Situated learning theory offers a radical critique of cognitivist theories of learning, emphasizing the relational aspects of learning within communities of practice in contrast to the individualist assumptions of conventional theories. However, although many researchers have embraced the theoretical strength of situated learning theory, conceptual issues remain undeveloped in the literature. Roberts, for example, argues in this issue that the notion of 'communities of practice' -a core concept in situated learning theory -is itself problematic. To complement her discussion, this paper explores the communities of practice concept from several perspectives. Firstly, we consider the perspective of the individual learner, and examine the processes which constitute 'situated learning'. Secondly, we consider the broader socio-cultural context in which communities of practice are embedded. We argue that the cultural richness of this broader context generates a fluidity and heterogeneity within and beyond communities. Finally, we argue that it is sometimes difficult to distinguish conceptually between the terms 'participation' and 'practice' because of occasional duplication of meaning. We propose, instead, a refinement of the definition to allow for greater conceptual clarity.

This paper provides an overview of previous work that has explored the processes and mechanisms by which communication constitutes organizing (as ongoing efforts at coordination and control of activity and knowledge) and organizations (as collective actors that are 'talked' into existence). We highlight differences between existing theories and analyses grounded in communication-as-constitutive (CCO) perspectives and describe six overarching premises for such perspectives; in so doing, we sharpen and bound the explanatory power of CCO perspectives for organization studies more generally. Building on these premises, we develop an agenda for further research, call for greater cross-fertilization between the communication and organization literatures, and illustrate ways in which communication-informed analyses have complemented and strengthened theories of the firm, organizational identity, sensemaking, and strategy as practice.

This paper examines the reasons for the apparently powerful impact of management gurus' ideas (i.e. guru theory) on senior managers. An examination of the limited literature on management gurus and other related literatures suggests three explanations for the appeal of guru theory for senior managers. The ®rst set of explanations relates to various features of management work which may heighten managers' receptivity to guru ideas. The second set focuses on the gurus themselves and emphasizes the form in which they are presented (i.e. public performances). The ®nal set of explanations highlights the importance of the socioeconomic and cultural context within which guru theories emerge and become widely adopted. A number of criticisms of these explanations are oered: that they de®ne the manager as passive, that the¯ow of ideas is one way (guru to manager), that they rely on an academic conception of knowledge. An alternative explanation of their success is outlined which suggests that their work ± their analyses, presentations and theories ± oer attractive conceptions of the role of managers which constitute the identity of the modern senior manager as an heroic, transformative leader. Gurus therefore not only constitute the organizational realities but also managers themselves.

No abstract