OTRAS CUOTAS .1 Mantenimiento Premium

3.12.1 INNOVATION – JUST A GOOD IDEA OR NOT:

In the web of competing definitions on innovation, the most simple one is “an innovation is a new idea”(Van de Ven, 1986; 591). Innovation can be further defined as “the process

of bringing new problem-solving ideas into use” (Kanter, 1983; Amabile, 1988; Glynn, 1996). As the researcher observes, the phrase “into use”, emphasizes the applicability for the new idea generated. It has been argued in management literature on innovation that

generation of a new idea is inadequate to be termed as ‘innovation’ without any record of

implementation or practical significance in terms of influencing the organizational

processes of delivery of products and services, bringing novelty to the organization and its suppliers and customers (McFadzean et al., 2005; Glynn, 1996; Tidd, 2001; Coakes & Smith, 2007). The milieu of generation of innovation is usually one of uncertainty, unexpected, non-routine and the process of innovation can be termed as the ‘adaptive response’ (Glynn, 1996). The phrase ‘adaptive response’ is perceived to be a critical one

by the researcher, who is proposing that Communities of Practice might be formed around the need for adapting and responding to the changing world for the IAS. Would it be possible that the formation of Communities of Practice driven by the need to adapt to changed scenarios turn out be the engines of innovation?

3.12.2 COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE – INCUBATOR OF IDEAS:

It has been widely accepted that CoPs, because of their interpretive nature, they facilitate knowledge sharing, generation of new ideas and diffusion of the same (Paul & Duguid, 1991; Wenger & Snyder, 2000; Wenger et al., 2002; Cross et al., 2001; Coakes & Clark, 2005). Daft and Weick (1984) in their discussion on ‘interpretive innovation’ perceive the community within organizations as the key to understanding innovating practice. They

describe the ‘enacting organization’ process which is constantly innovating as below: “These organizations construct their own environments. They gather information

by trying new behaviors and seeing what happens. They experiment, test, and simulate, and they ignore precedent, rules and traditional expectations” (Daft & Weickk, p288).

CoPs, which can be perceived as ‘enacting organizations’ through their fluid, non-

canonical, refreshing worldview which generate ‘spontaneously occurring’ experiments in practice in which they are engaged (Brown & Duguid, 1991). These processes of

‘stepping out’ of the conventional, mainstream organizational canonical practices drive

innovation by generating new practices (Hedberg, Nystrom & Starbuck, 1976; Schein, 1990).

The researcher introduces the idea of Communities of Practice being the incubators of ideas which translate into innovation through the modification and introduction of newer practices (Coakes & Smith, 2007). It is therefore argued that Communities of Practice are one of the supporting organizational forms for innovation. A study on Communities of Practice facilitating innovation by development of innovative ideas through learning of the community was conducted by Soekijad et al., (2004) in the field of multiple space use at industrial estates in Netherlands through formation of inter-organizational CoPs. The findings clearly indicate that the emergence and generation of new practices for developing industrial estates through the participation in Communities of Practice was highly effective.

3.12.3 COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE IN INNOVATION - (CoInvs):

This particular research will use the idea developed by Coakes & Smith (2007) of CoInvs,

a form of Community of Practice which are ‘specifically dedicated to the support of innovation’. This is a new concept developed by Coakes & Smith (2007) in this paper on

Communities of Practice and Innovation and the concept is that Communities of Practice

steering innovation are formed around pioneers of innovation, individuals who ‘champion innovation’ through the organization. CoInvs will be the safe havens for nurturing,

encouraging and disseminating innovation and are the repositories of knowledge for the

entire organization. The core concept is of ‘Innovation Champion’ (Glynn, 1996) who are

pivotal to the success of innovation and have the social skills, experience and expertise to

translate the innovation into a change in ‘work practices’. However this research makes a

departure from Coakes & Smith (2007) methodology who proposes the mapping of social networks of ‘influential individuals’ with the ‘Network visualization and analysis (NVA) (TLA, 2006; Smith, 2005a) technique. In this particular research work the researcher will work the reverse way through identifying the processes of innovation diffusion which is the processes of communication through ‘certain communication channels over time

among the members of a social system’ (Rogers, 1995).

In case of this particular research this innovation diffusion process will be studied around the identified CoPs within the IAS community in Karnataka. The case-site would be pertaining to one of the modern deliverables as part of the public administration like energy, environment, industry or urban planning. The rationale being that it would be expected that IAS officers would form CoPs to offer innovative solutions in these new domains which would require cutting-edge technologies and know-how. Comparatively with regards to the erstwhile functions performed by the ICS these departments are new and hence the level of innovation is expected to be high. The research intends to study the implementation in terms of where the innovation is actually converted into action. The focus will be to detect and identify the traces of a CoInv in the CoPs being studied, where the CoP will provide safe nurturing places for creative ideas as manifested through candid exchanges of ideas and thoughts stimulating learning opportunities.

3.13CHAPTER SUMMARY:

This chapter started with the coverage discussion and analysis of the landscape of the research literature on CoPs and their limitations. The current research literature on CoPs is still not definitive and still evolving with the early works dominating the scenario like those of the canonical works, and most of the current research literature heavily relies on these canonical works. The purpose of the chapter was to devise and develop a succinct, working definition of CoP, the elements of CoP and the applications. It was clear that prior to application of the idea of CoPs in any research context it was important to develop a clear conceptual framework. Communities of Practice was delineated into two elements, the Community dimension and the Practice dimension which were then well-defined.

The ‘birthplace of CoPs’, the Situated Learning was discussed with respect to the different

case-studies and the attributes of the contextual factors influencing the learning process. Community implies shared meaning, identity and understanding and is part of the

existence of the broader Communities of Practice. Practice in the context of CoPs implies for this particular study Situated Learning and innovation. This literature review will assist in developing a conceptual framework for conducting this particular research study.

4.0 DEVELOPING A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK – RESEARCH