Blog
About

  • Record: found
  • Abstract: found
  • Article: found
Is Open Access

Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care: lessons from the theory of communities of practice

, 1 , 1 , 1

Implementation Science : IS

BioMed Central

Read this article at

Bookmark
      There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

      Abstract

      BackgroundThe paper combines the analytical and instrumental perspectives on communities of practice (CoPs) to reflect on potential challenges that may arise in the process of interprofessional and inter-organisational joint working within the Collaborations for Leaderships in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs)--partnerships between the universities and National Health Service (NHS) Trusts aimed at conducting applied health research and translating its findings into day-to-day clinical practice.DiscussionThe paper discusses seminal theoretical literature on CoPs as well as previous empirical research on the role of these communities in healthcare collaboration, which is organised around the following three themes: knowledge sharing within and across CoPs, CoP formation and manageability, and identity building in CoPs. It argues that the multiprofessional and multi-agency nature of the CLAHRCs operating in the traditionally demarcated organisational landscape of the NHS may present formidable obstacles to knowledge sharing between various professional groupings, formation of a shared 'collaborative' identity, and the development of new communities within the CLAHRCs. To cross multiple boundaries between various professional and organisational communities and hence enable the flow of knowledge, the CLAHRCs will have to create an effective system of 'bridges' involving knowledge brokers, boundary objects, and cross-disciplinary interactions as well as address a number of issues related to professional and organisational identification.SummaryThe CoP approach can complement traditional 'stage-of-change' theories used in the field of implementation research and provide a basis for designing theory-informed interventions and evaluations. It can help to illuminate multiple boundaries that exist between professional and organisational groups within the CLAHRCs and suggest ways of crossing those boundaries to enable knowledge transfer and organisational learning. Achieving the aims of the CLAHRCs and producing a sustainable change in the ways applied health research is conducted and implemented may be influenced by how effectively these organisations can navigate through the multiple CoPs involved and promote the development of new multiprofessional and multi-organisational communities united by shared practice and a shared sense of belonging--an assumption that needs to be explored by further empirical research.

      Related collections

      Most cited references 47

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39

       S. Star,  J. Griesemer (1989)
        Bookmark
        • Record: found
        • Abstract: not found
        • Article: not found

        Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation

          Bookmark
          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development

           Paul Carlile (2002)
            Bookmark

            Author and article information

            Affiliations
            [1 ]Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester, Booth Street West, Manchester, M15 6PB, UK
            Contributors
            Journal
            Implement Sci
            Implementation Science : IS
            BioMed Central
            1748-5908
            2011
            23 June 2011
            : 6
            : 64
            3130688
            1748-5908-6-64
            21699712
            10.1186/1748-5908-6-64
            Copyright ©2011 Kislov et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

            This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

            Categories
            Debate

            Medicine

            Comments

            Comment on this article