‘Structuring spontaneity’: investigating the impact of management practices on the success of virtual communities of practice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the increasing number of virtual communities of practice (VCoPs), little is known about how organizations can help lead them to success. This paper aims to identify those management practices that are likely to increase their chance of success. Using an action research approach that brought together a multidisciplinary team of researchers, coaches and organizational participants, we closely followed the experiences of eight VCoPs over a six- to nine-month period and collected a large quantity of quantitative and qualitative data from many sources. Our results indicate that three types of management practices seem to have the most impact on a VCoP’s success: taking ongoing actions to develop a knowledge-sharing culture, providing adequate resources to the VCoPs, and monitoring the leadership of the community in order to address any occurring problems. This study represents a first step towards building an empirically based understanding of how organizations can sustain their VCoPs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it