because of their points will lead to more contributions in the future, as long as they feel that their content is generally appreciated by the rest of the sub-community within Reddit.


Sense of Efficacy
Individuals may contribute valuable information because the act results in a sense of efficacy, that is, a sense that they are capable of achieving their desired outcome and have some effect on this environment. There is well-developed research literature that has shown how important a persons sense of efficacy is (e.g. Bandura 1995). Studies have shown that increasing the users sense of efficacy boosts their intrinsic motivation and therefore makes them more likely to stay in an online community. According to Wang and Fesenmaiers research, efficacy is the biggest factor in affecting active contribution online. Of the many sub-factors, it was discovered that satisfying other members needs is the biggest reason behind the increase of efficacy in a member followed by being helpful to others (Wang and Fesenmaier).[12] Features such as the task progress bars and an attempt to reduce some difficulty of completing a general task can easily enhance the feeling of self-worth in the community. Creating immersive experiences with clear goals, feedback and challenge that exercise peoples skills to the limits but still leave them in control causes the experiences to be intrinsically interesting. Positive but constructive and sincere feedbacks also produce similar effects and increase motivation to complete more tasks. A competitive settingwhich may or may not have been intended to be competitive can also increase a persons self-esteem if quality performance is assumed (Kraut 2012[13]).

Online participation


Sense of Community
People, in general, are social beings and are motivated by receiving direct responses to their contributions. Most online communities enable this by allowing people to reply back to others contributions (i.e. many Blogs allow comments from readers, one can reply back to forum posts, etc.). Using as an example, other users can rate whether one's product review was helpful or not. Granted, there is some overlap between improving ones reputation and gaining a sense of community, and it seems safe to say that there are also some overlapping areas between all four motivators. While some people are active contributors to online discussion, others join virtual communities and do not actively participate, a concept referred to as lurking (Preece 2009). There are several reasons why people choose not to participate online. For instance, users may get the information they wanted without actively participating, think they are helpful by not posting, want to learn more about the community before becoming an active member, be unable to use the software provided, or dislike the dynamics they observe within the group(Preece, Nonnecke & Andrews 2004) (Bishop 2007). When online communities have lurking members, the amount participation within the group decreases and the sense of community for these lurking members also diminishes. Online participation increases the sense of community for all members, as well as gives them a motivations to continue participating. Other problems regarding a sense of community arise when the online community attempts to attract and retain newcomers. These problems include difficulty of recruiting newcomers, making them stay committed early on, and controlling their possible inappropriate behavior. If an online community is able to solve these problems with their newcomers, then they can increase the sense of community within the entire group. A sense of community is also heightened in online communities when each person has a willingness to participate due to intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. Findings also show that newcomers may be unaware that an online social networking website even has a community. As these users build their own profiles and get used to the culture of the group over time, they eventually self-identify themselves with the community.

Online Participation and Psychology

Studies have found that the nature and the level of participation in online social networking sites have been directly correlated with the personality of the participants. The Department of Psychology in the University of Windsor site their findings regarding this correlation in the articles Personality and motivations associated with Facebook use [14] and The Influence of Shyness on the Use of Facebook in an Undergraduate Sample [15]. The articles state that people who have high levels of anxiety, stress, or shyness are more likely to favor socializing through the Internet than in-person socialization. The reason for this is because they are able to communicate with others without being face-to-face, and mediums such as chat rooms give a sense of anonymity which make them feel more comfortable when participating in discussions with others. Studies also show that in order to increase online participation, the contributors must feel unique, useful, and be given challenging and specific goals. These findings fall in line with the social psychology theories of social loafing and goal setting. Social loafing claims that when people are involved in a group setting, they tend to not contribute as much and depend on the work of others. Goal setting is the theory stating that people will work harder if given a specific goal rather than a broad or general problem. However, other social psychology theories have been disproven to help with online participation. For instance, one study found that users will contribute more to an online group project than an individual one. Additionally, although users enjoy when their contributions are unique, they want a sense of similarity within the online community. Finding similarities with other members of a community encourage new users to participate more and become more active within the community. So, new users must be able to find and recognize similar users already participating in the community. Also, the online community must give a method of analyzing and quantifying the contribution made by any user to visualize their contributions to users and help convince them that they are unique and useful. However, these and other psychological motivations behind online participation are still being researched today.

Online participation


Participation in the social web

Online participation is relevant in different systems of the social web such as: Blogging (Nardi et al. 2004) Micro-blogging (Java et al. 2007) Online dating services (Siibak 2007) Social bookmarking (Benbunan-Fich & Koufaris 2008) (Ames & Naaman 2007) Social network services (Krasnova et al. Nowobilska) (Schaefer 2008) (Joinson 2008) (Jacobs 2009) (Penenberg 2009) Virtual worlds (Yee 2006) Wiki (Rafaeli & Ariel 2008) (Oded 2007) (Wilkinson & Huberman 2007) Nielsens 90-9-1% rule: In most online communities, 90% of users are lurkers who never contribute, 9% of users contribute a little, and 1% of users account for almost all the action. It is interesting to point out that the majority of the user population is in fact not contributing to the informational gain of online communities, which leads to the phenomenon of contribution inequality. Often, feedbacks, opinions and editorials are posted from those users who have stronger feelings towards the matter than most others; thus it is often the case that some posts online are not in fact representative of the entire population leading to what is call the Survivorship bias. Therefore, it is important to ease the process of contribution as well as to promote quality contribution to address this concern.

Ames, Morgan; Mor, Naaman (2007). "Why We Tag: Motivations for Annotation in Mobile and Online Media" [16] . Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in computing systems (CHI 2007), San Jose, CA, USA, 2007. Benbunan-Fich, Raquel; Koufaris, Marios (2008). "Motivations and Contribution Behaviour in Social Bookmarking Systems: An Empirical Investigation". Electronic Markets 18 (2): 150160. doi:10.1080/10196780802044933 [17]. Bishop, J. (2007). "Increasing participation in online communities: A framework for humancomputer interaction" [18]. Computers in Human Behavior 23 (4): 18811893. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2005.11.004 [19]. Krasnova, H.; Hildebrand, H.; Gnther, O.; Kovrigin, A.; Nowobilska, A. (2008). "Why Participate in an Online Social Network: An Empirical Analysis" [20]. Proc. 16th European Conf. on Information Systems. (ECIS 2008). Jacobs, Gina (2009). "National Poll: Young People See Social Networking as Attention Seeking" [21]. SDSU News, Tuesday, August 25, 2009. Java, Akshay; Song, Xiaodan; Finin, Tim; Tseng, Belle (2007). Why we twitter: understanding microblogging usage and communities [22]. Proceedings of the 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD 2007 workshop on Web mining and social network analysis. pp.5665 Joinson, Adam N. (2008). "Looking at, looking up or keeping up with people? Motives and use of Facebook". SIGCHI 2008. pp.10271036 Kollock, Peter (1999). "The Economies of Online Cooperation: Gifts and Public Goods in Cyberspace" [23]. In Smith, Marc; Kollock, Peter. Communities in Cyberspace. London: Routledge. pp.220239. Meyer, Gordon R. (1989). "The social Organization of the Computer Underground" [24]. Masters thesis in Sociology, Northern Illinois University. Nardi, Bonnie A.; Schiano, Diane J.; Gumbrecht, Michelle; Swartz, Luke (2004). "Why We Blog". Communications of the ACM 47 (12): 4146. doi:10.1145/1035134.1035163 [25]. Nov, Oded (2007). "What motivates Wikipedians" [26]. Communications of the ACM 50 (11): 6064. doi:10.1145/1297797.1297798 [27]. Wikipedia:Link rot Penenberg, Adam L. (October 13, 2009). "Facebook is no fad (Commentary: Social networking is a basic human need)" [28]. MarketWatch.

Online participation Preece, J. (2009). "An event-driven community in washington, DC: Forces that influence participation" [29]. In Foth, M.. Handbook of research on urban informatics: The practice and promise of the real-time city. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. ISBN978-1-60566-152-0. Preece, J.; Nonnecke, B.; Andrews, D. (2004). "The top five reasons for lurking: improving community experiences for everyone" [30]. Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2): 201223. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2003.10.015 [31] . Rafaeli, S.; Ariel, Y. (2008). "Online motivational factors: Incentives for participation and contribution in Wikipedia" [32]. In Barak, A.. Psychological aspects of cyberspace: Theory, research, applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN0-521-87301-0. Rheingold, Howard (1993). The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier [33] (1st. ed.). Addison-Wesley Pub. Co. ISBN978-0-201-60870-0. Schaefer, Cora (2008). "Motivations and usage patterns on social network sites" [34]. Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Galway, Ireland, 2008 Siibak, A. (2007). "Casanova's of the Virtual World. How Boys Present Themselves on Dating Websites" [35]. Young People at the Crossroads: 5th International Conference on Youth Research in Karelia; Petrozavodsk, Republic of Karelia, Russian Federation; September 15, 2006. (Eds.) M. Muukkonen& K. Sotkasiira. Joensuu University: Joensuun yliopisto. pp.8391. ISBN978-952-219-020-8 Wilkinson, Dennis M.; Huberman, Bernardo A. (2007). "Assessing the Value of Cooperation in Wikipedia" [36]. First Monday 12 (4): 6064. Yee, Nick (2006). "The Demographics, Motivations, and Derived Experiences of Users of Massively Multi-User Online Graphical Environments". Presence 15 (3): 309329. doi:10.1162/pres.15.3.309 [37].


[14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] http:/ / www. uni-graz. at/ dips/ neubauer/ lehre/ fm_lll/ ROSS%20ET%20AL%20(2009). pdf http:/ / www. liebertonline. com/ doi/ abs/ 10. 1089/ cpb. 2008. 0214 http:/ / yahooresearchberkeley. com/ blog/ wp-content/ uploads/ 2007/ 02/ chi2007-Ames-whyWeTag. pdf http:/ / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1080%2F10196780802044933 http:/ / zaphod. mindlab. umd. edu/ docSeminar/ pdfs/ sdarticle. pdf http:/ / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1016%2Fj. chb. 2005. 11. 004 http:/ / is2. lse. ac. uk/ asp/ aspecis/ 20080183. pdf http:/ / newscenter. sdsu. edu/ sdsu_newscenter/ news. aspx?s=71510 http:/ / aisl. umbc. edu/ get/ softcopy/ id/ 1073/ 1073. pdf http:/ / www. connectedaction. net/ wp-content/ uploads/ 2009/ 05/ 2001-peter-kollock-economies-of-online-cooperation. htm http:/ / csrc. nist. gov/ publications/ secpubs/ hacker. txt http:/ / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1145%2F1035134. 1035163 http:/ / faculty. poly. edu/ ~onov/ Nov_Wikipedia_motivations. doc http:/ / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1145%2F1297797. 1297798 http:/ / www. marketwatch. com/ story/ social-networking-moves-beyond-fad-to-destiny-2009-10-13 http:/ / vrolik. de/ book/ http:/ / www. ifsm. umbc. edu/ ~preece/ Papers/ CHB_Corrected_Proof. pdf http:/ / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1016%2Fj. chb. 2003. 10. 015 http:/ / gsb. haifa. ac. il/ ~sheizaf/ cyberpsych/ 11-Rafaeli& Ariel. pdf http:/ / www. rheingold. com/ vc/ book/ intro. html http:/ / is2. lse. ac. uk/ asp/ aspecis/ 20080180. pdf http:/ / mail. jrnl. ut. ee:8080/ 35/ http:/ / firstmonday. org/ htbin/ cgiwrap/ bin/ ojs/ index. php/ fm/ article/ view/ 1763/ 1643 http:/ / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1162%2Fpres. 15. 3. 309

Online participation


External links
Community Equity Specification ( - Sun project which objective is to build a dynamic Social Value system by calculating the Contribution, Participation, Skills, and Reputation equity a person can gain by actively engaging in online communities.

Online community of practice

An Online Community of Practice (OCoP), also known as a Virtual Community of Practice, is a Community of Practice that is developed on, and is maintained using the Internet. To qualify as an OCoP, the characteristics of a Community in Practice (CoP) as described by Lave and Wenger must be met. To this end, an OCoP must include active members who are practitioners, or experts, in the specific domain of interest. Members must participate in a process of collective learning within their domain.[1] Additionally, social structures must be created within the community to assist in knowledge creation and sharing. Knowledge must be shared and meaning negotiated within an appropriate context. Community members must learn through both instruction-based learning and group discourse. Finally, multiple dimensions must facilitate the long-term management of support as well as enable immediate synchronous interactions.[2]

Current Research
Research suggests that through extended connections, reflections, and online discourse, OCoPs can enable the growth of a collective identity between the members of a community.[3] OCoPs provide a virtual space in which people who might normally never meet can come together, share stories and experiences, and solve problems pertaining to the domain interest. The evolving technologies of the Internet allow for an extension of traditional communities in geographic and cultural ways, crossing borders and languages to include experts from around the world.[1] Additionally, people who are engaged in emergent and uncommon practices, or who have few local resources can become members of online communities. OCoPs allow for the enculturation of newcomers to a practitioners community. In this way, both experienced and novice practitioners learn together and help shape the personal identities of the members and the collective identities of the greater practice.[3] Some questions remain as to what level of participation in an online community constitutes legitimate membership of an OCoP. Two types of participation have been identified to distinguish between levels of activity. Active participation means that members regularly contribute to community discourse. Peripheral participation, also called lurking, means that members read without contributing themselves. While it is preferable to have more active participation, some recent studies have concluded that peripheral participation is normal in online communities.[4] Though these members may not contribute to the community discourse, they nevertheless learn from observing, and as such are legitimate participants.[3] Despite this, some academicians assert that peripheral participation can threaten an OCoP if more members lurk than actively participate.[5]

OCoPs and Social Networking

Web 2.0 applications and social networks have increased the ease with which OCoPs are created and maintained. The structural characteristics of a community of practice include a shared domain of interest, a notion of community, and members who are also practitioners.[1] Only with all three characteristics present does a group become a community. A single Internet application, though it may incorporate one of these characteristics, may not be enough to fully support a full community in practice.[2] The continued development of Web 2.0 technologies and the ensuing evolution of vast social networks have easily enabled incorporating these characteristics within an OCoP.[6]

Online community of practice Social networks allow for the creation of clearly defined domains of interest in which dialogue and interactive conversations create communities with common and recorded histories. Social network tools allow members of OCoPs to create and share knowledge and develop cultural historical processes.[6]


An online community of practice enables participants to read, submit and receive advice and feedback from the community to the extent that they wish. Those who choose to participate in a strictly receptive manner (i.e. only reading) can still gain knowledge and skills from the communal resources, which is especially valuable to beginning practitioners. OCoPs give beginners, who might not feel comfortable sharing their knowledge, an opportunity to learn from veteran colleagues beyond their immediate geographic area through observation and absorption of information and dialogue. The veterans lend a degree of legitimacy to the community, as well as to the experiences of the new members. The result is an atmosphere of mentorship for novices. As new practitioners gain understanding and expertise, they are become more comfortable with sharing their own backgrounds and perspectives with the OCoP further expanding the field of knowledge.[6] The asynchronous nature of many forums (e.g. blogs, wikis), allows participants to be involved at their own convenience. The forums maintain a record of ideas, discourse and resources, creating an archive of expertise for a field of practice that can be accessed at any time from nearly anywhere.[3] Professionals who work alone or are the only person from their field of practice in a work setting have indicated a reduced sense of isolation after participating in an OCoP. The contributions of the group help identify the similar and disparate characteristics of a practitioner resulting in a both a sense of community identity as well as an individuals identity within the community.[3]

A common hindrance to participation in online communities of practice is the technology required for involvement. Members who do not have ready access to computers, PDAs or similar web-accessing technology are precluded from taking part in an OCoP. Members with slow or unreliable equipment are unable to participate to their full potential and may find the technical difficulties so discouraging they withdraw completely. Likewise, the technical aptitude required to participate online can be daunting to individuals who are uncomfortable with their computer skills.[3]

The nature of an online forum can cause problems in creating a sense of community. The lack of physical identification and body language in text-only forums can make it difficult to foster meaningful connections between members. Without the sense of connectivity with other practitioners, involvement falters.[7] The flexibility of most forums, which allows participants to contribute at any time, also makes it is easy to not participate at all. Moderators of an OCoP forum have to reassert the presence of the OCoP through activities, events, and occasions in order to promote involvement. Individuals who do not participate for a period of time and return can find the onslaught of information and posts overwhelming and discouraging.[3]

Online community of practice


Diversity of participants
The varying levels of knowledge, skill and experience within an OCoP can deter less confident members from participating in the community. The diverse nature of a community can also create linguistic and cultural barriers to participation. Discourse and jargon can create confusion and misunderstanding for non-native speakers and clarifying the communication errors online can prove difficult.[6]

Examples of Online Collaborative Tools

Online collaborative tools are the means and mediums of working together on the Internet that facilitate collaboration by individuals who may be located in vastly different geographical areas.[8] They may include online tools specifically developed to address the needs of communities of practice including members around the world[9] or other types of tools and forums that are available and used for OCoPs.

Social Networking Sites

The first social network site (SNS),, was created in 1997.[10] Examples of social networking sites include the following: LinkedIn Facebook MySpace YouTube

Virtual Worlds
Virtual worlds, which are online community-based environments, are now being used in both educational and professional settings. In education, these virtual worlds are being used to communicate information and allow for face-to-face virtual interaction between students and teachers. They also allow students to access and use resources provided by the teacher in both the physical classroom as well as in the virtual classroom. In professional environments, virtual training is used to provide virtual visits to company locations as well as to provide training that can be converted from classroom content to online, virtual world content. Virtual worlds provide training simulations for what could otherwise be hazardous situations. Companies are using virtual worlds to exchange information and ideas.[11] In addition, virtual worlds are being used for technical support and business improvements. Case studies document how virtual worlds are used to provide teamwork and training simulations that would not have otherwise been as accessible. Examples of virtual worlds used include the following: Second Life Whyville

Information Sharing
Online tools are available for the sharing of information. This information can be intended for a wide range of audiences, from two participants to many participants. These tools can be used to communication new thoughts or ideas and can provide a setting necessary for collaborative knowledge building.[6] Activities associated with these tools can be integrated into the presentation of online classroom and/or training materials. Examples of tools that allow information sharing include the following: Wikis Google Docs Blogs

Online community of practice


Further reading
Cothrel, J.; Williams, R.L. (1999). On-line communities: helping them form and grow. Journal of Knowledge Management. 3 (1): 5460. do?contentType=Article&contentId=883669. Dub, 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. 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. Preece, J. & Maloney-Krichmar, D. (2003) Online Communities: Focusing on Sociability and Usability. In J. Jacko and A. Sears, A. (Eds.), The human-computer interaction handbook (pp.596620).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 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. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wenger, E.; McDermott, R.; Snyder, W.M. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. pp.304. Wenger, E.; White, Nancy; Smith, John D. (2009). Digital Habitats; stewarding technology for communities. Portland: CPsquare. pp.228. Vavasseur, C.B. & MacGregor, S. Kim. (2008). Extending Content-Focused Professional Development through Online Communities of Practice. Journal of Research and Technology in Education. 40(4), 517-536.

[1] Wenger, E. (2007). Communities of practice: A brief introduction. Retrieved October 5th, 2010, from http:/ / www. ewenger. com/ theory/ [2] Wenger, E. (2001). Supporting communities of practice: A survey of community-oriented technologies. Retrieved October 30, 2001 from http:/ / www. ewenger. com/ tech [3] Gray, B. (2004). Informal Learning in an Online Community of Practice. Journal of Distance Education/Revue de l'enseignement distance, 19(1), 20-35. [4] Preece, J., Nonnecke, B. and Andrews, D. (2004). The top five reasons for lurking: improving community experiences for everyone. Computers in Human Behavior. 20(2), 201-223 [5] Riverin, S. & Stacey, E. (2008). Sustaining an Online Community of Practice: A Case Study. Journal of Distance Education. 22(2), 45-58. [6] Gunawardena, Charlotte N. et al. (2009). A theoretical framework for building online communities of practice with social networking tools. Educational Media International. 46(1), 3-16. [7] Preece, J. (2004). Etiquette, Empathy and Trust in Communities of Practice: Steppingstones to Social Capital. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 10(3), 294-302. [8] Srinivas, H (2008). Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. The Global Development Research Center: Knowledge Management, http:/ / www. gdrc. org/ kmgmt/ c-learn. [9] Implementing Best Practices (IBP) Knowledge Gateway http:/ / my. ibpinitiative. org/ [10] Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), article 11. [11] Heiphetz, Alex and Woodhill, Gary (2010). Training and Collaboration with Virtual Worlds. New York: McGraw-Hill

Organizational learning


Organizational learning
Organizational learning is an area of knowledge within organizational theory that studies models and theories about the way an organization learns and adapts. In Organizational development (OD), learning is a characteristic of an adaptive organization, i.e., an organization that is able to sense changes in signals from its environment (both internal and external) and adapt accordingly. (see adaptive system). OD specialists endeavor to assist their clients to learn from experience and incorporate the learning as feedback into the planning process.

Argyris and Schn were the first to propose models that facilitate organizational learning; others have followed in the tradition of their work: Argyris & Schn (1978) distinguished between single-loop and double-loop learning, related to Gregory Bateson's concepts of first and second order learning. In single-loop learning, individuals, groups, or organizations modify their actions according to the difference between expected and obtained outcomes. In double-loop learning, the entities (individuals, groups or organization) question the values, assumptions and policies that led to the actions in the first place; if they are able to view and modify those, then second-order or double-loop learning has taken place. Double loop learning is the learning about single-loop learning. Kim (1993), integrates Argyris, March and Olsen and another model by Kofman into a single comprehensive model; further, he analyzes all the possible breakdowns in the information flows in the model, leading to failures in organizational learning; for instance, what happens if an individual action is rejected by the organization for political or other reasons and therefore no organizational action takes place? Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995) developed a four stage spiral model of organizational learning. They started by differentiating Polanyi's concept of "tacit knowledge" from "explicit knowledge" and describe a process of alternating between the two. Tacit knowledge is personal, context specific, subjective knowledge, whereas explicit knowledge is codified, systematic, formal, and easy to communicate. The tacit knowledge of key personnel within the organization can be made explicit, codified in manuals, and incorporated into new products and processes. This process they called "externalization". The reverse process (from explicit to tacit) they call "internalization" because it involves employees internalizing an organization's formal rules, procedures, and other forms of explicit knowledge. They also use the term "socialization" to denote the sharing of tacit knowledge, and the term "combination" to denote the dissemination of codified knowledge. According to this model, knowledge creation and organizational learning take a path of socialization, externalization, combination, internalization, socialization, externalization, combination . . . etc. in an infinite spiral. Recently Nonaka returned to this theme in an attempt to move this model of knowledge conversion forwards (Nonaka & von Krogh 2009) Bontis, Crossan & Hulland (2002) empirically tested a model of organizational learning that encompassed both stocks and flows of knowledge across three levels of analysis: individual, team and organization. Results showed a negative and statistically significant relationship between the misalignment of stocks and flows and organizational performance. Flood (1999) discusses the concept of organizational learning from Peter Senge and the origins of the theory from Argyris and Schn. The author aims to "re-think" Senge's The Fifth Discipline (Senge 1990) through systems theory. The author develops the concepts by integrating them with key theorists such as Bertalanffy, Churchman, Beer, Checkland and Ackoff. Conceptualizing organizational learning in terms of structure, process, meaning, ideology and knowledge, the author provides insights into Senge within the context of the philosophy of science and the way in which systems theorists were influenced by twentieth-century advances from the classical assumptions of science.

Organizational learning Watson, Bruce D., 2002 [1] argues that organizational learning has proven to be a somewhat elusive concept to grasp and therefore its practical implementation has also been difficult. There are various positions on what "learning" is understood to be and there is a lack of synthesis of theoretical and empirical investigations. He argues that the conception of "learning" in the organizational learning literature has received insufficient attention and that this has largely contributed to the lack of clarity in the concept of organizational learning. It is proposed that cognitive science, especially connectionism, provides a model of individual learning that is capable of incorporating implicit and explicit elements of learning and knowledge. Connectionist models of learning mimic the physiological neural processes of the brain and connectionism demonstrates the capacity to combine cognitivist and constructivist theories of learning. To accomplish the transition to an explanation of collective cognitive processes as occur in organizations, and while continuing to recognize the individual neural processes that must be involved, it is proposed that the theory of situated action is united with connectionism. On the basis of such, a reconceptualisation of organizational learning and a new framework to guide management practice is proposed. Imants (2003) provides theory development for organizational learning in schools within the context of teachers' professional communities as learning communities, which is compared and contrasted to teaching communities of practice. Detailed with an analysis of the paradoxes for organizational learning in schools, two mechanisms for professional development and organizational learning, (1) steering information about teaching and learning and (2) encouraging interaction among teachers and workers, are defined as critical for effective organizational learning. Common (2004) discusses the concept of organizational learning in a political environment to improve public policy-making. The author details the initial uncontroversial reception of organizational learning in the public sector and the development of the concept with the learning organization. Definitional problems in applying the concept to public policy are addressed, noting research in UK local government that concludes on the obstacles for organizational learning in the public sector: (1) overemphasis of the individual, (2) resistance to change and politics, (3) social learning is self-limiting, i.e. individualism, and (4) political "blame culture." The concepts of policy learning and policy transfer are then defined with detail on the conditions for realizing organizational learning in the public sector. Bontis & Serenko (2009a), and Bontis & Serenko (2009b) proposed and validated a causal model explicating organizational learning processes to identify antecedents and consequences of effective human capital management practices in both for-profit and non-profit sectors. The results demonstrate that managerial leadership is a key antecedent of organizational learning, highlight the importance of employee sentiment, and emphasize the significance of knowledge management. Van Niekerk & Von Solms (2004) Compares and discusses organizational learning models for information security learning within organizations. Double-loop learning, as presented by Argyris & Schn (1978) is compared to outcome-based education, and information security specific standards published by the National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST), to determine its suitability for the fostering of an information security culture. Bushe [2] (2001, 2009a, 2009b)[3]}Defines organizational learning as an inquiry into the patterns of organizing among two or more people that leads to new knowledge and a change in those patterns of organizing. Arguing that since everyone creates their own experience, in every interaction everyone is having a different experience, and so learning from collective experience is a lot more difficult than simply discussing what happened in the past to decide what people want to do in the future. Bushe argues that many of dysfunctional patterns of organizing are sustained by sense-making processes that lead people to make up stories about each other that are more negative than the reality. Through an "organizational learning conversation" people come to understand their own experience and the experience of others which often allow them to revise their patterns of organizing in positive ways.


Organizational learning


Organizational knowledge
Some of this knowledge can be termed technical knowing the meaning of technical words and phrases, being able to read and make sense of data and being able to act on the basis of generalizations. Scientific knowledge is propositional; it takes the form of causal generalizations whenever A, then B. For example, whenever water reaches the temperature of 100 degrees, it boils; whenever it boils, it turns into steam; steam generates pressure when in an enclosed space; pressure drives engines. A large part of the knowledge used by managers, however, does not assume this form. The complexities of a managers task are such that applying A may result in B, C, or Z. A recipe or an idea that solved very well a particular problem, may, in slightly different circumstances backfire and lead to ever more problems. More important than knowing a whole lot of theories, recipes and solutions for a manager is to know which theory, recipe or solution to apply in a specific situation. Sometimes a manager may combine two different recipes or adapt an existing recipe with some important modification to meet a situation at hand. Managers often use knowledge in the way that a handyman will use his or her skills, the materials and tools that are at hand to meet the demands of a particular situation. Unlike an engineer who will plan carefully and scientifically his or her every action to deliver the desired outcome, such as a steam engine, a handyman is flexible and opportunistic, often using materials in unorthodox or unusual ways, and relies a lot on trial and error. This is what the French call bricolage, the resourceful and creative deployment of skills and materials to meet each challenge in an original way. Rule of thumb, far from being the enemy of management, is what managers throughout the world have relied upon to inform their action. In contrast to the scientific knowledge that guides the engineer, the physician or the chemist, managers are often informed by a different type of know-how. This is sometimes referred to a narrative knowledge or experiential knowledge, the kind of knowledge that comes from experience and resides in stories and narratives of how real people in the real world dealt with real life problems, successfully or unsuccessfully. Narrative knowledge is what we use in everyday life to deal with awkward situations, as parents, as consumers, as patients and so forth. We seek the stories of people in the same situation as ourselves and try to learn from them. As the Chinese proverb says "A wise man learns from experience; a wiser man learns from the experience of others". Narrative knowledge usually takes the form of organization stories (see organization story and organizational storytelling). These stories enable participants to make sense of the difficulties and challenges they face; by listening to stories, members of organizations learn from each other's experiences, adapt the recipes used by others to address their own difficulties and problems. Narrative knowledge is not only the preserve of managers. Most professionals (including doctors, accountants, lawyers, business consultants and academics) rely on narrative knowledge, in addition to their specialist technical knowledge, when dealing with concrete situations as part of their work. More generally, narrative knowledge represents an endlessly mutating reservoir of ideas, recipes and stories that are traded mostly by word or mouth on the internet. They are often apocryphal and may be inaccurate or untrue - yet, they have the power to influence people's sense making and actions.

Organizational learning


Individual learning
Learning by individuals in an organizational context is the traditional domain of human resources, including activities such as: training, increasing skills, work experience, and formal education. Given that the success of any organization is founded on the knowledge of the people who work for it, these activities will and, indeed, must continue. However, individual learning is only a prerequisite to organizational learning. Others take it farther with continuous learning. The world is orders of magnitude more dynamic than that of our parents, or even when we were young. Waves of change are crashing on us virtually one on top of another. Change has become the norm rather than the exception. Continuous learning throughout ones career has become essential to remain relevant in the workplace. Again, necessary but not sufficient to describe organizational learning. What does it mean to say that an organization learns? Simply summing individual learning is inadequate to model organizational learning. The following definition outlines the essential difference between the two: A learning organization actively creates, captures, transfers, and mobilizes knowledge to enable it to adapt to a changing environment. Thus, the key aspect of organizational learning is the interaction that takes place among individuals. A learning organization does not rely on passive or ad hoc process in the hope that organizational learning will take place through serendipity or as a by-product of normal work. A learning organization actively promotes, facilitates, and rewards collective learning. Creating (or acquiring) knowledge can be an individual or group activity. However, this is normally a small-scale, isolated activity steeped in the jargon and methods of knowledge workers. As first stated by Lucilius in the 1st century BC, Knowledge is not knowledge until someone else knows that one knows. Capturing individual learning is the first step to making it useful to an organization. There are many methods for capturing knowledge and experience, such as publications, activity reports, lessons learned, interviews, and presentations. Capturing includes organizing knowledge in ways that people can find it; multiple structures facilitate searches regardless of the users perspective (e.g., who, what, when, where, why,and how). Capturing also includes storage in repositories, databases, or libraries to ensure that the knowledge will be available when and as needed. Transferring knowledge requires that it be accessible to as needed. In a digital world, this involves browser-activated search engines to find what one is looking for. A way to retrieve content is also needed, which requires a communication and network infrastructure. Tacit knowledge may be shared through communities of practice or consulting experts. Knowledge needs to be presented in a way that users can understand it, and it must suit the needs of the user to be accepted and internalized. Mobilizing knowledge involves integrating and using relevant knowledge from many, often diverse, sources to solve a problem or address an issue. Integration requires interoperability standards among various repositories. Using knowledge may be through simple reuse of existing solutions that have worked previously. It may also come through adapting old solutions to new problems. Conversely, a learning organization learns from mistakes or recognizes when old solutions no longer apply. Use may also be through synthesis; that is creating a broader meaning or a deeper level of understanding. Clearly, the more rapidly knowledge can be mobilized and used, the more competitive an organization. An organization must learn so that it can adapt to a changing environment. Historically, the life-cycle of organizations typically spanned stable environments between major socioeconomic changes. Blacksmiths who didnt become mechanics simply fell by the wayside. More recently, many Fortune 500 companies of two decades ago no longer exist. Given the ever-accelerating rate of global-scale change, the more critical learning and adaptation become to organization relevance, success, and ultimate survival. Organizational learning is a social process, involving interactions among many individuals leading to well-informed decision making. Thus, a culture that learns and adapts as part of everyday working practices is essential. Reuse must equal or exceed reinvent as a desirable behavior. Adapting an idea must be rewarded along with its initial creation. Sharing to empower the organization must supersede controlling to empower an individual.

Organizational learning Clearly, shifting from individual to organizational learning involves a non-linear transformation. Once someone learns something, it is available for their immediate use. In contrast, organizations need to create, capture, transfer, and mobilize knowledge before it can be used. Although technology supports the latter, these are primarily social processes within a cultural environment, and cultural change, however necessary, is a particularly challenging undertaking.


Learning organization
The work in Organizational Learning can be distinguished from the work on a related concept, the learning organization. This later body of work, in general, uses the theoretical findings of organizational learning (and other research in organizational development, system theory, and cognitive science) in order to prescribe specific recommendations about how to create organizations that continuously and effectively learn. This practical approach was championed by Peter Senge in his book The Fifth Discipline.

Diffusion of innovations
Diffusion of innovations theory explores how and why people adopt new ideas, practices and products. It may be seen as a subset of the anthropological concept of diffusion and can help to explain how ideas are spread by individuals, social networks and organizations.

Argyris, C.; Schn, D. (1978). Organizational Learning: A theory of action perspective [4]. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley. ISBN0-201-00174-8. Bontis, Nick; Crossan, M.; Hulland, J. (2002). "Managing an Organizational Learning System by Aligning Stocks and Flows". Journal of Management Studies 39 (4): 437469. Bontis, Nick; Serenko, A. (2009a). "A causal model of human capital antecedents and consequents in the financial services industry" [5]. Journal of Intellectual Capital 10 (1): 5369. Bontis, Nick; Serenko, A. (2009b). "Longitudinal knowledge strategizing in a long-term healthcare organization" [6] . International Journal of Technology Management 47 (1/2/3): 276297. Common, R. (2004). "Organisational Learning in a Political Environment: Improving policy-making in UK government". Policy Studies 25 (1): 3549. Flood, R.L. (2009). Rethinking the Fifth Discipline: Learning within the unknowable [7]. London: Routledge. Imants, J. (2003). "Two basic mechanisms for organizational learning in schools". European Journal of Teacher Education 26 (3): 293311. Kim, Daniel H. (1993). "The Link between Individual and Organizational Learning" [8]. Sloan Management Review 35 (1): 3750. March, J.G.; Olsen, J.P.. (1975). "The uncertainty of the past: organizational learning under ambiguity". European Journal of Political Research 3: 147171. Nonaka, I.; Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge Creating Company [9]. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN0-19-509269-4. Nonaka, Ikujiro; von Krogh, Georg (2009). "Tacit Knowledge and Knowledge Conversion: Controversy and Advancement in Organizational Knowledge Creation Theory" [10]. Organization Science 20 (3): 635652. doi:10.1287/orsc.1080.0412 [11]. Rother, Mike (2009). [[Toyota Kata [12]]]. McGraw-Hill. ISBN0-07-163523-8. Senge, Peter M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline. Doubleday/Currency. ISBN0-385-26094-6. Van Niekerk, J.; Von Solms, R. (2004). "Organisational learning models for information security" [13]. Information Security South Africa (ISSA).

Organizational learning Watson, Bruce (2002). Rethinking Organisational Learning [14]. Melbourne: Doctorate, Faculty of Education, Education, The University of Melbourne.


[1] http:/ / repository. unimelb. edu. au/ 10187/ 5802%20%20 [2] http:/ / www. clearleardership. com [3] Bushe, G.R. (Clear Leadership: How outstanding leaders make themselves understood, clear out the mush and help everyone get real at work. Palo Alto, CA; Davies-Black, 2001. Bushe, G.R. Clear Leadership (Rev Ed): Sustaining real collaboration and partnership at work. Boston: Davies-Black, 2009a. Bushe, G.R. Learning from collective experience: A different view of organizational learning. Organization Development Practitioner,41:3, 19-23, 2009b (http:/ / www. clearlearning. ca/ images/ stories/ pdf/ Learning_From_Collective_Experience. pdf). [4] http:/ / www. amazon. com/ Organizational-Learning-Addison-Wesley-Organization-Development/ dp/ 0201001748 [5] http:/ / www. aserenko. com/ papers/ Bontis_Serenko_causal_model. pdf [6] http:/ / www. aserenko. com/ papers/ IJTM_47_123_Published_Bontis_Serenko. pdf [7] http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=3H65KbRvdLQC [8] http:/ / sloanreview. mit. edu/ the-magazine/ articles/ 1993/ fall/ 3513/ the-link-between-individual-and-organizational-learning/ [9] http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=B-qxrPaU1-MC [10] http:/ / zonecours. hec. ca/ documents/ H2010-1-2241390. S2-TacitKnowledgeandKnowledgeConversion-ControversyandAdvancementinOrganizationalKnowledgeCreation. pdf [11] http:/ / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1287%2Forsc. 1080. 0412 [12] http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=_1lhPgAACAAJ& dq=toyota+ kata [13] http:/ / icsa. cs. up. ac. za/ issa/ 2004/ Proceedings/ Full/ 043. pdf [14] http:/ / repository. unimelb. edu. au/ 10187/ 5802

Further reading
Amidon, Debra M. (1997) Innovation Strategy for the Knowledge Economy. Butterworth-Heinman, Newton, MA. p19 Argote, L. (1999). Organizational learning: Creating, retaining and transferring knowledge. Norwell, MA, Kluwer Academic Publishers. Argyris, C. (1990), Overcoming Organizational Defences: Facilitating Organizational Learning, Allyn & Bacon, Boston. Bray, D. (2007). " Literature Review - Knowledge Management Research at the Organizational Level (http://", Social Science Research Network. Easterby-Smith, M. and M. A. Lyles (editors). (2003). The Blackwell Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge Management, Oxford, Blackwell Publishing. Garvin, D. A. (2000), Learning in Action: A Guide to Putting the Learning Organization to Work, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. May, Paul (2000) The Business of E-Commerce. Cambridge university press, New York. p7

External links
University of Colorado at Denver organizational learning page with links to articles (http://carbon.cudenver. edu/~mryder/itc_data/org_learning.html)

Personal network


Personal network
A personal network is a set of human contacts known to an individual, with whom that individual would expect to interact at intervals to support a given set of activities. Personal networks are intended to be mutually beneficialextending the concept of teamwork beyond the immediate peer group. The term is usually encountered in the workplace, though it could apply equally to other pursuits outside work. Personal networking is the practice of developing and maintaining a personal network, which is usually undertaken over an extended period. Personal networking is often encouraged by large organizations, in the hope of improving productivity, and so a number of tools exist to support the maintenance of networks. Many of these tools are IT-based, and use Web 2.0 technologies. Care should be taken not to confuse a personal network with a Personal area network.

Professional learning community

A professional learning community (PLC) is an extended learning opportunity to foster collaborative learning among colleagues within a particular work environment or field. It is often used in schools as a way to organize teachers into working groups.

PLCs have many variations. In one definition PLCs "extend... classroom practice into the community; bringing community personnel into the school to enhance the curriculum and learning tasks for students; or engaging students, teachers, and administrators simultaneously in learning."[1] Richard Dufour, a recognized national expert in PLCs, finds that "To create a professional learning community, focus on learning rather than on teaching, work collaboratively, and hold yourself accountable for results."[2] The Ontario Ministry of Education defines a PLC as "a shared vision or running a school in which everyone can make a contribution, and staff are encouraged to collectively undertake activities and reflection in order to constantly improve their students performance."[3] The idea behind a PLC was to integrate two concepts that in the past, have been quite distinctive from each other; professional and community. Louis states that, professionalism is, "based on specialized knowledge and a focus on serving client needs"; whereas community is, "based on caring, support, and mutual responsibility within a group."

Staff development
Barriers to implementation
Many teachers and other educators often feel as if they are pawns in a larger game of chess where school and district leaders place obstacles that can cause issues in educators doing their job (Buffum and Hinman, 2006).[4] Some of the barriers that are present and inhibit the development of PLC's, according to Riley and Stoll (2004), include subject areas, because some educational subjects tend to naturally take precedence over others. Another obstacle is simply the physical layout of the school.[5] Because of these difficulties many teachers are turning to the internet for PLCs. Teachers are finding groups through twitter, Facebook, and other social media websites that allow then to interact with teachers all across the country to brainstorm and exchange ideas. These groups can be helpful for those with PLCs already at their current school and those without PLCs.

Professional learning community


Staff as a community
A PLC is seen as an effective staff development team approach and a powerful strategy for school change and possible improvement. The idea of community is crucial to the success of PLCs. The PLC process should be a reflective process where both individual and community growth is achieved. Among the team there should be a shared vision of where they want the school to be. In his book The Fifth Discipline, Peter Senge comments on shared vision and states, The practice of shared vision involves the skills of unearthing shared pictures of the future that foster genuine commitment and enrollment rather than compliance. In mastering this discipline, leaders learn the counter-productiveness of trying to dictate a vision, no matter how heartfelt (1990, p.9).[6] "Collaborative efforts may seem at first to be hard to organize and keep going, yet under the PLC model of small groups working together within a larger group, the collaborative teams can be organized as either academic, grade level, or any other sub group that works well within the framework of what the PLCs are hoping to accomplish (Norwood, 2007)[7]".

Through this commitment and creation of a shared vision the team, including leaders and participants, becomes empowered to work together and achieve goals. PLCs are not effective when the team is being told what to do and does not collaborate. PLCs must be a joint venture for it is true that, "Top-down mandates and bottom-up energies need each other.".[8] This process involves sharing diverse ideas and making compromises so that all members are satisfied with the direction in which the organization is moving.

Authentic instruction
In regards to authentic instruction, student achievement, and teacher empowerment the results of PLCs can be tremendous.[9][10] This statement is supported by Hord who states, "The benefits of professional learning community to educators and students include reduced isolation of teachers, better informed and committed teachers, and academic gains for students".[1] Expert Michael Fullan has found that PLCs are necessary, stating "Numerous studies document the fact that professional learning communities or collaborative work cultures at the school and ideally at the district level are critical for the implementation of attempted reforms."[11]

There are many core characteristics of PLCs (Louis, in press) including collective team work in which leadership and responsibility for student learning are extensively shared, a focus on reflective inquiry, emphasis on improving student learning, shared values and norms, and development of common practices and feedback. Dufour & Eaker (1998) and Levine & Shapiro (2004) as cited in Education for All further break down these points and indicate the characteristics of PLCs are as follows:[3] Shared vision and values that lead to a collective commitment of school staff, which is expressed in day-to-day practices Solutions actively sought, openness to new ideas Working teams cooperate to achieve common goals Encouragement of experimentation as an opportunity to learn Questioning of the status quo, leading to an ongoing quest for improvement and professional learning Continuous improvement based on evaluation of outcomes rather than on the intentions expressed Reflection in order to study the operation and impacts of actions taken

Professional learning community


Educational community building

"If schools are to be significantly more effective, they must break from the industrial model upon which they were created and embrace a new model that enables them to function as learning organizations. We prefer characterizing learning organizations as professional learning communities for several vital reasons. While the term organization suggests a partnership enhanced by efficiency, expediency, and mutual interests, community places greater emphasis on relationships, shared ideals, and a strong culture all factors that are critical to school improvement. The challenge for educators is to create a community of commitment a professional learning community. It sounds simple enough, but as the old adage warns, the devil is in the details."[12] In an educational setting a PLC may contain people from multiple levels of the organization who are collaboratively and continually working together for the betterment of the organization. Peter Senge believes "it is no longer sufficient to have one person learning for the organization."[13] The idea that there is one main decision maker who controls the organization is not sufficient in todays school; all people within the community must work effectively towards common goals. A major principle of PLCs is that people learn more together than if they were on their own. The idea of team learning is an interesting concept that teachers work to promote in their classrooms but often do not practice in their professional lives. Senge suggests that when teams learn together there are beneficial results for the organization.[13] It becomes the team, not the individual, that is viewed as the main learning unit. High-quality collaboration has become no less than an imperative.[14] Team learning builds upon personal mastery and shared vision. This involves creating a snapshot of what is important to both individuals and the school community. Although individuals are responsible for their own actions, feelings and opinions, it is the common good of the community that guides decision making.

It is important for leadership in the schools to establish and maintain PLCs.[15] Successful PLCs will require a shift in the traditional leadership role from leader-centered (top-down) to shared leadership. Often, a top down leader will create the vision statement and then staff members will be encouraged to adhere to the goals outlined in the statement. Thompson, Gregg and Niska (2004)[16] point out how many educators often feel that "new ideas that came from someone else without teacher input" is a waste of time and does not qualify as true leadership or support. Principals need to lead from the center rather than the top.[15] The view of the principal as the instructional leader is changing to one that reflects the principals role within a community of learners and leaders. "The practice of shared vision involves the skills of unearthing shared pictures of the future that foster genuine commitment and enrolment rather than compliance. In mastering this discipline, leaders learn the counter-productiveness of trying to dictate a vision, no matter how heartfelt"[6] Through this commitment and creation of a shared vision the team becomes empowered to work together and achieve goals. As teachers capacity increases and they develop a feeling of success, they will better understand that when they ally their strengths and skills they are able to reach goals they could not reach on their own.

Professional learning community


[1] Hord, S.M. (1997). Professional Learning Communities: What are they and why are they important? (http:/ / www. sedl. org/ change/ issues/ issues61. html) Issues about Change. 6(1). [2] DuFour, R. (2004). "Schools as learning communities," (http:/ / www. mesd. k12. or. us/ si/ dufour_PLCs. pdf) Educational Leadership, 61(8) p 6-11. [3] Ministry of Education. (2005). Education for all: The report of the expert panel on literacy and numeracy instruction for students with special education needs, kindergarten to grade 6. (http:/ / www. edu. gov. on. ca/ eng/ document/ reports/ speced/ panel/ speced. pdf), Ontario Education, ISBN 0-7794-8060-0 Retrieved November 16, 2006 [4] Buffum, A., & Hinman, C. (2006). Professional learning communities: reigniting passion and purpose. Leadership, 35(5), 16-19. [5] Riley, K., & Stoll, L. (2004). Inside-out and outside-in: Why schools need to think about communities in new ways. Education Review, 18(1), 34-41. [6] Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Currency Doubleday. [7] Norwood, J. (2007). Professional Learning Communities to Increase Student Achievement. Essays in Education 20, 33-42 [8] Fullan, M. (1999). Change Forces: The Sequel. New York: Falmer Press. [9] Marks, H. & Loius, K. (1999). Teacher empowerment and the capacity for organizational learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(5), 707-750. [10] Marks, H. & Loius, K. (1998). Does professional community affect the classroom? Teacher work and student work in restructuring schools. American Journal of Education, 106(4), 532-57. [11] Fullan, M. (2001). The New Meaning of Educational Change. New York: Teachers College Press. p 74. [12] (DuFour & Eaker, 1998, as cited in James, L. (2005) (http:/ / www. nevada. edu/ spo/ plc/ pdf) [13] Senge, P. (2000). Give me a lever long enough...and single handed I can move the world. In The Jossey-Bass Reader on Educational Leadership (pp.13-25). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [14] Gajda, R. (2007). Evaluating the imperative of intraorganizational collaboration. (http:/ / aje. sagepub. com/ cgi/ content/ abstract/ 28/ 1/ 26) American Journal of Evaluation, 28(1), 26-44. [15] Dufour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student achievement. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service. [16] Thompson, S., Gregg, L., & Niska, J. (2004). Professional Learning Communities, Leadership, and Student Learning. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 28(1), 35-54.

External links
Professional Learning Communities: What Are They And Why Are They Important ( change/issues/issues61.html) All Things PLC (

Situated cognition


Situated cognition
Situated cognition is a theory that poses that knowing is inseparable from doing[1] by arguing that all knowledge is situated in activity bound to social, cultural and physical contexts.[2] Under this assumption, which requires an epistemological shift from empiricism, situativity theorists suggest a model of knowledge and learning that requires thinking on the fly rather than the storage and retrieval of conceptual knowledge. In essence, cognition cannot be separated from the context. Instead knowing exists, in situ, inseparable from context, activity, people, culture, and language. Therefore, learning is seen in terms of an individual's increasingly effective performance across situations rather than in terms of an accumulation of knowledge, since what is known is co-determined by the agent and the context. This perspective rejects mind-body dualism and person-environment dualism.

While situated cognition gained recognition in the field of educational psychology in the late twentieth century,[3] it shares many principles with older fields such as critical theory, (Frankfurt School, 1930; Freire, 1968) anthropology (Jean Lave & Wenger, 1991), philosophy (Martin Heidegger, 1968), critical discourse analysis (Fairclough, 1989), and sociolinguistics theories (Bhaktin, 1981) that rejected the notion of truly objective knowledge and the principles of Kantian empiricism. Situated cognition draws a variety of perspectives, from an anthropological study of human behavior within communities of practice[4] to the ecological psychology of the perception-action cycle[5] and intentional dynamics,[6] and even research on robotics with work on autonomous agents at NASA and elsewhere (e.g., work by W. J. Clancey). Early attempts to define situated cognition focused on contrasting the emerging theory with information processing theories dominant in cognitive psychology.[7] Recent perspectives of situated cognition have focused on and draw from the concept of identity formation[4] as people negotiate meaning through interactions within communities of practice.[8] Situated cognition perspectives have been adopted in education,[9] instructional design,[10] online communities and artificial intelligence (see Brooks, Clancey). Grounded Cognition, concerned with the role of simulations and embodiment in cognition, encompasses Cognitive Linguistics, Situated Action, Simulation and Social Simulation theories. Research has contributed to the understanding of embodied language, memory, and the representation of knowledge.[11] Recently theorists have recognized a natural affinity between situated cognition, New Literacy Studies and new literacies research (Gee, 2010). This connection is made by understanding that situated cognition maintains that individuals learn through experiences. It could be stated that these experiences, and more importantly the mediators that affect attention during these experiences is affected by the tools, technologies and languages used by a socio-cultural group and the meanings given to these by the collective group. New literacies research examines the context and contingencies that language and tool use by individuals and how this changes as the Internet and other communication technologies affect literacy.[12]


Situated cognition


Term affordance

Definition properties of the environment, specified in the information array (flow field) of the individual, that present possibilities for action and are available for an agent to perceive directly and act upon Once an intention (goal) is adopted, the agents perception (attention) is attuned to the affordances of the environment.

attention and intention attunement community of practice

attunement is a persisting state of awareness of the affordances in the environment and how they may be acted upon The concept of a **community of practice** (often abbreviated as CoP) refers to the process of social learning that occurs and shared sociocultural practices that emerge and evolve when people who have common goals interact as they strive towards those goals. perception of what doesn't change across different situations

detection of invariants direct perception (pick up) effectivities embodiment

describes the way an agent in an environment senses affordances without the need for computation or symbolic representation The agents ability to recognize and use affordances of the environment. as an explanation of cognition emphasizes first that the body exists as part of the world. In a dynamic process, perception and action occurring through and because of the body being in the world, interact to allow for the processes of simulation and representation. the initial stage(s) of a person's active membership in a community of practice to which he or she has access and the opportunity to become a full participant.

legitimate peripheral participation

perceiving and acting Gibson (1986) described a continuous perception-action cycle, which is dynamic and ongoing. Agents perceive and act with cycle intentionality in the environment at all times.

Key principles
J. J. Gibson introduced the idea of affordances as part of a relational account of perception.[13] Perception should not be considered solely as the encoding of environmental features into the perceiver's mind, but as an element of an individual's interaction with her environment (Gibson, 1977). Central to his proposal of an ecological psychology was the notion of affordances. Gibson proposed that in any interaction between an agent and the environment, inherent conditions or qualities of the environment allow the agent to perform certain actions with the environment.[14] He defined the term as properties in the environment that presented possibilities for action and were available for an agent to perceive directly and act upon.[15] Gibson focused on the affordances of physical objects, such as doorknobs and chairs, and suggested that these affordances were directly perceived by an individual instead of mediated by mental representations such as mental models. It is important to note that Gibson's notion of direct perception as an unmediated process of noticing, perceiving, and encoding specific attributes from the environment, has long been challenged by proponents of a more category-based model of perception. This focus on agent-situation interactions in ecological psychology was consistent with the situated cognition program of researchers such as James G. Greeno (1994, 1998), who appreciated Gibson's apparent rejection of the factoring assumptions underlying experimental psychology. The situated cognition perspective focused on "perception-action instead of memory and retrievalA perceiving/acting agent is coupled with a developing/adapting environment and what matters is how the two interact".[16] Greeno (1994) also suggested that affordances are "preconditions for activity," and that while they do not determine behavior, they increase the likelihood that a certain action or behavior will occur. Shaw, Turvey, & Mace (as cited by Greeno, 1994) later introduced the term effectivities, the abilities of the agent that determined what the agent could do, and consequently, the interaction that could take place. Perception and

Situated cognition action were co-determined by the effectivities and affordances, which acted 'in the moment' together.[17] Therefore, the agent directly perceived and interacted with the environment, determining what affordances could be picked up, based on his effectivities. This view is consistent with Norman's (1988) theory of "perceived affordances," which emphasizes the agent's perception of an object's utility as opposed to focusing on the object itself. An interesting question is the relationship between affordances and mental representations as set forth in a more cognitivist perspective. While Greeno (1998) argues that attunements to affordances are superior to constructs such as schemata and mental models, Glenberg & Robertson (1999) suggested that affordances are the building blocks of mental models.


Perception (Variance/Invariance)
The work of Gibson (1986) in the field of visual perception greatly influences situated cognition.[14] Gibson argued that visual perception is not a matter of the eye translating inputs into symbolic representation in the brain. Instead the viewer perceives and picks up on the infinite amount of information available in the environment. Specifically, an agent perceives affordances by discovering the variants, what changes, and more importantly the invariants, what does not change across different situations. Given a specific intention (or intentional set),Wikipedia:Please clarify perceptions of invariants are co-determined by the agent and the affordances of the environment, and are then built upon over time.Wikipedia:Please clarify

Situated cognition and ecological psychology perspectives emphasize perception and propose that memory plays a significantly diminished role in the learning process. Rather, focus is on the continuous tuning of perceptions and actions across situations based on the affordances of the environment and the interaction of the agent within that environment (Greeno, 1994). Representations are not stored and checked against past knowledge, but are created and interpreted in activity (Clancey, 1990). Situated cognition understands memory as an interaction with the world, bounded by meaningful situations, that brings an agent toward a specified goal (intention). Thus, perception and action are co-determined by the effectivities and affordances, which act 'in the moment' together.[18] Therefore, the agent directly perceives and interacts with the environment, determining what affordances can be picked up, based on his effectivities, and does not simply recall stored symbolic representations.

Situativity theorists recast knowledge not as an entity, thing, or noun, but as knowing as an action or verb.[14] It is not an entity which can be collected as in knowledge acquisition models. Instead knowing is reciprocally co-determined between the agent and environment.[19] This reciprocal interaction can not be separated from the context and its cultural and historical constructions.[4] Therefore knowing isn't a matter of arriving at any single truth but instead it is a particular stance that emerges from the agent-environment interaction.[19] Knowing emerges as individuals develop intentions[20] through goal-directed activities within cultural contexts which may in turn have larger goals and claims of truth. The adoption of intentions relates to the direction of the agent's attention to the detection of affordances in the environment that will lead to accomplishment of desired goals. Knowing is expressed in the agent's ability to act as an increasingly competent participant in a community of practice. As agents participate more fully within specific communities of practice, what constitutes knowing continuously evolves.[4] For example a novice environmentalist may not look at water quality by examining oxygen levels but may consider the color and smell.[19] Through participation and enculturation within different communities, agents express knowing through action.

Situated cognition


Since knowing is rooted in action and can not be decontextualized from individual, social, and historical goals[19] teaching approaches that focus on conveying facts and rules separately from the contexts within which they are meaningful in real-life do not allow for learning that is based on the detection of invariants. They are therefore considered to be impoverished methods that are unlikely to lead to transfer. Learning must involve more than the transmission of knowledge but must instead encourage the expression of effectivities and the development of attention and intention[21] through rich contexts[22] that reflect real life learning processes.[4] Learning, more specifically literacy learning is affected by the Internet and other communication technologies as also evidenced in other segments of society. As a result of this youth are recently using affordances provided by these tools to become experts in a variety of domains.[23] These practices by youth are viewed as them becoming "pro-ams" and becoming experts in whatever they have developed a passion for.[24]

Individuals don't just read or write texts, they interact with them, and often these interactions involve others in various socio-cultural contexts. Since language is often the basis for monitoring and tracking learning gains in comprehension, content knowledge and tool use in and out of school the role of situated cognition in language learning activities is important. Membership and interaction in social and cultural groups is often determined by tools, technologies and discourse use for full participation. Language learning or literacy in various social and cultural groups must include how the groups work with and interact with these texts.[23] Language instruction in the context of situated cognition also involves the skilled or novice use of language by members of the group, and instruction of not only the elements of language, but what is needed to bring a student to the level of expert. Originating from emergent literacy,[25] specialist-language lessons examines the formal and informal styles and discourses of language use in socio-cultural contexts.[26] A function of specialist-language lessons includes "lucidly functional language", or complex specialist language is usually accompanied by clear and lucid language used to explain the rules, relationships or meanings existing between language and meaning.[23]

Legitimate peripheral participation

According to Jean Lave and Wenger (1991) legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) provides a framework to describe how individuals ('newcomers') become part of a community of learners. Legitimate peripheral participation was central to Lave and Wenger's take on situated cognition (referred to as "situated activity") because it introduced socio-cultural and historical realizations of power and access to the way thinking and knowing are legitimated. They stated, "Hegemony over resources for learning and alienation from full participation are inherent in the shaping of the legitimacy and peripherality of participation in its historical realizations" (p.42). Lave and Wenger's (1991) research on the phenomenon of apprenticeship in communities of practice not only provided a unit of analysis for locating an individual's multiple, changing levels and ways of participation, but also implied that all participants, through increased involvement, have access to, acquire, and use resources available to their particular community. To illustrate the role of LPP in situated activity, Lave and Wenger (1991) examined five apprenticeship scenarios (Yucatec midwives, Vai and Gola tailors, naval quartermasters, meat cutters, and nondrinking alcoholics involved in AA). Their analysis of apprenticeship across five different communities of learners lead them to several conclusions about the situatedness of LPP and its relationship to successful learning. Key to newcomers' success included: access to all that community membership entails, involvement in productive activity, learning the discourse(s) of the community including "talking about and talking within a practice," (p.109), and willingness of the community to capitalize on the inexperience of newcomers, "Insofar as this continual interaction of new perspectives is sanctioned, everyone's participation is legitimately peripheral in some respect. In other words, everyone can to some degree be considered a 'newcomer' to the future of a changing

Situated cognition community"[27]


Representation, Symbols, and Schema

In situated theories, the term "representation" refers to external forms in the environment that are created through social interactions to express meaning (language, art, gestures, etc.) and are perceived and acted upon in the first person sense. "Representing" in the first person sense is conceived as an act of re-experiencing in the imagination that involves the dialectic of ongoing perceiving and acting in coordination with the activation of neural structures and processes. This form of reflective representation is considered to be a secondary type of learning, while the primary form of learning is found in the "adaptive recoordination that occurs with every behavior".[28] Conceptualizing is considered to be a "prelinguistic" act, while "knowing" involves creative interaction with symbols in both their interpretation and use for expression. "Schema" develop as neural connections become biased through repeated activations to reactivate in situations that are perceived and conceived as temporally and compositionally similar to previous generalized situations.[28]

Goals, Intention and Attention

The Young-Barab Model (1998) pictured to the left, illustrates the dynamics of intentions and intentional dynamics involved in the agents interaction with his environment when problem solving. Dynamics of Intentions:[29] goal (intention) adoption from among all possible goals (ontological descent). This describes how the learner decides whether or not to adopt a particular goal when presented with a problem. Once a goal is adopted, the learner proceeds by interacting with their environment through intentional dynamics. There are many levels of intentions, but at the moment of a particular occasion, the agent has just one intention, and that intention constrains his behavior until it is fulfilled or annihilated. Intentional Dynamics:[29] dynamics that unfold when the agent has only one intention (goal) and begins to act towards it, perceiving and acting.[15] It is a trajectory towards the achievement of a solution or goal, the process of tuning ones perception (attention). Each intention is meaningfully bounded, where the dynamics of that intention inform the agent of whether or not he is getting closer to achieving his goal. If the agent is not getting closer to his goal, he will take corrective action, and then continue forward. This is the agents intentional dynamics, and continues on until he achieves his goal.

There are various definition of transfer found within the situated cognition umbrella. Researchers interested in social practice often define transfer as increased participation.[4] Ecological psychology perspectives define transfer as the detection of invariance across different situations.[30] Furthermore transfer can only "occur when there is a confluence of an individual's goals and objectives, their acquired abilities to act, and a set of affordances for action".[31]

Embodied cognition
The traditional cognition approach assumes that perception and motor systems are merely peripheral input and output devices.[32] However, embodied cognition posits that the mind and body interact 'on the fly' as a single entity. An example of embodied cognition is seen in the area of robotics, where movements are not based on internal representations, rather, they are based on the robots direct and immediate interaction with its environment.[33] Additionally, research has shown that embodied facial expressions influence judgments,[34] and arm movements are related to a persons evaluation of a word or concept.[35] In the later example, the individual would pull or push a lever towards his name at a faster rate for positive words, then for negative words. These results appeal to the embodied nature of situated cognition, where knowledge is the achievement of the whole body in its interaction with the world.

Situated cognition


As to the mind, by and large, situated cognition paves the way to various form of externalism. The issue is whether the situated aspect of cognition has only a practical value or it is somehow constitutive of cognition and perhaps of consciousness itself. As to the latter possibility, there are different positions. David Chalmers and Andy Clark, who developed the hugely debated model of the extended mind, explicitly rejected the externalization of consciousness.[36] For them, only cognition is extended. On the other hand, others, like Riccardo Manzotti[36] or Teed Rockwell,[37] explicitly considered the possibility to situate conscious experience in the environment.

Pedagogical Implications
Since situated cognition views knowing as an action within specific contexts and views Direct Instruction models of knowledge transmission as impoverished, there are significant implications for pedagogical practices. First, curriculum requires instructional design that draws on apprenticeship models common in real life.[3] Second, curricular design should rely on contextual narratives that situate concepts in practice. Classroom practices such as Project Based Learning and Problem Based Learning would qualify as consistent with the situated learning perspective, as would techniques such as Case Base Learning, Anchored Instruction, and Cognitive Apprenticeship.

Cognitive Apprenticeship
Cognitive Apprenticeships were one of the earliest pedagogical designs to incorporate the theories of situated cognition (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989). Cognitive apprenticeship uses four dimensions (e.g., content, methods, sequence, sociology) to embed learning in activity and make deliberate the use of the social and physical contexts present in the classroom (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; Collins, Brown, & Newman, 1989). Cognitive apprenticeship includes the enculturation of students into authentic practices through activity and social interaction (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989). The technique draws on the principles of Legitimate Peripheral Participation (Lave & Wenger, 1991) and reciprocal teaching (Palinscar & Brown, 1984; 1989) in that a more knowledgeable other, i.e. a teacher, engages in a task with a more novice other, i.e. a learner, by describing their own thoughts as they work on the task, providing "just in time" scaffolding, modeling expert behaviors, and encouraging reflection.[38] The reflection process includes having students alternate between novice and expert strategies in a problem-solving context, sensitizing them to specifics of an expert performance, and adjustments that may be made to their own performance to get them to the expert level (Collins & Brown, 1988; Collins, Brown, & Newman, 1989). Thus, the function of reflection indicates "co-investigation" and/or abstracted replay by students.[39] Collins, Brown, and Newman (1989) emphasized six critical features of a cognitive apprenticeship that included observation, coaching, scaffolding, modeling, fading, and reflection. Using these critical features, expert(s) guided students on their journey to acquire the cognitive and metacognitive processes and skills necessary to handle a variety of tasks, in a range of situations[40] Reciprocal teaching, a form of cognitive apprenticeship, involves the modeling and coaching of various comprehension skills as teacher and students take turns in assuming the role of instructor.

Anchored Instruction
Anchored instruction is grounded in a story or narrative that presents a realistic (but fictional) situation and raises an overarching question or problem (compare with an essential question posed by a teacher). This approach is designed to 1) engage the learner with a problem or series of related problems, 2) require the learner to develop goals and discover subgoals related to solving the problem(s), and 3) provide the learner with extensive and diverse opportunities to explore the problem(s) in a shared context with classmates. For example, a Spanish teacher uses a video drama series focused on the murder of a main character. Students work in small groups to summarize parts of the story, to create hypotheses about the murderer and motive, and to create a presentation of their solution to the class. Stories are often paired so that across the set students can detect the invariant structure of the underlying

Situated cognition knowledge (so 2 episodes about distance-rate-time, one about boats and one about planes, so students can perceive how the distance-rate-time relationship holds across differences in vehicles). The ideal smallest set of instances needed provide students the opportunity to detect invariant structure has been referred to as a "generator set" of situations. The goal of anchored instruction is the engagement of intention and attention. Through authentic tasks across multiple domains, educators present situations that require students to create or adopt meaningful goals (intentions). One of the educators objectives can be to set a goal through the use of an anchor problem.[41] A classic example of anchored instruction is the Jasper series.[42] The Jasper series includes a variety of videodisc adventures focused on problem formulation and problem solving. Each videodisc used a visual narrative to present an authentic, realistic everyday problem. The objective was for students to adopt specific goals (intentions) after viewing the story and defining a problem. These newly adopted goals guided students through the collaborative process of problem formulation and problem solving.


Perceiving and Acting in Avatar-based Virtual Worlds

Virtual worlds provide unique affordances for embodied learning, i.e. hands on, interactive, spatially oriented, that ground learning in experience. Here "embodied" means acting in a virtual world enabled by an avatar. Contextual affordances of online games and virtual environments allow learners to engage in goal-driven activity, authentic interactions, and collaborative problem-solving - all considered in situated theories of learning to be features of optimal learning. In terms of situated assessment, virtual worlds have the advantage of facilitating dynamic feedback that directs the perceiving/acting agent, through an avatar, to continually improve performance.

Research Methodologies
The situative perspective is focused on interactive systems in which individuals interact with one another and physical and representational systems. Research takes place in situ and in real-world settings, reflecting assumptions that knowledge is constructed within specific contexts which have specific situational affordances. Mixed methods and qualitative methodologies are the most prominently used by researchers. In qualitative studies, methods used are varied but the focus is often on the increased participation in specific communities of practice, the affordances of the environment that are acted upon by the agent, and the distributed nature of knowing in specific communities. A major feature of quantitative methods used in situated cognition is the absence of outcome measures. Quantitative variables used in mixed methods often focus on process over product. For example trace nodes, dribble files, and hyperlink pathways are often used to track how students interact in the environment.[43]

Critiques of Situativity
In "Situated Action: A Symbolic Interpretation" Vera and Simon wrote: " . . . the systems usually regarded as exemplifying Situated Action are thoroughly symbolic (and representational), and, to the extent that they are limited in these respects, have doubtful prospects for extension to complex tasks"[44] Vera and Simon (1993) also claimed that the information processing view is supported by many years of research in which symbol systems simulated "broad areas of human cognition" and that that there is no evidence of cognition without representation. Anderson, Reder and Simon (1996) summarized what they considered to be the four claims of situated learning and argued against each claim from a cognitivist perspective. The claims and their arguments were: 1. Claim: Activity and learning are bound to the specific situations in which they occur. Argument: Whether learning is bound to context or not depends on both the kind of learning and the way that it is learned. 2. Claim: Knowledge does not transfer between tasks. Argument: There is ample evidence of successful transfer between tasks in the literature. Transfer depends on initial practice and the degree to which a successive task has

Situated cognition similar cognitive elements to a prior task. 3. Claim: Teaching abstractions is ineffective. Argument: Abstract instruction can be made effective by combining of abstract concepts and concrete examples. 4. Claim: Instruction must happen in complex social contexts. Argument: Research shows value in individual learning and on focusing individually on specific skills in a skill set. Anderson, Reder and Simons summarize their concerns when they say: "What is needed to improve learning and teaching is to continue to deepen our research into the circumstances that determine when narrower or broader contexts are required and when attention to narrower or broader skills are optimal for effective and efficient learning" (p.10).


[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] John Seely Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; Greeno, 1989 Greeno & Moore, 1993 Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989 Lave & Wenger, 1991 J. J. Gibson, 1986

[6] Shaw, Kadar, Sim & Reppenger, 1992 [7] Bredo, 1994 [8] Brown & Duguid, 2000; Clancey, 1994 [9] Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989) [10] Young, 2004 [11] Barsalou, 2007 [12] Leu et al., 2009 [13] Gibson, 1977 [14] Greeno, 1994 [15] Gibson 1979/1986 [16] Young, Kulikowich, & Barab, 1997, p.139 [17] Gibson 1979/1986; Greeno, 1994; Young et al., 1997 [18] Gibson 1979/1986; Greeno, 1994; Young Kulikowich, & Barab, 1997 [19] Barab & Roth, 2006 [20] Young, 1997 [21] Young, 2004b [22] Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt, 1990 [23] Gee, 2010 [24] Anderson, 2006; Leadbeater & Miller, 2004 [25] Dickinson & Neuman, 2006; Gee, 2004 [26] Gee, 2004; Gee, 2007 [27] Lave & Wenger, 1991, p.117 [28] Clancey, 1993 [29] Kugler et al., 1991; Shaw et al., 1992; Young et al., 1997 [30] Young & McNeese, 1995 [31] Young et al., 1997, p.147 [32] Niedenthal, 2007; Wilson, 2002 [33] Wilson, 2002 [34] Niedenthal, 2007 [35] Markman, & Brendl, 2005 [36] Clark, A., (2008), Supersizing the Mind, Oxford, Oxford University Press. [37] Rockwell, 2005 #1561 [38] Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1985; Scardamalia, Bereiter. & Steinbach, 1984 [39] Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1983; Collins & Brown, 1988 [40] Collins et al.,1989 [41] Barab & Roth, 2006; Young et al., 1997 [42] The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt, 1990; Young et al., 1997; Young & McNeese, 1995

Situated cognition
[43] Shaw, Effken, Fajen, Garret & Morris, 1997 [44] Vera & Simon, 1993, p.7


Anderson, J.R.; Reder, L.M.; Simon, H.A. (1996). "Situated learning and education". Educational Researcher 25 (4): 511. Bredo, E. (1994). "Reconstructing educational psychology: Situated cognition and Deweyian pragmatism". Educational Psychologist 29 (1): 2335. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep2901_3 ( s15326985ep2901_3). Brown, J. S.; Collins, A. & Duguid, S. (1989). "Situated cognition and the culture of learning" (http://www. Educational Researcher 18 (1): 3242. Clancey, W. J (1993). "Situated action: A neuropsychological interpretation response to Vera and Simon". Cognitive Science 17: 87116. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog1701_7 ( s15516709cog1701_7). Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1990). "Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition". Educational Research 19 (6): 210. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1993). Anchored instruction and situated cognition revisited. Educational Technology March Issue, 52-70. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1994). From visual word problems to learning communities: Changing conceptions of cognitive research. In K. McGilly (Ed.) Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom proactice. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. Driscoll, M. P. (2004). Psychology of learning for instruction (3 ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Allyn & Bacon. ISBN0-205-37519-7. Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). "A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality". Psychological Review 95 (2): 256273. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256 ( 0033-295X.95.2.256). Engle, R.A. (2006). Framing interactions to foster generative learning: A situative explanation of transfer in a community of learners classroom 15 (4). pp.451498. Eysenck, M. W., & Keane, M. T. (2005). Cognitive psychology (5 ed.). New York: Psychology Press. ISBN1-84169-359-6. Gagne, R. M., Wager, W.W., Golas, K. C., & Keller, J. M. (2005). Principles of Instructional Design (5 ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. ISBN0-534-58284-2. Gibson, James J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. ISBN0-89859-959-8. Glenberg, A. M.; Robertson, D. A. (1999). "Indexical understanding of instructions". Discourse Processes 28 (1): 126. doi: 10.1080/01638539909545067 ( Greeno, J. G. (1989). "A perspective on thinking". American Psychologist 44 (2): 134141. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.44.2.134 ( Greeno, J. G. (1994). "Gibson's affordances". Psychological Review 101 (2): 336342. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.101.2.336 ( PMID 8022965 (http:// Greeno, J. G. (1998). "The situativity of knowing, learning, and research". American Psychologist 53 (1): 526. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.53.1.5 ( Greeno, J. G. (2006). "Authoritative, accountable positioning and connected, general knowing: Progressive themes in understanding transfer". J. of the Learning Sciences 15 (4): 539550. Hart, L. A. (1990). Human Brain & Human Learning. Black Diamond, WA: Books for Educators. ISBN978-0-9624475-9-4.

Situated cognition Kugler, P. N., Shaw, R. E., Vicente, K. J., & Kinsella-Shaw, J. (1991). The role of attractors in the self-organization of intentional systems. In R. R. Hoffman and D. S. Palermo (Eds.) Cognition and the Symbolic Processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Lave, J. (1977). "Cognitive consequences of traditional apprenticeship training in West Africa". Anthroppology and Education Quarterly 18 (3): 1776180. Markman, A. B., & Brendl, C. M. (2005). "Constraining theories of embodied cognition". Psychological Science 16 (1): 610. doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.00772.x ( x). PMID 15660844 ( Niedenthal, P. M. (2007). "Embodying emotion". Science 316 (5827): 10021005. doi: 10.1126/science.1136930 ( PMID 17510358 ( 17510358). Ormrod, J. E. (2004). Human learning (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. ISBN0-13-094199-9. Palinscar, A.S., & Brown, A.L. (1984). "Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and monitoring activities". Cognition and Instruction 1 (2): 117115. doi: 10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1 ( 1207/s1532690xci0102_1). Roth, W-M (1996). "Knowledge diffusion in a grade 4-5 classroom during a unit on civil engineering: An analysis of a classroom community in terms of its changing resources and practices". Cognition and Instruction 14 (2): 179220. doi: 10.1207/s1532690xci1402_2 ( Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2003). Knowledge building. In J. W. Guthrie (Ed.) Encyclopedia of Education (2nd Ed., pp.13701373). New York: Macmillan Reference. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. ISBN0-395-61556-9. Shaw, R.E.; Effken, J; Fajen, B.R.; Garrett, S.R.; Morris, A. (1997). "An ecological approach to the on-line assessment of problem-solving paths: Principles and applications". Instructional Science 25 (2): 151166. doi: 10.1023/A:1002975703555 ( Shaw, R. E.; Kadar, E.; Sim, M.; Repperger, D. W. (1992). "The intentional spring: A strategy for modeling systems that learn to perform intentional acts". Journal of Motor Behavior 24 (1): 328. doi: 10.1080/00222895.1992.9941598 ( PMID 14766495 ( Weiner, B. (1994). "Ability versus effort revisited: The moral determinants of achievement evaluation and achievement as a moral system". Educational Psychology Review 12: 114. doi: 10.1023/A:1009017532121 ( Wilson, M. (2002). "Six views of embodied cognition". Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 9 (4): 625636. doi: 10.3758/BF03196322 ( Wilson, B.B., & Myers, K. M. (2000). Situated Cognition in Theoretical and Practical Context. In D. Jonassen, & S. Land (Eds.) Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments. (pp.5788). Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Young, M. F.; Kulikowich, J. M.; Barab, S. A. (1997). "The unit of analysis for situated assessment". Instructional Science 25 (2): 133150. doi: 10.1023/A:1002971532689 ( A:1002971532689). Young, M., & McNeese, M.(1995). A Situated Cognition Approach to Problem Solving. In P. Hancock, J. Flach, J. Caid, & K. Vicente (Eds.) Local Applications of the Ecological Approach to Human Machine Systems.(pp.359391). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Young, M. (2004a). An Ecological Description of Video Games in Education. Proceedings of the International Conference on Education and Information Systems Technologies and Applications (EISTA), July 22, Orlando, FL, pp.203208.


Situated cognition Young, M. (2004b). An ecological psychology of instructional design: Learning and thinking by perceiving-acting systems. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology, 2nd Ed. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.


Citations & Further reading

Anderson, J. R.; Greeno, J. G.; Reder, L. M.; Simon, H. A. (2000). "Perspectives on learning, thinking, and activity" ( (PDF). Educational Researcher 29 (4): 1113. CiteSeerX: ( summary?doi= Anderson, C. (2006). The long tail: Why the future of business is selling less of more. New York: Hyperion. Brown, A. L. (1992). "Design experiments:Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating in complext interventions in classroom settings". Journal of the Learning Sciences 2 (2): 141178. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2 ( Clancey, William J. (1997). Situated Cognition: On Human Knowledge and Computer Representation. New York: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.2277/0521448719 ( ISBN0-521-44871-9. "Special Issue: Situated Action". Cognitive Science (Norwood, NJ: Ablex) 17 (1). Jan-March 1993. Collins, A., & Brown, J. (1988). The computer as a tool for learning through reflection. In H. Mandi & A. Lesgold (Eds.), Learning issues for intelligent tutoring systems (pp.118). New York: Springer-Verlag. Collins, A., Brown, J., & Newman, S. (1989). Cognitive Apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience & Education. New York: Simon & Schuster. ISBN0-684-83828-1. Dickinson, D. K., & Neuman, S. B. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of Early Literacy Research, Vol. 2. New York: Guilford Press. Gallagher, S., Robbins, B.D., & Bradatan, C. (2007). Special issue on the situated body. Janus Head: Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature, Continental Philosophy, Phenomenological Psychology, and the Arts, 9(2). URL: Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated Language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling. London: Routledge. Gee, J. P. (2007). Good video games and good learning: Collected essays on video games, learning, and literacy. New York: Lang. Gee, J. P. (2010). A Situated-Sociocultural Approach to Literacy and Technology. In E. Baker (Ed.), The New Literacies: Multiple Perspectives on Research and Practice, pp.165193. New York: Guilford Press. Greeno, J. G. (1994). "Gibson's affordances". Psychological Review 101 (2): 336342. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.101.2.336 ( PMID 8022965 (http:// Greeno, J. G. (1997). "On claims that answer the wrong question". Educational Research 26 (1): 517. doi: 10.3102/0013189X026001005 ( Greeno, J.G.; Middle School, Mathematics Through Applications Project Group (1998). "The situativity of knowing, learning, and research". American Psychologist 53 (1): 526. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.53.1.5 (http:// Greeno, J. G. (2006). "Authoritative, accountable positioning and connected, general knowing: Progressive themes in understanding transfer". Journal of the Learning Sciences 15 (4): 539550. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls1504_4 ( Griffin, M. M. (1995). "You can't get there from here: Situated learning, transfer, and map skills". Contemporary Educational Psychology 20: 6587. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1995.1004 ( 1004).

Situated cognition Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press (A Bradford Book). ISBN0-262-58146-9. Keller, C. & Keller, J. (1996). Cognition and Tool Use: The Blacksmith at Work. Cambridge University Press (ISBN 0-521-55239-7) Kirshner, D. & Whitson, J. A. (1997) Situated Cognition: Social, semiotic, and psychological perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum (ISBN 0-8058-2038-8) Kirshner, D.; Whitson, J. A. (1998). "Obstacles to understanding cognition as situated". Educational Researcher 27 (8): 2228. doi: 10.3102/0013189X027008022 ( JSTOR 1177113 ( Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in Practice. ISBN[[Special:BookSources/0-521-35018-8 |0-521-35018-8 ]]. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Pr.. ISBN978-0-521-42374-8. Leadbeater, C., & Miller, P. (2004). The Pro-Am revolution: How enthusiasts are changing our society and economy. London: Demos. Leu, D. J.; O'Byrne, W. I.; Zawilinski, L.; McVerry, J. G.; Everett-Cacopardo, H. (2009). "Expanding the new literacies conversation". Educational Researcher 39: 264269. doi: 10.3102/0013189X09336676 (http://dx.doi. org/10.3102/0013189X09336676). Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1983). Child as co-investigator: Helping children gain insight into their own mental processes. In S. Paris, G. Olson, & H. Stevenson (Eds.), Learning and motivation in the classroom (pp.83107). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1985). Fostering the development of self-regulation in childrens knowledge processing. In S. F. Chipman, J. W. Segal, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Thinking and learning skills: Research and open questions (pp.563577). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Scardamalia, M.; Bereiter, C.; Steinbach, R. (1984). "Teachability of reflective processes in written composition". Cognitive Science 8 (2): 173190. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog0802_4 ( s15516709cog0802_4).


Situated learning


Situated learning
Situated learning was first proposed by Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger as a model of learning in a community of practice. At its simplest, situated learning is learning that takes place in the same context in which it is applied. Lave and Wenger (1991)[1] argue that learning should not be viewed as simply the transmission of abstract and decontextualised knowledge from one individual to another, but a social process whereby knowledge is co-constructed; they suggest that such learning is situated in a specific context and embedded within a particular social and physical environment.

Lave and Wenger

Lave and Wenger assert that situated learning "is not an educational form, much less a pedagogical strategy".[2] However, since their writing, others have advocated different pedagogies that include situated activity: Workshops, kitchens, greenhouses and gardens used as classrooms Stand-up role playing in the real world setting, including most military training (much of which, though, takes a behaviourist approach) Field trips including archaeological digs and participant-observer studies in an alien culture On the job training including apprenticeship and cooperative education Sports practice, music practice and art are situated learning by definition, as the exact actions in the real setting are those of practice with the same equipment or instruments Many of the original examples from Lave and Wenger[1] concerned adult learners, and situated learning still has a particular resonance for adult education. For example, Kimble and Hildreth[3] show how adult learners discover, shape, and make explicit their own knowledge through situated learning within a community of practice. Situated learning was first projected by Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger as a model of learning in a community of practice. This type of learning allows an individual (students/learner) to learn by socialization, visualization, and imitation. Learning begins with people trying to solve problems.[4] When learning is problem based, people explore real life situations to find answers, or to solve the problems. Hungs study focuses on how important being social is to learning. In believing that learning is social, Hung adds that learners who gravitate to communities with shared interests tend to benefit from the knowledge of those who are more knowledgeable than they are. He also says that these social experiences provide people with authentic experiences. When students are in these real-life situations they are compelled to learn. Hung concludes that taking a problem-based learning approach to designing curriculum carries students to a higher level of thinking.[4] "The pedagogy of the lifelong-learning era is evolving toward reliance on interaction. Sometimes this involves interacting with a rich technological environment such as a computer tutor or a game on the web and sometimes with other people by means of a computer network. The pedagogy of computer tutors echoes the apprenticeship model in setting individualized tasks for learners and offering guidance and feedback as they work." [5] Situated learning is becoming more involved with technology in ways to help individuals learn information differently than they have in the past. The model of learning a skill through technology mimics how individuals learned in the past from a professional in that skill. In the past when individuals learned about a particular topic it was done in person, in a hands-on environment. Technology makes it possible to do these same things using a computer or any other similar device. Interaction through the computer between individuals is one more way to make situated learning more successful as well as give students an opportunity to have another venue through which to learn. In fact, an understanding of video games as learning environments is becoming increasingly important as gaming culture rivals schooling for the attention of children and adolescents across the world. James Paul Gee argues that the compelling nature of video game participation is in part due to the underlying social, cognitive, and developmental learning principles around which successful games are built. With this perspective, games and gaming can be a source for

Situated learning inspiration in building more effective learning environments. [6] Allowing students to have the opportunity to participate, interact and inject their own ideas is a way to obviously grow and make informed decisions. Gee has proven this with the use of video games. It enables the learner to build their social and communication skills as well as develop their cognition abilities. Computer-based learning software such as SimCity has permitted users to utilize situated learning by allowing them to run their own city and become dictators whereby they have to make informed decisions which will either deteriorate their people or help them thrive. As stated, more effective learning environments are built this way. Instruction must be situated in an authentic context that resembles that of the classroom teacher to enrich their learning process by providing realistic experiences that more easily transfer. [7] Students process information by visualizing, hearing, reasoning and reflecting so they tend to learn more easily by having models to go by or imitate. In some study cases, teachers have gone as far as to make the classroom environment as homey as possible, whether it is a computerized set up or a physical set up. It gives the students the look and feel of being at home in a comfortable setting which allows them to feel and learn freely. It has been proven to have a great impact on the students learning abilities. This is another innovative way of utilizing situated learning. "When today's students enter their post-education professional lives, odds are pretty good that they will be asked to work with others from around the globe collaboratively to create content for diverse and wide-ranging audiences. Odds are also pretty good that they are going to need to read and write effectively in linked environments as they locate, analyze, remix, and share the best, most relevant content online for their own learning." [8] When students complete their education they will be expected to use the skills they have learned throughout their educational career in the professional career. It is imperative that they are able to sufficiently utilize these skills to complete work goals. Through situated learning students will be able to learn the skills and also be able to accurately use the skills they have learned. Situated learning allows students to gain experience through doing in some way and from this experience they are able to be productive in their lives after they have graduated. When students complete their education they will be expected to use the skills they have learned throughout their educational career in the professional career. It is imperative that they are able to sufficiently utilize these skills to complete work goals. Through situated learning students will be able to learn the skills and also be able to accurately use the skills they have learned. Situated learning allows students to gain experience through doing in some way and from this experience they are able to be productive in their lives after they have graduated. Situated learning continues after graduation. "Almost any job-related skill can be taught by practicing the skill, and computer simulations can create immersive environments where the target skills are necessary for solving engaging problems." [9] In situations where situated learning is not possible, simulations can offer an alternative way to provide employees with an authentic learning experience. Situated learning allows employees to immediately apply what they've learned in the context of performing job-related tasks. Learning occurs among peers who perform the same function. Problem-solving and the generation of new ideas can be better supported in a social learning environment where all of the stakeholders experience the positive effects of ongoing learning. Often, the benefits of situated learning extend well beyond the immediate group of practitioners throughout the organization and the broader community. Richardson notes that, in an educational setting, teachers can use collaborative technologies in their own practice in order to gain a better understanding about how to integrate these technologies in the classroom.[8] Many online learning courses still use the traditional teacher-directed, textbook oriented curriculum that is compartmentalized by discipline. Many universities have begun to recognize that authentic situation learning must occur in online courses. A key aspect is to recognize that the unit itself must be an authentic activity and not just made up of disjointed activities. "The learning environment needs to provide ill-defined activities which have real-world relevance, and which present a single complex task to be completed over a sustained period of time, rather than a series of shorter disconnected examples."[10]


Situated learning Utley presents Hung's argument that "learning embedded in rich situations assists adult learners to reflect on their actions, and discuss issues and problems with fellow members of a learning community." [11] While it may be possible for adult learners to gain knowledge and apply theories presented in other learning environments to what they experience in a real-world setting, situated learning offers an opportunity to work with others in considering how to best apply new concepts related to the specific context of their practice. While theoretical knowledge provides a foundation, the insights and skills developed through authentic practice can lead to more meaningful learning.[8] "Learning centers are also making an impact on career educationMost of the participants are minorities, and a large proportion are African-American and Hispanic women. They range in age from 13 to 91, half of them between 20 and 31 years of age, but with a large number of teenagers as well. Most come to learn job skills and take classes at the centers, as well as to use the Internet facilities.".[12] The increase in learning centers across the country is evidence of how the U.S., and the world really, has morphed into a society of continuing learners. Much of this learning is happening in centers described by Halverson and Collins. Examples of these learning centers, which are perfect examples of situated learning, include local libraries and job training centers. These learning centers are providing adults in particular with the kind of social interaction they need to extend their learning. This supports Hung's findings that people learn by simply being in certain situations with others.[4] As organizations re-evaluate how they accomplish necessary workplace training with limited funds, they depend on informal learning that occurs within specific areas of practice to ensure that employees develop the skills they need to be effective. Reliance on structured, theoretical training programs, especially offered by third-party providers, is decreasing, and companies are finding ways to facilitate authentic learning opportunities within their communities of practice. Wagner notes that financial considerations have led to fewer managers, so organizations are looking to those who actually do the work for ideas about improving their products and services.[13] "The issue of choosing between very abstract and very specific instruction can be viewed in the following way. If abstract training is given, learners must also absorb the money and time costs of obtaining supplemental training for each distinct application. But if very specific training is given, they must completely retrain for each application" [14] ). When determining whether abstract or specific instruction are going to be more productive it is important to look at which method will be most useful to the individuals that are learning the skill. If students receive specific instruction they are going to be capable of performing those set tasks only. When students are taught abstract instruction they are exposed to more skills that will be useful in helping them obtain a variety of jobs but at the same time they may have training that is not necessarily needed. When money is "wasted" by educating individuals on things that are not needed for their future it is possible to look at the situation and realize that the monies could have been of more use in giving another individual more specific instruction.[15] "In the world of academics and policy wonks, however, a growing number of alarmist studies have appeared over the last several years about how much more unprepared young Americans are for the demands of work today than was the case twenty years ago. Workers entering the labor force in the United States are less educated than young people in many other countries" [16] Our students are coming out of school unprepared and it seems that if they were in an educational setting where situated learning was implemented as much as possible, they would be better prepared for their futures. Based on Wagner's research we are less prepared than other countries as far as education goes, which is not necessarily something new, but it is definitely something that seems to far from changing. When our students are put into situations where they learn by doing they most likely will be more successful than if they were just told how something needed to be done.


Situated learning


Situated Learning and Social Media

The act of writing in a Weblog, or blogging can go a long way toward teaching skills such as research, organizations and the synthesis of ideas. [17] Teachers/Instructors have come to realize just how important it is to utilize the web as a teaching tool for the new generation of students (Digital Natives). One of the best tools is Weblog. It gives the students an opportunity to think, research, and realize that they can write and have a voice that can be viewed and read by many who may or my not share the same idea. When students blog they are creating journals/text entries which is considered to be English (writing) and Reading; they also have the opportunity to utilize other learning tools such as videos, photos and other digital media. "Networked learning, in contrast, is committed to a vision of the social that stresses cooperation, interactivity, mutual benefit, and social engagement. The power of ten working interactively will invariably outstrip the power of one looking to beat out the other nine."

Social networks like Facebook, Twitter and Ning allow learners, once they move beyond the personal connections, to embrace a community where they can learn from each other. Social interaction is an important part of the learning process.[4] As technology has grown and become an integral part of the lives of children, teens and young adults, older adults have been forced to adapt. For example, as more adults have been forced to move through the job market recently, they've turned to technology to develop new skills and to find work. Even fast-food restaurants require job seekers to complete employment applications online. By the creation of visualizations, students learn to use different types of computer applications that will be useful as they select a direction for their future study. [19] Students learn in different manners and visualization or situated learning seems to be the most used of all learning styles. Students are able to mimic what they see and hear which enables them to retain information for the long term. Through visualizations of different types of computer applications; the students knowledge is defined by the social process of interacting and doing. It allows the students to learn naturally as a result of social behavior. The computer application acts as a guide while the students learn naturally from their own experience. As always, situated learning accelerates a student learning process and ability. Simulating the experiences that learners would have while performing the functions required in a job allows the opportunity to immediately apply what they've learned and benefit from an organization's existing knowledgebase. With recent advances in technology, it is possible to facilitate the social aspects of learning by virtually connecting individuals within a distributed community of practice in the online environment.[5] Research shows that learners not only respond by feeding back information, but they also actively use what they know to explore, negotiate, interpret, and create. They construct solutions, thus shifting the emphasis toward the process of learning." [20] While these are skills that teachers are trying to develop in young learners, adults have already developed and used these skills. They have sharpened these skills through work, higher education, raising children or through marriage. As lifelong learners dealing with real-life problems, a project based approach is what develops when they come together with other adults at brick and mortar learning centers or in social networking communities on the web.

Situated learning


[1] Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger (1991) Situated Learning. Legitimate peripheral participation, Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press [2] Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger (1991) Situated Learning. Legitimate peripheral participation, Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press p. 40 [4] Hung, D. (2002). Situated cognition and problem-based learning: implications for learning and instruction with technology. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 13(4), 393-415. [5] Halverson, A. C. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology. New York: Teachers College Press. [6] Halverson, A. C. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology. New York: Teachers College Press, p. 84. [7] Willis, J. & Cifuentes, L. (2005). Training teachers to integrate technology into the classroom curriculum: Online versus face-to-face course delivery (comparative analysis of teacher technology training courses). Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 3(1), p43-54. [8] Richardson, W. (2010). Blogs, wikis, podcasts and other powerful web tools for classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. [9] Halverson, A. C. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology. New York: Teachers College Press, p. 74. [11] Utley, B L. (2006). Effects of situated learning on knowledge gain of instructional strategies by students in a graduate level course. Teacher education and special education, 29(1), p.70. [12] Halverson, A. C. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology. New York: Teachers College Press, p. 80. [13] Wagner, T. (2010). The new world of work and the seven survival skills. In The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don't teach the new survival skills our children need--and what we can do about it (pp. 1-42). New York: Basic Books. [14] Anderson, J.R., Reder, L.M., & Simon, H.A. (1996). Situated learning and education. Educational Researcher, 25(4), p. 8. [15] Anderson, J.R., Reder, L.M., & Simon, H.A. (1996). Situated learning and education. Educational Researcher, 25(4), 5-11. [16] Wagner, T. (2010). The new world of work and the seven survival skills. In The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don't teach the new survival skills our children need--and what we can do about it (pp. 1-42). New York: Basic Books, p. 12. [17] Richardson, W. (2010). Blogs, wikis, podcasts and other powerful web tools for classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin, p. 27. [18] Richardson, W. (2010). Blogs, wikis, podcasts and other powerful web tools for classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin, p. 133. [19] Ernst, J. & Clark, A. (2009). Technology-based content through virtual and physical modeling: A national research Study. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 1989-1997: 1997-2010. 20(2), 2336. [20] Markham, T. (2003). Project based learning handbook: A guide to standards-focused project based learning for middle and high school teachers. Buck Institute for Education.

External links
Foulger, T.S. (2005). Innovating Professional Development Standards: A Shift to Utilize Communities of Practice. Essays in Education, 14. Retrieved Nov 11, 2007, from vol14summer2005.html ( Situated Learning in Adult Education. ERIC Digest. ( html) New Ways of Learning in the Workplace. ERIC Digest. (

Social capital


Social capital


Theory History Positivism Antipositivism Functionalism Conflict theory Middle-range Mathematical Critical theory Socialization Structure and agency Research methods

Quantitative Qualitative Historical Computational Ethnographic Network-analytic Topics Subfields Anomie Cities Class Crime Culture Deviance Demography Education Economy Environment Family Gender Health Industry Internet Knowledge

Social capital

Law Literature Medicine Politics Mobility Race and ethnicity Rationalization Religion Scientific knowledge Secularization Social networks Social psychology Stratification Browse

Portal Category tree Lists Journals List of sociologists Article index

Part of a series on



Sense of community Social capital Perspectives

Community psychology Community studies Types

Community of interest Community of practice Community of place Development

Community development Community organizing See also

Outline Community portal WikiProject Community

In sociology, social capital is the expected collective or economic benefits derived from the preferential treatment and cooperation between individuals and groups. Although different social sciences emphasize different aspects of

Social capital social capital, they tend to share the core idea "that social networks have value". Just as a screwdriver (physical capital) or a university education (cultural capital or human capital) can increase productivity (both individual and collective), so do social contacts affect the productivity of individuals and groups.[1]


The term 'social capital' was in occasional use from about 1890, but only became widely used in the late 1990s.[2] In the first half of the 19th century, Alexis de Tocqueville had observations about American life that seemed to outline and define social capital. He observed that Americans were prone to meeting at as many gatherings as possible to discuss all possible issues of state, economics, or the world that could be witnessed. The high levels of transparency caused greater participation from the people and thus allowed for democracy to work better. L. J. Hanifan's 1916 article regarding local support for rural schools is one of the first occurrences of the term "social capital" in reference to social cohesion and personal investment in the community.[3] In defining the concept, Hanifan contrasts social capital with material goods by defining it as: "I do not refer to real estate, or to personal property or to cold cash, but rather to that in life which tends to make these tangible substances count for most in the daily lives of people, namely, goodwill, fellowship, mutual sympathy and social intercourse among a group of individuals and families who make up a social unit If he may come into contact with his neighbor, and they with other neighbors, there will be an accumulation of social capital, which may immediately satisfy his social needs and which may bear a social potentiality sufficient to the substantial improvement of living conditions in the whole community. The community as a whole will benefit by the cooperation of all its parts, while the individual will find in his associations the advantages of the help, the sympathy, and the fellowship of his neighbors (pp. 130-131)." Jane Jacobs used the term early in the 1960s. Although she did not explicitly define the term social capital her usage referred to the value of networks.[4] Political scientist Robert Salisbury advanced the term as a critical component of interest group formation in his 1969 article "An Exchange Theory of Interest Groups" in the Midwest Journal of Political Science. Sociologist Pierre Bourdieu used the term in 1972 in his Outline of a Theory of Practice,[5] and clarified the term some years later in contrast to cultural, economic, and symbolic capital. Sociologists James Coleman, Barry Wellman and Scot Wortley adopted Glenn Loury's 1977 definition in developing and popularising the concept.[6] In the late 1990s the concept gained popularity, serving as the focus of a World Bank research programme and the subject of several mainstream books, including Robert Putnam's Bowling Alone[1] and Putnam and Lewis Feldstein's Better Together. The concept that underlies social capital has a much longer history; thinkers exploring the relation between associational life and democracy were using similar concepts regularly by the 19th century, drawing on the work of earlier writers such as James Madison (The Federalist Papers) and Alexis de Tocqueville (Democracy in America) to integrate concepts of social cohesion and connectedness into the pluralist tradition in American political science. John Dewey may have made the first direct mainstream use of "social capital" in The School and Society in 1899, though he did not offer a definition. The power of 'community governance' has been stressed by many philosophers from Antiquity to the 18th century, from Aristotle to Thomas Aquinas and Edmund Burke (Bowles and Gintis, 2002[7]). This vision was strongly criticised at the end of the 18th century, with the development of the idea of Homo Economicus and subsequently with 'rational choice theory'. Such a set of theories became dominant in the last centuries, but many thinkers questioned the complicated relationship between 'modern society' and the importance of 'old institutions', in particular family and traditional communities (Ferragina, 2010:75[8]). The debate of community versus modernization of society and individualism has been the most discussed topic among the fathers of sociology (Tnnies, 1887;[9] Durkheim, 1893;[10] Simmel, 1905;[11] Weber, 1946[12]). They were convinced that industrialisation and urbanization were transforming social relationship in an irreversible way. They observed a

Social capital breakdown of traditional bonds and the progressive development of anomie and alienation in society (Wilmott, 1986[13]). After Tnnies' and Weber works, reflection on social links in modern society continued with interesting contributions in the 1950s and in the 1960s, in particular 'The Mass Society Theory' (Bell, 1962;[14] Nisbet, 1969;[15] Stein, 1960;[16] Whyte, 1956[17]). They proposed themes similar to those of the founding fathers, with a more pessimistic emphasis on the development of society (Ferragina, 2010: 76). In the words of Stein (1960:1): The price for maintaining a society that encourages cultural differentiation and experimentation is unquestionably the acceptance of a certain amount of disorganization on both the individual and social level. All these reflections contributed remarkably to the development of the social capital concept in the following decades. The appearance of the modern social capital conceptualization is a new way to look at this debate, keeping together the importance of community to build generalized trust and the same time, the importance of individual free choice, in order to create a more cohesive society (Ferragina, 2010;[18] Ferragina, 2012 [19] ). It is for this reason that social capital generated so much interest in the academic and political world (Rose, 2000[20]).


Evaluating social capital

Though Bourdieu might agree with Coleman that social capital in the abstract is a neutral resource, his work tends to show how it can be used practically to produce or reproduce inequality, demonstrating for instance how people gain access to powerful positions through the direct and indirect employment of social connections. Robert Putnam has used the concept in a much more positive light: though he was at first careful to argue that social capital was a neutral term, stating whether or not [the] shared are praiseworthy is, of course, entirely another matter,[21] his work on American society tends to frame social capital as a producer of "civic engagement" and also a broad societal measure of communal health.[22] He also transforms social capital from a resource possessed by individuals to an attribute of collectives, focusing on norms and trust as producers of social capital to the exclusion of networks. Mahyar Arefi[23] identifies consensus building as a direct positive indicator of social capital. Consensus implies shared interest and agreement among various actors and stakeholders to induce collective action. Collective action is thus an indicator of increased social capital. Edwards and Foley, as editors of a special edition of the American Behavioural Scientist on "Social Capital, Civil Society and Contemporary Democracy", raised two key issues in the study of social capital. First, social capital is not equally available to all, in much the same way that other forms of capital are differently available. Geographic and social isolation limit access to this resource. Second, not all social capital is created equally. The value of a specific source of social capital depends in no small part on the socio-economic position of the source with society. On top of this, Portes has identified four negative consequences of social capital: exclusion of outsiders; excess claims on group members; restrictions on individual freedom; and downward levelling norms.[24] An interesting distinction of social organization is that between bonding and bridging ties, which complicates the neo-Tocquevillean view of social capital. Varshney [25] studied the correlation between the presence of interethnic networks (bridging) versus intra-ethnic ones (bonding) on ethnic violence in India.[26] He argues that interethnic networks are agents of peace because they build bridges and manage tensions, by noting that if communities are organized only along intra-ethnic lines and the interconnections with other communities are very weak or even nonexistent, then ethnic violence is quite likely. Three main implications of intercommunal ties explain their worth: 1. Facilitate communication in the community across ethnic lines 2. Squelch false rumors 3. Help the administration carry out its job and in particular peace, security and justice This is a useful distinction; nevertheless its implication on social capital can only be accepted if one espouses the functionalist understanding of the latter concept. Indeed, it can be argued that interethnic, as well as intra-ethnic

Social capital networks can serve various purposes, either increasing or diminishing social capital. In fact, Varshney himself notes that intraethnic policing (equivalent to the self-policing mechanism proposed by Fearon and Laitin [27]) may lead to the same result as interethnic engagement. Finally, social capital is often linked to the success of democracy and political involvement. Robert D. Putnam, in his book Bowling Alone makes the argument that social capital is linked to the recent decline in American political participation.[28]


Definitions, forms, and measurement

Social capital lends itself to multiple definitions, interpretations, and uses. David Halpern argues that the popularity of social capital for policymakers is linked to the concept's duality, coming because "it has a hard nosed economic feel while restating the importance of the social." For researchers, the term is popular partly due to the broad range of outcomes it can explain;[29] the multiplicity of uses for social capital has led to a multiplicity of definitions. Social capital has been used at various times to explain superior managerial performance,[30] improved performance of functionally diverse groups,[31] the value derived from strategic alliances,[32] and enhanced supply chain relations.[33] 'A resource that actors derive from specific social structures and then use to pursue their interests; it is created by changes in the relationship among actors'; (Baker 1990, p.619). Early attempts to define social capital focused on the degree to which social capital as a resource should be used for public good or for the benefit of individuals. Putnam[34] suggested that social capital would facilitate co-operation and mutually supportive relations in communities and nations and would therefore be a valuable means of combating many of the social disorders inherent in modern societies, for example crime. In contrast to those focusing on the individual benefit derived from the web of social relationships and ties individual actors find themselves in, attribute social capital to increased personal access to information and skill sets and enhanced power.[35] According to this view, individuals could use social capital to further their own career prospects, rather than for the good of organisations. In The Forms of Capital[36] Pierre Bourdieu distinguishes between three forms of capital: economic capital, cultural capital and social capital. He defines social capital as "the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition."[37] His treatment of the concept is instrumental, focusing on the advantages to possessors of social capital and the deliberate construction of sociability for the purpose of creating this resource.[24] James Coleman defined social capital functionally as a variety of entities with two elements in common: they all consist of some aspect of social structure, and they facilitate certain actions of actors...within the structure[24]that is, social capital is anything that facilitates individual or collective action, generated by networks of relationships, reciprocity, trust, and social norms. In Coleman's conception, social capital is a neutral resource that facilitates any manner of action, but whether society is better off as a result depends entirely on the individual uses to which it is put.[21] According to Robert Putnam, social capital "refers to the collective value of all 'social networks' and the inclinations that arise from these networks to do things for each other."[1] According to Putnam and his followers, social capital is a key component to building and maintaining democracy. Putnam says that social capital is declining in the United States. This is seen in lower levels of trust in government and lower levels of civic participation. Putnam also says that television and urban sprawl have had a significant role in making America far less 'connected'. Putnam believes that social capital can be measured by the amount of trust and "reciprocity" in a community or between individuals.[citation needed] Nan Lin's concept of social capital has a more individualistic approach: "Investment in social relations with expected returns in the marketplace." This may subsume the concepts of some others such as Bourdieu, Flap and Eriksson.[38]

Social capital Newton (1997) considered social capital as subjective phenomenon formed by values and attitudes which influence interactions. In "Social Capital and Development: The Coming Agenda," Francis Fukuyama points out that there isn't an agreed definition of social capital, so he explains it as "shared norms or values that promote social cooperation, instantiated in actual social relationships" (Fukuyama, 27), and uses this definition throughout this paper. He argues that social capital is a necessary precondition for successful development, but a strong rule of law and basic political institutions are necessary to build social capital. He believes that a strong social capital is necessary for a strong democracy and strong economic growth. Familism is a major problem of trust because it fosters a two-tiered moral system, in which a person must favor the opinions of family members. Fukuyama believes that bridging social capital (a phrase used by Putnam in Bowling Alone), is essential for a strong social capital because a broader radius of trust will enable connections across borders of all sorts and serve as a basis for organizations. Although he points out many problems and possible solutions in his paper, he does admit that there is still much to be done to build a strong social capital. The Social Capital Foundation (TSCF) suggested that social capital should not be mixed up with its manifestations. While for example social capital is often understood as the networks that a person possesses and that he/she may use in a social integration purpose, it is more the disposition to create, maintain and develop such networks that constitutes real social capital. Similarly, civic engagement is a manifestation of social capital but not social capital itself. In this definition, social capital is a collective mental disposition close to the spirit of community.[39] Nahapiet and Ghoshal in their examination of the role of social capital in the creation of intellectual capital, suggest that social capital should be considered in terms of three clusters: structural, relational, and cognitive.[40] Carlos Garca Timn describes that the structural dimensions of social capital relate to an individual ability to make weak and strong ties to others within a system. This dimension focuses on the advantages derived from the configuration of an actor's, either individual or collective, network.[citation needed] The differences between weak and strong ties are explained by Granovetter.[41] The relational dimension focuses on the character of the connection between individuals. This is best characterized through trust of others and their cooperation and the identification an individual has within a network. Hazleton and Kennan[42] added a third angle, that of communication. Communication is needed to access and use social capital through exchanging information, identifying problems and solutions, and managing conflict. According to Boisot[43] and Boland and Tenkasi,[44] meaningful communication requires at least some sharing context between the parties to such exchange. The cognitive dimension focusses on the shared meaning and understanding that individuals or groups have with one another.[citation needed] Robison, Schmid, and Siles[45] reviewed various definitions of social capital and concluded that many did not satisfy the formal requirement of a definition. They noted that definitions must be of the form A=B while many definition of social capital described what it can be used to achieve, where it resides, how it can be created, and what it can transform. In addition, they argue that many proposed definition of social capital fail to satisfy the requirements of capital. They propose that social capital be defined as "sympathy". The object of another's sympathy has social capital. Those who have sympathy for others provide social capital. One of the main advantages of having social capital is that it provides access to resources on preferential terms. Their definition of sympathy follows that used by Adam Smith, the title of his first chapter in the "Theory of Moral Sentiments." A network-based conception can also be used for characterizing the social capital of collectivities (such as organizations or business clusters).[46]


Social capital


Social capital: a new name from an old idea
The modern emergence of social capital concept renewed the academic interest for an old debate in social science: the relationship between trust, social networks and the development of modern industrial society. Social Capital Theory gained importance through the integration of classical sociological theory with the description of an intangible form of capital. In this way the classical definition of capital has been overcome allowing researchers to tackle issues in a new manner (Ferragina, 2010:73). Through the social capital concept researchers have tried to propose a synthesis between the value contained in the communitarian approaches and individualism professed by the 'rational choice theory.' Social capital can only be generated collectively thanks to the presence of communities and social networks, but individuals and groups can use it at the same time. Individuals can exploit social capital of their networks to achieve private objectives and groups can use it to enforce a certain set of norms or behaviors. In this sense, social capital is generated collectively but it can also be used individually, bridging the dichotomized approach 'communitarianism' versus 'individualism' (Ferragina, 2010:75).[47]

Definitional issues
The term "capital" is used by analogy with other forms of economic capital, as social capital is argued to have similar (although less measurable) benefits. However, the analogy with capital is misleading to the extent that, unlike traditional forms of capital, social capital is not depleted by use;[48] in fact it is depleted by non-use ("use it or lose it"). In this respect, it is similar to the now well-established economic concept of human capital. Social Capital is also distinguished from the economic theory Social Capitalism. Social Capitalism as a theory challenges the idea that Socialism and Capitalism are mutually exclusive. Social Capitalism posits that a strong social support network for the poor enhances capital output. By decreasing poverty, capital market participation is enlarged.

In his pioneering study, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (Simon & Schuster, 2000), Harvard political scientist Robert D. Putnam wrote: "Henry Ward Beecher's advice a century ago to 'multiply picnics' is not entirely ridiculous today. We should do this, ironically, not because it will be good for America though it will be but because it will be good for us."[1] Writing before the proliferation of the internet, Putnam claims to have found an overall decline in social capital (really civic engagement) in America over the past fifty years, a trend that may have significant implications for American society. Putnam speaks of two main components of the concept: bonding social capital and bridging social capital, the creation of which Putnam credits to Ross Gittel and Avis Vidal. Bonding refers to the value assigned to social networks between homogeneous groups of people and Bridging refers to that of social networks between socially heterogeneous groups. Typical examples are that criminal gangs create bonding social capital, while choirs and bowling clubs (hence the title, as Putnam lamented their decline) create bridging social capital.[citation needed] Bridging social capital is argued to have a host of other benefits for societies, governments, individuals, and communities; Putnam likes to note that joining an organization cuts in half an individual's chance of dying within the next year.[citation needed] The distinction is useful in highlighting how social capital may not always be beneficial for society as a whole (though it is always an asset for those individuals and groups involved). Horizontal networks of individual citizens and groups that enhance community productivity and cohesion are said to be positive social capital assets whereas self-serving exclusive gangs and hierarchical patronage systems that operate at cross purposes to societal interests can be thought of as negative social capital burdens on society.

Social capital Social capital development on the internet via social networking websites such as Facebook or Myspace tends to be bridging capital according to one study, though "virtual" social capital is a new area of research.[49] There are two other sub-sources of social capital. These are consummatory, or a behavior that is made up of actions that fulfill a basis of doing what is inherent, and instrumental, or behavior that is taught through ones surroundings over time.[50] Two examples of consummatory social capital are value interjection and solidarity. Value interjection pertains to be a person or community that fulfills obligations such as paying bills on time, philanthropy, and following the rules of society. People that live their life this way feel that these are norms of society and are able to live their lives free of worry for their credit, children, and receive charity if needed. Coleman goes on to say that when people live in this way and benefit from this type of social capital, individuals in the society are able to rest assured that their belongings and family will be safe.[51] The other form of consummatory social capital, solidarity, dates back to the writings of Karl Marx, a German philosopher and sociologist from the 19th century. The main focus of the study of Karl Marx was the working class of the Industrial Revolution. Marx analyzed the reasons these workers supported each other for the benefit of the group. He held that this support was an adaptation to the immediate time as opposed to a trait that was installed in them throughout their youth.[50] As another example, Coleman states that this type of social capital is the type that brings individuals to stand up for what they believe in, and even die for it, in the face of adversity.[52] The second of these two other sub-sources of social capital is that of instrumental social capital. The basis of the category of social capital is that an individual who donates his or resources not because he is seeking direct repayment from the recipient, but because they are part of the same social structure. By his or her donation, the individual might not see a direct repayment, but, most commonly, they will be held by the society in greater honor.[52] The best example of this, and the one that Portes mentions, is the donation of a scholarship to a member of the same ethnic group. The donor is not freely giving up his resources to be directly repaid by the recipient, but, as stated above, the honor of the community. With this in mind, the recipient might not know the benefactor personally, but he or she prospers on the sole factor that he or she is a member of the same social group.[53]


There is no widely held consensus on how to measure social capital, which has become a debate in itself: why refer to this phenomenon as 'capital' if there is no true way to measure it? While one can usually intuitively sense the level/amount of social capital present in a given relationship (regardless of type or scale), quantitative measuring has proven somewhat complicated. This has resulted in different metrics for different functions. In measuring political social capital, it is common to take the sum of societys membership of its groups. Groups with higher membership (such as political parties) contribute more to the amount of capital than groups with lower membership, although many groups with low membership (such as communities) still add up to be significant. While it may seem that this is limited by population, this need not be the case as people join multiple groups. In a study done by Yankee City,[54] a community of 17,000 people was found to have over 22,000 different groups. Many studies measure social capital by asking the question: do you trust the others?. Other researches analyse the participation in voluntary associations or civic activities. Knack and Keefer (1996) measured econometrically correlations between confidence and civic cooperation norms, with economic growth in a big group of countries. They found that confidence and civic cooperation have a great impact in economic growth, and that in less polarized societies in terms of inequality and ethnic differences, social capital is bigger. Narayan and Pritchet (1997) researched the associativity degree and economic performance in rural homes of Tanzania. They saw that even in high poverty indexes, families with higher levels of incomes had more participation in collective organizations. The social capital they accumulated because of this participation had individual benefits for them, and created collective benefits through different routes, for example: their agricultural practices were better than those of the families without participation (they had more information about agrochemicals, fertilizers and

Social capital seeds); they had more information about the market; they were prepared to take more risks, because being part of a social network made them feel more protected; they had an influence on the improvement of public services, showing a bigger level of participation in schools; they cooperated more in the municipality level. The level of cohesion of a group also affects its social capital.[55] However, there is no one quantitative way of determining the level of cohesiveness, but rather a collection of social network models that researchers have used over the decades to operationalize social capital. One of the dominant methods is Ronald Burt's constraint measure, which taps into the role of tie strength and group cohesion. Another network based model is network transitivity. How a group relates to the rest of society also affects social capital, but in a different manner. Strong internal ties can in some cases weaken the groups perceived capital in the eyes of the general public, as in cases where the group is geared towards crime, distrust, intolerance, violence or hatred towards other. The Ku Klux Klan and the Mafia are examples of these kinds of organizations. Sociologists Carl L. Bankston and Min Zhou have argued that one of the reasons social capital is so difficult to measure is that it is neither an individual-level nor a group-level phenomenon, but one that emerges across levels of analysis as individuals participate in groups. They argue that the metaphor of "capital" may be misleading because unlike financial capital, which is a resource held by an individual, the benefits of forms of social organization are not held by actors, but are results of the participation of actors in advantageously organized groups.[56]


Integrating history and socio-economic analysis

Beyond Putnam
Putnam's work contributed tremendously to shape the debate. His conclusions have been praised but also criticised. Criticism has mainly focused on the lack of awareness of the structural socio-economic conditions of society (see Skocpol 1996;[57] Skocpol et al. 2000;[58] Thomson 2005 [59]), as for example, the level of income inequality (Knack and Keefer 1997;[60] Costa and Kahn 2003;[61] OConnel 2003;[62] Ferragina 2010 [63]), and the excessive determinism of the historical analysis (Lupo 1993;[64] Lemann 1996;[65] Tarrow 1996 [66]). Recently, Ferragina (2012 [19]) integrated the insights of these two criticisms and proposed a cross-regional analysis of 85 European regions, linking together the socio-economic and the historic- institutional analyses to explore the determinants of social capital. He argued that to investigate the determinants of social capital, one has to integrate the synchronic and the diachronic perspectives under the guidance of a methodological framework able to put these two approaches in continuity.

The Sleeping social capital theory

Putnams work, nourished by doctrines like the end of history (Fukuyama 1992 [67]) was largely deterministic, and proposed the dismissal of more articulated historical interpretations. This determinism has reduced Southern Italian history as being a negative path to modernity; only the Italian regions that experienced the development of medieval towns during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries have got high levels of social capital today, the others are condemned by the prevalence of the authoritarian rule of the Normans more than 800 years ago. However, from a purely historical perspective, the medieval town is not unanimously considered to be a symbol of freedom, creation of horizontal ties and embryo of democratic life. In Making Democracy Work, Putnam disregarded the division within municipal towns and their dearth of civic participation and considered only the experience of few areas in North Central Italy, ignoring the existence of important towns in the South.[68] To this more complicated historical picture, Ferragina (2012)[19] added the result of a regression model, which indicated that social capital in the South of Italy and Wallonia should be much lower than currently detected according to their socio-economic condition. He unfolded Putnams theory by undertaking a comparative analysis between these two deviant cases and two regular cases located in the same country, namely Flanders and the North

Social capital of Italy. The historical legacy does not have a negative effect on the present lack of social capital in Wallonia and the South of Italy, but the potentially positive effect of the historical legacy is currently curtailed by the poor socio-economic conditions, notably by the high level of income inequality and the low level of labour market participation. This historical interpretation is driven by the comparison with Flanders and the North East of Italy. The value of the historical legacy for present socio-economic development is similar to the appropriable social capital theorized by Coleman (1990 [69]) at the individual level.[70] Using the example of the Korean students, Coleman argued that the construction of a secret network of people (at a time in which the appreciation for the authoritarian government was rapidly declining among the population) as a means of organizing the democratic revolt was the result of a process of socialization that took place during their childhood (with the involvement in the local churches). The relation between historical evolutions and the socio-economic variables has similar characteristics at the macro level.[70] Only after reaching a sufficient level of labour market activity and income redistribution (this is comparable to the growing unpopularity of the authoritarian government) can the memory of historical events of social engagement become fully appropriable by the population (this is comparable to the participation in the local churches during childhood), leading to the development of innovative forms of social participation (this is comparable to the construction of the secret circles that enhanced the democratic revolt). This process increases social capital even further if socio-economic development is matched by the revival of the unique historical legacy of the area.[71] The reconstruction of this unique past can rapidly become a source of pride for the entire area, contributing in turn to an increasing intra-regional solidarity, and with it enhancement of social networks and social trust. The Flemish case (and also to a lesser extent that of the North East of Italy) illustrates this process well. The socio-economic improvements that took place in the nineteenth century were matched by the revival of the glorious Flemish traditions of the thirteenth and fourteenth century. The increase of social capital generated by the reduction of income inequality and the increasing participation in the labour market due to the economic development was multiplied by the reconstruction of Flemish identity and pride. This pride and self- confidence has, in turn, increased the feeling of solidarity within the region and contributed to generate a level of social capital, which is hardly explicable by the single socio-economic predictors.[70] Ferragina suggests that, in the divergent cases, the value of the historical legacy is affected by the poor present socioeconomic conditions. Social capital sleeps, not because of the absence of certain clearly defined historical steps as suggested by Putnam, but because socio- economic underdevelopment profoundly depressed the self-pride of Southern Italians and Walloons. The biased and simplistic interpretations of Southern Italian and Walloon history will be discarded only when their socio-economic conditions reach a sufficient level, enacting a cycle similar to Flanders and the North East of Italy. Stronger redistribution, an increase of labour market participation accompanied by a simultaneous process of reinvention of the past could enhance a positive cycle of social capital increase in both areas. The historical legacy in these two areas should not be seen as the root of the present lack of social capital but as a potential element for improvement. Important moment of social engagement also existed in the history of these two areas; the imagery of Walloons and Southern Italians should be nourished by these almost forgotten examples of collective history (i.e. the Fasci Siciliani in the south of Italy) rather than the prevailing idea that the historical legacy of these areas is simply an original sin, a burden to carry through the process of modernization.[70]


Social capital


Social Capital Motives

Robison and colleagues measured the relative importance of selfishness and four social capital motives using resource allocation data collected in hypothetical surveys and non-hypothetical experiments. The selfishness motive assumes that an agent's allocation of a scarce resource is independent of his relationships with others. This motive is sometimes referred to as the selfishness of preference assumption in neoclassical economics. Social capital motives assume that agents allocation of a scarce resource may be influenced by their social capital or sympathetic relationships with others which may produce socio-emotional goods that satisfy socio-emotional needs for validation and belonging. The first social capital motive seeks for validation by acting consistently with the values of ones ideal self. The second social capital motive seeks to be validated by others by winning their approval. The third social capital motive seeks to belong. Recognizing that one may not be able to influence the sympathy of others, persons seeking to belong may act to increase their own sympathy for others and the organizations or institutions they represent. The fourth social capital motive recognizes that our sympathy or social capital for another person will motivate us to act in their interest. In doing so we satisfy our own needs for validation and belonging. Empirical results reject the hypothesis often implied in economics that we are 95% selfish.[72]

Relation with civil society

A number of authors[22][73][74][75] give definitions of civil society that refer to voluntary associations and organisations outside the market and state. This definition is very close to that of the third sector, which consists of "private organisations that are formed and sustained by groups of people acting voluntarily and without seeking personal profit to provide benefits for themselves or for others"[citation needed]. According to such authors as Walzer, Alessandrini, Newtown, Stolle and Rochon, Foley and Edwards, and Walters, it is through civil society, or more accurately, the third sector, that individuals are able to establish and maintain relational networks. These voluntary associations also connect people with each other, build trust and reciprocity through informal, loosely structured associations, and consolidate society through altruism without obligation. It is "this range of activities, services and associations produced by... civil society"[22] that constitutes the sources of social capital. If civil society, then, is taken to be synonymous with the third sector then the question it seems is not 'how important is social capital to the production of a civil society?' but 'how important is civil society to the production of social capital?'.Wikipedia:No original research Not only have the authors above documented how civil society produces sources of social capital, but in Lyons work "Third Sector",[76] social capital does not appear in any guise under either the factors that enable or those that stimulate the growth of the third sector, and Onyx[77] describes how social capital depends on an already functioning community. The idea that creating social capital (i.e., creating networks) will strengthen civil society underlies current Australian social policy aimed at bridging deepening social divisions. The goal is to reintegrate those marginalised from the rewards of the economic system into "the community". However, according to Onyx (2000), while the explicit aim of this policy is inclusion, its effects are exclusionary. Foley and Edwards[78] believe that "political systems...are important determinants of both the character of civil society and of the uses to which whatever social capital exists might be put".[21] Alessandrini agrees, saying, "in Australia in particular, neo-liberalism has been recast as economic rationalism and identified by several theorists and commentators as a danger to society at large because of the use to which they are putting social capital to work".[22] The resurgence of interest in "social capital" as a remedy for the cause of todays social problems draws directly on the assumption that these problems lie in the weakening of civil society. However this ignores the arguments of many theorists who believe that social capital leads to exclusion[citation needed] rather than to a stronger civil society. In international development, Ben Fine and John Harriss have been heavily critical of the inappropriate adoption of social capital as a supposed panacea (promoting civil society organisations and NGOs, for example, as agents of development) for the inequalities generated by neo liberal economic development.[79][80] This leads to controversy as

Social capital to the role of state institutions in the promotion of social capital. An abundance of social capital is seen as being almost a necessary condition for modern liberal democracy. A low level of social capital leads to an excessively rigid and unresponsive political system and high levels of corruption, in the political system and in the region as a whole. Formal public institutions require social capital in order to function properly, and while it is possible to have too much social capital (resulting in rapid changes and excessive regulation), it is decidedly worse to have too little. Kathleen Dowley and Brian Silver published an article entitled "Social Capital, Ethnicity and Support for Democracy in the Post-Communist States". This article found that in post-communist states, higher levels of social capital did not equate to higher levels of democracy. However, higher levels of social capital led to higher support for democracy.[81] A number of intellectuals in developing countries have argued that the idea of social capital, particularly when connected to certain ideas about civil society, is deeply implicated in contemporary modes of donor and NGO driven imperialism and that it functions, primarily, to blame the poor for their condition.[82] The concept of social capital in a Chinese social context has been closely linked with the concept of guanxi. An interesting attempt to measure social capital spearheaded by Corporate Alliance [83] in the English speaking market segment of the United States of America and Xentrum [84] through the Latin American Chamber of Commerce [85] in Utah on the Spanish speaking population of the same country, involves the quantity, quality and strength of an individual social capital. With the assistance of software applications and web based relationship oriented systems such as LinkedIn [86], these kinds of organizations are expected to provide its members with a way to keep track of the number of their relationships, meetings designed to boost the strength of each relationship using group dynamics, executive retreats and networking events as well as training in how to reach out to higher circles of influential people.


Social capital and women's engagement with politics

See also Gender and social capital There are many factors that drive volume towards the ballot box, including education, employment, civil skills, and time. Careful evaluation of these fundamental factors often suggests that women do not vote at similar levels as men. However the gap between women and men voter turnout is diminishing and in some cases women are becoming more prevalent at the ballot box than their male counterparts. Recent research[87] on social capital is now serving as an explanation for this change. Social capital offers a wealth of resources and networks that facilitate political engagement. Since social capital is readily available no matter the type of community, it is able to override more traditional queues for political engagement (e.g., education, employment, civil skills, etc.). There are unique ways in which women organize. These differences from men make social capital more personable and impressionable to women audiences thus creating a stronger presence in regards to political engagement. A few examples of these characteristics are: Women's informal and formal networks tend toward care work that is often considered apolitical.[88] Women are also more likely to engage in local politics and social movement activities than in traditional forums focused on national politics.[89] Women are more likely to organize themselves in less hierarchical ways and to focus on creating consensus.[88] The often informal nature of female social capital allows women to politicize apolitical environments without conforming to masculine standards, thus keeping this activity off the radar. These differences are hard to recognize within the discourse of political engagement and may explain why social capital has not been considered as a tool for female political engagement until as of late.[87]

Social capital


Effects on health
A growing body of research has found that the presence of social capital through social networks and communities has a protective quality on health. Social capital affects health risk behavior in the sense that individuals who are embedded in a network or community rich in support, social trust, information, and norms, have resources that help achieve health goals.[90] For example, a person who is sick with cancer may receive information, money, or moral support he or she needs to endure treatment and recover. Social capital also encourages social trust and membership. These factors can discourage individuals from engaging in risky health behaviors such as smoking and binge drinking.[91] Inversely, a lack of social capital can impair health. For example, results from a survey given to 13-18 year old students in Sweden showed that low social capital and low social trust are associated with higher rates of psychosomatic symptoms, musculoskeletal pain, and depression.[92] Additionally, negative social capital can detract from health. Although there are only a few studies that assess social capital in criminalized populations, there is information that suggests that social capital does have a negative effect in broken communities. Deviant behavior is encouraged by deviant peers via favorable definitions and learning opportunities provided by network-based norms.[93] However in these same communities, an adjustment of norms (i.e. deviant peers being replaced by positive role models) can pose a positive effect.

Effects of the Internet

Similar to watching the news and keeping abreast of current events, the use of the Internet can relate to an individual's level of social capital. In one study, informational uses of the Internet correlated positively with an individual's production of social capital, and social-recreational uses were negatively correlated (higher levels of these uses correlated with lower levels of social capital).[94] Another perspective holds that the rapid growth of social networking sites such as Facebook and Myspace suggests that individuals are creating a virtual-network consisting of both bonding and bridging social capital. Unlike face to face interaction, people can instantly connect with others in a targeted fashion by placing specific parameters with internet use. This means that individuals can selectively connect with others based on ascertained interests, and backgrounds. Facebook is currently the most popular social networking site and touts many advantages to its users including serving as a "social lubricant" for individuals who otherwise have difficulties forming and maintaining both strong and weak ties with others.[95] This argument continues, although the preponderance of evidence shows a positive association between social capital and the internet. Critics of virtual communities believe that the Internet replaces our strong bonds with online "weak-ties"[96] or with socially empty interactions with the technology itself.[97] Others fear that the Internet can create a world of "narcissism of similarity," where sociability is reduced to interactions between those that are similar in terms of ideology, race, or gender.[98] A few articles suggest that technologically-based interactions has a negative relationship with social capital by displacing time spent engaging in geographical/ in-person social activities.[96] However, the consensus of research shows that the more people spend online the more in-person contact they have, thus positively enhancing social capital.[99]

Social capital


Effects on educational achievement

Coleman and Hoffer collected quantitative data of 28,000 students in total 1,015 public, Catholic and other private high schools in America from the 7 years' period from 1980 to 1987.[100] It was found from this longitudinal research that social capital in students' families and communities attributed to the much lower dropout rates in Catholic schools compared with the higher rates in public. Teachman et al.[101] further develop the family structure indicator suggested by Coleman. They criticise Coleman, who used only the number of parents present in the family, neglected the unseen effect of more discrete dimensions such as stepparents' and different types of single-parent families. They take into account of a detailed counting of family structure, not only with two biological parents or stepparent families, but also with types of single-parent families with each other (mother-only, father-only, never-married, and other). They also contribute to the literature by measuring parent-child interaction by the indicators of how often parents and children discuss school-related activities. Morgan and Sorensen[102] directly challenge Coleman for his lacking of an explicit mechanism to explain why Catholic schools students perform better than public school students on standardised tests of achievement.[103] Researching students in Catholic schools and public schools again, they propose two comparable models of social capital effect on mathematic learning. One is on Catholic schools as norm-enforcing schools whereas another is on public schools as horizon-expanding schools. It is found that while social capital can bring about positive effect of maintaining an encompassing functional community in norm-enforcing schools, it also brings about the negative consequence of excessive monitoring. Creativity and exceptional achievement would be repressed as a result. Whereas in horizon expanding school, social closure is found to be negative for student's mathematic achievement. These schools explore a different type of social capital, such as information about opportunities in the extended social networks of parents and other adults. The consequence is that more learning is fostered than norm-enforcing Catholic school students. In sum, Morgan and Sorensen's (1999) study implies that social capital is contextualised, one kind of social capital may be positive in this setting but is not necessarily still positive in another setting.[102] In the setting of education through Kilpatrick,S & Johns, S &Mulford B (2010, p.113-19) states, ... social capital is a useful lens for analysing lifelong learning and its relationship to community development. Social capital is particularly important in terms of education. Also the importance of education with ...schools being designed to create functioning community- forging tighter links between parents and the school (Coleman &Hoffer, 1987) linking that without this interaction, the social capital in this area is disadvantaged and demonstrates that social capital plays a major role in education. Without social capital in the area of education, teachers and parents that play a responsibility in a students learning, the significant impacts on their childs academic learning can rely on these factors. With focus on parents contributing to their childs academic progress as well as being influenced by social capital in education. Without the contribution by the parent in their childs education, gives parents less opportunity and participation in the students life. As Tedin, Kent L. & Weiher, Gregory R (2010, pp.60929) states of the most important factors in promoting student success is the active involvement of parents in a childs education. With parents also involved in activities and meetings the school conducts, the more involved parents are with other parents and the staff members. Thus parent involvement contributes to social capital with becoming more involved in the school community and participating makes the school a sustainable and easy to run community. Reference List- Kilpatrick,S & Johns, S &Mulford B 2010, Social capital, educational institutions and leadership, in E Baker, B McGraw & P Peterson (eds), The International encyclopedia of education, 3rd edn, Elsevier Science, Oxford, pp.11319. Tedin, Kent L. & Weiher, Gregory R. 2011, General Social Capital, Education-Related Social Capital, and Choosing Charter Schools, The policy Studies Journal, Vol.39, No. 4, pp.609 29. In their journal article "Beyond social capital: Spatial dynamics of collective efficacy for children", Sampson et al.[104] stress the normative or goal-directed dimension of social capital. They claim, "resources or networks alone (e.g. voluntary associations, friendship ties, organisational density) are neutral--- they may or may not be effective

Social capital mechanism for achieving intended effect"[105] Marjoribanks and Kwok[106] conducted a survey in Hong Kong secondary schools with 387 fourteen-year-old students with an aim to analyse female and male adolescents differential educational achievement by using social capital as the main analytic tool. In that research, social capital is approved of its different effects upon different genders. In his thesis "New Arrival Students in Hong Kong: Adaptation and School Performance", Hei Hang Hayes Tang argues that adaptation is a process of activation and accumulation of (cultural and social) capitals. The research findings show that supportive networks is the key determinant differentiating the divergent adaptation pathways. Supportive networks, as a form of social capital, is necessary for activating the cultural capital the newly arrived students possessed. The amount of accumulated capital is also relevant to further advancement in the ongoing adaptation process.[107] Min Zhou and Carl L. Bankston[108] in their study of a Vietnamese community in New Orleans find that preserving traditional ethnic values enable immigrants to integrate socially and to maintain solidarity in an ethnic community. Ethnic solidarity is especially important in the context where immigrants just arrive in the host society. In her article "Social Capital in Chinatown", Zhou examines how the process of adaptation of young Chinese Americans is affected by tangible forms of social relations between the community, immigrant families, and the younger generations.[109] Chinatown serves as the basis of social capital that facilitates the accommodation of immigrant children in the expected directions. Ethnic support provides impetus to academic success. Furthermore maintenance of literacy in native language also provides a form of social capital that contributes positively to academic achievement. Stanton-Salazar and Dornbusch[110] found that bilingual students were more likely to obtain the necessary forms of institutional support to advance their school performance and their life chances. Putnam (2000) mentions in his book Bowling Alone, "Child development is powerfully shaped by social capital" and continues "presence of social capital has been linked to various positive outcomes, particularly in education".[111] According to his book, these positive outcomes are the result of parents' social capital in a community. In states where there is a high social capital, there is also a high education performance.[112] The similarity of these states is that parents were more associated with their children's education. Teachers have reported that when the parents participate more in their children's education and school life, it lowers levels of misbehavior, such as bringing weapons to school, engaging in physical violence, unauthorized absence, and being generally apathetic about education.[113] Borrowing Coleman's quotation from Putnam's book, Coleman once mentioned we cannot understate "the importance of the embeddedness of young persons in the enclaves of adults most proximate to them, first and most prominent the family and second, a surrounding community of adults".[114]


In geography
In order to understand social capital as a subject in geography, one must look at it in a sense of space, place, and territory. In its relationship, the tenetsWikipedia:Avoid weasel words of geography relate to the ideas of social capital in the family, community, and in the use of social networks. The biggest advocate for seeing social capital as a geographical subject was American economist and political scientist Robert Putnam. His main argument for classifying social capital as a geographical concept is that the relationships of people is shaped and molded by the areas in which they live.[115] Putnam (1993) argued that the lack of social capital in the South of Italy was more the product of a peculiar historical and geographical development than the consequence of a set of contemporary socio-economic conditions. This idea has sparked a lengthy debate and received fierce criticism (Ferragina, 2010; Ferragina 2012: 3).[116] There are many areas in which social capital can be defined by the theories and practices. Anthony Giddens developed a theory in 1984 in which he relates social structures and the actions that they produce. In his studies, he does not look at the individual participants of these structures, but how the structures and the social connections that stem from them are diffused over space.[117] If this is the case, the continuous change in social structures could bring about a change in social capital, which can cause changes in community atmosphere. If an area is plagued by social

Social capital organizations whose goals are to revolt against social norms, such as gangs, it can cause a negative social capital for the area causing those who disagreed with said organizations to relocate thus taking their positive social capital to a different space than the negative. Another area where social capital can be seen as an area of study in geography is through the analysis of participation in volunteerism and its support of different governments. One area to look into with this is through those who participate in social organizations. People that participate are of different races, ages, and economic status.[118] With these in mind, variances of the space in which these different demographics may vary, causing a difference in involvement among areas. Secondly, there are different social programs for different areas based on economic situation.[118] A governmental organization would not place a welfare center in a wealthier neighborhood where it would have very limited support to the community, as it is not needed. Thirdly, social capital can be affected by the participation of individuals of a certain area based on the type of institutions that are placed there.[118] Mohan supports this with the argument of J. Fox in his paper "Decentralization and Rural Development in Mexico", which states structures of local governance in turn influence the capacity of grassroots communities to influence social investments."[119] With this theory, if the involvement of a government in specific areas raises the involvement of individuals in social organizations and/or communities, this will in turn raise the social capital for that area. Since every area is different, the government takes that into consideration and will provide different areas with different institutions to fit their needs thus there will be different changes in social capital in different areas.


Negative social capital

It has been noted that social capital may be not always be used for positive ends. An example of the complexities of the effects of social capital is violent or criminal gang activity that is encouraged through the strengthening of intra-group relationships (bonding social capital). The negative consequences of social capital are more often associated with bonding vis--vis bridging.[120] Without "bridging" social capital, "bonding" groups can become isolated and disenfranchised from the rest of society and, most importantly, from groups with which bridging must occur in order to denote an "increase" in social capital. Bonding social capital is a necessary antecedent for the development of the more powerful form of bridging social capital.[121] Bonding and bridging social capital can work together productively if in balance, or they may work against each other. As social capital bonds and stronger homogeneous groups form, the likelihood of bridging social capital is attenuated. Bonding social capital can also perpetuate sentiments of a certain group, allowing for the bonding of certain individuals together upon a common radical ideal. The strengthening of insular ties can lead to a variety of effects such as ethnic marginalization or social isolation. In extreme cases ethnic cleansing may result if the relationship between different groups is so strongly negative. In mild cases, it just isolates certain communities such as suburbs of cities because of the bonding social capital and the fact that people in these communities spend so much time away from places that build bridging social capital. Social capital (in the institutional Robert Putnam sense) may also lead to bad outcomes if the political institution and democracy in a specific country is not strong enough and is therefore overpowered by the social capital groups. "Civil society and the collapse of the Weimar Republic" suggests that "it was weak political institutionalization rather than a weak civil society that was Germanys main problem during the Wihelmine and Weimar eras."[122] Because the political institutions were so weak people looked to other outlets. Germans threw themselves into their clubs, voluntary associations, and professional organizations out of frustration with the failures of the national government and political parties, thereby helping to undermine the Weimar Republic and facilitate Hitlers rise to power. In this article about the fall of the Weimar Republic, the author makes the claim that Hitler rose to power so quickly because he was able to mobilize the groups towards one common goal. Even though German society was, at the time, a "joining" society these groups were fragmented and their members did not use the skills they learned in their club associations to better their society. They were very introverted in the Weimar Republic. Hitler was able to capitalize on this by uniting these highly bonded groups under the common cause of bringing Germany to the top of

Social capital world politics. The former world order had been destroyed during World War I, and Hitler believed that Germany had the right and the will to become a dominant global power. Later work by Putnam also suggests that social capital, and the associated growth of public trust are inhibited by immigration and rising racial diversity in communities.[123] Putnam's study regarding the issue argued that in American areas with a lack of homogeneity, some individuals neither participated in bonding nor bridging social capital. In societies where immigration is high (USA) or where ethnic heterogeneity is high (Eastern Europe), it was found that citizens lacked in both kinds of social capital and were overall far less trusting of others than members of homogenous communities were found to be. Lack of homogeneity led to people withdrawing from even their closest groups and relationships, creating an atomized society as opposed to a cohesive community. These findings challenge previous beliefs that exposure to diversity strengthens social capital, either through bridging social gaps between ethnicities or strengthening in-group bonds.


Social capital and reproduction of inequality

Coleman indicated that social capital eventually led to the creation of human capital for the future generation.[124] Human capital, a private resource, could be accessed through what the previous generation accumulated through social capital. Field suggested that such a process could lead to the very inequality social capital attempts to resolve.[124] While Coleman viewed social capital as a relatively neutral resource, he did not deny the class reproduction that could result from accessing such capital, given that individuals worked toward their own benefit. Even though Coleman never truly addresses Bourdieu in his discussion, this coincides with Bourdieu's argument set forth in Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. Bourdieu and Coleman were fundamentally different at the theoretical level (as Bourdieu believed the actions of individuals were rarely ever conscious, but more so only a result of their habitus (see below) being enacted within a particular field, but this realization by both seems to undeniably connect their understanding of the more latent aspects of social capital. According to Bourdieu, habitus refers to the social context within which a social actor is socialized. Thus, it is the social platform, itself, that equips one with the social reality they become accustomed to. Out of habitus comes field, the manner in which one integrates and displays his or her habitus. To this end, it is the social exchange and interaction between two or more social actors. To illustrate this, we assume that an individual wishes to better his place in society. He therefore accumulates social capital by involving himself in a social network, adhering to the norms of that group, allowing him to later access the resources (e.g. social relationships) gained over time. If, in the case of education, he uses these resources to better his educational outcomes, thereby enabling him to become socially mobile, he effectively has worked to reiterate and reproduce the stratification of society, as social capital has done little to alleviate the system as a whole. This may be one negative aspect of social capital, but seems to be an inevitable one in and of itself, as are all forms of capital.[citation needed]

[1] Putnam, Robert. (2000), "Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community" (Simon and Schuster). [2] http:/ / books. google. com/ ngrams/ graph?content=social+ capital& year_start=1800& year_end=2008& corpus=0& smoothing=0 [3] Hanifan, L. J. (1916) "The rural school community center", Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 67: 130-138. Also see Hanifan, L. J. (1920)The Community Center, Boston: Silver Burdett. [4] Jacobs, Jane (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Random House, 1961, page 138 [5] Bourdieu, Pierre. (1972) Outline of a Theory of Practice [6] Coleman, James. (1988). "Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital". American Journal of Sociology Supplement 94: S95-S120. Wellman, Barry and Scot Wortley. (1990). "Different Strokes from Different Folks: Community Ties and Social Support". American Journal of Sociology 96: 558-88. Loury, Glenn (1977). A Dynamic Theory of Racial Income Differences. Chapter 8 of Women, Minorities, and Employment Discrimination, Ed. P.A. Wallace and A. Le Mund. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books. [7] Bowles, S. and Gintis S. (2002) "Social Capital and Community Governance". "The Economic Journal, 112: 419-436" [8] Ferragina, E. (2010) Social Capital and Equality: Tocqueville's Legacy. "The Toqueville Review, vol. XXXI: 73-98" http:/ / www. emanueleferragina. com/ attachments/ 002_Ferragina%20Tocqueville%20review. pdf [9] Tonnies, F. (1955) [1887]. Community and Association. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul

Social capital
[10] Durkheim, E. (1893) "De la Division du Travail". Les Classiques de Science Sociale. [11] Simmel, G. (1969) [1905] "The Metropolis and Mental Life", in Richard Sennet (eds) Classic Essays on the Culture of Cities. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. [12] Weber, M. (1946) "The Protestant Sects and the Spirit of Capitalism". In Hans H. Gert and Mills C. Wright (eds) From Max Weber. New York: Oxford University Press. [13] Wilmott, P. (1986) Social Networks, Informal Care and Public Policy. London: Policy Studies Institute. [14] Bell, D. (1962) "America as a Mass Society", in Daniel Bell (eds) The End of Ideology. New York: Collier Books [15] Nisbet, R. A. The Quest for Community. New York: Oxford University Press [16] Stein, M. R. (1960) The Eclipse of Community: an Interpretation of American Studies. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [17] Whyte, W. (1956) The Organization Man. New York: Simon and Schuster. [18] Ferragina,Pp. 76 (2010 [19] Ferragina, E. (2012) Social Capital in Europe: A Comparative Regional Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=YG0ryZmv5bMC& printsec=frontcover& source=gbs_ge_summary_r& cad=0#v=onepage& q& f=false [20] Rose, N. (2000) "Community Citizenship and the Third Way", American Behavioural Scientist 43: 1395-1411. [21] Foley, M. W. & Edwards, B. (1997). Escape from politics? [22] Alessandrini, M. (2002). Is Civil Society an Adequate Theory? [23] Arefi, M. (2003) Revisiting the Los Angeles Neighborhood Initiative (LANI): Lessons for Planners. Journal of planning education and research, vol.22 iss.4 pg.384 [24] Portes, A. (1998). Social Capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1-24. [25] http:/ / sitemaker. umich. edu/ varshney/ home [26] Varshney Ashutosh, Ethnic Conflict and Civil Society India and Beyond, in World Politics, Volume 53, Number 3, April 2001, pp. 362-398 [27] James Fearon and David Laitin, 1996, Explaining Inter-Ethnic Cooperation, American Political Science Review, December 1996 [29] Halpern, D (2005) Social Capital Cambridge: Polity Press. p1-2 [30] Moran 2005 [31] Evans and Carson 2005 [32] Koka and Prescott 2002 [33] McGrath and Sparks 2005 [34] 1993 [35] Uzzi and Dunlap 2005 [36] (http:/ / www. marxists. org/ reference/ subject/ philosophy/ works/ fr/ bourdieu-forms-capital. htm) [37] Bourdieu, Pierre. (1983). "konomisches Kapital, kulturelles Kapital, soziales Kapital" in Soziale Ungleichheiten (Soziale Welt, Sonderheft 2), edited by Reinhard Kreckel. Goettingen: Otto Schartz & Co. pp. 249 [38] as noted in Lin, Nan (2001). Social Capital, Cambridge University Press [39] "The Social Capital Foundation", Citizendium, The Citizen Compendium, <>. [40] Nahapiet, J. & Ghoshal, S. (1998) " Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage (http:/ / www. jstor. org/ pss/ 259373)" Academy of Management Review 23(2):242-266 [41] Granovetter, M. S. (1973). "The Strength of Weak Ties," American Journal of Sociology 78 (6), pp 1360 - 1380. [42] Hazleton V. & Kennan, W. (2000). Social capital: reconceptualizing the bottom line. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 5 (2), 81-86. [43] Boisot, M. (1995) Information space: A framework for learning in organizations, institutions and culture, London, Routledge [44] Boland and Tenkasi (1995) [45] Robison,L.J., A.A. Schmid, and M.E. Siles (2002) "Is Social Capital Really Capital?" Review of Social Economy 60:1-21 [46] Huber, F. (2009) Social Capital of Economic Clusters: Towards a Network-based Conception of Social Resources (http:/ / www3. interscience. wiley. com/ journal/ 122242385/ abstract?CRETRY=1& SRETRY=0). Journal of Economic and Social Geography (TESG) 100(2):160-170 [47] Ferragina (2010), Pp.75 [48] David Bollier: The Cornucopia of the Commons] ( link (http:/ / www. yesmagazine. org/ issues/ reclaiming-the-commons/ the-cornucopia-of-the-commons)), yes! magazine, June 30, 2001 [49] Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007) [50] Portes p. 7-8 [51] Portes p. 7 [52] Portes p. 8 [53] Portes p. 8-9 [54] W. Lloyd Warner, J.O. Low, Paul S. Lunt, & Leo Srole (1963). Yankee City. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press [55] Perkins, D.D., & Long, D.A. (2002). Neighborhood sense of community and social capital: A multi-level analysis. In A. Fisher, C. Sonn, & B. Bishop (Eds.), Psychological sense of community: Research, applications, and implications (pp. 291-318). New York: Plenum. (https:/ / my. vanderbilt. edu/ perkins/ files/ 2011/ 09/ PerkinsLong. 2002. Neighborhood_sense_of_communitysocial_capital. pdf)


Social capital
[56] Bankston, Carl L. and Min Zhou. 2002. Social Capital as Process: The Meanings and Problems of a Theoretical Metaphor? Sociological Inquiry 72 (2): 285-317 [57] Skocpol, T. (1996) Unravelling from Above. The American Prospect, 25, 2025 [58] Skocpol, T., Ganz, M. & Munson, Z. (2000) A Nation of Organisers: The institutional Origins of Civic Voluntarism in the United States. American Political Science Review, 94, 52746 [59] Thomson, I.T. (2005) The Theory that Wont Die: From Mass Society to the Decline of Social Capital. Sociological Forum, 20, 42148 [60] Knack, S. & Keefer, P. (1997) Does Social Capital Have an Economic Pay-Off ? A Cross Country Investigation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112, 125188 [61] Costa, D.E. & Kahn, M.E. (2003) Understanding the American Decline in Social Capital, 19521998. Kylos, 56, 1746 [62] OConnel, M. (2003) Anti Social Capital: Civic Values versus Economic Equality in the EU. European Sociological Review, 19, 2418 [63] Ferragina, E. (2010) Social Capital and Equality: Tocquevilles legacy. The Tocqueville Review, XXXI, 7398 [64] Lupo, S. (1993) Usi e Abusi del Passato. Le Radici dellItalia di Putnam. Meridiana, 18, 15168 [65] Lemann, N. (1996) Kicking in Groups. Atlantic Monthly, 277, 226 [66] Tarrow, S. (1996) Making Social Science Work across Space and Time: A Critical Refl ection on Robert Putnams Making Democracy Work. American Political Science Review, 90, 38997 [67] Fukuyama, F. (1992) The End of History and the Last Man, London, Penguin [68] Ferragina, E. (2012) Social Capital in Europe: A Comparative Regional Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar p. 133-154 http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=YG0ryZmv5bMC& printsec=frontcover& source=gbs_ge_summary_r& cad=0#v=onepage& q& f=false [69] Coleman, J.S. (1990) Foundations of Social Theory, Cambridge MA, Harvard University Press [70] Ferragina, E. (2012) Social Capital in Europe: A Comparative Regional Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar [71] Social Capital in Europe: A Comparative Regional Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar [72] Lindon J. Robison, Robert S. Shupp, Songqing Jin, Marcelo E. Siles, Tawni H. Ferrarini The relative importance of selfishness and social capital motives The Journal of Socio-Economics 41 (2012) 118127 [73] Cox in Alessandrini (2002) [74] Schmidt in Alessandrini (2002) [75] Walzer (1992) [77] Onyx (2000) [78] Foley and Edwards (1997) [79] Fine, Ben. (2001). Social Capital versus Social Theory: Political Economy and Social Science at the Turn of the Millennium. London: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-24179-0. [80] Harriss, J. (2001). Depoliticizing Development: The World Bank and Social Capital. Leftword/Anthem/Stylus. [81] Kathleen M. Dowley and Brian D. Silver, "Social Capital, Ethnicity and Support for Democracy in the Post-Communist States", Europe-Asia Studies, 54, No. 4 (2002): 505-527. [82] For instance see David Moore's edited book 'The World Bank', University of KwaZulu-Natal Press, 2007 [83] http:/ / www. corporatealliance. net [84] http:/ / www. xentrum. org [85] http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20080605052742/ http:/ / www. camaralatinoamericana. com/ [86] http:/ / www. linkedin. com [87] Harell, A. (2009). Equal Participation but Separate Paths?: Womens Social Capital and Turnout [88] Eliasoph, N. 1998. Avoiding Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. [89] Vickers, J. 1997. Reinventing Political Science: A Feminist Approach. Halifax: Fernwood. [90] Lin, N. Building a network theory of social capital. In N. Lin, K. Cook, & R.S. Burt, (Eds.), Social capital: Theory and research, (pp.3-29). New York: Aldine de Gruyter. [91] Bolin, K., Lindgren, B., Lindstrom, M., & Nystedt, P. (2003)Investments in social capital implications of social interactions for the production of health. [92] Aslund, C., Starrin, B., & Nilsson, K. (2010). " Social capital in relation to depression, musculoskeletal pain, and psychosomatic symptoms: a cross-sectional study of a large population-based cohort of Swedish adolescents (http:/ / www. biomedcentral. com/ 1471-2458/ 10/ 715/ abstract)." BMC Public Health 10(715). [93] Sutherland, Edwin H. and Donald R. Cressey (1978). Criminology. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company. [94] Shah, D. V., Kwak, N., & Holbert, R. L. (2001). "Connecting" and "disconnecting" with civic life: Patterns of Internet use and the production of social capital. Political Communication, 18 (2), 141-162. [95] Steinfield, C., DiMicco, J. M., Ellison, N. B., & Lampe, C. (2009). "Bowling Online: Social Networking and Social Capital within the Organization." Proceedings of the Fourth Communities and Technologies Conference. [96] Cummings, J., Butler, B., & Kraut, R. (2002). The quality of online social relationships. Communications of the ACM, 45(7), 103-108. [97] Nie, N. H. (2001). Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the Internet: Reconciling conflicting findings. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 42035. [98] Fernback, J. (1997). The individual within the collective : Virtual ideology and the realization of collective principles. In S. Jones(Ed.), Virtual culture (pp.36-54). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.


Social capital
[99] Boase, Jeffrey and Barry Wellman. 2005. "Personal Relationships: On and Off the Internet." In Handbook of Personal Relationships, edited by A. L. Vangelisti and D. Perlman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Boase, Jeffrey, John Horrigan, Barry Wellman, and Lee Rainie. 2006. "The Strength of Internet Ties." Pew Internet and American Life Project, Washington. []. Hua Wang and Barry Wellman. 2010. Social Connectivity in America: Changes in Adult Friendship Network Size from 2002 to 2007. American Behavioral Scientist53 (8): 1148-1169. Caroline Haythornthwaite and Lori Kendall "Internet and Community", American Behavioral Scientist 2010 53: 1083-1094. [100] Coleman and Hoffer (1987) "High School and Beyond" [101] Teachman et al. (1996) [102] Morgan and Sorensen (1999) [103] Chen (2002) [105] Sampson et al., 1999, p.635, quoted by Chen, 2002 [106] Marjoribanks and Kwok (1998) [107] Hei Hang Hayes Tang (2002) "New Arrival Students in Hong Kong: Adaptation and School Performance" [108] * Zhou, Min and Carl L. Bankston III Growing Up American: How Vietnamese Children Adapt to Life in the United States New York: Russell Sage Foundation(1998) [109] Zhou (2000) [110] Stanton-Salazar (1995) (quoted by Wong, 2002) [111] Putnam (2000), p. 296 [112] Putnam (2000), p.300 [113] Putnam (2000), p. 301 [114] Putnam (2000), p. 303 [115] Mohan, p. 193 [116] Ferragina, E. (2010) Social Capital and Equality: Tocqueville's Legacy. "The Toqueville Review, vol. XXXI: 73-98" http:/ / www. emanueleferragina. com/ attachments/ 002_Ferragina%20Tocqueville%20review. pdf; Ferragina, E. (2012 p. 3) Social Capital in Europe: A Comparative Regional Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=YG0ryZmv5bMC& printsec=frontcover& source=gbs_ge_summary_r& cad=0#v=onepage& q& f=false [117] Mohan, p. 196198 [118] Mohan, p. 197 [119] Mohan, p. 198 [120] Perkins, D.D., Hughey, J., & Speer, P.W. (2002). Community psychology perspectives on social capital theory and community development practice. Journal of the Community Development Society, 33(1), 33-52. (https:/ / my. vanderbilt. edu/ perkins/ files/ 2011/ 09/ Perkins_Hughey_Speer-JCDS-33-no1-2002. pdf) (p. 47) [121] Bolin, B., Hackett, E.J., Harlan, S.L., Kirby, A., Larsen, L., Nelson, A., Rex, T.R., Wolf., S. (2004) Bonding and Bridging: Understanding the Relationship between Social Capital and Civic Action. Journal of Planning Education and Research 24:64-77 [122] Sheri Berman,World Politics 49, 3, April 1997) [123] Putnam, Robert D. (2006) E Pluribus Unim: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-First Century, Nordic Political Science Association [124] James Coleman, 1988. "Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital" American Journal of Sociology


Becker, Gary S. (1996). Accounting for Tastes. Part I: Personal Capital; Part II: Social Capital. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN0-674-54357-2. Description ( html) & Table of Contents. ( Bourdieu, Pierre. (1983). "konomisches Kapital, kulturelles Kapital, soziales Kapital" in Soziale Ungleichheiten (Soziale Welt, Sonderheft 2), edited by Reinhard Kreckel. Goettingen: Otto Schartz & Co. pp.18398. Coleman, James S. (1988). "Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital", American Journal of Sociology. 94 Supplement: (pp. S95-S-120), abstract. (<S95:SCITCO>2.0. CO;2-P) Dasgupta, Partha, and Serageldin, Ismail, ed. (2000). Social Capital: A Multifaceted Perspective. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ( book preview ( lpg=PA402&dq="social+capital+a+multifaceted+perspective"+"world+bank+publications"&source=web& ots=EEpdDaaNZf&sig=miES9_aAx19BMVe6TxWUAA6zQM8#PPP1,M1) except pp.217401, 403-25) Edwards, B. & Foley, M. W. (1998). Civil society and social capital beyond Putnam Everingham, C. (2001). Reconstituting Community

Social capital Ferragina, E. (2010). "Social Capital and Equality: Tocqueville's Legacy. Rethinking social capital in relation with income inequalities. The Tocqueville Review. Vol. XXXI n1 (pp. 73-98) http://www.emanueleferragina. com/attachments/002_Ferragina%20Tocqueville%20review.pdf Ferragina, E. (2012) Social Capital in Europe: A Comparative Regional Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false Stephen Knack and Philip Keefer (1997). "Does Social Capital Have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation," Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4), pp. 1251-1288. ( arquivos/econ-cultura/knack-keefer-1997.pdf) Lin, Nan, "Building a Network Theory of Social Capital", [CONNECTIONS 22(1): 28-51,1999 INSNA] (http:/ / Putnam, Robert D. (2006). E Pluribus Unim: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-First Century, Nordic Political Science Association From Steven N. Durlauf and Lawrence E. Blume, ed. (2008). The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition: "social capital" (abstract) (http:/ / www. dictionaryofeconomics. com/ article?id=pde2008_S000451& q=) by Partha Dasgupta "religion, economics of" (abstract) ( q=) by Laurence R. Iannaccone and Eli Berman "social norms" (abstract) (http:/ / www. dictionaryofeconomics. com/ article?id=pde2008_S000466& q=) by H. Peyton Young "social networks, economic relevance of" (abstract) (http:/ / www. dictionaryofeconomics. com/ article?id=pde2008_S000511&q=) by James Moody and Martina Morris Mohan, Giles, and John Mohan. "Placing Social Capital." Progress in Human Geography 26.2 (2002): 191-210. University of Cincinnati. Web. 7 Nov. 2010. <>. Portes, A. 1998: Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology 24: 1-24. "The Social Capital Foundation", Citizendium, The Citizen Compendium, <>. Zhou, Min and Carl L. Bankston III Growing Up American: How Vietnamese Children Adapt to Life in the United States New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1998. ISBN 978-0-87154-995-2.


External links
Social Capital Research ( - Detailed review of social capital, particularly social capital for social action. The Social Capital Foundation, Patrick Hunout ( Social Capital Gateway, Resources for the study of social capital ( Social capital tool by Martin Gargiulo INSEAD Faculty, Identifying patterns in your network. (http://www. The Saguaro Seminar's "Primer on Social Capital" ( htm) World Bank's PovertyNet page on social capital ( Lin N., 2001, Building a Network Theory of Social Capital (

Social capital Social Capital Inc., an organization dedicated to increasing social capital in local communities (http://www. New Papers on Social Capital, a Newsletter edited by the RePEc Project ( listinfo/nep-soc) Social Capital Theory in the Context of Japanese Children ( Bassani.html), article by Cherylynn Bassani in the electronic journal of contemporary japanese studies, 8 May 2003. A Comparison of Social Capital Between Parents in Single and Two Parent Families in Japan (http://www., article by Cherylynn Bassani in the electronic journal of contemporary japanese studies, 5 July 2007. Five Dimensions of Social Capital Theory as they Pertain to Youth Studies ( smpp/content~content=a770951041~db=all~jumptype=rss), article by Cherylynn Bassani in the Journal of Youth Studies 10, 1 2007. Assist Social Capital, Working to Promote Best Practice in the Development of Social Capital (http://www. Can Social Capital Explain Persistent Poverty Gaps? ( workingpaper06/paper12/working_paper06-12.pdf) from the National Poverty Center Ethnicity as Social Capital ( dwyer.pdf) Social Capital within Ethnic Communities ( Social capital, quality of life, and Internet and mobile phone use ( Collection of best Social Capital blogs by Heather Ross ( 12758-social-capital) Video explanation of how social capital indexing powers citizen engagement (http://www.government20club. org/2009/03/creating-a-citizen-driven-idea-sourcing-platform-needs-matching-system/) Measuring social capital in a Philippine slum ( article by Petr Matous and Kazumasa Ozawa in the Journal of Field Methods about social capital measurement methodology with a focus on socio-economically deprived contexts


Social network


Social network


Theory History Positivism Antipositivism Functionalism Conflict theory Middle-range Mathematical Critical theory Socialization Structure and agency Research methods

Quantitative Qualitative Historical Computational Ethnographic Network-analytic Topics Subfields Anomie Cities Class Crime Culture Deviance Demography Education Economy Environment Family Gender Health Industry Internet Knowledge

Social network

Law Literature Medicine Politics Mobility Race and ethnicity Rationalization Religion Scientific knowledge Secularization Social networks Social psychology Stratification Browse

Portal Category tree Lists Journals List of sociologists Article index

Network science

Theory History Graph Complex network Contagion Small-world Scale-free Community structure Percolation Evolution Controllability Topology Graph drawing Social capital Link analysis Optimization Reciprocity Closure Homophily Transitivity Preferential attachment Balance Network effect Influence Types of Networks Information Telecommunication Social Biological Neural Semantic Random Dependency Flow Graphs

Social network

Vertex Edge Component Directed Multigraph Bipartite Weighted Hypergraph Random Cycle Loop Path Neighborhood Clique Complete Cut Data structure Adjacency list & matrix Incidence list & matrix Metrics and Algorithms Centrality Degree Betweenness Closeness PageRank Motif Clustering Degree distribution Assortativity Distance Modularity Models Random ErdsRnyi BarabsiAlbert WattsStrogatz ERGM Epidemic Hierarchical Browse Topics Software Network scientists Graph theory Network theory

A social network is a social structure made up of a set of actors (such as individuals or organizations) and a complex set of the dyadic ties between these actors. The social network perspective provides a clear way of analyzing the structure of whole social entities.[] The study of these structures uses social network analysis to identify local and global patterns, locate influential entities, and examine network dynamics. Social networks and the analysis of them is an inherently interdisciplinary academic field which emerged from social psychology, sociology, statistics, and graph theory. Georg Simmel authored early structural theories in sociology emphasizing the dynamics of triads and "web of group affiliations."[1] Jacob Moreno is credited with developing the first sociograms in the 1930s to study interpersonal relationships. These approaches were mathematically formalized in the 1950s and theories and methods of social networks became pervasive in the social and behavioral sciences by the 1980s.[][] Social network analysis is now one of the major paradigms in contemporary sociology, and is also employed in a number of other social and formal sciences. Together with other complex networks, it forms part of the nascent field of network science.[2][]

A social network is a theoretical construct useful in the social sciences to study relationships between individuals, groups, organizations, or even entire societies (social units, see differentiation). The term is used to describe a social structure determined by such interactions. The ties through which any given social unit connects represent the convergence of the various social contacts of that unit. This theoretical approach is, necessarily, relational. An axiom of the social network approach to understanding social interaction is that social phenomena should be primarily conceived and investigated through the properties of relations between and within units, instead of the properties of these units themselves. Thus, one common criticism of social network theory is that individual agency is often ignored[3] although this may not be

Evolution graph of a social network: Barabsi model.

Social network the case in practice (see agent-based modeling). Precisely because many different types of relations, singular or in combination, form these network configurations, network analytics are useful to a broad range of research enterprises. In social science, these fields of study include, but are not limited to anthropology, biology, communication studies, economics, geography, information science, organizational studies, social psychology, sociology, and sociolinguistics.


In the late 1800s, both mile Durkheim and Ferdinand Tnnies foreshadowed the idea of social networks in their theories and research of social groups. Tnnies argued that social groups can exist as personal and direct social ties that either link individuals who share values and belief (Gemeinschaft, German, commonly translated as "community") or impersonal, formal, and instrumental social links (Gesellschaft, German, commonly translated as "society").[4] Durkheim gave a non-individualistic explanation of social facts, arguing that social phenomena arise when interacting individuals constitute a reality that can no longer be accounted for in terms of the properties of individual actors.[5] Georg Simmel, writing at the turn of the twentieth century, pointed to the nature of networks and the effect of network size on interaction and examined the likelihood of interaction in loosely-knit networks rather than groups.[6] Major developments in the field can be seen in the 1930s by several groups in psychology, anthropology, and mathematics working independently.[3][7][8] In psychology, in the 1930s, Jacob L. Moreno began systematic recording and analysis of social interaction in small groups, especially classrooms and work groups (see sociometry). In anthropology, the foundation for social network theory is the theoretical and ethnographic work of Bronislaw Malinowski,[9] Alfred Radcliffe-Brown,[10][11] and Claude Lvi-Strauss.[12] A group of social anthropologists associated with Max Gluckman and the Manchester School, including John A. Barnes,[13] J. Clyde Mitchell and Elizabeth Bott Spillius,[14][15] often are credited with performing some of the first fieldwork from which network analyses were performed, investigating community networks in southern Africa, India and the United Kingdom.[3] Concomitantly, British anthropologist S.F. Nadel codified a theory of social structure that was influential in later network analysis.[16] In sociology, the early (1930s) work of Talcott Parsons set the stage for taking a relational approach to understanding social structure.[17][18] Later, drawing upon Parsons' theory, the work of sociologist Peter Blau provides a strong impetus for analyzing the relational ties of social units with his work on social exchange theory.[19][20][21] By the 1970s, a growing number of scholars worked to combine the different tracks and traditions. One group consisted of sociologist Harrison White and his students at the Harvard University Department of Social Relations. Also independently active in the Harvard Social Relations department at the time were Charles Tilly, who focused on networks in political and community sociology and social movements, and Stanley Milgram, who developed the "six degrees of separation" thesis.[22]Mark Granovetter[23] and Barry Wellman[24] are among the former students of White who elaborated and championed the analysis of social networks.[25][26][27][28]

Social network


Levels of analysis
In general, social networks are self-organizing, emergent, and complex, such that a globally coherent pattern appears from the local interaction of the elements that make up the system.[30][31] These patterns become more apparent as network size increases. However, a global network analysis[32] of, for example, all interpersonal relationships in the world is not feasible and is likely to contain so much information as to be uninformative. Practical limitations of computing power, ethics and participant recruitment and payment also limit the scope of a social network analysis.[33][34] The nuances of a Self-organization of a network, based on Nagler, local system may be lost in a large network analysis, hence the quality [29] Levina, & Timme, (2011) of information may be more important than its scale for understanding network properties. Thus, social networks are analyzed at the scale relevant to the researcher's theoretical question. Although levels of analysis are not necessarily mutually exclusive, there are three general levels into which networks may fall: micro-level, meso-level, and macro-level.

Micro level
At the micro-level, social network research typically begins with an individual, snowballing as social relationships are traced, or may begin with a small group of individuals in a particular social context. Dyadic level: A dyad is a social relationship between two individuals. Network research on dyads may concentrate on structure of the relationship (e.g. multiplexity, strength), social equality, and tendencies toward reciprocity/mutuality. Triadic level: Add one individual to a dyad, and you have a triad. Research at this level may concentrate on factors such as balance and transitivity, as well as social equality and tendencies toward reciprocity/mutuality.[33]

Social network diagram, micro-level.

Actor level: The smallest unit of analysis in a social network is an individual in their social setting, i.e., an "actor" or "ego". Egonetwork analysis focuses on network characteristics such as size, relationship strength, density, centrality, prestige and roles such as isolates, liaisons, and bridges.[35] Such analyses, are most commonly used in the fields of psychology or social psychology, ethnographic kinship analysis or other genealogical studies of relationships between individuals. Subset level: Subset levels of network research problems begin at the micro-level, but may cross over into the meso-level of analysis. Subset level research may focus on distance and reachability, cliques, cohesive subgroups, or other group actions or behavior[citation needed].

Social network


Meso level
In general, meso-level theories begin with a population size that falls between the micro- and macro-levels. However, meso-level may also refer to analyses that are specifically designed to reveal connections between microand macro-levels. Meso-level networks are low density and may exhibit causal processes distinct from interpersonal micro-level networks.[36] Organizations: Formal organizations are social groups that distribute tasks for a collective goal.[37] Network research on organizations may focus on either intra-organizational or inter-organizational ties in terms of formal or informal relationships. Intra-organizational networks themselves often contain multiple levels of analysis, especially in larger organizations with multiple branches, franchises or semi-autonomous departments. In these cases, research is often conducted at a workgroup level and organization level, focusing on the interplay between the two structures.[37]
Social network diagram, meso-level Randomly-distributed networks: Exponential random graph models of social networks became state-of-the-art methods of social network analysis in the 1980s. This framework has the capacity to represent social-structural effects commonly observed in many human social networks, including general degree-based structural effects commonly observed in many human social networks as well as reciprocity and transitivity, and at the node-level, homophily and attribute-based activity and popularity effects, as derived from explicit hypotheses about dependencies among network ties. Parameters are given in terms of the prevalence of small subgraph configurations in the network and can be interpreted as describing the combinations of local social processes from which a given network emerges. These probability models for networks on a given set of actors allow generalization beyond the restrictive dyadic independence assumption of micro-networks, allowing models to be built from theoretical structural foundations of social behavior.[38]

Scale-free networks: A scale-free network is a network whose degree distribution follows a power law, at least asymptotically. In network theory a scale-free ideal network is a random network with a degree distribution that unravels the size distribution of social groups.[39] Specific characteristics of scale-free networks vary with the theories and analytical tools used to create them, however, in general, scale-free Examples of a random network and a scale-free networks have some common characteristics. One notable network. Each graph has 32 nodes and 32 links. characteristic in a scale-free network is the relative commonness of Note the "hubs" in the scale-free diagram (on the vertices with a degree that greatly exceeds the average. The right). highest-degree nodes are often called "hubs", and may serve specific purposes in their networks, although this depends greatly on the social context. Another general characteristic of scale-free networks is the clustering coefficient distribution, which decreases as the node degree increases. This distribution also follows a power law.[40] The Barabsi model of network evolution shown above is an example of a scale-free network.

Social network


Macro level
Rather than tracing interpersonal interactions, macro-level analyses generally trace the outcomes of interactions, such as economic or other resource transfer interactions over a large population. Large-scale networks: Large-scale network is a term somewhat synonymous with "macro-level" as used, primarily, in social and behavioral sciences, in economics. Originally, the term was used extensively in the computer sciences (see large-scale network mapping). Complex networks: Most larger social networks display features of social complexity, which involves substantial non-trivial features of network topology, with patterns of complex connections between elements that are neither purely regular nor purely random (see, Diagram: section of a large-scale social network complexity science, dynamical system and chaos theory), as do biological, and technological networks. Such complex network features include a heavy tail in the degree distribution, a high clustering coefficient, assortativity or disassortativity among vertices, community structure, and hierarchical structure. In the case of agency-directed networks these features also include reciprocity, triad significance profile (TSP, see network motif), and other features. In contrast, many of the mathematical models of networks that have been studied in the past, such as lattices and random graphs, do not show these features.[41]

Theoretical links
Imported theories
Various theoretical frameworks have been imported for the use of social network analysis. The most prominent of these are Graph Theory, Balance Theory, Social Comparison Theory, and more recently, the Social identity approach.[42]

Indigenous theories
Few complete theories have been produced from social network analysis. Two that have are Structural Role Theory and Heterophily Theory. The basis of Heterophily Theory was the finding in one study that more numerous weak ties can be important in seeking information and innovation, as cliques have a tendency to have more homogeneous opinions as well as share many common traits. This homophilic tendency was the reason for the members of the cliques to be attracted together in the first place. However, being similar, each member of the clique would also know more or less what the other members knew. To find new information or insights, members of the clique will have to look beyond the clique to its other friends and acquaintances. This is what Granovetter called "the strength of weak ties."[43]

Structural holes
In the context of networks, social capital exists where people have an advantage because of their location in a network. Contacts in a network provide information, opportunities and perspectives that can be beneficial to the central player in the network. Most social structures tend to be characterized by dense clusters of strong connections.[] Information within these clusters tends to be rather homogeneous and redundant. Non-redundant information is most often obtained through contacts in different clusters.[] When two separate clusters possess non-redundant information, there is said to be a structural hole between them.[] Thus, a network that bridges structural holes will provide network benefits that are in some degree additive, rather than overlapping. An ideal network structure has a vine and cluster structure, providing access to many different clusters and structural holes.[]

Social network


Information benefits
Networks rich in structural holes are a form of social capital in that they offer information benefits. The main player in a network that bridges structural holes is able to access information from diverse sources and clusters.[] This is beneficial to an individuals career because he is more likely to hear of job openings and opportunities if his network spans a wide range of contacts in different industries/sectors. This concept is similar to Mark Granovetters theory of weak ties, which rests on the basis that having a broad range of contacts is most effective for job attainment.

Social capital mobility benefits

In many organizations, members tend to focus their activities inside their own groups, which stifles creativity and restricts opportunities. A player whose network bridges structural holes has an advantage in detecting and developing rewarding opportunities.[] Such a player can mobilize social capital by acting as a broker of information between two clusters that otherwise would not have been in contact, thus providing access to new ideas, opinions and opportunities. British philosopher and political economist John Stuart Mill, writes, it is hardly possible to overrate the value...of placing human beings in contact with persons dissimilar to themselvesSuch communication [is] one of the primary sources of progress.[44] Thus, a player with a network rich in structural holes can add value to an organization through new ideas and opportunities. This in turn, helps an individuals career development and advancement. A social capital broker also reaps control benefits of being the facilitator of information flow between contacts. In the case of consulting firm Eden McCallum, the founders were able to advance their careers by bridging their connections with former big 3 consulting firm consultants and mid-size industry firms.[45] By bridging structural holes and mobilizing social capital, players can advance their careers by executing new opportunities between contacts. There has been research that both substantiates and refutes the benefits of information brokerage. A study of high tech Chinese firms by Zhixing Xiao found that the control benefits of structural holes are dissonant to the dominant firm-wide spirit of cooperation and the information benefits cannot materialize due to the communal sharing values of such organizations.[46] However, this study only analyzed Chinese firms, which tend to have strong communal sharing values. Information and control benefits of structural holes are still valuable in firms that are not quite as inclusive and cooperative on the firm-wide level. In 2004, Ronald Burt studied 673 managers who ran the supply chain for one of Americas largest electronics companies. He found that managers who often discussed issues with other groups were better paid, received more positive job evaluations and were more likely to be promoted.[] Thus, bridging structural holes can be beneficial to an organization, and in turn, to an individuals career.

Research clusters
Communication Studies are often considered a part of both the social sciences and the humanities, drawing heavily on fields such as sociology, psychology, anthropology, information science, biology, political science, and economics as well as rhetoric, literary studies, and semiotics. Many communications concepts describe the transfer of information from one source to another, and can thus be conceived of in terms of a network.

In J.A. Barnes' day, a "community" referred to a specific geographic location and studies of community ties had to do with who talked, associated, traded, and attended church with whom. Today, however, there are extended "online" communities developed through telecommunications devices and social network services. Such devices and services require extensive and ongoing maintenance and analysis, often using network science methods. Community development studies, today, also make extensive use of such methods.

Social network


Complex networks
Complex networks require methods specific to modelling and interpreting social complexity and complex adaptive systems, including techniques of dynamic network analysis.

Criminal networks
In criminology and urban sociology, much attention has been paid to the social networks among criminal actors. For example, Andrew Papachristos [citation needed] has studied gang murders as a series of exchanges between gangs. Murders can be seen to diffuse outwards from a single source, because weaker gangs cannot afford to kill members of stronger gangs in retaliation, but must commit other violent acts to maintain their reputation for strength.

Diffusion of innovations
Diffusion of ideas and innovations studies focus on the spread and use of ideas from one actor to another or one culture and another. This line of research seeks to explain why some become "early adopters" of ideas and innovations, and links social network structure with facilitating or impeding the spread of an innovation.

In demography, the study of social networks has led to new sampling methods for estimating and reaching populations that are hard to enumerate (for example, homeless people or intravenous drug users.) For example, respondent driven sampling is a network-based sampling technique that relies on respondents to a survey recommending further respondents.

Economic sociology
The field of sociology focuses almost entirely on networks of outcomes of social interactions. More narrowly, economic sociology considers behavioral interactions of individuals and groups through social capital and social "markets". Sociologists, such as Mark Granovetter, have developed core principles about the interactions of social structure, information, ability to punish or reward, and trust that frequently recur in their analyses of political, economic and other institutions. Granovetter examines how social structures and social networks can affect economic outcomes like hiring, price, productivity and innovation and describes sociologists contributions to analyzing the impact of social structure and networks on the economy.[47]

Health care
Analysis of social networks is increasingly incorporated into heath care analytics, not only in epidemological studies but also in models of patient communication and education, disease prevention, mental health diagnosis and treatment, and in the study of health care organizations and systems.[48]

Human ecology
Human ecology is an interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary study of the relationship between humans and their natural, social, and built environments. The scientific philosophy of human ecology has a diffuse history with connections to geography, sociology, psychology, anthropology, zoology, and natural ecology.[49][50]

Social network


Language and linguistics

Studies of language and lingustics, particularly evolutionary linguistics, focus on the development of linguistic forms and transfer of changes, sounds or words, from one language system to another through networks of social interaction. Social networks are also important in language shift, as groups of people add and/or abandon languages to their repertoire.

Literary networks
In the study of literary systems, network analysis has been applied by Anheier, Gerhards and Romo,[51] De Nooy,[52] and Senekal,[53] to study various aspects of how literature functions. The basic premise is that polysystem theory, which has been around since the writings of Even-Zohar, can be integrated with network theory and the relationships between different actors in the literary network, e.g. writers, critics, publishers, literary histories, etc., can be mapped using visualization from SNA.

Organizational studies
Research studies of formal or informal organizational relationships, organizational communication, economics, economic sociology, and other resource transfers. Social networks have also been used to examine how organizations interact with each other, characterizing the many informal connections that link executives together, as well as associations and connections between individual employees at different organizations.[54] Intra-organizational networks have been found to affect organizational commitment,[55] organizational identification,[35] interpersonal citizenship behaviour.[56]

Social capital
Social capital is a sociological concept which refers to the value of social relations and the role of cooperation and confidence to achieve positive outcomes. The term refers to the value one can get from their social ties. For example, newly arrived immigrants can make use of their social ties to established migrants to acquire jobs they may otherwise have trouble getting (e.g., because of lack of knowledge of language). Studies show that a positive relationship exists between social capital and the intensity of social network use.[57]

Further reading
Wellman, Barry; Berkowitz, S.D. (1988). Social Structures: A Network Approach. Structural Analysis in the Social Sciences. Cambridge University Press. ISBN0-521-24441-2. Scott, John (1991). Social Network Analysis: a handbook. SAGE. ISBN978-0-7619-6338-7. Wasserman, Stanley; Faust, Katherine (1994). Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Structural Analysis in the Social Sciences. Cambridge University Press. ISBN978-0-521-38269-4. Barabsi, Albert-Lszl (2003). Linked: How everything is connected to everything else and what it means for business, science, and everyday life. Plum. ISBN978-0-452-28439-5. Freeman, Linton C. (2004). The Development of Social Network Analysis: A Study in the Sociology of Science. Empirical Press. ISBN1-59457-714-5. Barnett, George A. (2011). Encyclopedia of Social Networks. SAGE. ISBN978-1-4129-7911-5. Kadushin, Charles (2012). Understanding Social Networks: Theories, Concepts, and Findings. Oxford University Press. ISBN978-0-19-537946-4. Rainie, Lee and Barry Wellman. 2012. Networked: The New Social Operating System. MIT Press. isbn=978-0-262-01719-0 E. Estrada, "The Structure of Complex Networks: Theory and Applications", Oxford University Press, 2011, ISBN 978-0-199-59175-6

Social network


External links
International Network for Social Network Analysis [58][59]

International Network for Social Network Analysis [58]

Peer-reviewed journals
Social Networks [60] Network Science [61] Journal of Social Structure [62] Journal of Mathematical Sociology [63] Social Network Analysis and Mining (SNAM) [64]

Textbooks and educational resources

Networks, Crowds, and Markets [65] (2010) by D. Easley & J. Kleinberg Introduction to Social Networks Methods [66] (2005) by R. Hanneman & M. Riddle Social Network Analysis Instructional Web Site [67] by S. Borgatti

Data sets
Pajek's list of lists of datasets [68] UC Irvine Network Data Repository [69] Stanford Large Network Dataset Collection [70] M.E.J. Newman datasets [71] Pajek datasets [72] Gephi datasets [73] KONECT - Koblenz network collection [74]

[3] Scott, John P. (2000). Social Network Analysis: A Handbook (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. [4] Tnnies, Ferdinand (1887). Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft, Leipzig: Fues's Verlag. (Translated, 1957 by Charles Price Loomis as Community and Society, East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.) [5] Durkheim, Emile (1893). De la division du travail social: tude sur l'organisation des socits suprieures, Paris: F. Alcan. (Translated, 1964, by Lewis A. Coser as The Division of Labor in Society, New York: Free Press.) [6] Simmel, Georg (1908). Soziologie, Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot. [7] For a historical overview of the development of social network analysis, see: [8] See also the diagram in [9] Malinowski, Bronislaw (1913). The Family Among the Australian Aborigines: A Sociological Study. London: University of London Press. [10] Radcliffe-Brown, Alfred Reginald (1930) The social organization of Australian tribes. Sydney, Australia: University of Sydney Oceania monographs, No.1. [11] Radcliffe-Brown, A.R. (1940). "On social structure". Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 70, 1-12. [12] Lvi-Strauss, Claude ([1947]1967). Les structures lmentaires de la parent. Paris: La Haye, Mouton et Co. (Translated, 1969 by J. H. Bell, J. R. von Sturmer, and R. Needham, 1969, as The Elementary Structures of Kinship, Boston: Beacon Press.) [13] Barnes, John (1954). "Class and Committees in a Norwegian Island Parish." Human Relations, (7): 39-58. [14] Freeman, Linton C. and Barry Wellman (1995). "A note on the ancestoral Toronto home of social network analysis." Connections, 18(2): 15-19. [15] Savage, Mike (2008). "Elizabeth Bott and the formation of modern British sociology." The Sociological Review, 56(4): 579605. [16] Nadel, SF. 1957. The Theory of Social Structure. London: Cohen and West.

Social network
[17] Parsons, Talcott ([1937] 1949). The Structure of Social Action: A Study in Social Theory with Special Reference to a Group of European Writers. New York, NY: The Free Press. [18] Parsons, Talcott (1951). The Social System. New York, NY: The Free Press. [19] Blau, Peter (1956). Bureaucracy in Modern Society. New York: Random House, Inc. [20] Blau, Peter (1960). "A Theory of Social Integration." The American Journal of Sociology, (65)6: 545-556 , (May). [21] Blau, Peter (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. [23] Granovetter, Mark (2007). "Introduction for the French Reader," Sociologica 2: 18 [24] Wellman, Barry (1988). "Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance." Pp. 19-61 in B. Wellman and S. D. Berkowitz (eds.) Social Structures: A Network Approach, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. [25] Mullins, Nicholas. Theories and Theory Groups in Contemporary American Sociology. New York: Harper and Row, 1973. [26] Tilly, Charles, ed. An Urban World. Boston: Little Brown, 1974. [27] Mark Granovetter, "Introduction for the French Reader," Sociologica 2 (2007): 18. [28] Wellman, Barry. 1988. "Structural Analysis: From Method and Metaphor to Theory and Substance." Pp. 19-61 in Social Structures: A Network Approach, edited by Barry Wellman and S.D. Berkowitz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [29] Nagler, Jan, Anna Levina and Marc Timme (2011). "Impact of single links in competitive percolation." Nature Physics, 7: 265-270. [30] Newman, Mark, Albert-Lszl Barabsi and Duncan J. Watts (2006). The Structure and Dynamics of Networks (Princeton Studies in Complexity). Oxford: Princeton University Press. [31] Wellman, Barry (2008). "Review: The development of social network analysis: A study in the sociology of science." Contemporary Sociology, 37: 221-222. [33] Kadushin, C. (2012).Understanding social networks: Theories, concepts, and findings. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [35] Jones, C. & Volpe, E.H. (2011). Organizational identification: Extending our understanding of social identities through social networks. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32, 413-434. [36] Hedstrm,Peter, Rickard Sandell, and Charlotta Stern (2000).Mesolevel Networks and the Diffusion of Social Movements: The Case of the Swedish Social Democratic Party. American Journal of Sociology, 106(1): 14572. (http:/ / www. nuffield. ox. ac. uk/ users/ hedstrom/ ajs3. pdf) [37] Riketta, M. & Nienber, S. (2007). Multiple identities and work motivation: The role of perceived compatibility between nested organizational units. British Journal of Management, 18, S61-77. [38] Cranmer, Skyler J. and Bruce A. Desmarais (2011). "Inferential Network Analysis with Exponential Random Graph Models." Political Analysis, 19(1): 66-86. [40] Barabsi, Albert-Lszl (2003). Linked: how everything is connected to everything else and what it means for business, science, and everyday life. New York, NY: Plum. [41] Strogatz, Steven H. (2001). "Exploring complex networks." Nature, 410: 268-276. [47] Granovetter, Mark (2005). "The Impact of Social Structure on Economic Outcomes." The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(1): 33-50 (http:/ / www. jstor. org/ stable/ 4134991) [48] Levy, Judith and Bernice Pescosolido (2002). Social Networks and Health. Boston, MA: JAI Press. [49] Crona, Beatrice and Klaus Hubacek (eds.) (2010). "Special Issue: Social network analysis in natural resource governance." Ecology and Society, 48. (http:/ / www. ecologyandsociety. org/ issues/ view. php?sf=48) [50] Ernstson, Henrich (2010). "Reading list: Using social network analysis (SNA) in social-ecological studies." Resilience Science (http:/ / rs. resalliance. org/ 2010/ 11/ 03/ reading-list-using-social-network-analysis-sna-in-social-ecological-studies/ ) [51] Anheier, H.K., J. Gerhards en F.P. Romo. 1995. Forms of capital and social structure of fields: examining Bourdieus social topography. American Journal of Sociology, 100:859903 [52] De Nooy, W. Fields and networks: Correspondence analysis and social network analysis in the framework of Field Theory. Poetics, 31:30527 [53] Senekal, B. A. 2012. Die Afrikaanse literre sisteem: Eksperimentele benadering met behulp van Sosiale-netwerk-analise (SNA), LitNet Akademies 9(3) [54] Podolny, J.M. & Baron, J.N. (1997). Resources and relationships: Social networks and mobility in the workplace. American Sociological Review, 62(5), 673-693 [55] Lee, J. & Kim, S. (2011). Exploring the role of social networks in affective organizational commitment: Network centrality, strength of ties, and structural holes. The American Review of Public Administration, 41(2), 205-223. [56] Bowler, W.M. & Brass, D.J. (2011). Relational correlates of interpersonal citizenship behaviour: A social network perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), 70-82. [57] ; Hua Wang and Barry Wellman, "Social Connectivity in America: Changes in Adult Friendship Network Size from 2002 to 2007, " American Behavioral Scientist 53 (8): 1148-69, 2010. DOI: 10.1177/0002764209356247 [58] http:/ / www. insna. org/ [59] (1977). Connections: bulletin of the International Network for Social Network Analysis. Toronto: International Network for Social Network Analysis. [60] http:/ / www. sciencedirect. com/ science/ journal/ 03788733 [61] http:/ / journals. cambridge. org/ action/ displaySpecialPage?pageId=3656 [62] http:/ / www. cmu. edu/ joss/ content/ articles/ volindex. html


Social network
[63] [64] [65] [66] [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] [72] [73] [74] http:/ / www. tandfonline. com/ toc/ gmas20/ current http:/ / www. springer. com/ computer/ database+ management+ %26+ information+ retrieval/ journal/ 13278 http:/ / www. cs. cornell. edu/ home/ kleinber/ networks-book/ http:/ / faculty. ucr. edu/ ~hanneman/ nettext/ http:/ / www. analytictech. com/ networks/ http:/ / pajek. imfm. si/ doku. php?id=data:urls:index http:/ / networkdata. ics. uci. edu/ index. html http:/ / snap. stanford. edu/ data/ http:/ / www-personal. umich. edu/ ~mejn/ netdata/ http:/ / vlado. fmf. uni-lj. si/ pub/ networks/ data/ http:/ / wiki. gephi. org/ index. php?title=Datasets#Social_networks http:/ / konect. uni-koblenz. de/ networks


Tacit knowledge
Tacit knowledge (as opposed to formal, codified or explicit knowledge) is the kind of knowledge that is difficult to transfer to another person by means of writing it down or verbalizing it. For example, stating to someone that London is in the United Kingdom is a piece of explicit knowledge that can be written down, transmitted, and understood by a recipient. However, the ability to speak a language, use algebra,[1] or design and use complex equipment requires all sorts of knowledge that is not always known explicitly, even by expert practitioners, and which is difficult to explicitly transfer to users. While tacit knowledge appears to be simple, it has far reaching consequences and is not widely understood.

The term tacit knowing or tacit knowledge was first introduced into philosophy by Michael Polanyi in 1958 in his magnum opus Personal Knowledge. He famously introduces the idea in his later work The Tacit Dimension with the assertion that we can know more than we can tell..[2] According to him, not only is there knowledge that cannot be adequately articulated by verbal means, but also all knowledge is rooted in tacit knowledge in the strong sense of that term. With tacit knowledge, people are not often aware of the knowledge they possess or how it can be valuable to others. Effective transfer of tacit knowledge generally requires extensive personal contact, regular interaction [3] and trust. This kind of knowledge can only be revealed through practice in a particular context and transmitted through social networks.[4] To some extent it is "captured" when the knowledge holder joins a network or a community of practice.[5] Another example of tacit knowledge is the ability to ride a bicycle. Some examples of daily activities and tacit knowledge are: riding a bike, playing the piano, driving a car, and hitting a nail with a hammer.[6] The formal knowledge of how to ride a bicycle is that in order to balance, if the bike falls to the left, one steers to the left. To turn right the rider first steers to the left, and then when the bike falls right, the rider steers to the right.[7] You may know explicitly how turning of the handle bars or steering wheel change the direction of a bike or car, but you cannot simultaneously focus on this and at the same time orientate yourself in traffic. Similarly, you may know explicitly how to hold the handle of a hammer, but you cannot simultaneously focus on the handle and hit the nail correctly with the hammer. The master pianist can perform brilliantly, but if he begins to concentrate on the movements of his fingers instead of the music, he will not be able to play as a master. Knowing the explicit knowledge, however, is no help in riding a bicycle, doesnt help in performing well in the tasks since few people are aware of it when performing and few riders are in fact aware of this. Tacit knowledge is not easily shared. Although it is that which is used by all people, it is not necessarily able to be easily articulated. It consists of beliefs, ideals, values, schemata and mental models which are deeply ingrained in us

Tacit knowledge and which we often take for granted. While difficult to articulate, this cognitive dimension of tacit knowledge shapes the way we perceive the world. In the field of knowledge management, the concept of tacit knowledge refers to a knowledge possessed only by an individual and difficult to communicate to others via words and symbols. Therefore, an individual can acquire tacit knowledge without language. Apprentices, for example, work with their mentors and learn craftsmanship not through language but by observation, imitation, and practice. The key to acquiring tacit knowledge is experience. Without some form of shared experience, it is extremely difficult for people to share each other's thinking processes[8] Tacit knowledge has been described as know-how - as opposed to know-what (facts), know-why (science), or know-who (networking)[citation needed]. It involves learning and skill but not in a way that can be written down. On this account knowing-how or embodied knowledge is characteristic of the expert, who acts, makes judgments, and so forth without explicitly reflecting on the principles or rules involved. The expert works without having a theory of his or her work; he or she just performs skillfully without deliberation or focused attention [9] Tacit knowledge vs. Explicit knowledge:[10] Although it is possible to distinguish conceptually between explicit and tacit knowledge, they are not separate and discrete in practice. The interaction between these two modes of knowing is vital for the creation of new knowledge.[11]


Differences with explicit knowledge

Tacit knowledge can be distinguished from explicit knowledge in three major areas: Codifiability and mechanism of transferring knowledge: while explicit knowledge can be codified, and easily transferred without the knowing subject, tacit knowledge is intuitive and unarticulated knowledge cannot be communicated, understood or used without the knowing subject. Unlike the transfer of explicit knowledge, the transfer of tacit knowledge requires close interaction and the buildup of shared understanding and trust among them. Main methods for the acquisition and accumulation: Explicit knowledge can be generated through logical deduction and acquired through practical experience in the relevant context. In contrast, tacit knowledge can only be acquired through practical experience in the relevant context. Potential of aggregation and modes of appropriation: Explicit knowledge can be aggregated at a single location, stored in objective forms and appropriated without the participation of the knowing subject. Tacit knowledge in contrast, is personal contextual. It is distributive, and cannot easily be aggregated. The realization of its full potential requires the close involvement and cooperation of the knowing subject. The process of transforming tacit knowledge into explicit or specifiable knowledge is known as codification, articulation, or specification. The tacit aspects of knowledge are those that cannot be codified, but can only be transmitted via training or gained through personal experience.

Transmission Models for Tacit knowledge

A chief practice of technological development is the codification of tacit knowledge into explicit programmed operations so that processes previously requiring skilled employees can be automated for greater efficiency and consistency at lower cost. Such codification involves mechanically replicating the performance of persons who possess relevant tacit knowledge; in doing so, however, the ability of the skilled practitioner to innovate and adapt to unforeseen circumstances based on the tacit "feel" of the situation is often lost. The technical remedy is to attempt to substitute brute-force methods capitalizing on the computing power of a system, such as those that enable a supercomputer programmed to "play" chess against a grandmaster whose tacit knowledge of the game is broad and deep.

Tacit knowledge The conflicts demonstrated in the previous two paragraphs are reflected in Ikujiro Nonaka's model of organizational knowledge creation, in which he proposes that tacit knowledge can be converted to explicit knowledge. In that model tacit knowledge is presented variously as uncodifiable ("tacit aspects of knowledge are those that cannot be codified") and codifiable ("transforming tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge is known as codification"). This ambiguity is common in the knowledge management literature. Nonaka's view may be contrasted with Polanyi's original view of "tacit knowing." Polanyi believed that while declarative knowledge may be needed for acquiring skills, it is unnecessary for using those skills once the novice becomes an expert. And indeed, it does seem to be the case that, as Polanyi argued, when we acquire a skill we acquire a corresponding understanding that defies articulation [12]


One of the most convincing examples of tacit knowledge is facial recognition. We know a persons face, and can recognize it among a thousand, indeed a million. Yet we usually cannot tell how we recognize a face we know, so most of this cannot be put into words.. When you see a face you are not conscious about your knowledge of the individual features (eye, nose, mouth), but you see and recognize the face as a whole [13] Another example of tacit knowledge is the notion of language itselfit is not possible to learn a language just by being taught the rules of grammara native speaker picks it up at a young age almost entirely unaware of the formal grammar which they may be taught later. Other examples are how to ride a bike, how tight to make a bandage, or knowing whether a senior surgeon feels an intern may be ready to learn the intricacies of surgery; this can only be learned through personal experimentation. Collins showed [14] that a particular laser (The ppTEA laser) was designed in America and the idea, with specific assistance from the designers, was gradually propagated to various other universities world-wide. However, in the early days, even when specific instructions were sent, other labs failed to replicate the laser, it only being made to work in each case following a visit to or from the originating lab or very close contact and dialogue. It became clear that while the originators could clearly make the laser work, they did not know exactly what it was that they were doing to make it work, and so could not articulate or specify it by means of monologue articles and specifications. But a cooperative process of dialogue enabled the tacit knowledge to be transferred. Another example is the Bessemer steel process Bessemer sold a patent for his advanced steel making process and was sued by the purchasers who couldn't get it to work. In the end Bessemer set up his own steel company because he knew how to do it, even though he could not convey it to his patent users. Bessemer's company became one of the largest in the world and changed the face of steel making.[15] As apprentices learn the craft of their masters through observation, imitation, and practice, so do employees of a firm learn new skills through on-the-job training. When Matsushita started developing its automatic home bread-making machine in 1985, an early problem was how to mechanize the dough-kneading process, a process that takes a master baker years of practice to perfect. To learn this tacit knowledge, a member of the software development team, Ikuko Tanaka, decided to volunteer herself as an apprentice to the head baker of the Osaka International Hotel, who was reputed to produce the areas best bread. After a period of imitation and practice, one day she observed that the baker was not only stretching but also twisting the dough in a particular fashion (twisting stretch), which turned out to be the secret for making tasty bread. The Matsushita home bakery team drew together eleven members from completely different specializations and cultures: product planning, mechanical engineering, control systems, and software development. The twisting stretch motion was finally materialized in a prototype after a year of iterative experimentation by the engineers and team members working closely together, combining their explicit knowledge. For example, the engineers added ribs to the inside of the dough case in order to hold the dough better as it is being churned. Another team member suggested a method (later patented) to add yeast at a later stage in the process, thereby preventing the yeast from over-fermenting in high temperatures.[16]

Tacit knowledge


Knowledge management
According to Parsaye, there are three major approaches to the capture of tacit knowledge from groups and individuals. They are:[17] Interviewing experts. Learning by being told. Learning by observation. Interviewing experts can be done in the form of structured interviewing or by recording organizational stories. Structured interviewing of experts in a particular subject is the most commonly used technique to capture pertinent, tacit knowledge. An example of a structured interview would be an exit interview. Learning by being told can be done by interviewing or by task analysis. Either way, an expert teaches the novice the processes of a task. Task analysis is the process of determining the actual task or policy by breaking it down and analyzing what needs to be done to complete the task. Learning by observation can be done by presenting the expert with a sample problem, scenario, or case study and then observing the process used to solve the problem.[citation needed] Some other techniques for capturing tacit knowledge are:[citation needed]Wikipedia:No original research Action learning All of these approaches should be recorded in order to transfer the tacit knowledge into reusable explicit knowledge. Professor Ikujiro Nonaka has proposed the SECI (Socialization, Externalization, Combination, Internalization) model, one of the most widely cited theories in knowledge management, to present the spiraling knowledge processes of interaction between explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995). The IRG Solution - hierarchical incompetence and how to overcome it argued that tacit knowledge was essentially a property of social networks and that much tacit knowledge was held in, and communicated by this informal lateral communication between network members.

[1] [2] [3] [4] Collins, H.M. "Tacit Knowledge, Trust and the Q of Sapphire" Social Studies of Science' p. 71-85 31(1) 2001. Polanyi, Michael (1966), The Tacit Dimension, University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 4. Goffin, K. & Koners, U. (2011). Tacit Knowledge, Lessons Learnt, and New Product Development. J PROD INNOV MANAG, 28, 300-318. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1993). Tacit knowledge, practical intelligence, general mental ability, and job knowledge. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2, 8-9. [5] Goffin, K. & Koners, U. (2011). Tacit Knowledge, Lessons Learnt, and New Product Development. J PROD INNOV MANAG, 28, 300-318. [6] Engel, P. J. H. (2008). Tacit knowledge and Visual Expertise in Medical Diagnostic Reasoning: Implications for medical education. Medical Teacher, 30, e184-e188. DOI: 10.1080/01421590802144260. [7] http:/ / en. wikipedia. org/ wiki/ Bicycle_and_motorcycle_dynamics [8] Lam, A. (2000). Tacit Knowledge, Organizational Learning and Societal Institutions: An Integrated Framework. Organization Studies 21(3), 487-513. [9] Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1993). Tacit knowledge, practical intelligence, general mental ability, and job knowledge. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2, 8-9. [10] Lam, A. (2000). Tacit Knowledge, Organizational Learning and Societal Institutions: An Integrated Framework. Organization Studies 21(3), 487-51. [11] Giulio Angioni, Fare, dire, sentire: l'identico e il diverso nelle culture, Il Maestrale, 2011, 26-99 [12] Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1993). Tacit knowledge, practical intelligence, general mental ability, and job knowledge. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2, 8-9. [13] Lam, A. (2000). Tacit Knowledge, Organizational Learning and Societal Institutions: An Integrated Framework. Organization Studies 21(3), 487-513. [14] Collins, H.M. "Tacit Knowledge, Trust and the Q of Sapphire" Social Studies of Science' p. 71-85 31(1) 2001 [15] J.E. Gordon, "The new science of strong materials", Penguin books. [16] Nonaka, Ikujiro; Takeuchi, Hirotaka (1995), The knowledge creating company: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 284, ISBN 978-0-19-509269-1.

Tacit knowledge


Further reading
Angioni, Giulio, 2011. Fare, dire, sentire: l'identico e il diverso nelle culture, Il Maestrale. Giulio Angioni ISBN 978-88-6429-020-I Bao, Y.; Zhao, S. (2004), "MICRO Contracting for Tacit Knowledge - A Study of Contractual Arrangements in International Technology Transfer", in Problems and Perspectives of Management, 2, 279- 303. Brohm, R. Bringing Polanyi onto the theatre stage: a study on Polanyi applied to Knowledge Management, in: Proceedings of the ISMICK Conference, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 1999, pp.5769. Brohm, R. (2005), Polycentric Order in Organizations, Erasmus University Rotterdam: Published dissertation ERIM, hdl: 1765/6911 ( Collins, H.M. "Tacit Knowledge, Trust and the Q of Sapphire" Social Studies of Science' p.71-85 31(1) 2001 Dalkir, Kimiz (2005) "Knowledge Management in Theory and Practice" pp.8290 Gladwell, Malcolm 2005. Blink: the power of thinking without thinking. Little, Brown: New York. Gourlay, Stephen, "An Activity Centered Framework for Knowledge Management". In Claire Regina McInerney, Ronald E. Day (2007). Rethinking knowledge management. Springer. ISBN3-540-71010-8. Nonaka, Ikujiro; Takeuchi, Hirotaka (1995), The knowledge creating company: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation (, New York: Oxford University Press, pp.284, ISBN978-0-19-509269-1 Patriotta, G. (2004). Studying organizational knowledge. Knowledge Management Research and Practice, 2(1). Ploszajski, P.; Saquet, A.; Segalla, M. Le savoir tacite dans un contexte culturel (z: ), Les Echos, Le Quotidien de LEconomie, 18 Novembre 2004, Paris 2004 Polanyi, Michael. "The Tacit Dimension". First published Doubleday & Co, 1966. Reprinted Peter Smith, Gloucester, Mass, 1983. Chapter 1: "Tacit Knowing". Reber, Arthur S. 1993. Implicit learning and tacit knowledge: an essay on the corgnitive unconscious. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-510658-X Sanders, A. F. (1988). Michael Polanyi's post critical epistemology, a reconstruction of some aspects of 'tacit knowing'. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Smith, M. K. (2003) 'Michael Polanyi and tacit knowledge', the encyclopedia of informal education, 2003 Mark K. Smith Tsoukas, H. (2003) Do we really understand tacit knowledge? in The Blackwell handbook of organizational learning and knowledge management. Easterby-Smith and Lyles (eds), 411-427. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishing . Wilson, Timothy D. 2002. Strangers to ourselves: discovering the adaptive unconscious. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA. 0-674-01382-4

External links
More on tacit knowledge in organizations ( Dictionary of Philosophy of Mind - tacit knowledge ( tacitknowledge.html) Tacit knowledge, tacit knowing or behaving? by Stephen Gourlay (PDF) ( sngourlay/PDFs/Gourlay 2002 tacit knowledge.pdf) The Duality of Knowledge ( Processes of Knowledge Transformation ( Processes_of_Knowledge_Transformation) from the ITtoolbox Wiki National Library for Health Knowledge Management Specialist Library ( KnowledgeManagement/SearchResults.aspx?tabID=289&catID=10397) - collection of resources about auditing intellectual capital.

Value network


Value network
A value network is a business analysis perspective that describes social and technical resources within and between businesses. The nodes in a value network represent people (or roles). The nodes are connected by interactions that represent tangible and intangible deliverables. These deliverables take the form of knowledge or other intangibles and/or financial value. Value networks exhibit interdependence. They account for the overall worth of products and services. Companies have both internal and external value networks.[1]

External value networks

External facing networks include customers or recipients, intermediaries, stakeholders, complementary, open innovation networks and suppliers.

Internal value networks

Internal value networks focus on key activities, processes and relationships that cut across internal boundaries, such as order fulfillment, innovation, lead processing, or customer support. Value is created through exchange and the relationships between roles. Value networks operate in public agencies, civil society, in the enterprise, institutional settings, and all forms of organization. Value networks advance innovation, wealth, social good and environmental well-being.

Clayton Christensen's value networks

Christensen defines value network as: "The collection of upstream suppliers, downstream channels to market, and ancillary providers that support a common business model within an industry. When would-be disruptors enter into existing value networks, they must adapt their business models to conform to the value network and therefore fail that disruption because they become co-opted." [2]

Fjeldstad and Stabells value networks

Fjeldstad and Stabell [3] presents a framework for "value configurations" in which a "Value network" is one of two alternatives to Michael Porter's Value Chains (the other being the Value shop configuration). F&S's value networks consists of these components: A set of customers. Some service the customers all use, and enables interaction between the customers. Some organization that provides the service. A set of contracts that enables access to the service.

An obvious example of a value network is the network formed by phone users. The phone company provides a service, users enter a contract with the phone company and immediately has access to all the value network of other customers of the phone company. Another less obvious example is a car insurance company: The company provides car insurance. The customers gains access to the roads and can do their thing and interact in various ways while being exposed to limited risk. The insurance policies represent the contracts, the internal processes of the insurance company the service provisioning. Unfortunately F&S and Christensen's concepts both address the same issue; the conceptual understanding of how a company understands itself and its value creation process, but they are not identical. Christensen's value networks address the relation between a company and its suppliers and the requirements posed by the customers, and how

Value network these interact when defining what represents value in the product that is produced. Fjeldstad & Stabell's value networks is a configuration which emphasize that the value being created is between customers when they interact facilitated by the value networks. This represents a very different perspective from Christensen's but confusingly also one that is applicable in many of the same situations as Christensen's.


Normann and Ramirez' value constellations

Normann and Ramirez argued [4] as early as 1993 that in todays environment, strategy is no longer a matter of positioning a fixed set of activities along a value chain. According to them the focus today should be on the value creating system itself. Where all stakeholders co-produce value. Successful companies conceive of strategy as systematic social innovation. With this article they laid a foundation for the Value Network to emerge as a mental model.

Verna Allee's value networks

Verna Allee defines value networks [5] as any web of relationships that generates both tangible and intangible value through complex dynamic exchanges between two or more individuals, groups or organizations. Any organization or group of organizations engaged in both tangible and intangible exchanges can be viewed as a value network, whether private industry, government or public sector. Allee developed Value network analysis, a whole systems mapping and analysis approach to understanding tangible and intangible value creation among participants in an enterprise system. Revealing the hidden network patterns behind business processes can provide predictive intelligence for when workflow performance is at risk. She believes value network analysis provides a standard way to define, map and analyse the participants, transactions and tangible and intangible deliverables that together form a value network. Allee says, value network analysis can lead to profound shifts in perception of problem situations and mobilise collective action to implement change [6]

Important terms and concepts

Tangible value
All exchanges of goods, services or revenue, including all transactions involving contracts, invoices, return receipt of orders, request for proposals, confirmations and payment are considered to be tangible value. Products or services that generate revenue or are expected as part of a service are also included in the tangible value flow of goods, services, and revenue (2). In government agencies these would be mandated activities. In civil society organizations these would be formal commitments to provide resources or services.

Intangible value
Two primary subcategories are included in intangible value: knowledge and benefits. Intangible knowledge exchanges include strategic information, planning knowledge, process knowledge, technical know-how, collaborative design and policy development; which support the product and service tangible value network. Intangible benefits are also considered favors that can be offered from one person to another. Examples include offering political or emotional support to someone. Another example of intangible value is when a research organization asks someone to volunteer their time and expertise to a project in exchange for the intangible benefit of prestige by affiliation (3). All biological organisms, including humans, function in a self-organizing mode internally and externally. That is, the elements in our bodiesdown to individual cells and DNA moleculeswork together in order to sustain us. However, there is no central boss to control this dynamic activity. Our relationships with other individuals also progress through the same circular free flowing process as we search for outcomes that are best for our well-being.

Value network Under the right conditions these social exchanges can be extraordinarily altruistic. Conversely, they can also be quite self-centered and even violent. It all depends on the context of the immediate environment and the people involved.[7]


A non-linear approach
Often value networks are considered to consist of groups of companies working together to produce and transport a product to the customer. Relationships among customers of a single company are examples of how value networks can be found in any organization. Companies can link their customers together by direct methods like the telephone or indirect methods like combining customers resources together. The purpose of value networks is to create the most benefit for the people involved in the network (5). The intangible value of knowledge within these networks is just as important as a monetary value. In order to succeed knowledge must be shared to create the best situations or opportunities. Value networks are how ideas flow into the market and to the people that need to hear them. Because value networks are instrumental in advancing business and institutional practices a value network analysis can be useful in a wide variety of business situations. Some typical ones are listed below. Relationship management Relationship management typically just focuses on managing information about customers, suppliers, and business partners. A value network approach considers relationships as two-way value-creating interactions, which focus on realizing value as well as providing value. Business web and ecosystem development Resource deployment, delivery, market innovation, knowledge sharing, and time-to-market advantage are dependent on the quality, coherence, and vitality of the relevant value networks, business webs and business ecosystems.[8] Fast-track complex process redesign Product and service offerings are constantly changing - and so are the processes to innovate, design, manufacture, and deliver them. Multiple, inter-dependent, and concurrent processes are too complex for traditional process mapping, but can be analyzed very quickly with the value network method. Reconfiguring the organization Mergers, acquisitions, downsizing, expansion to new markets, new product groups, new partners, new roles and functions - anytime relationships change, value interactions and flows change too.[9] Supporting knowledge networks and communities of practice Understanding the transactional dynamics is vital for purposeful networks of all kinds, including networks and communities focused on creating knowledge value. A value network analysis helps communities of practice negotiate for resources and demonstrate their value to different groups within the organization. Develop scorecards, conduct ROI and cost/benefit analyses, and drive decision making Because the value network approach addresses both financial and non-financial assets and exchanges, it expands metrics and indexes beyond the lagging indicators of financial return and operational performance - to also include leading indicators for strategic capability and system optimization...

Value network


[1] Value Network Basics, [2] Christensen, C.; The Innovator's Dilemma: The Revolutionary Book that Will Change the Way You Do Business, Collins Business Essentials, page 296 [3] abstract Stabell, Charles B., and Fjeldstad, . (http:/ / www3. interscience. wiley. com/ cgi-bin/ abstract/ 2193/ ABSTRACT) "Configuring value for competitive advantage: On chains, shops, and networks" Strategic Management Journal 19, 1998 [4] Online HBS Version Normann, R. and Ramrez, R. From Value Chain to Value Constellation: Designing Interactive Strategy (http:/ / harvardbusinessonline. hbsp. harvard. edu/ hbsp/ hbr/ articles/ article. jsp?ml_action=get-article& ml_issueid=3934& articleID=93408& pageNumber=1), Harvard Business Review, 71, July/August, 1993, pp. 65-77 [5] Allee, V. The Future of Knowledge: Increasing Prosperity through Value Networks, Butterworth-Heinemann 2003 (ISBN :) [6] Value Networks LLP, Value Network Adoption at Boeing and in Large Organizations (III/III), Publisher: Colabria, November 2007. [7] Ehin, Charles. Hidden Assets: Harnessing the Power of Informal Networks. New York: Springer, 2005. [8] Tapscott, D., Ticol, D., Lowy, A. Digital Capital, Harnessing the Power of Business Webs. Harvard Business School Press. May 2000 [9] Stabell, Charles B., and Fjeldstad, . "Configuring value for competitive advantage: On chains, shops, and networks" Strategic Management Journal 19. abstract (http:/ / www3. interscience. wiley. com/ cgi-bin/ abstract/ 2193/ ABSTRACT) 1998

External links
OpenVNA ( - the non-commercial, open network site leading value network standards, taxonomies, visualization, analytics, vocabulary, methods, tools and techniques. NetLab ( at the University of Toronto, studies the intersection of social, communication, information and computing networks. Value Network Analysis and Value Conversion of Tangible and Intangible Assets ( value_networks/Value_Conversion_JIC_online_version.pdf), Verna Allee. CASOS ( - Center for Computational Analysis of Social and Organizational Systems at Carnegie Mellon.

Value network analysis

Value network analysis is a methodology for understanding, using, visualizing, optimizing internal and external value networks and complex economic ecosystems. The methods include visualizing sets of relationships from a dynamic whole systems perspective. Robust network analysis approaches are used for understanding value conversion of financial and non-financial assets, such as intellectual capital, into other forms of value. The value conversion question is critical in both social exchange theory that considers the cost/benefit returns of informal exchanges and more classical views of exchange value where there is concern with conversion of value into financial value or price. Value network analysis offers a taxonomy for non-financial business reporting, which is becoming increasingly important in SEC Filings. In some approaches taxonomies are supported by Extensible Business Reporting Language XBRL. Venture capitalists and investors are concerned with the capability of a firm to create value in future. Financial statements are limited to current and past financial indicators and valuations of capital assets. In contrast, value network analysis is one approach to assessing current and future capability for value creation and to describe and analyze a business model. Advocates of VNA claim that strong value-creating relationships support successful business endeavors at the operational, tactical, and strategic levels. A value network perspective, in this context would encompass both internal and external value networks loose yet complex configurations of roles within industries, businesses, business units or functions and teams within organizations that engage in mutually beneficial relationships. Tools used in the past to analyze business value creation, such as the value chain and value added, are linear and mechanistic approaches based on a process perspective. These approaches are considered inadequate to address this new level of business complexity where value creating activities occur in complex, interdependent and dynamic relationships

Value network analysis between multiple sets of actors. Other claims for value network analysis are that it is an essential skill for a successful enterprise dependent on knowledge exchanges and collaborative relationships, which are seen as critical in almost every industry. that this type of analysis helps individuals and work groups better manage their interactions and address operational issues, such as balancing workflows or improving communication. that the approach also scales up to the business level to help forge stronger value-creating linkages with strategic partners and improve stakeholder relationships. that it also connects with other modeling tools such as Lean Manufacturing, Six Sigma, workflow tools, business process reengineering, business process management, social network analysis tools and system dynamics.


Basics of value network analysis

Value network analysis addresses both financial and non-financial value. Every business relationship includes contractual or mandated activities between participants and also informal exchanges of knowledge, favors, and benefits. The analysis begins with a visual map or diagram that first shows the essential contractual, tangible revenue- or funding-related business transactions and exchanges that occur between each node of the networks. Nodes represent real people, typically individuals, groups of individuals such as a business unit or aggregates of groups such as a type of business in an industry network. During analysis when adopting a reflective, double loop or generative learning mode, it is beneficial to regard nodes as role plays (shortened to roles). Practitioners have found {2} that conversation between participants about role plays within a larger whole invariably results in transforming individual behaviour and gaining commitment to implementing needed change as elaborated below. Along with the more traditional business transactions the critical intangible exchanges are also mapped. Intangible exchanges are those mostly informal knowledge exchanges and benefits or support that build relationships and keep things running smoothly. These informal exchanges are actually the key to creating trust and opening pathways for innovation and new ideas. Traditional business practices ignore these important intangible exchanges, but they are made visible with a value network analysis. The visualizations and diagrams link to a variety of assessments, usually handled in Excel type spreadsheets to increase value outputs, to leverage knowledge and intangibles for improving financial and organizational performance, and to find new value opportunities. When the analysis is complete people gain insights into what is actually happening now, where more value can be realized, and what is required to achieve maximum value benefit across the entire business activity that is the focus of the analysis. It is conventional to refer to the actual "things" that move from one Participant to another as "deliverables," whether tangible or intangible. If users find it conceptually unusual or contextually difficult to refer to an intangible (informal) thing as a "deliverable," they may, instead, prefer to use an alternative descriptive term "contribution."

Value network analysis


Allee, Verna. "Value Network Analysis and Value Conversion of Tangible and Intangible Assets." Journal of Intellectual Capital. Publisher: Emerald Insights, Year: 2008, Volume: 9, Issue: 1, Page: 5 - 24, Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1108/14691930810845777 [1]

External links
Value Network Analysis and Value Conversion of Tangible and Intangible Assets [2], Verna Allee.

[1] http:/ / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1108%2F14691930810845777 [2] http:/ / www. vernaallee. com/ images/ VAA-VNAandValueConversionJIT. pdf

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. Dub, Bourhis & Jacob, 2005; Murillo, 2006; Zarb, 2006; Hara & Hew, 2007; Murillo, 2008). For example, some [1] claim that a wiki (such as 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).[2] Wenger et al., 2002; Kimble & Hildreth, 2005.[3] 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.

Virtual community of practice


On-Line Communities of Practice

Communities of Practice like Saps SDN developer network, Adobes 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 eBays 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.

Ackerman, & G. Mark, (Eds.), Proceedings of GROUP International Conference on Supporting Group Work. (pp.1120). 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" [4]. Journal of Knowledge Management 3 (1): 5460. Dub, 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 [5]. 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 [6]. 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 [7]. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. pp.304. Wenger, E.; White, Nancy; Smith, John D. (2009). Digital Habitats; stewarding technology for communities [8]. Portland: CPsquare. pp.228. Zarb, M.P (2006). Modelling Participation in Virtual Communities-of-Practice [9]. LSE MSc ADMIS Dissertation: Distinction, Accessed from

Virtual community of practice


[1] The Adult Literacy Education Wiki as a Virtual Community of Practice (http:/ / www. chris-kimble. com/ CLEE/ Book_2/ Chapters/ Chapter_16. html) E. Jacobson in C. Kimble and P. Hildreth (eds). Communities of Practice: Creating Learning Environments for Educators. Charlotte NC, Information Age Publishing (2008) [2] Computer Mediated Communications and Communities of Practice. (http:/ / www. chris-kimble. com/ Publications/ Documents/ Hildreth_1998. pdf) Hildreth, Kimble & Wright, Proceedings of Ethicomp98, (March 1998), Rotterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 275 - 286, (1998) [3] Dualities, Distributed Communities of Practice and Knowledge Management (http:/ / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1108/ 13673270510610369) Kimble & Hildreth, Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(4), 102 - 113. (2005) [4] http:/ / www. emeraldinsight. com/ Insight/ viewContentItem. do?contentType=Article& contentId=883669 [5] http:/ / murillo. wikidot. com [6] http:/ / InformationR. net/ ir/ 13-4/ paper386. html [7] http:/ / hbswk. hbs. edu/ archive/ 2855. html [8] http:/ / isbn. nu/ 9780982503607 [9] http:/ / lse. academia. edu/ MichaelZarb/ Papers/ 725773/ Modelling_participation_in_virtual_communities-of-practice

External links
Kimble, C.; Hildreth, P. (2004). Communities of Practice: Going One Step Too Far? (http://www.chris-kimble. com/Publications/Documents/Kimble_2004.pdf). Evry, France: Proceedings 9e colloque de l'AIM, (May 2004). pp.304. ( A critical review of virtual CoPs ) Where is the Action in Virtual Communities of Practice? ( commdcscw00.pdf) Another critical review of virtual CoPs Communities of Practice: Going Virtual ( Kimble_2001b.pdf) 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 ( rdonlyres/4165BDC8-C42C-43CF-8EEF-57DCEB0939BC/0/TeiglandthesisKnowledgeNetworking.pdf) Zarb, M.P (2006). Modelling Participation in Virtual Communities-of-Practice ( MichaelZarb/Papers/725773/Modelling_participation_in_virtual_communities-of-practice) DARnet wiki - Action Research with Distributed Communities of Practice (

Article Sources and Contributors


Article Sources and Contributors

Community of practice Source: Contributors: Anna Frodesiak, Annavhh, Aroberts, Arouck, Astein, Audry2, Bart133, Betacommand, Bookjunky, Brett Sykes, CQ, Canadianaeh, Ceyockey, Chapulin, Charlie2010, Chawt, Cheakamus, Chris 73, Clkmtl, Compo, Cormaggio, Corza, CsDix, DanMS, Danger, Dgrey, DrGNAGarcia, Ebonsign, Educationmaster, Emaradiegue, EnriqueMurillo, Fru1tbat, Galapagos999, Gioto, GraemeL, Grey Horse, Guptan99, HMSSolent, Hallows AG, Harrytmax, Headbomb, Hispalois, Hu12, Infolady0919, Itsmejudith, JRR Trollkien, Jamesrnorwood, Jauerback, Jeffanthonyfds, JeremyA, Jessicapierce, Jheuristic, JimR, Jpbowen, JzG, KYPark, Kchorst, Kenneth M Burke, Kku, Klk24549, LilHelpa, MER-C, Macrakis, Maunus, Maurreen, Mbiama Assogo Roger, Mdorohovich, Mecha-ant, Michael Hardy, MithrandirAgain, MrOllie, MysticRyu, Nabeth, Nasa-verve, Nechamayaniger, NeilN, Neoluk, Nesbit, Oberst, OnePt618, Pablo X, Pamaga, Patrick Hindert, Pbice, Penguindo, PhilipO, Poppystepwell, Qaramazov, Richard McDermott, RichardF, Rjwilmsi, Rocketrod1960, Ronz, SMcCandlish, Sam Korn, Seanmendoza, Shirulashem, SiobhanHansa, Skwikiedit, Smithjd8, Snowded, Spike Wilbury, Stevenson-Perez, StuartF, Svick, Szquirrel, THF, Tarmo, Teryx, The Brain, The stuart, The wub, Theoldsparkle, Thseamon, Tiatia 144, Tndemageren, UninvitedCompany, Wolfkeeper, Woodstck, Yshkwok, Zabialokolo, Zidonuke, Zml, , 203 anonymous edits Discourse community Source: Contributors: ARK, Argav, Benjamin9832, Bryan Derksen, CJ Withers, ChristianH, Cnilep, Dreamteam289, Edward, Jab843, Kingturtle, Kushboy, Kyfhv, Linguistlist, Loren.wilton, Maunus, Mdmeyer93, Ntennis, Paine Ellsworth, PatPeter, Piotr ukowski, R.W. Wesley, SMcCandlish, Socrhet26, Szyslak, TyA, Vonkje, Waqas Anwar, Wikiper765856, 52 anonymous edits Duality (CoPs) Source: Contributors: Chateau Brillant, Compo, Staberinde, Welsh, 3 anonymous edits Explicit knowledge Source: Contributors: Booyabazooka, Boxplot, BritishWatcher, CrazyChemGuy, DGG, Dendodge, DougR908, Julia Rossi, Kku, Lanaesuejones, Lganzman, Luckyslugnuts, MLWilson, Malcolma, MrOllie, Pollinosisss, Ruud Koot, S19991002, Sareh58, Smartse, Sultanzahir, Woohookitty, 25 anonymous edits Knowledge management Source: Contributors: ABF, ALR, Aacurtis, AbsolutDan, AcademicBusinessResearch, Achristoffersen, AdamRetchless, Al E., Alan Liefting, Alan1001, Albert Simard, Alex Kosorukoff, Alex Rio Brazil, AlexAnglin, AlistairMcMillan, Allstar18, Alphachimp, Alphax, Altenmann, Amy.C, An Fior Eireannach, Andredries, Andrewspencer, Andygray.yo, Andyjsmith, Angela, Angelalves, Angenser, Anna Lincoln, Anonymous editor, Anthere, Ap, Arpabr, Ash, Asocall, AuburnPilot, Auntof6, Avoided, Axon, B9 hummingbird hovering, Banefirex, Banno, Baseballbits, Benechanuk, Betaeleven, Betterusername, Bhojarajug, Bijose, Bilby, Billyb22, Bkonrad, Bmccaff, Bonatto, Boxplot, Brockert, Broonesh, Browneffect, Bynary, C628, CALR, Cablue, Caiaffa, Carbuncle, CarolineSdano, Cffig, Charles Matthews, Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry, Chasehrlich, ChemGardener, ChrisCollison, Christoph Thalhammer, Chuq, Cielomobile, Clayoquot, Clemmerl, Closedmouth, Coasterlover1994, Compo, Corp Vision, Craigb81, Crayon101, Crisis, Cybercobra, Cyr S., DGG, DabMachine, DarknessEnthroned, Daveg0403, Davidkazuhiro, Dawnseeker2000, Dejudicibus, Dgrey, Dgurteen, Dholakia ratna, DigitalDoug, Dineshasewwandi, Discospinster, Djw, Dmezei, DokReggar, DonJuan8701, DoriSmith, Dorineruter, Dr.Yogesh.Malhotra, Drc79, Drdan01, EagleFan, EddyVanderlinden, Ehheh, EntmootsOfTrolls, Erianna, Ericblazek, Espoo, Everyking, Farah100, Fieldday-sunday, Finn-Zoltan, Fish and karate, Fivetrees, Flewis, Fnielsen, Fran.rod.rod, Freakofnurture, Fredbauder, Func, Garycairns, Gavin.collins, Gazpacho, Geoff.parcell, Gf uip, Gholden84, Gizzakk, Glendac, Gmelli, GraemeL, Gregory S. Waddell, Gthere, Hanaxa, Harmjoosse, Harvey the rabbit, Headbomb, Heapg, Heather Husson, Hede2000, Heisss, HelgeHan, Helgex, Hephaestos, Hirzel, HisSpaceResearch, Hobartimus, Hongjone, Hu12, Hvgard, IEdML, Iamnumbertwentyfour, Icairns, Ihcoyc, Ingo77, Intellect12345, Irrc irri, Isotope23, IvanLanin, J.delanoy, J04n, JG 41102, JacHeale1, Jackvinson,, James Baraldi, Jr., Janeel j-man, Jarble, Jarkeld, Jarothbart, Jauerback, Jbw2, Jeff3000, Jeffrey Newman, Jenniferz, JerseyBoy1, Jfiling, Jheuristic, JimBrander, JimR, Jinian, Joe McCrea, JohannesKnopp, Johnmarkh, Jojalozzo, Jon Awbrey, JonesC-NC, Jorjani, Jppigott, Jsarmi, Jtrojan, Jwissick, JzG, KConWiki, KYPark, Kapilg99, Karbinski, Kash100, Ke5crz, Kellylautt, Kenstandfield, Kevin B12, Kff, Khalid, Khalid hassani, Kku, Kmexpert, Knowledge2society, Koavf, Kordzik, Kpanek1, Ktr101, Kuru, L Kensington, LMackinnon, Lafleur, LaggedOnUser, Lanaesuejones,, LeeHunter, Leongwenhow, Lfstevens, Linda Vandergriff, Lmatt, Logicalgregory, Lsutiger1987, Lubaf, MC MasterChef, MC10, MSGJ, Madman2001, Mahee3007, Mailer diablo, Makemi, Malcohol, Manuel Anastcio, Marcelo1229, Mark Arsten, Marktan, Martin Wagenleiter, Marudubshinki, Materialscientist, Mattg82, Matusz, Maurreen, Maybury, MaynardClark, Mdd, Mdwhorley, Megan1967, Mentifisto, Michael Hardy, Michael Veenswyk, Mike Rosoft, Mike V, Mikel Gmez, Mireille Jansma, MissJM77, Mneff, Moe Epsilon, Mollerup (usurped), Mootros, MrOllie, Msenthi, Mtaseer, Muistio, Mydogategodshat, N5iln, Nabeth, Nasa-verve, NeilN, Neilpw1, Nelson50, NeniPogarcic, Netvisionary, Nighthawk2050, Nimpal, Nimroth, Nurdin KG, Nurg, O.Koslowski, Oberst, Oddbodz, Ogemah, Ohconfucius, Ohio Mailman, OnomaKai, Osuke02, Overnumerousness, PFHLai, Pdorfman, Pearle, Perfecto, Peter-anthony, Phalseid, PhnomPencil, Piano non troppo, Pichai Asokan, Pigsonthewing, Pjshettar, Pmbhagat, Pmlineditor, Poetista, Prashant1615, Prof 7, Punja2002, QSECOFR, Quadell, RHaworth, RJBurkhart3, RS2008, Rahul-Nawani, Raja2002, Ramsan, Random contributor, RaptaGzus, Rasaj, Rcbutcher, Records Solutions, RedHillian, Renesis, Rettetast, Rhobite, RicDod, Richard fishburn, RichardF, Rmudambi, Roberdan, Roberto Cruz, RodC, Ronz, Rumpelstiltskin223, Ruud Koot, Ryulong, S KTT, SEWilco, SLiberman, SQL, ST47, Sabinegrabner, Sam Hocevar, Sandeep999, Sandymok, Sango123, Sarnholm, SchfiftyThree, Schmoozing, SchuminWeb, Scobeen, Sdriessen, Senthil.Muthusamy, Sgalup, ShelleyAdams, Sherry Happel, Shizhao, Siegfried Kreutzer, Silvonen, SimonP, Sintaku, Skhan123, Skomorokh, Snowded, Snowwecocke, SpeedyGonsales, Spitfire5000, Sspct99, Sswood18, SteinbDJ, Stephen Bain, Stevenson-Perez, Stewartdallas, Stic rotide, Strife911, Sunray, Swandogz, Symo 61, Sysdt, THEN WHO WAS PHONE?, Techdoer, Techna1, Teshel, The wub, TheAMmollusc, TheRhani, Theeverst87, Thehelpfulone, Thiseye, ThreePD, Thseamon, Titoxd, Tiuks, Tmp373, Tony1, Topiarydan, Torpenhow3, Toussaint, Traroth, Truthtable1, Tsgttucker, Tshalini, Turnover3g, Twergywhite, Universimmedia, Unyoyega, User68, Valentino k, Veinor, VeniWikiVici, Vespristiano, Vishaltayal, Vivek sam123, VladGenie, Waggers, Wally Tharg, WaysToEscape, Westendgirl, Whazzi, Wichitalineman, Wiki4fun, Wikid77, Wikilibrarian, Wikireviewer99, Wikisteff, Woohookitty, Xyzzyplugh, YUL89YYZ, Yannis05, YeahIKnow, Yunshui, Zajim, ZimZalaBim, Zzuuzz, , , 1556 anonymous edits Knowledge transfer Source: Contributors: Al Lemos, Alan Liefting, Alex Kosorukoff, Alex Rio Brazil, AxelBoldt, Ben ootjers, Bhny, Billgordon1099, Bonadea, Buckshot06, Chealer, Chris the speller, Clemiol, Closedmouth, Dancter, Dgrey, DinosaursLoveExistence, Dona amada, Dr Debug, Edward, Eolausson, FF2010, Galinwa, Gonzo fan2007, Helfrich c, Herr Lennartz, Icairns, Iridescent, Jarble, Jastaal, Jauerback, Jcarroll, Johnmarkh, Jseto, LOL, Lawsonstu, Makemi, MarkfromEngland, Miranda.m.martin, MrOllie, NeilN, Neilc, Nesbit, Nimroth, Northamerica1000, Ombudsman, Open Research, Peter-anthony, PeterBrooks, Psinu, Rich Farmbrough, Richi, Rjwilmsi, Robthepiper, Root2, Seacat1, Sherry Happel, Singhswat, Snowded, Sophus Bie, Ssd, Sunray, Thewheelbarrow, Thingg, Thseamon, Tim Chambers, Tom1211, TopSpeakingDocs, Treebo, Trickstar, Urhixidur, Westendgirl, Yingfan, , 84 anonymous edits Tag (metadata) Source: Contributors: 16@r, 2D, 365net, Aaronbrick, AbsolutDan, Achowat, Afterwriting, Alan1963, Aleksa Lukic, AlexandreDulaunoy, Alpha.three, And3k, Andrew Bunn, AnimeCentral3000, Antrek, Artw, BD2412, Babajobu, Balajisreenivas03, Bfallmann, Biblbroks, Blanchette, BlueAzure, Bongwarrior, Brendanmccabe, Briandmpcity, BrokenSegue,, C26000, Camxx, Cburgdorfer, Ceejayoz, ChangChienFu, CharlotteWebb, Cheetah99, CindyFSolomon, Cluetrainee, Computerjoe, Coolnat2004, Cybercobra, DOHill, DancingPhilosopher, Dancter, Devinmcmearty, Dissolve, Dkrukovsky, Download, Dpd, DragonflySixtyseven, Dreamyshade, Dreftymac, Dusttodead, Dylan Lake, ENeville, EagleFan, Edward Vielmetti, Engmark, Everything counts, Excirial, Fadookie, Fcendejas, Fling93, Foxj, Frap, Fred Hsu, FrummerThanThou, Gaius Cornelius, Gary King, Gogo Dodo, Gracefool, GrahamOxtoby, Grstain, Haakon, Harmil, Harryh, Hede2000, Here, Hu12, Husky, Iandelaney, Insanity Incarnate, J ham3, J.delanoy, JacobCHoward, Janner, Jarble, Jbw2, JeffMHoward, Jeremy Butler, Jncraton, Joe Gazz84, Joel7687, Jordaniair, JosebaAbaitua, Jtneill, Jujutacular, Karatloz, Katieh5584, KaurJmeb, Keilana, Kevin Marks, Khalid hassani, Knuckles, Kylelovesyou, Lcarscad, Ldrhcp, Leeeh1000, Legalburst777, Liftarn, Linksman, Liquidizer, Lordofthe9, Luckas Blade, Luigibob, Luna Santin, Madhero88, Mairi, Mark.e.curry, MilkMiruku, Mindmatrix, Mortense, Mrowton, NULL, Nichtich, NickPenguin, Obercc, Ohnoitsjamie, Oiboy77, Omegatron, PJMirella, Papertiger, Pbice, Peciv, Peepeedia, Pigsonthewing, Pitman6787, Planetoid, Poison Oak, Politono, Prodego, Prolog, Punja2002, Punkandbarbies, R'n'B, Rabbasher, Rafielad, RayneVanDunem, Rebeccaselah, Rettetast, Ronz, Rossami, Semag68, Serg!o, Shanes, Shii, SiobhanHansa, Snowolf, Spartaz, Sphayros, SqueakBox, Sstrader, SteinbDJ, Stephan Leeds, Stephan Mosel, Steven Walling, Syder, Tabletop, Tantek, The Anome, Themfromspace, Thkoch2001, Thumperward, Tide rolls, Tobias Bergemann, Tobias Conradi, Tom Morris, TonyClarke, Toussaint, TyroEdits, Unschool, Vandil, Vanis314, Vedexent, Vegaswikian, WereWolf, Wiggi888, WikHead, WilyD, Wimt, Wireless friend, Woohookitty, Xezbeth, Y, ZimZalaBim, Zoicon5, 306 anonymous edits Learning community Source: Contributors: ActOnBurma, Aethelstan123, Ambrower, Asargent1, Astirmays, Brianjmmurphy, Chuck Sirloin, ClamDip, Compo, D1doherty, Dreamyshade, Ed1vel1, FT2, Freechild, Gregzeng, InformationLiterate, Kenneth M Burke, MTN, Matatigre36, Mattisse, Michael Hardy, Nabeth, Pathoschild, PhilKnight, Pier440, Rbellin, Rgvg, Rjwilmsi, Ronz, WMRoth, Yknok29, Zatarain21, 25 anonymous edits Legitimate peripheral participation Source: Contributors: Andicat, Belovedfreak, Bookjunky, Compo, Gurch, Hcorder, Jeremykemp, Jpom, Koavf, Leafman, Meclee, Nabeth, Nesbit, Piotrus, SalimJah, The stuart, 11 anonymous edits Network of practice Source: Contributors: Alvestrand, Anna Frodesiak, Bellagio99, Brossow, Calliopejen1, Compo, Jeff3000, Katharineamy, Kku, Mild Bill Hiccup, Mimzy1990, Nabeth, Oli Filth, Only, Plasticup, Rich Farmbrough, RichardF, Siddhant, The Rambling Man, VCHunter, 14 anonymous edits Online participation Source: Contributors: Bender235, BigChicken, DMacks, Emaradiegue, Emilytsai18, Fmhf87, Galoubet, Iridescent, Kai-Hendrik, Mccree49, Nabeth, PKT, R'n'B, Rjwilmsi, Senna parsa, Sweb12, Wbm1058, 5 anonymous edits Online community of practice Source: Contributors: Arno Matthias, Bearcat, Emaradiegue, Guptan99, Nick Number, RHaworth Organizational learning Source: Contributors: AKM15, AbsolutDan, ActiveSelective, Albert Simard, Alex Rio Brazil, Andyjsmith, Avalon, Banno, Bido101, Blotwell, Bodhih, Bonadea, Bongdentoiac, BruceDWatson, Buridan, CX, Capt muthukrishnan, Compo, Cormaggio, DGG, Daven200520, DebaDas, Dona amada, ERcheck, Edward, ElaineF423, Eustress, Everyking, Fang Aili, Fayenatic london, Fubble, Gdolan, Gioto, Graphiurus Ocularis, Gregory S. Waddell, Gurch, Harvey the rabbit, Herbythyme,

Article Sources and Contributors

Jeremykemp, Jheald, Jheuristic, Jose Icaza, KYPark, Karl-Henner, Keepscases, Kenneth M Burke, Kku, LMackinnon, Learn5again, Luckyslugnuts, Maurreen, Mdd, Michael Hardy, Mike734, Mikebeep, Mimzy1990, MrOllie, Mydogategodshat, Nabeth, Nesbit, Nima1024, Oddbodz, Parkerdr, Paxse, Penbat, Picapica, RJFJR, Rich Farmbrough, RichardF, Richie.lukas, Rihale, Rjwilmsi, Ronz, ShelfSkewed, Soap, SpamBilly, Stephanlangdon, Stevenson-Perez, Sunray, THF, The wub, Thelittlegreyman, ThreePD, Thseamon, Wbnelson, Westendgirl, Wikidudeman, Wmahan, Woohookitty, 80 anonymous edits Personal network Source: Contributors: Anna Frodesiak, ChrisHodgesUK, Decstop, Gobonobo, Jeremy.worrell, Mean as custard, Ohnoitsjamie, Syp, Tnxman307, Vincej, Ws.jdsullivan, Zollerriia, tefica Horvat, 10 anonymous edits Professional learning community Source: Contributors: Asargent1, Chris the speller, Cmghiold, Compo, Deipnosophista, EagleFan, Freechild, Jamesrnorwood, Michael Hardy, Reinderien, Tom Morris, Woohookitty, Zeng8r, 9 anonymous edits Situated cognition Source: Contributors: Bminchel, CABinMA, Cassowary, CharlesGillingham, Chris the speller, ChrisGualtieri, Compo, Courcelles, Dgrey, Djfrost711, Dr. Peter Lankton, DrGNAGarcia, Gaius Cornelius, GerryStahl, Htjohnson, JTBurman, Jgmac1106, Jkwitt, Jm34harvey, Knewgarden, Kripkenstein, Lova Falk, Magioladitis, Makeswell, MartinPoulter, Metahacker, Metchew, Michael Hardy, Molokaibeach, Monkeyboy4, Nesbit, Nneonneo, Oadesope, OliviaGuest, PhnomPencil, Pontificalibus, PullUpYourSocks, Quadell, RainbowWiki, Rjwilmsi, SchreiberBike, Sjakkalle, Snowded, Sole Soul, Steven C. Hayes, TonyClarke, UConnMike, Vanessa Joy 2008, Wiobyrne, Yakstronaut, , 91 anonymous edits Situated learning Source: Contributors: Aaron Kauppi, Alan Pascoe, Buridan, CQ, Cnilep, Compo, Cormaggio, Dina, Dougher, ElKevbo, GraemeL, J04n, Jacobko, Johnkarp, Kate, Kingturtle, Kku, Koffeemaker, Ladel1jn, LeeHunter, Mlearning, MrOllie, Nesbit, Ot, Prljunkmail, Prolog, Qwyrxian, Rblaugh, Rculatta, Shanes, SimonP, Te Karere, Tfoulger, The bellman, Truman Burbank, Wikilibrarian, Zahid Abdassabur, 26 anonymous edits Social capital Source: Contributors: 12robincat, A.J.Chesswas, Alan Au, Alansohn, AleXd, Amayzes, Andreadb, Andy Marchbanks, Andycjp, Anna Frodesiak, Antiselfpromotion, Antoine56 98, Ascii27, AttoRenato, BD2412, BMGRAHAM, BamatexPhD, Barek, BeaumontBells, Bejnar, Bellagio99, Bender235, Bertilvidet, Betacommand, Bfinn, Bhny, Bill cz, Bjorn Martiz, Bluemoose, Bmedi, Bobfrombrockley, Bootle777, Brad7777, Brighterorange, Broadway1962, Bryan Derksen, CQ, Calwatch, Cerian, Cessator, Cgb345, Chlingl, Chris Howard, CidVSReno, ClaudineChionh, Colonies Chris, Compo, Contacttomquinn, Cordless Larry, Cretog8, CsDix, Curly Turkey, Cybercobra, DR, DaltonCastle, DanielCD, Dantadd, Dara21, DarwinPeacock, Dasani, Deborah909, DerHexer, Derek Ross, Detruncate, Dmwilliams, Dougofborg, Drpickem, Drstones, Duncansmob, Ecife, Edchi, Editor2020, Edusoc, Egoldstein84, Ekren, EliotAJardines, Enchanter, Eran, Erianna, Euchiasmus, Everyking, Ezagren, Feministgeo, Finlinkventures, Frahu, Frankie816, Ft93110, Fuzheado, Ghanygirl2607, Gilliam, Glacialfox, GrantNeufeld, Guillaume2303, Gurubanks,, Helvetius, Hisabness, Hmrox, Hu12, Hubriscantilever, Iadar, IjonTichyIjonTichy, Illuminatingvision, Ingenuity Arts, Inky, Iridescent, J-ham123456, JHMM13, JRFunk, JRR Trollkien, Jajon, Jeff3000, JenLouise, John D. Croft, John Quiggin, JohnOwens, Johndbeatty, JonasRH, Jroman05, Jsholt01, Jtneill, Juanruizh, Julia Rossi, Jusjih, Jweiss11, Karl J Brazier, Ken Gallager, Kenstandfield, Khalid aldkhaeel, Khalid hassani, Kingturtle, Klosterdev, Krushna86, L77, Leutha, Levineps, Lightmouse, LilHelpa, Lkbogdonoff, Loganchadde, Luisrull, M3taphysical, MBisanz, Mack2, Maimone, Malcolm Farmer, Marcok, Marcusfoth, Matthewcgirling, Mattisse, Max Calf, Meclee, Medzamor, Memeticbrand, Metamagician3000, Mfeadler, Mhjackson, Mild Bill Hiccup, Missstar6, MoenesElzeiny, MrOllie, Mthoward, Mulgul, NathanielAustin, Niigata seagull, Nikitko, Nurg, Odin of Trondheim, Olivier, OpenFuture, Orutra70, Ot, PTSE, Pdxtraveler, Pennbrook, Perkindd, Pgan002, Pgreenfinch, Ph.eyes, Phauly, Philip Trueman, Piotrus, Potatoandleeksoup, Preslav, Pressforaction, Psychophysenfose, RJBurkhart, Raastin, Radicalsubversiv, Raul654, Rd232, RedHouse18, Regiorgio, Rexkingman2, RichardVeryard, Rjwellings, Rjwilmsi, Rmhermen, Roadrunner, Robisonlj, Robofish, RockMFR, RogierBrussee, Romansdp, Saintswithin, Schmacker, Scottlondon, Sdedeo, Seb az86556, SebastianHelm, SelmaProdanovic, Sepsep3, Shoujun, SiobhanHansa, Slevi99, Smartiger, Soccap, Sociotard, Solace098, Somedifferentstuff, SorenSoren, Stephenb, Stephensuleeman, Stevenmitchell, Synchronism, TSCF, Tclaridge, Teratornis, The Thing That Should Not Be, Thewikikid, Thomasmeeks, Tillwe, TobyJ, Tomsega, Travisl, Unclenuclear, UninvitedCompany, Upslogger, Uvriss, Ville-e, Vwoodstock, Wavelength, Wingedsubmariner, Woohookitty, Xqno, Yaara dildaara, Zibudizz, 387 ,. anonymous edits Social network Source: Contributors: 2602:304:ABA5:1E09:F85D:45D2:5A6D:B738, Afterwriting, Anna Frodesiak, Apparition11, Artimis Cat, Axcurtis, Barek, Bellagio99, Bibid, Bjankuloski06en, BobDohse, Bonadea, Brad7777, Chriyu, Daivhp, DancingPhilosopher, Danno uk, Dappermuis, DarwinPeacock, Dash avtars, Editor2020, Ekren, ElKevbo, Equilibrium Allure, Eyeofyou, Funandtrvl, Gharibpoor, Groupuscule, Haganrich, Harlem Baker Hughes, Henry1792, Huon, IraChesterfield, Jake Wartenberg, Jim1138, Joe.zz, KLongAus, Kassshan, Klamma, Klilidiplomus, KuboF, Lotje, Lova Falk, Macedonian, Madcoverboy, Mean as custard, Meclee, Michael Hardy, Mike Restivo, Mindmatrix, Modotam, Morphh, Mrt3366, Mssclanz, Mysterytrey, Neonworm, NewEnglandYankee, Nextlevelwb, Nihiltres, Nullzero, OMurgo, Octahedron80, Ohnoitsjamie, Pete unseth, Piotrus, Plcoopr, Ryuzah, Sdaeun, Silvrous, Singhal.aman007, Spitfire19, SudoGhost, Svlberg, Tbhotch, The Devil's Advocate, Tide rolls, Tungsten, Uday.gautam6, Versageek, Vertium, Victoria A Allen, Wikipelli, , 121 anonymous edits Tacit knowledge Source: Contributors: AS48, Ajo Mama, AlexanderMelton, Andycjp, Anthere, Areteichi, AstroHurricane001, Atreddy, BD2412, Banno, Beland, Benspigel, Betaeleven, Bhadani, Bin2k1, Boxplot, Brian Pearson, BridgeBuilderKiwi, Brownpau, C9900, Compo, Cybercobra, Dbielawa, Deeb, Denisarona, Derek Andrews, Dgrey, DivineAlpha, Dooneyryan, Download, Dwis1963, Ejrrjs, Engineman, Fitzhugh, Gdm, George100, Graham king 3, Gregbard, Guaca, Hirokoterasawa, Hulagutten, JJ Harrison, JanCeuleers, JayVanderzant, Jeff3000, Jeffkross, Jeffrey Newman, John Quiggin, Jon Awbrey, Joshuagay, Julia Rossi, Jvpwiki, Kapilg99, Kbdank71, Keegscee, Kokkokanta, Koyaanis Qatsi, L Kensington, Lamro, Leedeth, Lganzman, Lova Falk, Luckyslugnuts, Macdonald-ross, Makemi, Marcopolo, MarkRainer, Maurreen, Michael Daly, Michael Hardy, Michaeljsouth, Midway, Mmortal03, Mootros, MrOllie, N2e, Nabeth, NawlinWiki, Neelix, NeilN, Neodop, Nicholas Brougham-Heide, NuclearWarfare, Owl Frosh, Padddler, Palanq, Peripitus, Piesmanga, Piotrus, Psinu, Ratpow, Rbrohm, Rhousler10, Rl, Ruud Koot, Saudade7, Shadowy Crafter, Shadygrove2007, Sigma0 1, Skoch3, Smartse, SmokeyJoe, Smpickens, Snow steed, Specdude, SpeedyGonsales, Stpuidhead, Tabletop, The Anome, Thseamon, TimIngalls, Tmh, Truman Burbank, Twang, Una Smith, Uncle G, Versageek, Vicarious, Viriditas, Visik, Wellspring, Wescbell, WhatisFeelings?, Zack Howes, Zaintoum, Zidel333, , 163 anonymous edits Value network Source: Contributors: Alan Au, Anna Frodesiak, Avalon, Bazonka, Bobo192, CanisRufus, Charles Ehin, Charles Matthews, Cyrius, David Meggitt, Dreamyshade, Edward Vielmetti, Eeekster, GoingBatty, GuyThackray, HectorMalot, Improv, InfiniteSeeker, Jeff3000, Jheuristic, John Quiggin, Kubigula, MaNeMeBasat, Meclee, MeganA, Northamerica1000, Observer77, Oleg Alexandrov, Pwforaker, R'n'B, Rich Farmbrough, Rjwilmsi, Rmz, Robguttman, Robin klein, Ronz, Ryan Roos, SarahD, SchreiberBike, Sergej, Sergej71, Vernaallee, Woohookitty, Zscout370, 78 anonymous edits Value network analysis Source: Contributors: Andycjp, Corza, Crystallina, David Meggitt, Harvey the rabbit, Jheuristic, John Yesberg, MZMcBride, Martarius, Northamerica1000, Olea, Rcowdam, Ronz, Sergej71, Snowded, Vernaallee, 16 anonymous edits Virtual community of practice Source: Contributors: Aroberts, Compo, Daven200520, Dv82matt, Emaradiegue, EnriqueMurillo, Fayenatic london, Gypsydoctor, JWSchmidt, Jauerback, Jojalozzo, Kku, Lotje, Michael Hardy, Mimzy1990, Nabeth, Ninguem, Oli Filth, PS2pcGAMER, PhilipO, Poderi, PtrHrngl, Ronz, SiobhanHansa, Siva1979, Smithjd8, Struway, Teryx, 45 anonymous edits


Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors


Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors

Image:Community.png Source: License: GNU Free Documentation License Contributors: User:Andrew_pmk Image:Duality_(CoP).png Source: License: Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Contributors: Compo File:knowledge spiral.svg Source: License: Copyrighted free use Contributors: JohannesKnopp Image:Web 2.0 Map.svg Source: License: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 2.5 Contributors: Original by Markus Angermeier Vectorised and linked version by Luca Cremonini Image:SNA segment.png Source: License: GNU General Public License Contributors: Screenshot taken by User:DarwinPeacock File:Internet_map_1024.jpg Source: License: Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Contributors: Barrett Lyon The Opte Project File:Barabasi Albert model.gif Source: License: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Contributors: Horvth rpd File:Network self-organization stages.png Source: License: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Contributors: User:Takemori39 File:Social-network.svg Source: License: Public Domain Contributors: User:Wykis File:Social Red.jpg Source: License: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike Contributors: Usuario:Daniel TenerifeDaniel Tenerife File:Scale-free network sample.png Source: License: GNU Free Documentation License Contributors: It Is Me Here File:Diagram of a social network.jpg Source: License: Public Domain Contributors: Katharinewillis.



Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported //