Título Inglês:
Communities of practice: creating and sharing knowledge
Título Espanhol:
Comunidades de práctica: creación y acción de compartir el conocimiento
Resumo:
Este artigo tem como objetivo analisar as estratégias adotadas pelas Comunidades de Prática (CoP) em relação a criação e compartilhamento do conhecimento. O método utilizado foi o estudo de caso múltiplo. Os dados foram coletados através de entrevistas, análise de documentos e observação. As estratégias adotadas pelas CoPs são predominantemente focadas no compartilhamento do conhecimento e não na criação de conhecimento, o que pode influenciar diretamente na capacidade da empresa de inovar com base nas CoPs. Nas CoPs analisadas, a falta de suporte da empresa em relação às CoPs e a motivação predominantemente individual dos participantes são potenciais razões para a ênfase dada ao compartilhamento do conhecimento e não à criação do conhecimento. Com base na análise das CoPs, identificou-se que: O suporte da empresa influencia o foco da CoP na criação ou compartilhamento de conhecimento; O suporte da empresa influencia o tipo das atividades desenvolvidas pela CoP e os fatores que motivam os funcionários a participarem das mesmas; A motivação dos participantes influencia o foco da CoP em criar ou compartilhar conhecimento; As atividades da CoP influenciam o foco na criação ou compartilhamento do conhecimento; A confiança entre os membros da CoP influencia o foco na criação ou compartilhamento do conhecimento.
Resumo Inglês:
This study aims to analyze the strategies adopted by Communities of Practice (CoPs) in relation to the creation and sharing of knowledge. For this purpose, a multiple case study method was adopted. Data were collected through interviews, document analysis and observation. The CoP strategies were found to be predominantly focused on knowledge sharing rather than knowledge creation, which may directly influence the company’s capacity for CoP-based innovation. In the analyzed CoPs, the lack of appreciation of the CoPs shown by the company and the predominantly individually-based motivation for participating in the CoPs are both potential reasons for the emphasis given to knowledge sharing instead of knowledge creation. Based on the analysis of the CoPs, the following aspects were identified: The support of the company influences the focus of the CoP on knowledge creation and/or sharing; the support of the company influences the choice of activities in the CoP and the factors that motivate participation; the motivation of the participants influences the focus of the CoP on the knowledge creation and/or sharing; the activities of the CoP influence the focus on knowledge creation and/or sharing; the trust among the CoP members influences the focus on knowledge creation and/or sharing.
Resumo Espanhol:
Este artículo tiene como objetivo analizar las estrategias adoptadas por las Comunidades de Práctica (CoP) para crear y compartir el conocimiento. El método utilizado fue el estudio de caso múltiple. Los datos fueron recolectados mediante entrevistas, análisis de documentos y observación. Las estrategias adoptadas por las CoPs son predominantemente enfocadas en la acción de compartir conocimiento y no en la creación del conocimiento, lo que puede influenciar directamente en la capacidad de la empresa de innovar con base en las CoPs. En las CoPs analizadas, la falta de soporte de la empresa en relación a las CoPs y la motivación predominantemente individual de los participantes son potenciales razones para el énfasis dado a la acción de compartir el conocimiento y no a la creación del conocimiento. Basándose en el análisis de las CoPs, se identificó que: el soporte de la empresa influencia en el énfasis, por la CoP, en la creación o en la acción de compartir el conocimiento; el soporte de la empresa ejerce influencia en el tipo de actividades desarrolladas por la CoP y en los factores que motivan a los funcionarios a participar de ellas; la motivación de los participantes influencia en el foco de la CoP, en crear o compartir conocimiento; las actividades de la CoP tal como la confianza entre los miembros de la CoP influencian en el foco en la creación o en la acción de compartir el conocimiento.
Citação ABNT:
HARTUNG, K.; OLIVEIRA, M. Communities of practice: creating and sharing knowledge. Revista de Gestão, v. 20, n. 3, p. 407-422, 2013.
Citação APA:
Hartung, K., & Oliveira, M. (2013). Communities of practice: creating and sharing knowledge. Revista de Gestão, 20(3), 407-422.
Link Permanente:
http://www.spell.org.br/documentos/ver/30633/comunidades-de-pratica--criacao-e-compartilhamento-do-conhecimento/i/pt-br
Referências:
BARDIN, L. Análise de Conteúdo. Lisboa: Edições 70, 2008.
BHATT, G. D. Knowledge management in organizations: examining the interaction between technologies, techniques, and people. Journal of Knowledge Management, v. 5, n. 1, p. 68, 2001.
.
BISHOP, J.; BOUCHLAGHEM, D.; GLASS, J.; MATSUMOTO, I. Identifying and Implementing Management Best Practice for Communities of Practice. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, v. 4, p. 160-175, 2008. .
BROWN, J. S.; DUGUID, P. Structure and spontaneity: knowledge and organization. In: NONAKA, I.; TEECE, D. (Ed.). Managing Industrial Knowledge. London: Sage, 2001. p. 4467.
COAKES, E. Communities of Practice and Technology Support. In: COAKES, E.; CLARKE, S. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of communities of practice in information and knowledge management. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference, 2006.
DAVIS, J. G.; SUBRAHMANIAN, E.; WESTEMBERG, A. W. The "global" and the "local" in knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management, v. 9, n. 1, p. 101, 2005. .
DU PLESSIS, M. The strategic drivers and objectives of communities of practice as vehicles for knowledge management in small and medium enterprises. International Journal of Information Management, v. 28, n. 1, p. 61-67, 2008. .
FONTAINE, M. A.; MILLEN, D. R. Understanding the Benefits and Impact of Communities of Practice. In: HILDRETH, P. M.; KIMBLE, C. (Ed.). Knowledge networks: innovation through communities of practice. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Pub., 2004. 330p.
FORBES. The Global 2000. 2008. Disponível em: . Acesso em: 16 de jun. 2009.
HARRIS, T. Improving the Deal with Knowledge Management. KM World, v. 14, n. 10, p. S4, 2005.
HAYEK, F. A. The use of knowledge in society. American Economic Review, v. 35, n. 4, p. 519-530, 1945.
KIM, S.-J.; HONG, J.-Y.; SUH, E.-H. A diagnosis framework for identifying the current knowledge sharing activity status in a community of practice. Expert Systems with Applications, v. 39, n. 18, p. 13093–13107, 2012. .
KINGSTON, J. Choosing a Knowledge Dissemination Approach. Knowledge and Process Management, v. 19, n. 3, p. 160-170, 2012. .
KINNEY, T. Knowledge Management, Intellectual Capital and Adult Learning. Adult Learning, v. 10, n. 2, p. 2-4, 1998.
KRATZER, J.; ZBORALSKI, K.; LEENDERS, R. T. A. J. Interaction quality within communities of practice: contextual factors of utilising different communication media. Int. J. Networking and Virtual Organisations, v. 6, n. 2, p. 199-223, 2009. .
LAVE, J.; WENGER, E. Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. 138 p. .
LEE, C. C.; YANG, J. Knowledge value chain. Journal of Management, v. 19, n. 9, p. 783-793, 2000.
LEE, J.; SUH, E.; HONG, J. A maturity model based CoP evaluation framework: A case study of strategic CoPs in a Korean company. Expert Systems with Applications, v. 31, n. 6, p. 502-509, 2010.
LÓPEZ-NICOLÁS, C.; MEROÑO-CERDÁN, A. L. Strategic knowledge management, innovation and performance. International Journal of Information Management, v. 31, n. 6, p. 502-509, 2011. .
MACHADO, D. D. N. A dinâmica da criação e gestão do conhecimento: Um estudo de caso. Revista Administração, v. 5, n. 1, p. 56-71, 2006.
NONAKA, I.; TOYAMA, R. Criação do Conhecimento como Processo Sintetizador. In: TAKEUCHI, H.; NONAKA, I. (Ed.). Gestão do Conhecimento. Porto Alegre: Bookman, 2008. 320 p.
OECD. Guidelines for collecting and interpreting technological innovation data. 3. ed. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: Statistical Office of the European Communities, 2005. 162 p.
OECD. The measurement of scientific and technological activities: proposed standard practice for surveys of research and experimental development: Frascati manual 1993. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: Statistical Office of the European Communities, 1994. 261 p.
ROBERTS, J. Limits to Communities of Practice. Journal of Management Studies, v. 43, n. 3, p. 623-639, 2006. .
SUCHMAN, L. A. Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. 2. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
TEIGLAND, R. Communities of practice at an Internet Firm: Netovation vs. on-time performance. In: LESSER, E. L.; FONTAINE, M. A.; SLUSHER, J. A. (Ed.). Knowledge and communities: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2000. 151178. .
WENGER, E. C.; SNYDER, W. M. Communities of practice: the organizational frontier. Harvard Business Review, v. 78, n. 1, p. 139-145, 2000.
WENGER, E. Communities of practice: Learning as a social system. Systems thinker, v. 9, n. 5, p. 15, 1998a.
WENGER, E. Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1998b. 318 p. .
WENGER, E.; MCDERMOTT, R. A.; SNYDER, W. Cultivating communities of practice: a guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2002. 284 p.
WENGER, E.; WHITE, N.; SMITH, J. D.; ROWE, K. Technology for communities. In: CEFRIO (Ed.). Guide de mise en place et d’animation de communautés de pratique intentionelle. Québec: CEFRIO, 2005.
YIN, R. K. Estudo de caso: planejamento e métodos. 3. ed. Porto Alegre: Bookman, 2005.
ZBORALSKI, K. Antecedents of knowledge sharing in communities of practice. Journal of Knowledge Management, v. 13, n. 3, p. 90-101, 2009. .
