Thanks for these examples, having an example gives you more of an
insight that when someone just mentions it!
I would like to jump on your expression of surprise that
organisations miss the point for the need of facilitation. I have an
experience where we facilitated a community of practice for 2 years
on behalf of two organisations. (you can find the case study here by
the way: http://www.scribd.com/doc/3404250/From-a-meeting-to-a-
community-of-practice) After the facilitators stepped down, the
organisations felt that the community should be able to continue 'on
its own'. I sometimes get the impression that the name community of
practice or network has a false connotation of complete self-
organisation. And self-organisation is fine, but then the value
remains exactly within the small self-organised group. If you want to
make that knowledge and the social capital more widely accessible,
you need the kind of leveraging as you do with the facilitation. So
in the end, the organisations loose out, as the whole thing becomes
I'm very curious to hear other people's experiences how they deal
with this. If they recognize this too. It's like people don't see the
downsides of complete self-organisation?
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Steve Glovinsky"
> Done - I've posted four examples from the four countries we are
> so far. I set them up as pdf files on our site at
> Think franchise, and you will get the idea.
> And yes, John, well qualified, well trained, full-time moderators
are a key
> to success. When I present to new groups I am always surprised
that so many
> organizations trying to introduce Communities of Practice miss this
> With our focus on providing a research service this point may be
> obvious, and I can see where the more typical discussion groups, not
> designed to "put their communities to work", would not need to be
> intensive. But still, serious professional efforts usually need to
> professionally managed....
> (Could I put in a plug? The "franchise" is in need of funds for
> If anyone has or knows of a possible source could they please get
> Thanks. S)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On
> Of John D. Smith
> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 5:53 AM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: [cp] Forums & KM: What CoP's Should Do to Manage
> Discussion-Produced Knowledge
> --- In com-prac@yahoogroup <mailto:com-prac%40yahoogroups.com>
> <steve.glovinsky@> wrote:
> > The main product or our research service is the
> > "Consolidated Reply" - a template that synthesizes discussion
> threads in the
> > form of an executive brief and captures the experiences and
> > offered by participants. Our aim is to get all Solution Exchanges
> using the
> > same template so that they can be indexed in a common repository
> > currently building) and shared across countries.
> Sounds interesting, Steve...
> I wonder if you could point us to an example of either the
> or their use? A URL or a file you could share in the com-prac "files
> area" would be great: http://groups.
> I think you and Nancy have implicitly brought up the importance of
> paid staff for the functioning of a community. Anything you might
> have to say about that would be very interesting, too.
> * John D. Smith ~ Voice: 503.963.8229 ~ Skype: smithjd
> * Portland, Oregon, USA http://www.learning
> <http://www.learningAlliances.net> Alliances.net
> * "Your responsibility does not end with complaining. Suggest
> something better!" - Esther Dyson
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]