Exploring the Embeddedness of an Informal Community of Practice Within a Formal Organizational Context: A Case Study in the German Military

Abstract

The embeddedness of communities of practice (CoPs)—self-organized groups of practitioners, who engage in the same practices, learn from each other, and innovate together—in contexts of formal hierarchical systems, is characterized through tension. CoPs drive learning and change, while formal systems are focused on stable execution and control, suppressing informality and self-organization. How leadership navigates this tension and shapes embeddedness is of interest to scholars and practitioners alike. In this article, we employ an interpretative research approach to explore how a CoP emerges and interacts with the formal hierarchy of the German Armed Forces. The findings of this study indicate that the embeddedness of a CoP within the formal organizational context molds through the dynamic interplay between administrative leaders and community members. In drawing from complexity leadership theory our grounded, cross-level, process model uncovers how a CoP evolves as individuals experience adaptive pressures in their practices stemming from environmental changes and start to generate new resources in response. Furthermore, it reveals how organizational leaders alternate between administrative leadership and enabling leadership techniques, allowing for both self-organized activities and also the integration of the emergent outcomes. Therefore, the model contributes to our understanding of the processes that unfold at the interface between a CoP and formal hierarchical system.

Practicing Integrated Care Pathways in Norwegian Hospitals: Coordination through Industrialized Standardization, Value Chains, and Quality Management or an Organizational Equivalent to Improvised Jazz Standards

“…Semi-formal structures will only survive and flourish when they are allowed to exist relatively free from formal organizations and management. The study of introducing cancer-genetic pathways in England [ 70 ] as well as a recent study from German military supports this view [ 114 ]. This reasoning connects to the presence of separate, distinct institutional logics and tries to avoid blurring and coopting mechanisms between them.…”

“…The most valuable research will then probably be research that looks at experiences with improvisation and attempts to learn more about its fundamental ambiguity. The studies of Martin et al [ 70 ], Oborn and Dawson [ 88 ], Zuiderent-Jerak [ 52 ], den Herder-van der Eerden et al [ 107 ] and not least of Schulte et al [ 114 ] are a good example of this.…”

On the heterogeneity and equifinality of knowledge transfer in small innovative organizations

“…Processes for transferring knowledge internally Small innovative software firms in our sample deploy seven intra-firm knowledge transfer processes, including communities of practice, within project teams, across project teams, nonproject related meetings, in-house exchanges with clients, technological devices, and playful activities. Communities of practice have been commonly described in prior knowledge management literature as an informal knowledge transfer mechanism (Schulte et al, 2020).…”

Communities of practice and what they can do for International Relations

“…While Adler suggests a cooperative relationship between the institutions and the CoP, Benjamin Schulte, Florian Andresen, and Hans Koller track a different trajectory in their analysis of how a CoP changed the practice of the Germany Federal Armed Forces. 66 Here the CoP emerged against the institution, as single practitioners became aware of the Army's limitations in handling intercultural issues in military missions abroad. Practitioners thus started to reach out and connect across hierarchical boundaries, outside (and partially against) the formal institution.…”