The social dynamics of micro-firm learning in an evolving learning community

Abstract

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues.Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. b s t r a c tMicro-firms dominate the tourism sector internationally, yet there is a notable absence of studies specifically relating to their learning interactions with other tourism firms. Even when studied, a social learning lens is rarely applied in either micro-firm or tourism learning network research despite its relevance in this domain. In seeking to understand and map the social dynamics of micro-firm learning and participation in an independent learning network, the authors studied an evolving learning community (ELC) situated in Ireland's south west region over a four-year period. The findings demonstrate the complexity associated with creating and sustaining a social learning infrastructure in this context. An ELC model is proffered to provide insight into inter and intra social dynamics that influence learning development in the micro-firm setting. The proposed future research includes the study of additional ELCs, in Ireland and other countries, for the purposes of cross case/cross country comparison, and in pursuit of greater insight into the social dynamics of these communities.

Facilitating Cross-Border Rural Micro-Firm Knowledge Exchange

“…Academics from a variety of disciplines and/or local, regional, national and international authority actors (Haugen Guasdal, 2008) assume the role of 'knowledge brokers' supporting cross-border knowledge exchange on a continuous and interim basis as appropriate (Jack et al, 2004;Reinl and Kelliher, 2014). They provide connections between smaller firms and relevant experts (von Malmborg, 2007), regardless of location, and facilitate access to otherwise unavailable knowledge and resources (Chell and Baines, 2000;Kelliher et al, 2014).…”

“…Previous research suggests that these sets should be as 'diverse as necessary and as similar as possible' (Halme, 2001, p 112) in order to challenge existing frames of reference and assist network members to develop an appreciation of the interdependencies of rural development and to negotiate sustainability issues (Halme, 2001;Lee et al, 2005). The set can then hone the 'requirements for collective action in their resolution' (Graci, 2013, p 36) using platforms which support dialogue and negotiation and permit network members to reach a level of shared meaning, which can in turn underpin longer-term knowledge exchange (Lave and Wenger, 1991;Reinl and Kelliher, 2014). Despite the value of difference noted above, a 'common language' approach is of particular importance in a cross-disciplinary network context (Swan et al, 2002) as discipline-specific knowledge may be so embedded within practice that exchanges may fail, even at a local level.…”

“…While leveraging existing social structures that underpin collaboration and knowledge exchange within rural communities is advised (Phillipson et al, 2006;Reinl and Kelliher, 2014), knowledge brokers should also seek to expand the networks' boundary to include international actors (Erkuş -Öztυ '' rk, 2009). Opening restrictive knowledge flows in this way should help to alleviate 'spatial blindness' (Brouder and Eriksson, 2013).…”

“…Virtual and physical forums offer 'collaborative space' where geographically distant members, sharing domain-/discipline-specific experience and knowledge requirements can meet and participate in broader knowledge exchange pools. Network 'champions', as in situ knowledge brokers (Phillipson et al, 2006;Reinl and Kelliher, 2014), can readily translate local knowledge (Breschi and Lissoni, 2003) across geographical borders, while FLN brokers connect local network members with providers of specialist knowledge facilitating multi-level knowledge exchange in an international context (Halme, 2001).…”

“…Rural business communities are defined by their small-scale, peripheral nature and the specialization of their economic/industry base (Deavers, 1992). These rural business communities are dominated by micro-firms and rely on them to facilitate economic growth, competitiveness and employment (Murdoch, 2000;Phillipson et al, 2004;Reinl and Kelliher, 2014). Micro-firms are demarcated as commercial entities employing 10 people or fewer (European Commission, 2011) and are the target rural group relating to this study.…”