-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
1/156
Managing organizational communities
Jean-Charles Pillet
Toulouse Business School - IAE Toulouse
A dissertation
in fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Master of Research in Management Sciences
2012
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
2/156
Acknowledgements
I am especially grateful and would like to thank my academic supervisor on the side of IAE
Toulouse, Dr. Marion Fortin, for her invaluable support and encouragement along this
dissertation journey. Her sharp insights and thought-provoking conversations have greatly
contributed in my understanding of some theoretical and methodological issues that form the
backbone of this study. I was also able to receive advices from Dr. Denis Lacoste, on the
behalf of Toulouse Business School, and would like to thank him for this.
This project would not have been possible without the various forms of support and
encouragement that I was able to receive from the company for which this research was
conducted, and which, I believe, occur only in rare and fortunate circumstances. First, I would
like to thanks my company supervisor, Jan Krans, who has been instrumental in creating the
context and conditions for this study to take place. Moreover, I would like to express my
gratitude to my company manager, Yann Renou, who acknowledged several arrangements in
order for this project to be carried out in the best possible conditions. Finally, I would like to
thank all the participants that directly contributed to this project (users, experts, colleagues),
with a specific mention to Johan Louis and Thomas Goubin for their staunch enthusiasmthroughout this project.
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
3/156
Abstract
This research intends to clarify the dynamics that underpin intra-organizational knowledge
exchange processes. Theoretical challenges were identified in the literature and resulted in the
formulation of a research question, which can be formulated in these terms: "What factors
stimulate public knowledge exchanges in organizational communities?". Those exchanges
occur in a virtual space and are supported by computer technologies. The research question
does not make direct reference to this aspect because I make the assumption that technology
acceptance factors (e.g. Davis et al., 1989) do not directly impact knowledge exchange
behaviors1. The research question has remained relatively unchanged throughout this study.
I was given the opportunity to directly explore the research question through a six-month
immersion within the research environment. Two sets of psychosocial factors, that may elicit
public knowledge exchange, were identified: "relational" factors and "actualization
opportunity" factors. "Relational" factors directly reflect the social capital of a community,
and "actualization opportunity" factors account for the potential of a community to satisfy the
desire for personal and professional development of its member. Knowledge exchange was
apprehended from a knowledge-seeker and a knowledge-contributor perspective to account
for the two-sidedness of the construct. Based on this, I have developed a set of hypothesis that
led to the development of a research model.
It must be acknowledge that this research is confined within the specificities of its context. In
particular, this study is concomitant to the deployment of the a solution that supports the
development of the communities. Therefore, this dissertation is grounded in the embryonic
nature of its subject.
1Indeed, only 7% of a research conducted by KPMG (2000) mentioned technology as a barrier for the successful
implementation of KM initiatives.
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
4/156
Table of content
1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Research context .......................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Research strategy ......................................................................................................... 5
2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................... 7
2.1 Knowledge ................................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Knowledge processes .................................................................................................. 8
2.3 Online communities ................................................................................................... 12
2.4 Digital public goods ................................................................................................... 14
2.5 Summary and research question ................................................................................ 17
3 FIELD EXPLORATION .................................................................................................. 19
3.1 Preliminary observations ........................................................................................... 19
3.2 Qualitative pre-study ................................................................................................. 35
3.3 Summary and research direction ............................................................................... 48
4 THE RESEARCH MODEL ............................................................................................. 49
4.1 Summary of the tentative model ................................................................................ 49
4.2 Relational capital ....................................................................................................... 51
4.3 Actualization opportunities ........................................................................................ 68
4.4 Precautions ................................................................................................................. 78
5 DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................. 80
5.1 Limitations ................................................................................................................. 80
5.2 Managerial guidelines ................................................................................................ 82
5.3 Research directions .................................................................................................... 84
5.4 Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 86
6 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... I7 APPENDIX ..................................................................................................................... XII
7.1 Appendix to the observation .................................................................................... XII
7.2 Interview guide ........................................................................................................ XV
7.3 Interview transcriptions (categorized) ................................................................... XVII
7.4 Questionnaire ........................................................................................................ LVIII
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
5/156
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
6/156
Glossary of abbreviations and acronyms
CL = Community Leader
CM = Critical Mass
CSP = Community Support Professional
ESN = Enterprise Social Network
KIF = Knowledge-Intensive-Firm
KM = Knowledge Management
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
7/156
1
1 INTRODUCTION1.1Research context1.1.1 The organizationThe organization in which the case study was performed is an international information
technology services company with approximately 74,000 employees, operating in 42
countries. The knowledge-intensive-firm (KIF) (Starbuck, 1992) employs globally distributed
employees who generally do not get the opportunity to arrange face-to-face meetings due to
travel expenses and time efficiency. The organizational business is focused on the business
technology that powers progress and helps organizations to create their firm of the future.
Serving a global client base, it delivers hi-tech transactional services, consulting and
technology services, systems integration and managed services. With its deep technology
expertise and industry knowledge, the company works with clients across the following
market sectors: Manufacturing, Retail, Services, Public, Health & Transports, Financial
Services, Telecoms, Media & Technology and Energy & Utilities.
1.1.2 Background of the internal pilotIn February 2011, the Chief Executive Officer of the company announced the replacement of
in-house email usage by social software applications within three years time. By applying
new ways of working using innovative technologies for more efficient communication,
teamwork and team connectivity, the company aims improving communication flows and
knowledge capture. Ultimately, the company expects to improve it sales & delivery pipe,
quicken its decision making process and increase the overall well-being of its employees.
Those are the main drivers for the program. A change management program is conducted to
ensure these objectives are met internally. By the same token, the company hopes it will be
able to capitalize on this pioneer experience2. The company is a KIF dominated by human
capital over other types of capital (e.g. labour of financial) (Starbuck, 1972). An underlying
goal of the program is thus to capitalize on this internal experience for selling purpose. In
brief, this program aims at (a) reducing internal email usage to zero, (b) introducing
2Although similar actions exist, none has been conducted at such a scale (about 74 000 employees).
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
8/156
2
collaborative ways of working, (c) implement a new information technology solution and (d)
benefit from the experience acquired in leading the program.
The technology that would ensure that those objectives are achieved is a social media
technology called Enterprise Social Network (ESN). Out of a portfolio of several ESN
solutions, one was selected and implemented as a pilot. The pilot - which constitutes the field
of research - has been set-up in May 2012. Since then, the number of user has grown steadily
and a total of 1000 account within a month. From this pilot, the team in charge of the
deployment of the solution hopes to achieve the following:
Learn how to technically install, manage and administer a social solution Learn how to train and motivate employees to use it Learn how to measure the business impact of social platforms in real live situations Understand group dynamics and social behavior Learn from the experience of end users on the daily usage of such a platform
This research project will focus on answering questions that relate to the three last points.
More specifically, the underlying and initiating questions that are being asked in regards to
this project are the following:
How do people make use of the solution: What is the frequency of participation? Whatis the number of communities they belong to? What is the focus of their main
community? Who do they interact with (strangers or identified colleagues)?
The aim is to understand the concrete user behaviors. It will enable the company tocustomize the solution to align it with the need of its users.
What drives people to participate to the community: How do people feel about publicparticipation and its implications (increased visibility of participation)? Do they enjoy
helping others? Do people feel like they belong to an online collective? Do employees
like the idea of being more visible to the management?
The objective is to understand the psychosocial aspects that underpin publicparticipation in a business setting.
What are the benefits of using this new technology: How does it impact individualperformance and efficiency? Do information and knowledge flow more freely between
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
9/156
3
individuals? Do people develop working ties with each other? Is it better for the well-
being of the employees?
This will help the company identify the potential gaps between the expected and theactual benefits of an ESN solution regarding various dimensions (group performance,
knowledge flow, social network, climate).
1.1.3 Community structure and governanceTypes of communities
Due to the restricted number of possible users and to the objectives of the pilot, a selection
process took place to identify the communities that would be granted access to the ESN. The
selection process required each applicant community to fill in a form where it will give
information about their goals, size, digital deployment plans and expected business benefits
from participation. It is important to note that access to the test platform was controlled: not
every community could participate to the pilot and not everyone was directly granted access
should they belong to an accepted community.
There are currently two types of communities:
The so-called structured communities that correspond to the formal structure ofthe organization. There are four types of structured communities.
o Organization Units (lead by the manager of the unit)o Clients (lead by the contract manager in Service Line, or the Global
Account manager)
o Projects (lead by the project manager)o Distribution lists (lead by the owner of the distribution list)
The open communities that emerged from the needof the employees.Types of governance
The selection process in place required the community leaders to initiate a basic strategy for
managing their community. Three governance approaches were chosen that differ in the level
of training their leaders have received: the professional-supported communities (CSP), the
ambassador-supported communities, and the self-support communities. Approximately one
third of the communities were attributed to each governance type.
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
10/156
4
Community Support Professionals: A team of 8 specialized community managers wasbuilt. They are trained consultants that received a training of 3 days and have received
an internal certification to sell ESNs under the company's brand. 23 consultants
followed this workshop, of which the project team selected 8 people, based on
experience, personality and the grade they received at the test that followed the
workshop. These 8 CSPs received the role of helping new communities to
successfully onboard, build a community and work in a social way using ESN tooling
and supporting a new way of working(company document). The remaining 8 CSPs
took an additional training curriculum on the functionalities of the solution. This
training was given by the ESN solution provider. They would also participate in a so-
called community strategy workshop led by the ESN solution provider as well. The
CSP would get a budget to spend 8 hours a week on this support. The CSPs would be
assigned about a third of the pilot communities (based on community size).
Ambassadors: A team of 23 consultants has volunteered to receive a training andcertification. Each ambassador can support up to 3 communities. They would not get a
formal training on the solution, but where able to do online training. They did not
participate in the community strategy workshop. Unfortunately, many of them did
not follow the formal training, which lead to many cases where the end users had
better knowledge than the ambassador supposed to help them. It also turned out that
due to lack of incentives, there were no as prone to spend time on animating the
community as they initially were.
Self-supporting communities: The self-supported communities did not receive aformal help line. All of them were required to follow the online training on the
platform. If needed, they could rely on the online support that both CSP and
Ambassadors could provide directly on the platform. Most likely, this is a sufficient
coordination mechanism for teams below twenty members.
The role of community leader
A community manager is the voice of the company on the platform. The value of a
community leader lies in his or her ability to serve as a hub to connect managers and
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
11/156
5
employees across countries, to instill new ways of working through the use of ESNs and other
collaborative tools and to provide feedback to the internal teams.
The community leader is in charge of the well-being of his or her community. The community
leader is in charge of creating the initial content that will initiate participation. In the longer
run, he or she also has to monitor online conversations and identify valuable user generated
content. The community leader is a part of the formal structure of the company that ensures
that the content emerging from the online community is accurately provided to the appropriate
service line. He or she also has an operational support role for the users of the community that
he or she is in charge of, since the company had decided that there would not be a dedicated
helpdesk for the ESN. The community leader is also part of the change mechanism and must
identify and engage advocates and deliver training when and where needed. Besides, heor
she must take up the role of a representative for the community he manages and participate
in professional networking by interacting with peers and influencers & attending events.
Among the requirements for becoming a community leader stated in the job description is the
need to be a people-oriented person and the need to possess 360 Leadership skills. The
community leader needs to be someone who enjoys working hard and someone who thrives
on the excitement of a goal-oriented team. As implicitly stated in the job description, the
community leader has a role of high visibility with all his or her deeds observable on the
platform though his or her comments and postings. In order to encourage others to share their
views, he or she must love to write and enjoy sharing ideas with others. Lastly, the
community leader needs to be net savvy.
1.2Research strategyThe objective of this dissertation is to come up with a model that could be tested during future
research. The suggested model has been developed following an exploratory phase that
comprised of literature reviews and a qualitative pre-study (Quivy & Van Campenhoudt,
2006). For this research project, I was granted access to pilot solution that supports
knowledge exchange. I was thus able to quickly familiarize with the environment and
therefore discern the core issues that underpin public knowledge exchange activities.
Therefore, this research was conducted under conditions of participant observation (DeWalt
& DeWalt, 1998).
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
12/156
6
Fig. 1 - Summary of the research approach (inductive approach)
Research question
Literature review
(knowledge exchange)
Field Exploration
Company documents - Participative
observation - Auto-generated quantitative
data - interviews - literature
Theoretical model
development
Literature review
(construct-specific)
Identification of
measurement items
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
13/156
7
2 LITERATURE REVIEW2.1KnowledgeOrganizational theorists view knowledge as an organizational resource that provides asustainable competitive advantage because knowledge cannot be easily replicated (Grant,
1996). Organizational knowledge can therefore be considered as an asset for the firm, in
addition to other forms of capital (Quinn, 1992). In this vein, the term intellectual capitalhas
been coined. It refers to the "knowledge and knowing capability of a social collectivity, such
as an organization, intellectual community, or professional practice" (Nahapiet & Goshal,
1998).
There are three issues that surround the concept of knowledge. The first issue lies in the
distinction types of knowledge. Scholars and practitioners frequently make a distinction
between a practical, or experience-based form of knowledge versus a rather abstract and
reflective view of knowledge. This conceptual distinction aligns with Polanyi's identification
of two sorts of knowledge: explicit and tacit. They differ in the extent to which they can be
communicated and transferred (Polanyi, 1967; Brown & Duguid, 1991). Explicit knowledge
is a codified and can easily be communicated in formal language including grammatical
statements, mathematical expressions, specifications, and manuals. By contrast, tacit
knowledge is embedded in the experiences and the value system of the individual, which
makes it more difficult to articulate. This suggests that explicit and tacit knowledge are
conceptually different forms of knowledge; explicit knowledge does not encompass tacit
knowledge (and vice-versa) and one cannot convert the types of knowledge from one form to
another (Cook and Brown, 1999).
The second issue of interest relates to the most appropriate level of analysis for studyingknowledge processes. Knowledge processes can be studied at the individual level, the group
level or at the organizational level. Simon (1991) advances that organizational learning takes
place in "human heads", which directs the analysis to the individual level. Although the
individual level analysis helps to shed some light on the organizational learning process, it
fails the capture the social aspect of the learning process. Brown and Duguid (2001) proposed
that knowledge processes are dependent on social acceptance rather than individual
preferences. Others have argued that knowledge is a socially embedded concept; the exchange
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
14/156
8
of knowledge requires the presence of a shared understanding that may only be achieved
through the collective (Tsouka & Vladimirou, 2001). There also exist studies that analyzed
collective knowledge processes at the organizational level (e.g. Weick & Roberts, 1993). This
study adopts the group level of analysis. The group level of analysis is appropriate because
the study focuses on knowledge processes within communities on the ESN. In addition, the
group level of analysis enables us to study the social dynamics of knowledge processes, which
is an important aspect on the ESN.
The last issue with regards to the concept of knowledge lies in the distinction between itself
and information. There is no consensus over the conceptual difference between knowledge
and information. The mainstream view considers information to be flows of messages but
perceives knowledge as something embedded in the individuals and the collectives"beliefs,
commitment, perspectives, intention and action (Nonaka, 2006). Knowledge management
researchers tend to attach a higher value to knowledge as opposed to information (e.g. Alavi
& Leidner, 2001). The distinction between both is nevertheless limited from a practical point
of view (Wang & Noe, 2010). Information and knowledge will therefore be used
interchangeably in this dissertation.
2.2Knowledge processesA popular classification of knowledge processes within the literature focuses on the lifecycle
of knowledge within the firm (e.g., Alavi & Leidner, 2000; Davenport & Prusak, 1998).
There are essentially four knowledge processes in this classification: knowledge generation
(creation and knowledge acquisition), knowledge codification (storing), knowledge exchange
(knowledge sharing and seeking), and knowledge application. Although there are other
possible classifications of knowledge processes (e.g. see Nonaka, 1995), this one was chosen
for it relates more directly to tangible business practices, and is thus more pertinent to
practitioners.
Knowledge generationinvolves two main processes. The first process involves the discovery
and resolution of opportunities or problems, and the creation of innovation within an
organization (Gray & Chan, 2000; Matusik & Hill, 1998). The second process is knowledge
acquisition, which involves obtaining and integrating knowledge from external sources
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
15/156
9
(Davenport & Prusak, 1998). I found in the observations that people largely relied on
knowledge that is created within the confines of the organization. At this stage of maturity of
the pilot, members seldom post contributions from external sources, except for certain articles
that they may come across. This has been expressed by an interviewee: "For instance, I
happen to see an article on the web, a video or anything that may be of interest for some
community members, I might post this information [...]. More importantly, the interviews
confirmed that certain communities supported knowledge generation processes through the
exchange of opinions and views: "Quick answers from the right people [...] just so that the
right people can have an opinion on them." or "It was very beneficial because it's not just my
view and that other person's view, but a balanced view from other people involved".
Knowledge codificationis the translation of knowledge into text, drawings, presentation, etc.
for storage. I found that some communities used the ESN as a knowledge repository. On the
ESN, the knowledge codification process is embedded in other social process such
collaborative creation: "This document has been created, which was addressing how we are
positioning our services in the market. And basically, this was nothing less than an assemble
of Q&As and this is a living document" or "Document sharing [...] really is something that
enable collaboration. People will typically be curious, take a look, and react more easily
because of the ESN. Add a note, a comment, and possibly amend it, add a slide, etc."
Knowledge exchange refers to the sharing of task-related information and expertise and the
collaboration with others for the resolution of issues, the formulation of new concepts, or the
execution of policies and procedures (Cummings, 2004). The concepts of "knowledge
exchange" and "knowledge sharing" differ from one another, although they have been used
interchangeably in the literature (e.g. Cabrera et al., 2006). Knowledge exchange
encompasses knowledge sharing behaviors (or employees providing knowledge to others) as
well as knowledge seeking activities (or employees looking for knowledge from others).
Knowledge sharing by employees (or in the context of this dissertation, the members of a
community) constitutes the main way through which knowledge is generated and codified
(Wang & Noe, 2010). The main feature of the ESN solution is thus to propose a collaborative
space for knowledge exchange. Evidence of knowledge sharing behaviors in the virtual space
the ESN provides is not scarce. For instance, an interviewee mentioned the following: " We
are encouraging the people to post Q&A from their work into this community". The ESN is
an open communication platform that facilitates collective knowledge exchange "You can
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
16/156
10
have a consideration between two people and then others can see whats happening. And then
they might go in and say, you might want to know this and this".
Knowledge application refers to the actual use of knowledge that has been captured or created
within the ESN. I found examples of situations where there were direct applications of the
knowledge available within a given virtual space "I am essentially trying to get information
from them that Im using it for business and its about getting feedback and ideas about what
theyre actually doing on the platform."; "So we really have the possibility to quickly identify
how to solve a specific problem. It already happened, and it is interesting to see how the ESN
can support us."; "An ESN would allow [...] us to collaborate on that information creating a
bid document, for example, or preparing the actual proposal document.
The exchange of knowledge resources
The recent literature acknowledges that knowledge is a critical organizational resource that
provides a sustainable competitive advantage in a competitive and dynamic economy (e.g.,
Davenport & Prusak, 1998; Foss & Pedersen, 2002; Grant, 1996; Spender & Grant, 1996). An
individual's willingness to share his or her knowledge is an essential in order for the
organization to benefit from the knowledge he or she possesses. The use of knowledge-
management systems and the resource-based view literature suggests that knowledge is a
resource for the firm for it is valuable, rare, inimitable and non-substitutable (Barney, 1991).
This perspective nevertheless overlooks the value this knowledge has for an employee of the
firm, all knowledge workers. I define knowledge workers as "individuals who use information
or knowledge as a primary input or output of their job" (Ford & Staples, 2006). Through the
interviews I have conducted, I found evidence that knowledge is an individual asset that may
provide a competitive advantage for the individual (McLure & Faraj, 2000). One of these
advantages lies in the reputational asset of the person:
You obviously here think that knowledge is a power, or I don't know. Im quite
open to it I think it is quite important, I think, some people would obviously want to
go to that point where oh I know that, I can help you, look at me, Im brilliant.
When addressing the question about the reasons that may refrain people from sharing
information with other, one of the interviewee raised the likelihood of knowledge hoarding
behavior:
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
17/156
11
Because they are intimidated, because they do not see any interest in sharing,
because they do not want to show what they do, because they do not want it to be
used by other, because this is their knowledge and they do not want the rest to
benefit from it.
The discussion so far highlighted the value of knowledge both at the organizational and the
individual level. It can also be argued that knowledge is valuable to a community. The core
argument is that by contributing their personal knowledge to the community, members
incrementally accumulate information and knowledge, which eventually becomes an asset for
the community. With sufficient effort, a community may amass enough knowledge to
overcome issues related to information asymmetries, which in turn, may improve its
performance. Evidence that lend support to this idea exists in the qualitative phase study:
If we were able to answer to one persons questions, we were very sure that those
same problems may be occurring to somebody else and answering it once would
save a lot of time and effort.
There is very little activity in-between seminars, and especially very little vision on
what the rest of the group members are doing. As soon as we started using the ESN,
it prove to be the bond that allows our physical community to continue collaborating
as a virtual community.
[The community] is an element of all countries, all departments, all services, they
are all working in the market of [the community], globally. So in all countries that's
different, in one country the focus will be on consulting, in the other one it will be
on system integration, another one on managed services. Each country has a
different director for the specific service line, then for the country as well. It's very
complex to get everybody in touch with everybody and aligned, so that's the biggest
challenge.
Knowledge seekers may be able to find answers to their questions in the community and,
therefore, attach a certain value to the pool of knowledge available to them. Few empirical
studies have investigated knowledge value from the perspective of seekers; most studies have
focused on the sharing of knowledge by those who possess it (Ford & Staples, 2006).
Provided that knowledge seekers are the ones benefiting from the knowledge available in the
online community, the value of the pool knowledge available in a given community should be
assessed from their perspective. In the study context, the same individual can be both
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
18/156
12
knowledge seeker and knowledge contributor. He or she may rely on the community to find
advices in one instance, and contribute his or her own knowledge in another.
2.3Online communitiesThe concept of communities is of growing interest in the management literature since the
beginning of the 1990s. Communities are defined as a gathering of individualswho accept to
exchange voluntarily and on a regular basis about a common interest or objective in a given
field of knowledge (Amin and Cohendet, 2004). Several forms of communities have been
identified in the literature: communities of practice (Lave and Wenger, 1991), epistemic
communities (Cowan et al., 2000), communities of creation (Sawhney and Prandelli, 2000),
communities of innovation (Lynn et al., 1997), open source communities(von Hippel and von
Krogh, 2003), virtual cognitive communities (Bogenrieder & Nooteboom, 2004). The
conceptual definitions of community differ depending on the aspect of knowledge on which
they focus (Burger-Helmchen & Cohendet, 2011). For instance, epistemic communities
(Cowan et al., 2000) mostly focus on knowledge creation processes, while communities-of-
practice(Lave & Wenger, 1991) are concerned with the combination of existing knowledge.
In the following discussion, the concept of community-of-practice, or CoP, will first be
introduced. Next, some specificities of the study that the concept does not aptly capture will
be highlighted. Finally, to conclude the discussion, an introduction to alternative
conceptualizations will be provided.
A CoP is a work-related group of individuals who frequently participate in sharing and
learning activities that are built upon shared interest and issues (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Lesser
& Storck, 2001). Indeed, the communities that are studied in this dissertation are not direct
transpositions of the formal organizational structure; instead, they are organized around the
practices of the members who collaborate in them. This observation is consistent with the way
CoPs have been conceptualized in the literature. Further, CoPs have been distinguished in the
literature with regards to three aspects, which have direct implication for this research project:
They focus on a domain of shared interest. This implies that members of thosecommunities freely join and withdraw. Further, this presupposes that CoPs rely on the
intrinsic motivation rather than on extrinsic incentives to stimulate the participation of
their members.
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
19/156
13
Members engage in joint activities such as discussions, provision of help and sharingof information, through which they build relationships. This suggests that CoPs provide a
fertile ground for relational capital to develop. The concept of relational capital can be defined
as "the kind of personal relationship people have developed with each other through a history
of interactions" (Nahapiet & Goshal, 1998).
Over time, they develop a collection of experiences, stories, best practices, and waysof solving problems on which their members can rely when needed (Gray, 2004). This
element indicates that knowledge is collectively and dynamically created through the ongoing
interaction of community members. Therefore, the concept of CoP potentially provides an apt
framework for one to understand socially embedded knowledge exchange processes
(Nahapiet & Goshal, 1998, p. 246).
Important differences nevertheless exist between the concept of CoP (as defined in the
literature) and the practical observation I make of it throughout this study. First, Brown and
Duguid (1991; 2001) suggested that CoPs form networks that may extend beyond the confines
of the organization. The authors drew on findings from Orr (1990), who found that
communities are made of both suppliers and customers. In contrast, the communities I
investigate are confined within the boundaries of the organization. Second, Brown & Duguid
(2001) emphasized on the regular interactions that occur between communities, which
allowed for the information to freely flow within the organization. In contrast, in the context
of this study, it was observed that communities seldom interact with each other. This has been
confirmed in several interviews although most people adhere to several communities, they
focus their participation on one. This indicates that the boundaries in the virtual space are not
as permeable as the literature suggests. Third, CoPs have been conceptualized as emerging
social systems largely disengaged from the formal structure of the organization (Orr, 1990;
Brown & Duguid, 1991). More fundamentally, the investigated communities have been
created with the purpose of carrying out business tasks more efficiently (e.g. projects, bid
management), and their form and membership did not result from the process of the activities
(Brown & Duguid, 1991, p. 49). In addition, it appears that the role of community leader
sometimes overlaps with the function of the person in the organization. This slightly differs
from Orr's view that "the only real status is that of members" (Orr, 1990, p. 33).
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
20/156
14
The concept of CoPs was developed at a time when communication technologies were not
common in the company setting. An underlying assumption of the concept is that community
members are in the same physical location, and face-to-face communication is the form for
interaction. The concept of electronic network-of-practice extends the concept of CoP to
knowledge exchange processes that take place mainly through computer-mediated
communication technologies (Wasko & Teigland, 2004; Wasko & Faraj, 2005; Wasko et al.,
2009). It attempts to integrate the concept of virtual communities and the concept of CoP
(Rheingold, 1993). The concept is of interest because it accounts for the dynamics that
underlie participation in public good situations. For example, the concept takes into
consideration free-riding behaviors: "Knowledge contributors have no assurances that those
they are helping will ever return the favor, and lurkers may draw upon the knowledge of
others without contributing anything in return" (Wasko, 2005). Similar to virtual
communities, electronic networks-of-practice concern interactions taking place on the
Internet. In particular, it is assumed that members typically do not know each other in
electronic networks-of-practice. This greatly contrast with what I observed and with that
confirmed by the interviews.
To conclude, there seem to be a conceptual gap in the field in accounting for organizational
communities that use social technologies to coordinate and exchange knowledge. The term
online community will be used throughout this dissertation to refer to geographically
distributed workers from various organizational units, whose desire to connect in a common
virtual space is primarily motivated by the benefits they expect to derive from their
membership.
2.4
Digital public goodsWe previously supported the view that online communities constitute a collective pool of
knowledge on which they can rely for future needs. They achieve this outcome by aggregating
the participations of dispersed individuals in a virtual public space. The participation process
occurs when members respond to enquiries or exchange information with each other. It is
made available to other members, regardless of their level of participation. In fact, one is
typically unable to exclude other community members from benefitting from its information
pool. The pool of knowledge, therefore, shares the non-excludable attribute of classical public
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
21/156
15
goods. It also exhibits the characteristic of non-rivalry because the value of the pool of
knowledge does not decrease as more members access it. In the economics literature, public
goods are goods that yield the same benefit to all members of a community regardless of who
pays to produce these goods. Two important features distinguish a public good from a private
one: non-rivalry and non-excludability. The non-rivalrous nature of the public good means
that consumption of the good by one individual does not reduce the total amount that is
available for consumption (Shmanske 1991). Non-excludability implies that once the good is
provided, it is not possible to exclude anyone from consuming it (Head, 1962).
The main challenge that one faces in the production and maintenance of public goods, and
more generally in any collective action, is to provide enough incentive to make people
participate. Indeed, assuming the user of a public good is rational (i.e. seeks to maximize his
or her net benefit), there is little incentive for contributing to the provision of the good: access
to the content of the public good is not contingent on participation in its provision because of
the non-excludable nature of the good. This situation where an individual benefits from
others contribution to provision and maintenance of the good, is commonly known as "free-
riding" (Sweeney, 1973). As an individual can benefit from the public good whether or not he
contributes to it, and since contribution is costly to the individual, it is in his or her best
interest to free-ride. Therefore, under the assumption of pure rationality of its members,online communities are deemed to failure. Indeed, online communities rely on the
participation of their members to provide the collective pool of knowledge that is assimilated
to a public good.
In reality, however, I do observe situations where public goods are privately provided and
maintained. In order to explain the provision of public goods in such situations, scholars have
proposed alternative theories. The theory of collective action relaxes the assumption of
individualism rooted in classical public goods theories in order to better reflect the reality of
public good provision3. In his analysis, Olson (1965) provides a typology of groups. He
distinguished between the privileged, the intermediate and the latent type of groups. The
distinction lies in the level of coordination required to achieve collective action. On one end
3Specifically, Olson (1965) builds his theory on the assumption that an individual's decision is influenced by the
decisions made by others (sequential interdependence), whereas initial public goods theories assume that the
agents make their decision without the interference of others (independence).
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
22/156
16
of the spectrum, there are theprivilegedgroups, which are characterized by the willingness of
some - if not all - members to bear the burden associated with the provision of a public good.
On the other end, there are the latentgroups, which are too large to be able to provide enough
incentives for individuals to contribute to the public good provision because individual
actions are not noticeable to others. In the middle, there are the intermediategroups, which
may be able to attain public good provision through some form of group coordination.
Privileged groups were considered as unusual exceptions (most public goods required
coordinated action) until the advent of online interaction.
Our discussion so far brings support to the relevance of the framework provided by public
goods theory. The term digital public good may thus be introduce to account for the public
goods dynamics that underlie the provision of the knowledge pool in the virtual space. Indeed,
important similarities exist between physical public goods a digital public goods; in contrast,
noticeable differences may also be raised (Kollock, 1999). The following table account for
some of these aspects:
Tab. 1 - Similarities and differences between physical and digital public goods
Similarities Differences
There is a lack of visibility over members'
contributions
The cost for coordinating and contributing are
drastically reduced in the online space (Gurak, 1997)
Contributions are not forced but based on the free will
of the members
Psychological and technological barriers may exist at
the individual level that may impede public
participation (e.g. confidence in expressing one-self in
public)
Participants differ in the amount of resource they are
willing to contribute
Individuals participate for a variety of reasons that
may not directly be linked to the completion of the
public good (e.g. reputational gain)
Participants have heterogeneous interest in
contributing the public good
Even if they are willing to contribute, some may not be
able to due to their lack of knowledge on the subject
matter of the community
Digital public goods are highly mobile and can be
replicated indefinitely at almost no cost
Empirical studies have tested the relevance have tested the relevance of the framework
provided by public goods theories in situations similar to those one may encounter in an
online community. Overall, findings were highly supportive. In the late 80's, Thorn and
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
23/156
17
Connolly (1987) organized a series of lab experiments consisting of several rounds during
which 4 to 8 students were to share information on a centralized electronic platform. They
found that discretionary information was undersupplied to the detriment of the participants
under public good circumstances (i.e. contribution is costly; participation is not mandatory;
information is freely available to all). In a similar vein, Rafaeli and La Rose (1993) applied
theories of public good and mass communication to the online context offered by electronic
bulletin boards (the precursors of the forums). The results indicate that the diversity of content
between participants were the most important predictors of the bulletin board system's
success. These factors were found to be more critical than the management policies
implemented by system operators (i.e. time and contribution restrictions). Constant et al.
(1994) made an additional critical step towards establishing the contribution to an information
pool as a social dilemma rather than a personal preference by introducing the logic of
knowledge ownership in their experiments on knowledge sharing. The study shows that when
the information shared is perceived to be owned by the organization, people tend to give more
weight to the collective benefit that the information sharing generates and less weight to the
personal cost they incur from doing so. The changes in attitude that Constant et al. (1994)
highlight in their experiment are another step towards linking the public goods and online
community knowledge.
2.5Summary and research questionThe discussion in the preceding sections has shown that the challenges faced in the provision
of a public good are relevant to knowledge processes in online community. In particular, two
different challenges have been identified. The first challenge relates to the issue of
motivation: what can one do to get individuals contribute their knowledge to the community
when it is rational to free-ride? The second challenge concerns the coordination within thecommunity: assuming that all members are willing to contribute their knowledge to the
community, who will bear the costs of coordinating their actions efficiently? Those two
questions provide the theoretical foundations of this research project. Some of the challenges
that present themselves in addressing the two questions include:
Motivational challenge: What are the mechanisms that drive members participation?How do people feel about publicly sharing their valuable knowledge? Are there
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
24/156
18
business-specific factors that may hinder or enhance the provision of the collective
pool of knowledge?
Coordination challenge: Do online communities coordinate naturally or do they relyon the organization for doing so? What is the role of the community leader/manager in
this process? Are coordination costs still relevant in the online context?
Ultimately, the research question can be formulated as: "What factors stimulate public
knowledge exchanges in organizational communities?".
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
25/156
19
3 FIELD EXPLORATIONThe exploration phase seeks to achieve a better understanding of the subject of study, as well
as identify the best way to approach it (Quivy & Van Campenhoudt, 2006). This phase
combines:
The analysis of several company documents (e.g. community requests for joining); A participative observation through a presence on the pilot; The analysis of a set of quantitative data reflecting the activity on the pilot; The examination of a set of 10 exploratory interviews.
3.1Preliminary observationsNota: The figures provided in this chapter date from 23 of July, 2012 - on average one monthafter community opening.
3.1.1 Introducing the communitiesAmong the communities on [esn], six of them were identified, with the help of the company
tutor. These communities are namely the Global Cloud Solution Community, the UK&I Zero
Emails Ambassadors, the Juniors Group, the Zumtobel Service Support Team, the UK mobile
BYOD Trial and the Global Markets & Sales Financial Services community. These virtual
communities have been identified within the pilot based on two distinguishing features.
Firstly, these communities provide platforms that are conducive for knowledge and
information sharing. Secondly, they support operational needs and/or idea generation and
therefore have a direct value for the company. In this section, I conduct a preliminary analysis
in order to provide a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of these communities.
Before commencing the analysis, I would like to provide an overview of the six successful
virtual communities in terms of the type activity they support and content they provide. Tab. 2below summarizes the key characteristics of these communities.
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
26/156
20
Tab. 2 - Community overview
Global
Cloud
Solution
Community
UK&I Zero
email
ambassador
s
Juniors
Group
Zumtobel
Service
Support
Team
UK Mobile
BYOD Trial
Global
Markets &
Sales
Financial
Services
Opening date 29-may 15-june 18-june 04-june 12-july 13-june
Size* 53 20** 39 50** 137 202
Community
type
Organization
al unit
Distribution
list
Organization
al unitClient Project
Organization
al unit
Support type Ambassador AmbassadorNot
supported
Not
supported
Not
supportedCSP
Access rights PrivateMembers
onlyPrivate
Members
onlyPrivate Private
* as of 23rd of July / ** Estimated
Global Cloud Solution Community (53 members): The main objective of the Global Cloud
Solution community is to provide a platform for its members to exchange information and to
collaborate on Cloud Computing offers and services. It is driven by the business need to
increase sales revenues through innovating in the products and services that relate to the
Cloud Computing technology. Besides acting as a platform for the exchange of ideas and
collaboration, the community also provides members with an avenue for sharing documents.
A number of documents, such as client presentations and proposals, are made available in the
community. The community members are then able to reuse these documents by adapting
them to their clients context. A summary of the biweekly meetings of the Global Cloud
Business team is also made available solely on the platform. Other items that can be found in
the community include valuable tools, such as an excel price calculator. Employees can obtain
membership for this community via approval/invitation. The viewing of content and
participation in discussions is limited to only members of the community.
Content example [type of knowledge]: MASS storage capacity and IOPS calculatorv11 [explicit], Collaboration With University College of XXX. Cloud innovation
programs [tacit], Cloud offering -Presentation for a Chinese company [explicit].
UK&I Zero email ambassadors (20 members estimated): This community aims to facilitate
communication between the members of the Zero Email program in the UK-Ireland region.
This community provides a space where members can give their views and exchange ideas on
https://jazzplt.atos.net/thread/1954https://jazzplt.atos.net/thread/1954 -
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
27/156
21
topics related to the introduction and use of the ESN. An example of such a topic would be
how ESN will impact the workplace in the future. Although the formation of this group is
not driven by business requirements, the creation of a pool of people who possess some level
of knowledge and expertise in the field of Enterprise 2.0 is always valuable for a knowledge
intensive firm that derive revenues from selling related technologies and services. Unlike the
Global Cloud Solution community, viewing of the content posted on the UK&I Zero email
ambassadors community is not restricted to the ambassadors4. This means that everyone that
has an account on [esn] can potentially view the discussions on the community. Participation,
however, is restricted to people who have joined the community.
Content example [type of knowledge]:How Zero Email has been helping me workbetter...[tacit], Some basics to get started [tacit].
Juniors Group (39 members): The Juniors Group is restricted to the 40 young employees that
have been identified as the talents who will serve as the future leaders of the company. An
important purpose of this group of employees is to work together on small international
projects that generate direct benefits to the business. Thus, the main objective of the
community is to provide them with an environment where they can work collaboratively. An
additional objective of the community is to create a strong global Talent Community in order
to attract and retain the talents of the company.
Zumtobel Service Support Team (50 members estimated): Zumtobel is a major customer of
the company. This community space aims to enable the exchange of knowledge, creation new
ideas and the facilitation of global collaboration regarding the Zumtobel Services. Technical
or quality issues are openly discussed. Membership to open to anyone on the platform.
Similar to the UK&I Zero email ambassadors community, non-members can view the content
posted in the community; however, users would have to become members of the community
before they can participate.
Content example [type]: GZ:I2751179 - SAPGUI 720 and Dual Monitors [tacit],WLAN problems with EliteBook 2560p - lost WLAN profiles [tacit], Service quality
issues July 2012 [tacit].
UK Mobile BYOD Trial (137 members): This community reflects the desire from project
leaders to pioneer the transposition of workflows on an ESN platform. Indeed, this virtual
4For more information on the role of community ambassador, see 1.1.3. Community structure and governance.
https://jazzplt.atos.net/groups/uki-zero-e-mail-amabassadors/blog/2012/07/30/how-zero-email-has-been-helping-me-work-betterhttps://jazzplt.atos.net/groups/uki-zero-e-mail-amabassadors/blog/2012/07/30/how-zero-email-has-been-helping-me-work-betterhttps://jazzplt.atos.net/groups/uki-zero-e-mail-amabassadors/blog/2012/07/30/how-zero-email-has-been-helping-me-work-betterhttps://jazzplt.atos.net/message/4418#4418https://jazzplt.atos.net/message/4418#4418https://jazzplt.atos.net/message/6075#6075https://jazzplt.atos.net/message/6075#6075https://jazzplt.atos.net/message/6075#6075https://jazzplt.atos.net/thread/2411https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-3392https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-3392https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-3392https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-3392https://jazzplt.atos.net/thread/2411https://jazzplt.atos.net/message/6075#6075https://jazzplt.atos.net/message/4418#4418https://jazzplt.atos.net/groups/uki-zero-e-mail-amabassadors/blog/2012/07/30/how-zero-email-has-been-helping-me-work-betterhttps://jazzplt.atos.net/groups/uki-zero-e-mail-amabassadors/blog/2012/07/30/how-zero-email-has-been-helping-me-work-better -
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
28/156
22
community is part of a broader project that aims to provide users of their own mobile device
(smartphone) with a formal framework of appropriate work usage. As there were no existing
policies that regulate the use of personal mobile devices for work purposes, staff from
different departments (HR, legal, business) drafted a new policy. This new policy was then
posted on the community in order to obtain feedbacks from the community members. Users
had to like the preliminary version of the policy before they were allowed in the virtual
community. The policy was refined, over the course of a month, based on the feedbacks
provided by the members of the community. The policy is targeted for official release three
months after the first round of feedback collection. The project leader chose to use the ESN
over other communications tools for this purpose, as it is the only platform that provides a fast
and interactive space of communication. Apart from collecting feedbacks on the new policy,
the community also acts as a sort of help desk; the community provides members with access
to several technical guides that help users with the installation applications on their
smartphones.
Content example [type]: Apple Setup Guide [tacit], Android Email Setup Guide[tacit], Applying an upgrade to an Andriod phone [tacit]
Global Markets & Sales Financial Services (202 members): Similar to the Global Cloud
Solution Community, this group aims to create a faster and more efficient organization. By
connecting people on the ESN, duplicative work can be reduced. Also, the community
facilitates the identification of experts, or knowledge carriers, among the 15 000 people that
constitute this service line. The community aims to create a common space where employees
from 15 countries can gather and interact. The community leader grants access to the
community on demand, after examining the individuals motivation to join the community.
Profiles of the community members range from account executives to anyone that works for a
client in the financial industry. It is important to note that the community access settings were
shifted from public to private due to free-riding behaviors.
Community focus
Having looked at some of the basic characteristics of the communities, I will now discuss the
community focus. Seven typical types of activities were identified in order to clarify the
overall orientation of the community. These activity types have been developed jointly with a
https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-1882https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-1882https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-1986https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-1986https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-1986https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-1986https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-1986https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-1986https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-1986https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-1986https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-1986https://jazzplt.atos.net/docs/DOC-1882 -
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
29/156
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
30/156
24
Tab. 3 - Community focus
Global
Cloud
Solution
Community
UK&I Zero
email
ambassadors
Juniors
Group
Zumtobel
Service
Support
Team
UK Mobile
BYOD Trial
Global
Markets &
Sales
Financial
Services
Community
type
Organization
al unit
Distribution
list
Organization
al unitClient Project
Organization
al unit
Operational
focus4 4 5 4 5 4
Communication
focus5 2 3 5 3 5
Collaboration
focus5 2 4 1 4 4
Knowledge
sharing focus4 4 1 2 5 5
Innovation
focus4 5 3 2 5 4
Collective
intelligence
focus
2 3 3 5 2 3
Socialization
focus3 2 5 1 1 3
As can be observed in Tab. 3., the selected communities have very diverse orientations. This
is because each of them pursues diferent aim(s) and objective(s). As a result, the activity that
the ESN supports is very different in each community.
Although the communities differ in their community focus on the whole, they do display
some level of similarities. One similarity in the community focus is that all the communities
have a strong operational focus (with a rating of 4 or 5).
Another observation that can be made is that most communities, with the exception of the
Juniors Group, have moderate or low focus on socialization. The high socialization focus of
the Juniors Group may be a result of the groups objective to create a strong global talent
community that will help to attract and retain new talents. In fact, the Junior Groupseeks to
intensify the interaction between its members in order to create a high sense of community
between them. The Junior Group meets two times a year during seminars, but its members
have difficulties keeping in touch aside from those physical encounters. An underlying benefit
of the ESN for this community is therefore to enhance the sense of belonging of its members
by increasing their level of interaction.
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
31/156
25
In addition to the aforementioned, the communities are also somewhat similarly in terms of
their collective intelligence focus. Besides the Zumtobel Service Support Team, all
communities indicate a moderately weak focus on collective intelligence (a rating of 2 or 3).
The strong focus on collective intelligence may be due to the purpose of the community to
provide service support to a major client. Given the importance of the client, the group would
likely need to leverage on the collective expertise of all its members in order to formulate the
best solution for its client.
Apart from the similarities that are apparent across all the communities, there also exist some
similarities between specific communities. For example, the Global Cloud Solution
Community, the Zumtobel Service Support Team and the Global Market & Sales Financial
Servicesall possess very strong communication focus, while the other three communities have
moderately weak communication focus. One reason for the strong communication focus of
these communities is the physical dispersion of the team members. Both the Global Cloud
Solution Communityand Global Market & Sales Financial Serviceshave employees located
all across the globe. [esn] provides an excellent communication platform; it ensures that
everyone in the community has the same information, regardless of the individuals
geographical location. In addition, both the Global Cloud Solution community and the
Financial Services community aim to reduce duplicative tasks over geographical units inorder to improve the performance of the overall organizational unit. The ESN enables them to
reduce the asymmetries of information inherent to simultaneous operations on a global scale.
Another example of similarities between groups can be found in terms of the knowledge
sharing focus. The Global Cloud Solution Community, UK&I Zero email ambassadors, the
UK Mobile BYOD Trialand the Global Market & Sales Financial Servicesall display a high
level of knowledge sharing focus. This is not surprising because all of these communities
make use of the ESN as a platform for sharing of both explicit knowledge (in terms of
documents, manuals etc.) and tactic knowledge (through sharing of experiences and
discussions) as I have discussed earlier. These four communities also share a high innovation
focus, which may have possibly resulted from the nature of the issues that they are concerned
with. Both the UK Mobile BYOD Trialand the UK&I Zero email ambassadors communities
are embedded in larger projects that will lead to something new for the company: a new
policy and a new way of working. Given the unprecedented nature of these projects, members
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
32/156
26
would most likely need to be innovative in developing the projects and addressing the
possible issues.
Community profile
Having looked at the community focus, I will now analyze the community profiles. In this
analysis, community profile comprises of three aspects degree of specialization of topics
discussed, geographical diversity of the community and job scope diversity of the community
members.
Degree of specialization: The topics being discussed within the communities were assessed in
terms of their degree of specialization. The coding resulted - whenever possible5 - from a
thorough observation of the contents that were made available on the community and of thetopics that were discussed. Some communities collaborated around the technical topics that
relate to the field of information systems and members would need to be highly specialized in
the field to understand the discussion. Other groups exchanged views on topics, such as how
the workplace is likely to change with the arrival of the ESN solutions, which do not require a
specific expertise (coded as low degree of specialization community).
Geographical diversity:In order to measuregeographical diversityof the community,a proxy
was created. This proxy was constructed based on the office location of the five most active
participants. When there was only one country represented among those people, the
geographical diversity was coded as low. When the five most active participants had their
offices located in two or three different countries, the geographical diversity was coded as
medium (mid). If there are more than four countries represented, thegeographical diversityis
high.
Job Scope Diversity: A proxy forjob scope diversity was constructed in a similar fashion. The
proxy was created based on the profiles of the five most active participants of each
community. The functions of these participants within the company were then compared in
order to evaluate the extent to which they overlap. When the roles were similar (different), the
job scope diversitywas rated as low (high).
5Although I might be part of the Talent group one day, I was not granted access to the Juniors Group due to thehighly restricted access of this community.
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
33/156
27
Although there are issues in generalizing the attributes of five members to the whole
community, it may be argued that those people reflect the orientation of the community rather
accurately. Indeed, they are the ones that, through their contributions, shape and determine the
direction the entire community. Tab. 4 provides an overview of the community profiles.
Tab. 4 - Community profile
Global
Cloud
Solution
Community
UK&I Zero
email
ambassador
s
Juniors
Group
Zumtobel
Service
Support
Team
UK Mobile
BYOD
Trial
Global
Markets &
Sales
Financial
Services
Degree of
specialization Mid-High Low Low High Low Mid-High
Geographical
diversity High Low High Mid Low-Mid High
Job scope
diversity Mid High High Low High High
The degree of specialization of a community is a function of both the topic that is being
discussed in the community, and its purpose. For instance, whereas the Cloud Computing
topic can get quite technical, the purpose of the Global Cloud Solutioncommunity is not todiscuss the IT aspects but rather the services that the technology can provide. The low level of
technicality in the purpose of the community mitigates the high level of technicality of the
topics. A lower degree of specializationreduces the barrier to join the community because it
can potentially interest a broader audience. Moreover, members of these communities do not
need to be specifically knowledgeable on the subject matters that are being discussed;
therefore, they may feel more inclined to participate. Both the UK Mobile BYOD Trialand the
UK&I Zero email ambassadors communities fall into this category. On the other end of the
spectrum, there are communities within which specialized topics that are being discussed.
This de factoconfines active participation to employees with technical profiles, which will be
discussed in the later when I talk aboutjob scope diversity.
Certain communities enjoy the participation of active members whose offices are scattered
across different countries. Because they are exposed to different environments (clients,
culture, practices), the members of geographically scattered communities are more likely to
have different views and opinions on the topics that are being discussed. By definition, the
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
34/156
28
UK Mobile BYOD Trialand the UK&I Zero email ambassadorscommunities do not involve
many individuals beyond the Great Britain region. On the other hand, the most active
members of both Global Cloud Solutionand theFinancial Servicescommunities come from
various part of the world.
The job scope diversityof a community reflects the heterogeneity of roles among the most
active members of the community. As noted above, this variable is negatively correlated with
the degree of specialization of the community. Technical discussions tend to attract
individuals with similar job profiles. The Zumtobel Service Support Team community
epitomizes this type of community: active participants are either desk members or server team
leader. On the contrary, the UK Mobile BYOD Trialand the UK&I Zero email ambassadors
communities attract a broader population with more diverse profiles (Heads of, Principles,
HR, BD Managers, etc.). Lastly, the aim of theJuniors Groupis to enable young people with
heterogeneous backgrounds to work together on projects that do not require a specific level of
expertise. By definition, the members of this group have very diverse profiles.
Activity level
In order to understand the dynamics of participation within the communities, it is essential to
take a look at how active it is. Activity in the online context can take several forms. Some of
them are described below:
Size: only takes into account the active users that browsed the content of thecommunity.
Average daily connections: average daily active member count from starting date -aside from the weekends.
Total contributions: amount of content available in the community Average user participation: total number of contributions divided by the number of
active users.
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
35/156
29
Tab. 5 - Activity level
Global
Cloud
Solution
Community
UK&I Zero
email
ambassador
s
Juniors
Group
Zumtobel
Service
Support
Team
UK Mobile
BYOD
Trial***
Global
Markets &
Sales
Financial
Services
Size* 53 20** 39 50** 137 202
Average
daily
connections
5 10 12 17 37 15
Total
contributions85 26 19 112 30 110
Average user
participation1,6 1,3** 0,5 2,2** N.A. 0,5
* as of 23rd of July / ** Estimate / *** based on one week of activity
Communities greatly differ in their sizes. There are 85 active members in them on average,
but the Financial Services community accounts for 10 times the amount of people in the
UK&I Zero email ambassadors community. It is interesting to note that the size of a
community is not necessarily reflected in the average number of daily connections: there are
as many people who connect to the Zumtobel Service Support Team and the Financial
Servicescommunities, although the latter accounts for four times the size of the former. The
average user participation is below one for certain communities. This, however, cannot be a
proxy of community success. The community focus must also be taken into account. For
instance, both the Global Cloud Solutioncommunity and the Zumtobelgroup emphasize on
the communication aspect of the tool (communication focus= 5). This is likely to lead to a
higher number of posts with fewer content. In that regard, the UK&I Zero email ambassadors
community stands out for it maintains a high participation ratio while the contributions are not
prompted by communicative purposes (communication focus= 2).
Characteristics of the critical mass of active users
It is commonly agreed that the critical mass of active users represents those users who are the
most actively contributing to the community. In other words, they are members that account
for most of the content created within a group. Two variables were used to evaluate the
impact of the critical mass of active users for each of the communities:
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
36/156
30
CM 90%: This variable commutes the number of users who account for about 90% ofthe content that is created within the community. A CM 90%ratiowas then computed
in order to see what proportion of active users this critical mass represents. CM 90%
Ratio= CM 90% / Size.
CM Top 3: For this variable, the critical mass corresponds to the three most importantcontributors of the community. This variable accounts for the proportion of content
that is created within the community by those three people solely. It reflects the impact
of the three most active participants on the community activity.
Tab. 6 - Critical mass of active users
Global
CloudSolution
Community
UK&I Zero
emailambassador
s
JuniorsGroup
Zumtobel
ServiceSupport
Team
UK Mobile
BYODTrial***
Global
Markets &
SalesFinancial
Services
Size* 53 20** 39 50** 137 202
Total
contributions85 26 19 112 30 110
CM 90% 10 17 8 28 19 26
CM 90% ratio 19% 85%** 21% 56%** 14% 13%
CM Top 3 44% 27% 53% 36% 27% 23%
* as of 23rd of July / ** Estimate / *** Based on one week of activity
The UK&I Zero email ambassadorsaccounts for the smallest critical mass. Indeed, 90% of
the content created in this group resulted from the joint effort of 17 people, or 85% of the
members. This surprising result may be due to the specificity of this community which
gathers individuals who share the characteristic of being committed to the ESN program.
The Global Cloud Solution, the Juniors Groupand the UK Mobile BYOD Trialhave nearly
20% of their users accounting for 90% of the content generated in their group. Yet,
interestingly, the three most active participants of both the UK Mobile BYOD Trialand the
Financial Services community only account for a fourth of the total contributions. This
proportion rises to a half for the Global Cloud Solution and the Juniors Group. These two
communities, therefore, prove to be the least balanced of all the communities in terms of
activity distribution across members.
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
37/156
31
Knowledge orientation
There are three types of content that can be found on the platform, each with a distinctive set
of characteristics. Each and every contribution that has been made falls into in one of those
three categories. These three content types and how they are likely to be used are discussed
below.
Documents: One important type of documents that can be found in these communities is
PowerPoint presentation. PowerPoint presentations are a major tool for consulting firms like
the one in which this research is being conducted. Depending on the community, they may
represent a large proportion of the uploaded content. Other types of documents from the
Microsoft Office suite, such as Word and Excel, are also disseminated on the platform. In
addition, one can find PDF versions of the instruction manuals for using the ESN and Wikis -
documents created collaboratively. Regardless of their types or nature, these documents are
readily available to all community members, who are then able to utilize them to meet their
needs. Documents share the major characteristics of the explicit form of knowledge.
Discussion messages: Whenever a user posts a question, it will take the form of a discussion.
Subsequent interactions will also take this form. The posting of a document may also trigger
comments from users. These discussion messages may seek clarification on the document, or
offer clarifications on a query. In other words, discussions messages attempt to verbalize what
is not said explicitly in the document or previous message. There may also be discussions
around ideas and topics of interests, whereby knowledgeable community members would
share their personal experiences with others. Discussions, therefore, share the major
characteristics of the tacit form of knowledge.
Blog posts: Some users on the platform seize the unique opportunity to express their view
through blog posts. These members make the effort to articulate their ideas in order to shed
the light on topics they are interested in. Expert users may ideally use this functionality as a
means of sharing their knowledge on a certain subject. Blogs are inherently interactive,
allowing visitors to leave comments and messages. Like documents, blogs generally produce
topic-specific discussions. They can, therefore, be affiliated to a rather tacit form of
knowledge.
As discussed, the content produced within a community can be classified as either an explicit
form of knowledge (Documents), or a tacit form of knowledge (Discussion messages and
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
38/156
32
Blog posts). Each piece of contribution was coded in this fashion, leading to the creation of
the following variables:
Knowledge pool (or Total Contributions): This variable measures the amount ofcontent available in the community. It is directly extracted from the platform's
statistics.
Knowledge orientation: This ratio accounts for the proportion of tacit knowledge overexplicit knowledge. Formula = (Discussion messages count + Blog posts count) /
Documents count. A value of 1 means that there are as much discussions and blogs as
documents in the community. A value of 2 means that there are twice as much
discussions and blogs as documents in the community.
Knowledge trend: The knowledge orientation of the community was calculated againone month after it was first captured in order to see if there was any change in it. The
knowledge trendreflects changes in the knowledge orientation of the community over
a month. = knowledge orientation remained stable; = knowledge orientation leant towards the
tacit form of knowledge; = knowledge orientation leant towards the explicit form of knowledge.
Tab. 7 - Knowledge orientation
Global
CloudSolution
Community
UK&I Zero
emailambassador
s
JuniorsGroup
Zumtobel
ServiceSupport
Team
UK Mobile
BYOD
Trial (one
week of
activity)
Global
Markets &
Sales
Financial
Services
Knowledge
pool85 26 19 112 30 110
Knowledge
orientation0,2 12,0 2,8 10,2 2,3 0,3
Knowledge
trend NA
There are important differences between the communities in terms of the type of content they
post. The UK&I Zero email ambassadors and the Zumtobel Service Support Team make
extensive use of discussions messages and blog posts, as opposed to documents, to exchange
knowledge. There are approximately 10 times more discussions than documents within these
communities. Further analysis is required to understand why those communities are
conducive for the creation of tacit forms of knowledge. The Juniors Group and the UK
Mobile BYOD Trialcommunities prove to be more balanced in their knowledge repartition:
-
8/13/2019 Managing Organizational Communities_Jean-Charles Pillet
39/156
33
2,5 discussions for 1 document on average. Finally, the Global Cloud Solution and the
Financial Servicescommunity have produced more documents than discussions messages and
blog posts. This is potentially because of their focus in reducing asymmetries of information,
which requires the sharing of a large number of documents that concern the activity of the
organizational unit.
3.1.2 Summary of the preliminary observationsThe sample of 6 communities that has been studied is highly heterogeneous in essence. Their
focus differs greatly from one to another; this affects the actual behavior of its members in
terms of participation patterns.
Some communities prove to be highly diverse in terms of their pool of members. This
diversity was analyzed in terms of geographical locations and job profiles of members coming
from various parts of the organization. Previous research has shown that crossing
geographical and organization boundaries are likely to allow for exposure to diverse sources
of information and knowledge (Cummings, 2004). This is because they operate in a different
culture and rely on different formal requirements, industry requirements, or standard
operating procedures. From a theoretical perspective, innovation arises from the novel
combination of disparate information and work practices (Burt, 2004). If properly managed,
the sharing of views and work practices that are assumed to be different across geographies
and departments is likely to lead to innovative ideas. The ESN allows for this sort of
interactions to take place on a regular basis. All other things being equal, heterogeneous
communities therefore possess higher potential for innovation than communities where
members have similar profiles backgrounds and office locations; heterogeneous communities
provide less redundant sources of information and knowledge. However, the assimilation ofinformation can be too complex a process when this information is too diverse (Molm, 2010).
In the context of the study, this situation is likely because participants work for the same
organization and therefore have a common language of communication (Boisot, 1995).
Therefore, promoting profile and geographical diversity withi