For Zyn Camus Only

Demystifying Organizational Learning: A Case Study of IBM’s Corporate Volunteer Program Ayse Kok Educational Studies, Kellogg College, University of Oxford, UK [email protected] Abstract: The purpose of this proposed research study is to empirically explore the nature of virtual communities of practice (CoP) in a global organisation within the context of its International Corporate Volunteer (ICV) Program. Following the logic of inductive research, a qualitative case study will be proposed here, to gain insight on the extent to which virtual CoPs can be utilized. For this purpose, a global business organisation that established a partnership with a Canadian non-profit organisation and implements a corporate volunteer program is proposed. Although previous studies confirmed the important role that the quality of dialogue plays in the cultivation of effective communities of practice this study shows that despite the quality of exchanges, virtual CoP might not be utilized due to some alternative channels of communication. Keywords: organizational learning, communities of practice, social learning theories, corporate volunteer programs, IBM

1. Social learning theories Recent epistemological and psychological theories have moved focus away from the individual to the social and constructive nature of knowledge. In contrast to the acquisition perspective which considers the mind as being a container, knowledge as a substance and learning as the transfer and addition of substance to mind, the participation perspective derives from studies of learning which understands learning as participation in communities of practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Accordingly, knowledge is socially constructed through collaborative efforts in dialogic interaction (Salamon, 1997). Cognition is also based on distributed access to information and a shared understanding amongst participants (Hutchins, 1995). The learning implications of this epistemology are profound. First, learning is situated, contextual and closely tied to the situation in which knowledge is being created (Brown et al., 1989; Lave & Wenger, 1991). Legitimate peripheral participation occurs through the attainment of the subjective perspective of individuals engaged in a shared enterprise that is contained within artifacts, behaviour and language (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Learning is more about becoming a practitioner through social interaction with others than learning about the practice (Brown& Duguid, 1991). Newcomers are moved to the status of full practitioners through a social process of scaffolding by experienced practitioners, shrinking the zone of proximal development to enable the novice to become a contributing member of the community (Brown& Duguid, 1991). The concept of Communities of Practice (CoP) could be operationalized as an empirical construct to provide a useful framework from the social learning perspective (Novicevic et al., 2007). Lave and Wenger are credited with coining the term CoP in their 1991 book, Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, in which they examined how “master practitioners” and “newcomers” form apprenticeship relationships through which situated learning takes place. To Lave & Wenger (1991), learning is a process that takes place in a participation framework, not in an individual mind. This means, among other things, that it is meditated by the differences of perspective among the CoP participants. It is the community, or at least those participating in the learning context, who ‘learn’ under this definition. (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p.15). Thus, the notion of CoP was first used, “to describe the way in which meaning was negotiated and reflected on in the practices of specific occupational groups . . .” (Wesley & Buysse, 2001, p.7). CoP s are ‘groups of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise in this area by interacting on an ongoing basis.’ They operate as ‘social learning systems’ where practitioners connect to solve problems, share ideas, set standards, build tools, and develop relationships with peer and stakeholders . . . [They] feature peer-to-peer collaborative activities to build member skills and steward the knowledge assets of organizations and society (Wenger & Snyder, 2000). CoP s can also be understood as spaces through which “communicative action” can take place (Polanyi, 2002). They are mediated by and through the social construction of knowledge (Wenger, 2004). CoP s are said to exist at the intersection of intellectual and social capital—through which social networks serve as the basis of knowledge creation and transfer (Kent et al., 2009; Lesser &

596

Ayse Kok

Prusak, 2000; Wenger, 2004; Wenger & Snyder, 2000). It is believed, “that communities of practice are valuable to organizations because they contribute to the development of social capital, which in turn is a necessary condition for knowledge creation, sharing, and use” (Lesser & Prusak, 2000, p. 124). CoP framework has come to be applied to both “intra” or “inter” organizational settings, described as “existing everywhere” as an “an integral part of our daily lives” (Wenger, 1998, p. 6,7). Wenger has taken the concept of CoP and extended it into a comprehensive theory of how organizations and individuals within organizations work together (1998). In his book, Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity, Wenger describes organizations as essentially “constellations of communities of practice”, and asserts that CoP can transcend organizational boundaries and/or exist within and across formal networks (1998, p. 30). CoP are also widely referenced in the literature to analyze strategic alliances and cross-sector collaborations (Toby, 2000; Lathlean & le May, 2002; Dewhurst & Navarro, 2004). These studies suggest that inter-organizational networks and collaborations are fertile ground for the application of CoP theory. The second feature of a CoP is the matter of engaging in a “joint enterprise,” which Wenger and his associates describe as the realm of purpose and “domain”—referring to its common purpose and the sense of members’ identification with a topic or practice (Snyder et al., 2003). “Communities of practice are groups formed around a shared interest in which discussion builds on the values and motivations of their members” (O’Donnell et al., 2003, p. 83). These interests and the common purposes that are derived from them are “communally” negotiated (Wenger, 1998, p. 78). “Practice is, first and foremost, a process by which we can experience the world and our engagement within it as meaningful” (1998, p. 51). A CoP’s joint enterprises are said to be held together through “mutual accountability” (1998, p. 81), essentially the level of reciprocity that exists between and among members of a CoP. Wenger’s third feature of a CoP is the existence of a “shared repertoire,” (1998, p. 82) that can be understood as the realm of tools and techniques (Wenger & Snyder, 2000). The shared tools and techniques of a CoP are the medium through which meaning is negotiated and learning occurs. A shared repertoire can include informal conversation around a lunch table to a structured protocol to guide dialogue and decision-making. Wenger & Synder (2000) also state that CoP are no longer the new frontier of organizations and have become as common as business units or teams; these informal structures require specific efforts to be integrated into the organization so that their full power can be leveraged (Wenger & Snyder, 2000; Dean & Peter, 200). When it comes to applying the CoP framework to organizational settings, consideration should be given to the modes of communication used within and between CoP s. These modes of communication include face-to-face interactions as well as the use of various information technologies. The literature regarding the place of “virtual communities of practice” most often looks at the role of information technology within the context of the existence of on-line CoP (Davenport & Hall 20022; Daniel et al., 2002; Henri & Pudelko, 2003). These studies point to the importance that the CoP framework has taken on as a tool to assess the quality of on-line communities and the role that information technology (both from a hardware and a software perspective) has in the process. Whether it is through face-to-face interactions or via electronic forums, CoP members will engage in some form of dialogue with each other. Studies have been conducted examining the quality of “virtual discourse”, the role of storytelling and narrative development, the adoption of common language and assessment of the quality of dialogue (Gajda & Koliba, 2007). These studies confirm the important role that the quality of dialogue plays in the cultivation of effective communities of practice. CoP dialogue has been measured in terms of frequency, degrees of structure and quality of exchanges, and aligned to systemic evaluation of data and decision-making (Gajda & Koliba, 2007).

1.1 Conceptual framework Based on these related theories and definitions of social learning, virtual CoPs will be defined in this research study as the entity of all processes of communication, collaboration and connectedness. For this to occur, there must be a system of individuals, technology and organisational elements and the interactions of these elements: (1) Individuals are the most obvious part of virtual CoPs: if there are no individuals within the

organisation, then nothing will happen. Therefore, human beings are the focal point of OL.

597

Ayse Kok

(2) Technology is often the most visible part of virtual CoPs:, since it represents the tools that human beings use to do activities. Technology refers to physical systems or tools - machinery, tools, equipment, software programs, databases, and so on.

(3) Organisation refers to the formal managerial systems under which virtual CoPs function. For instance, communication channels, hierarchy of responsibilities and tasks, and other formal organisation manifestations will greatly influence individuals and their actions.

This points to the need to focus not only on the individual elements, but in particular on their mutual interplay. The definition proposed above emphasizes the formal and informal way in which human beings interact as an essential constituent of virtual CoPs:.

2. Research methodology The study is designed to explore the nature of OL facilitated by IBM’s CSC program and the role that online collaboration tools play in fostering or inhibiting OL. Consequently, an embedded naturalistic case study approach (Patton, 1980; Yin, 1984) is adopted. The qualitative design for this study draws upon Glaser and Strauss (1999), Miles & Huberman (1994), Patton (1980), and Strauss & Corbin (1997).

2.1 Research context As companies work to grow and thrive in a globalized economy, they have increasingly utilized International Corporate Volunteer (ICV) programs to enhance organisational learning. One of the organizations that develops volunteer programs so that their employees can provide expertise to small businesses, nonprofits, and universities on specialized international assignments is IBM. Being one of the leading organisations in the field of technology, IBM implements an ICV program called Corporate Service Corps (CSC) in partnership with a Canadian based non-profit organisation- DOT (Digital Opportunity Trust) - so that the employees work on cross-border volunteer projects, alone or in teams, for a period of two weeks to one year. Employees work with small businesses, government agencies, non-profit and charity organizations, and associations in varied industries. They leverage their core competencies and skills to provide consulting services in functional areas such as marketing, finance, IT, project management, and strategic planning. The CSC program gathers teams of IBM Leaders with a diversity of skills, drawn from different countries and business units and places them in emerging markets to tackle important social and economic issues in collaboration with DOT. The IBM Leaders work on projects in four-week assignments. Under the CSC programme, IBM deploys employees in teams of 8-10 people for a four week period in a country. The experience is followed by a period intended for sharing the experience inside and possibly outside of the company. Because most ICV programs comprise a relatively short period in the field, pre-assignment training is also provided to build a cohesive team, prepare participants for the cultural and technical aspects of the assignment, and allow them to work with their clients to develop and refine project activities. IBM facilitates 3 months of pre-work for CSC teams. The pre-work materials are delivered and managed through a learning delivery software package, and they include team-based and individual assignments. Teams also meet virtually on a weekly basis for the 3 months before they depart on assignment. Because the team members are from many different countries and likely have never met, pre-work focuses heavily on team-building. It also assists the participants in honing their cultural intelligence, consulting, and communication skills with respect to working in international teams and living in their host country. IBM also assigns a number of staff to work with the team during pre-work, including team facilitators, country-specific advisors (staff who are either from a CSC country or who work there), and alumni from previous CSC assignments in the same country. IBM’s global non-profit partner DOT also participates in pre-work, providing necessary information about the project, logistics, partner information, and country specifics. DOT has in-depth knowledge of key countries that spans business operations, culture, challenges and opportunities for the private, public, and non-profit sectors. Consequently, DOT identifies local partners and projects that complement the company’s culture, mission, and goals for an ICV program.

598

Ayse Kok

2.2 A case study approach A qualitative case study methodology is appropriate for exploring a concept for which there has been no previous research in a given context (Yin, 1984). According to Yin (1984), case studies are the preferred strategy for research that asks “how” and “why” questions.

2.2.1 Data collection

This research study includes in-depth online interviews with the participants of the virtual CoP and related stakeholders from two organisations, a review of existing organizational documentation, and observations of online collaboration tools such as the CSC program wiki, IBM intranet including Lotus Notes as well as related online communities and video or tele-conferencing sessions. Data collection for this case study is guided by qualitative methods outlined by Glaser and Strauss (1999), Miles & Huberman (1994) and Strauss and Corbin (1997). The data are collected primarily through online interviews with the participants of the OL programme as well as the related stakeholders from both organisations and corroborated through participant reflections and a review of organizational artifacts. The study includes online interviews with participants of the IBM CSC program as well as key individuals from the non-profit organisation DOT that supports IBM in implementing the program. As it was expected that DOT Program Managers would be most likely to provide reliable information regarding this program implementation, key informants were identified together.

2.2.2 Data analysis

The spirit of qualitative analyses essentially lies in making sense of massive amounts of data and translating the intangible ideas into comprehensive frameworks. Miles and Huberman (1994) suggest three concurrent steps for the analysis process: data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing and verification. Data will be analyzed in this manner within cases and across cases. The specificity of the semi-structured online interview protocol is a factor in leading to these themes. The verbatim transcripts (using the original English, as used by the interviewees) will be read through twice by the researcher without making any notes to get an overview of the information that the participants provided. Then, through continued reading, the data has been read again, with the researcher coding the categories of themes as they emerge. Next, reading through the transcripts again, themes have been identified within each category and the findings will be discussed with participants. The company documents provided by participants will be included in the text analysis. Observation notes related to OL program wiki, IBM intranet including Lotus Notes as well as related online communities and video or tele-conferencing sessions also provide useful information in understanding the process of online collaboration the interviewees described. The interviews focused on the advantages and disadvantages of the three communication channels that are essential elements of the virtual CoP: eMail, discussion boards, and chats. What follows is a summary and discussion of the CSC program participants’ comments.

2.2.3 eMail

While some advantages and disadvantages of eMail were mentioned only once, some others were listed by multiple participants. The following advantages were cited repeatedly: time to think before responding, ease of use, ability to respond at own pace, and ability to add attachments and save responses, ability to respond at anytime and anywhere. With respect to the disadvantages of participants listed the following repeatedly: time delay in receiving responses, difficulty in following the conversation thread, monologue-like messages, and the uncertainty of the receipt of message by others and the slowness of some eMail systems.

2.2.4 Discussion boards

Concerning discussion boards, participants pointed out the following advantages more than once: clear organization into conversation threads, convenient overview of messages on one page, and time to think before responding, ability to save responses, ability to respond at anytime and anywhere. The disadvantages of discussion boards repeatedly mentioned by participants were: having to wait for

599

Ayse Kok

answers, technical issues (including time-consuming log-on and having to be online to read and write), monologue-like postings, difficulty in following the conversation thread, and the shorter length of messages than in eMail.

2.2.5 Chats

With respect to chats, participants repeatedly listed the following advantages: feeling that conversation was "real", receiving responses instantly, the ability to have spontaneous conversations, enjoying a personable atmosphere conducive to relationship building, and a high level of interest and fun. More than any other communication channel, chatting elicited enthusiastic comments, such as "loved it," "best," and "liked it the most," accentuated by exclamation marks. Concerning disadvantages, the following were mentioned by multiple participants: scheduling problems due to different time zones, technical issues (such as being disconnected in the middle of a chat or ending up in the wrong chat room), the fast pace of discussion with little time to think and write, difficulty in following the conversation thread, difficulty in typing and keeping up with reading every posting, and limited suitability for business communication. Comparing the three channels, all participants agreed that they affected differences in message length, with eMail having the longest and chatting the shortest messages on average. They also noticed differences in formality; all of them agreed that chatting is the most informal channel, and many participants remarked that discussion boards seemed to be the most formal. In addition, there was consensus that chatting is the most interactive of the three channels. Finally, participants reflected on their experiences and described what they learned with respect to intercultural as well as online communication.

“Online collaboration is a very powerful tool, yet it has to be practiced and perfected, and styles may differ depending on the parties involved. It is beneficial to familiarize oneself with styles used across the globe.” “I learned that these collaborations can be interesting and informational. You can walk away with a greater understanding of a different culture while also understanding your own more thoroughly. It also showed that you must be selective in what you say because you don’t want to offend the other side.” “I can see how chatting can be more difficult when there are many people involved. There would have to be a moderator to control the conversation or someone doesn’t get a chance to speak at all or that the topic does not stray. That communication needs clear rules if you want to reach a result that is worth its name.”

3. Discussion The online collaboration platform used for IBM’s ICV program is divided into an internal intranet working area with all CSC key docs for the country teams and an external area for photos, videos, blogs, press releases etc is effective for the country teams. This platform is also linked to the IBM CSC website as well as the non-profit’s. Key program documents included are: 1) Program Planning Documents; 2) Statement of Works; 3) Team workplans; 4) Overall Team Presentations; 5) Deliverables of country teams to local partners; 6) Deployment Reports and 7) Photos, videos and blogs regarding the ICV program (See Figure 1). In terms of the efforts made to increase the use of the virtual CoP within the context of this ICV program one of the interviewees made the following statements:

“We don't really do much in social media with our NGO implementation partners. We provide a virtual CoP for our participants to blog, share pictures and post videos. A small area is given to each NGO partner to provide an overall summary. But otherwise we don't do much more than that.”

So, contrary to the popular belief, the use of the virtual CoP is not always preferred and widespread even within a company like IBM.

600

Ayse Kok

Figure 1: Overview of virtual CoP When asked about the key factors/building blocks that enable or disable IBM to facilitate the use of the virtual CoP one of the senior level IBM managers made the following remark:

“The important question to ask is what value would we create by doing more in this arena. If we had a clear answer to that question we'd invest more in this space.”

When asked about how many times online collaboration tools are used to exchange information with related stakeholders it has been stated that as eMail is constant the participants of the ICV program don't use any online collaboration tools with non profits. On the other side, one of the participants also stated:

“If we had an open, easy to use web-based platform for sharing preparatory learning that would be helpful.”

So, although in terms of providing knowledge sharing opportunities with colleagues, eMail has been stated as the most popular tool there is also a need for utilizing online collaboration tools. In terms of the key concerns regarding the use of online collaboration tools in relation to knowledge- sharing; privacy, people multi-tasking and not focusing on content have been cited. Additionally, none of the interview participants could be sure in terms of the factors that made them you feel more engaged with the online collaboration tools. Regarding the benefits expected in return from individual contributions to the exchange of idea via the use of virtual CoP; efficiency has often been mentioned as a clear goal. A unique aspect of the CSC program was the variety of communication processes that the teams used in order to be in contact. Conference calls were the most effective communication mechanism, while the media library and external wiki/blogging sites were the least effective communication mechanisms. And there was variance across the teams in the degree to which they found the Ning site and internal wiki to be effective.

“There is still plenty of scope for development & improvement. I'm not certain that all participants were very expert at using the collaboration tools - it means very different things to different people, with very varied results! It would also be extremely useful if we could get access to a standard, international teleconferencing number for effective collaboration - my teleconference number provider only had a limited number of countries on the local list - leading to some very complex arrangements in some cases to get people on calls! There perhaps needs also to be clarity over the different collaboration tools - team members were sometimes confused!” (CSC Participant, Sept, 2010)

601

Ayse Kok

A key feature of the CSC program that underlies many of the positive impacts on individuals is the communication aspect, particularly in having the teams collaborate. In the interviews, individuals repeatedly pointed out that they had been able to learn as much from their team members via the use of online collaboration tools as they did from being abroad for a month. It should be noted however, that participants felt only moderately well-prepared for their assignments. Participants felt they needed more tool-specific information earlier (e.g. link to wikis and blogs), and that the learning modules could have been a little more structured (better organization, more time to complete modules). Participants also felt that they would have benefitted from some online team process training.

“The use of the collaboration tools is unique in that you get to cycle through a team evolution process multiple times and experience patterns in team behavior / dynamics -- and practice guiding and influencing people from different cultures. Very rewarding. Right at the top of IBM experiences in my 12 years with the company.“ (CSC Participant, Sept, 2010) “Some discussion points and presentations should be offered before the fieldwork relative to the Edvisor training module that can be used to facilitate a team discussion.” (CSC Participant, Oct, 2010)

Participants were mixed on the self-paced aspect of the online pre-work curriculum and mentioned difficulty finding time to do everything. Some of them mentioned that the number of pre-work modules should be reduced and there should be more emphasis on project planning and consulting skills. Some strengths of online pre-work content included providing cultural awareness for participants, and overviews of country-specific history and culture.

“I am not sure you are enough warning /informing the participants that they are responsible for making really use of these tools and that no one will do the efforts for them. We live in a world where individual is accustomed to have information digested and integrated in a system which is delivered ready to use. This is a lot about personal empowerment as well.” (CSC Participant, Oct, 2010) “While a couple of the learning modules seemed dull and academic the conversations they inspired were terrific. On 2 of my teams using lotus live or lotus connections was very helpful. Having a typing option vs speaking for non-English speakers was helpful. It is important to note that some of the participants started interacting via the tool but then moved to speaking.” (CSC Participant, August, 2010) “I think the pre-learning needs to distinguish between what is essentially 'information' e.g. logistics and those topics which simply require commenting on and those which really need deeper discussion. It would also be very useful to have some standard 'prompt' questions we can fall back on - if facilitators are not fully on the ball, you can end up with team members simply regurgitating the material in the pre-learning, which has some value sometimes, but does not maximise the potential value. Also, would be useful to share ideas / practices on some of the pre-work activities that are not in the pre-learning but which are enjoyable and help the teaming process - I encouraged my teams for instance, to agree a simple motto, to work under. The consulting learning needs developing - I think a consulting simulation would be very useful. Not sure that the IBM Tools section, other than the SME Tool Kit is really a priority. The CSR Materiality Matrix needs better explanation.” (CSC Participant, Sept, 2010)

No matter what the parameters of the project, online collaborations give program participants a chance to practice intercultural and online communication skills in a global and technology-mediated setting common in today's business world. With indications emerging that business collaborations limited to a small number of conventional communication channels may impair companies' ability to compete in the global workplace (Malhotra & Majchrzak, 2005), online collaborations involving multiple channels and a variety of techniques are an excellent method not only to engage them but also to provide an optimal training ground for skills that are directly applicable to their future careers. Based on these findings, it should be taken into account that the virtual CoP, especially the social media (blogs, wikis) are not necessarily utilized in even global companies; so caution must be given that their value is not overestimated. While clearly more research needs to be done in this area, eMail still seems to be the popular tool in OL programs in terms of knowledge exchange despite the existence of alternative online collaboration platforms.

602

Ayse Kok

4. Conclusion As in any qualitative study, the conclusions from this study cannot be generalized to the larger population of all business organisations or other types of organisations. One limitation, therefore, is that this study has focused only on one specific organisation that established a partnership with a non-profit organisation due to its International Corporate Volunteer program. Although previous studies confirmed the important role that the quality of dialogue plays in the cultivation of effective communities of practice this study shows that despite the quality of exchanges, virtual CoP are not necessarily utilized due to some alternative channels of communication. It should be taken into consideration that my own experiences and relationships also potentially affect the level of participation as well as interpretation of data. Both researcher and reader bring their conceptual structures, schemata and an unfolding of realization. As Stake (1995) states, as a case researcher I might have failed to pass along to readers some of the information and the reader might also reconstruct the knowledge in ways that leave it differently connected and more likely to be personally useful. Yet, as the literature suggests, there is little evidence that helps to inform education, practice, policy, and research about issues surrounding the effective use of virtual CoPs for organisational learning. While the study tries to illuminate the important factors related to the adoption of virtual CoPs:in this organisation, it also tries to explain the benefits and challenges in using collaboration technologies for knowledge transfer between different organisations. As a result, the study aims to provide improvements and new directions for similar future partnerships.

References Argyris, C. (1977) Double-loop Learning in Organizations. Harvard Business Review, 55 (5), pp. 115-125. Argyris, C. & Schon, D.A. (1978) Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Reading, Mass:

Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley. Cyert, R.M. & March, J.G. (1992) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Oxford : Blackwell Business. Daft, R. & Huber, G.P. (1987) How Organizations Learn: A Communications Framework. Research in the

Sociology of Organizations, 5, pp. 1-36. Daft, R. & Weick, K.E. (1966) Toward a Model of Organizations as Interpretation Systems. Academy of

Management Journal, 9 (2), pp. 160-160. Dewey, J. (1938) Logic: The Theory of Inquiry. New York: Holt. Dewey, J. (1997) How We Think. Mineola, N.Y.: Dover Publications. Dewey, J. (2004) Democracy and Education. Mineola, N.Y.: Dover Publications. Easterby-Smith, M., Burgoyne, J. and Araujo, L. (1999) Organizational Learning and the Learning Organization:

Developments in Theory and Practice. London: SAGE. Easterby-Smith, M., Crossan, M. and Nicolini, D. (2000) Organizational Learning: Debates Past, Present and

Future. Journal of Management Studies, 37 (6), pp. 783-796. Easterby-Smith, M. & Lyles, M.A. (2003) The Blackwell Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge

Management. Oxford: Blackwell. Gulati, R. (1995) Social Structure and Alliance Formation Patterns: A Longitudinal Analysis. Administrative

Science Quarterly, 40 (4), pp. 619-652. Gulati, R., Nohria, N. and Zaheer, A. (2000) Strategic Networks. Strategic Management Journal, 21 (3), pp. 203. Huber, G.P. (1991) Organizational Learning: the Contributing Processes and the Literatures. Organization

Science, 2 (1), pp. 88-115. Kogut, B. & Zander, U. (1992) Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of

Technology. Organization Science, 3 (3), pp. 383-397. Kogut, B. & Zander, U. (1996) What Firms Do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning. Organization Science, 7 (5),

pp. 502-518. Nonaka, I. (1994) A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organization Science, 5 (1), pp. 14-

37. Nonaka, I. (1995) The Knowledge-creating Company: How Japanese Companies create the Dynamics of

Innovation. Oxford : Oxford University Press. Polanyi, M. (1967) The tacit dimension. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Polanyi, M.F.D. (2002) Communicative Action in Practice: Future Search and The Pursuit of An Open, Critical

and Non-coercive Large-group Process. Systems Research & Behavioral Science, 19 (4), pp. 357-366. Punch, K. (2005) Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. London: SAGE. Salomon, G. (1997) Distributed Cognitions: Psychological and Educational Considerations. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press. Stake, R.E. (1995) The Art of Case Study Research. London : Sage Publications. Tsoukas, H. (1996) The Firm as a Distributed Knowledge System: a Constructionist Approach. Strategic

Management Journal, 17, pp. 11-25.

603

Ayse Kok

Tsoukas, H. (2009) A Dialogical Approach to the Creation of New Knowledge in Organizations. Organization Science, 20 (6), pp. 941-957.

Weick, K.E. (1998) Improvisation as a Mindset for Organizational Analysis. Organization Science, 9 (5), pp. 543- 555.

Weick, K.E. (1991) The Nontraditional Quality of Organizational Learning. Organization Science, 2 (1), pp. 116- 124.

Wenger, E. C. (1999) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

Wenger, E.C. (2000) Communities of Practice: The Key to Knowledge Strategy. In E. L. Lesser, M. A. Fontaine, J. A. Slusher (Eds.) Knowledge and Communities. Boston: Butterworth Heinemann, pp. 3-20.

Wenger, E. C. (2004) Communities of Practice and Social Learning Systems. In K. Starkey, S. Tempest, & A. McKinlay (Eds.) How Organizations Learn: Managing the Search for Knowledge. London: Thomson, pp. 238-258.

Wenger, E.C. & Snyder, W.M. (2000) Communities of Practice: The Organizational Frontier. Yin, R.K. (2003) Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

604

Copyright of Proceedings of the International Conference on Intellectual Capital, Knowledge Management &

Organizational Learning is the property of Academic Conferences, Ltd. and its content may not be copied or

emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.

However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.