1. Communities of Practice in UK Higher Education: A case study on networks and group effectiveness Alison DeanDanielle Tucker Pamela YeowLinda Pomeroy Kent Business SchoolImperial College Business School

2. Higher education context (1)

3. Higher education context (2)

4. Higher Education context (3)

5. Higher Education literature context HE institutions a complex mix of activities but research remains the basis for assessing inter-University competitive standing (e.g., Lucas, 2000; Curran, 2001; Sharp & Coleman, 2005) Universities adopt a formalised approach to organising research but growing trend towards informal groupings Ng & Pemberton (2012): informal groupings (CoP) overcome intellectual isolation; increase synergy and leverage; create collaborative research Business literature (e.g., Balkundi & Harrison, 2006; Soekijad et al., 2011) how formal groups can become more like Communities of Practice

6. Communities of Practice Definition: Communities of practice are groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly An important aspect and function of communities of practice is increasing organisation performance. Through the creation of a shared identity and purpose - improved performance e.g. a competitive advantage, higher productivity, decreased learning curve, quicker response, preventing rework and encouraging new ideas.

7. Implications for Research Research networks - collaboration is important with groups of similar interest and with those you can collaborate with to develop theory and practice Requirement for support in order for it to function e.g. financial support, purposely co-ordinating groups and identifying specific leaders (type and role) Working within groupings or between offer more results. To offer some guidance as to how to create a higher performing research community which will be of interest to Higher Education Institutions

8. Our case study An academic department founded in the 1980’s situated within a multi-campus university in the UK. 5 UG and 5 PG programmes + specialist training & PhD Approximately 1700 students in total 71 academic and 30 support staff Ranked in the top 25 in 2008 RAE Top 10 in the National Student Survey in 2010: Guardian (2011): Top 10 for graduate employment 5 Research groups – Each managed by a senior academic (Head of Group)

9. Research questions Aims: To understand current organisational clustering and identity To understand the impact it has on research communities Specific research questions include: 1.How do clusters within the network correspond with formal groups created by the organisation? 2.What role do leaders play in the network? 3.How does this impact on the performance of communities of practice?

10. Data collection (1) In a questionnaire administered to all staff in March 2010 (response rate 51%) Identity and Classification Meaningful interactions Categorise interactions o R = Research related interaction o T = Teaching related interaction o S = Social interaction o A = Administrative interaction Interviews with most group heads (n=5) and a selection of other group members and key administrators

11. Data collection (2) Performance Data: Individual: o Promotions between 2007-2010 Group: o Average Number of Publications in peer-reviewed journals between 2007-2010 per person o Total Number of Publications per person (including conference papers and working papers)

12. Research questions Aims: To understand what makes a high performing research community To understand current organisational clustering and identity Specific research questions include: 1.How do clusters within the network correspond with formal groups created by the organisation? 2.What role do leaders play in the network? 3.How does this impact on the performance of communities of practice?

13. Research network – naturally occurring cliques Looked at this in two ways: Components: No obvious divisions/sub-structures within the network Cliques: Cliques – 44 cliques found. 3, 4, 5 groupings N-Cliques – 62 cliques. Mix between support staff and academics. Predominantly PhD secretary and strategy development manager from the support staff.

14. Research network - Academic Imperial College Business School ©

15. Density between Research groups - Research network 12345 115.52.707.82.5 20.92.20.0 3.6 31.702.90.40 41.30.70.410.40.6 51.72.700.68.2

16. Research questions Aims: To understand what makes a high performing research community To understand current organisational clustering and identity Specific research questions include: 1.How do clusters within the network correspond with formal groups created by the organisation? 2.What role do leaders play in the network? 3.How does this impact of the performance of communities of practice?

17. Brokerage Roles RoleDescription Liaison B-->A-->C Between different groups, neither of which they are a member Representative B-->C-->A Senior member of a group delegates the brokering role of external knowledge to someone else in the group Gatekeeper C-->A-->B Screens external knowledge to distribute within their own group Co-ordinator: A-->B-->CAll the actors are in the same group Consultant A-->B-->CMediates between actors in the same group, however, the broker is not part of the group

18. 6.25%CoOrdinatorGatekeeperRepresentativeConsultantLiaison 37----- 88----- 61----- 78----- 30----- 2184.48---- 62----- 24----- 13----- 35----- 58----- 81----- 70----- 46-3.73--0.93 45----- 3484.48---- Research network – CoP 3

19. 36%CoOrdinatorGatekeeperRepresentativeConsultantLiaison 39- ---- 6340.883.981.08-0.09 52- ---- 44-1.534.581.020.51 66- ---- 4336.216.40 --- 15- ---- 51- ---- 3621.15.602.80 -- 48- ---- 72- ---- 659.397.471.25-0.15 91- ---- 86- ---- Research network – CoP 4

20. Informal v formal (1) ‘..Sometimes it’s good to come (together) informally.. I think because that is more successful. You do it because you want to do it, not because you think you have to help someone because they said as Head of Group, you have to do it.’ ‘..it’s good that the Head of Group feels …like working together without even thinking about working together – that’s very, very, very important really, without having some, …, rules, or guidelines or some targets. So it’s more that you have that idea of feeling comfortable with them so everyone will do it without knowing that they are doing it’

21. Informal v formal (2) ‘..How much contact do you have with members of your Group? (Answer) Some more than others I would think.. mainly formal interactions’ ‘..the 20% (time spent on encouraging research activity) of the Head of Group that I spend on that would probably be to encourage Group members to publish more.’ ‘..how many of your professorial skills are being used in teaching management..........?(Answer) Nothing. I mean I don’t see any of that. I mean this is very stupid, EXCEL number crunching which I....It’s not a good use of my time, let’s put it that way.’

22. Teaching & Research Group 4 – integrating T & R TeachingResearch

23. Teaching v Research Group 3 – T & R Not integrated Teaching Research

24. Research questions Aims: To understand what makes a high performing research community To understand current organisational clustering and identity Specific research questions include: 1.How do clusters within the network correspond with formal groups created by the organisation? 2.What role do leaders play in the network? 3.How does this impact of the performance of communities of practice?

25. Research network – CoP 3 Peer review publications (avg) – 2.7 Total publications (avg) – 9.6 No. of promotions - 0

26. Research network – CoP 4 Peer review publications (avg) – 4.79 Total publications (avg) – 22.4 No. of promotions - 5

27. Comparative Performance CoPDensity (%)Total Publications (avg) Peer review Publications (avg) No. of Promotions (2007-2010) 115.520.34.51 22.28.41.91 32.99.62.70 410.422.44.795 58.26.53.31

28. Conclusions Research groups have not produced independent Communities of Practice – Instead collaboration across groups remains Higher density of both within-group and between-group is related to higher performance A group leader who is a good co-ordinator is not enough to increase the performance of that group You also need: – The leader to perform other brokerage roles (gatekeeper, liaison, representative) – Other brokers within the group

29. Thank you Any questions?