In the final theme, the concept of sustainability of the CoP was explored. The participants understood the voluntary nature of the CoPs they were involved in and it is interesting to observe their responses to what they considered affected sustainability. There is little current research into sustainability of professional CoPs however; Wenger et al. (2002) suggested that those constructed voluntarily around knowledge sharing were considered more stable. The paucity of research into CoP sustainability means there is little to draw on from the literature (Stoll et
al., 2006). However, Bryk et al. (1999) indicated that CoPs that are knowledge
sharing successfully, and where the internal processes are supporting learning effectively, will attract new members and hold sufficient interest for current members. They go on to suggest that this renewal cycle of the CoP promotes sustainability.
Wenger et al. (2002) suggested that if the passion for the subject were still strong among the membership the energy this exudes would sustain the CoP. They went on to suggest that regular reflection of CoP performance and investing in its development contributed to CoP longevity. The participant’s insight into what, for them, impacted sustainability informs our understanding of what is not only adversely affecting the tacit knowledge sharing, but damaging the life cycle and sustainability of the CoP.
5.5.1 The leadership
Participant 7 brought to our attention that poor leadership has a negative impact on the membership of the CoP. The leader who dominates the discussion and does not nurture knowledge sharing amongst the membership risks them disengaging from the CoP and the CoP may fall into decline. The leader as described by Participant 7 through dominating the discussion forces the CoP to look inward and the tacit knowledge sharing is damaged. The leader is not nurturing the CoP when enacting this behaviour and the natural tacit sharing, when inhibited by them, stops the community engagement so vital to the sharing of experience (Pyrko et al., 2016).
The study findings also suggest that the leader has a key role in promoting trust amongst the CoP membership. Should the leader’s behaviour not encourage the rich story telling of experience and, further, does not lead by example in this sharing then trust is adversely affected (Abrams et al., 2003). Many participants cited trust as an important aspect in their willingness to share knowledge within the CoP. Therefore, should the leader behaviours damage trust and not promote trust amongst the membership, this may suggest why members disengage. The leader, if not challenged on their behaviour, may be described as breaking the primary intent of the community, that of not allowing and valuing the contribution of the membership when discussing their topic.
151 Earlier in this Chapter, the importance of the role of the leader in facilitating tacit knowledge sharing, growing practice and encouraging engagement were discussed. The study considered the leader occupied a vital role and this may indicate that when this role is not performed well the sustainability of the CoP is harmfully affected.
5.5.2 Dominating characters
It was not surprising that a number of participants quoted those who would seek to dominate the discussion as affecting sustainability negatively. Participant 8 expressed shock at the unprofessionalism of some individuals who would dominate through dismissive and intimidating behaviour. It is argued the management of this behaviour may be vital in order to allow the contribution of other members of the CoP to flourish. It can be seen that this management of behaviour is linked to the leader, who if performing poorly (see above); compounds the negativity. However, the wider leadership or culture carriers within the CoP membership have a responsibility in controlling those negative dominating behaviours, without which Participant 8 suggests the CoP will simply wither and die.
Participant 7 describes the scenario that occurs when these dominant behaviours stifle knowledge sharing. The formation of cliques around those who see themselves as more important than others is suggested as one of the reasons behind the absence of CoP sharing. The impact here is that tacit sharing of experiences is not occurring and as a consequence what is left is mere posturing from a group of individuals telling their practice stories. Findings suggest that trust is impacted negatively by these behaviours and the view of the wider membership of the clique’s contribution is seen as untrustworthy. Participant 7 recounts the story of this CoP imploding clearly linking these behaviours not only to damaging the potential for any tacit knowledge sharing but also the outcome is the demise of the CoP itself.
5.5.3 Form of ongoing benefit
This sub theme illustrated the need for the CoP to continually engage their membership. A voluntary CoP, such as those described in this study, requires there to be a continuing realisable benefit for its membership. In effect a payback for the individual and the institution that is supporting their attendance and contribution. Participants suggested that the CoP must keep pace with the change occurring in the sector, thereby keeping abreast of the challenges the membership face.
Participant 1 suggested learning was their primary motive for attending and contributing to the CoP. The continual cycle of sharing of experience and the seeking of new knowledge is therefore deemed vital to their continuing engagement. Further, addressing new challenges in their area of interest brings more reward for CoP members, particularly those who see the value in the CoP as a source of innovation and provider of solutions to their practice problems. If the CoP is not energised by new challenges and continually providing opportunities for new learning through the sharing of experience then practice members are likely to disengage. Critically, this will also impact the CoP’s ability to recruit new members that normally would be attracted to the vibrancy of discussion and the innovation and problem solving associated with an ‘alive’ CoP (Wenger et al., 2002).
5.5.4 Relevance
Participant 7 described the concept of relevance as the CoP’s ability to stay current and focused on the issues occurring in their practice area. The dynamism of knowledge and its value to organisations suggests the need for CoPs to not only be relevant to their membership but to the perceived value of the CoP contribution to organisational Knowledge Management. (Polanyi, 1966)
Participant 8 suggested for the CoP to stay relevant it must be ambitious and drive forward the area of interest for the membership. The CoP it is suggested, not only needs to continue to address the current issues and challenges facing
153 the members but also needs to have a predictive capacity. This involves anticipating future issues and advancing the thinking and potential new solutions that may inform their practice and ultimately deliver benefit to the individuals’ institutions.
5.5.5 Willingness to share
The willingness to share featured prominently in the participants’ descriptions of what was required for successful tacit knowledge sharing. The findings suggest the willingness to share was multi-faceted in its impact on the CoP. Participant 6 goes as far as to suggest that a CoP membership that lacks a willingness to share is not a CoP. Throughout the interviews willingness to share was associated with underpinning confidence in the group. The confidence grows trust from the willingness to share through close engagement and better understanding between the CoP members (Abrams et al., 2003).
The findings also suggest trust proliferates through the group because of the willingness to share. As group trust grows, deeper experiences are shared and this rich experience leads to learning for the members. These activities assist in encouraging participation from those less confident. When the group are sharing willingly and freely then the confidence grows in individuals to participate. The positive effect of the willingness to share should not be underestimated, and this is supported from the participants in the data.