Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Communities of practice: Performance and evolution

  • Published:
Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We present a detailed model of collaboration in communities of practice and we examine its dynamic consequences for the group as a whole. We establish the existence of a novel mechanism that allows the community to naturally adapt to growth, specialization, or changes in the environment without the need for central controls. This mechanism relies on the appearance of a dynamic instability that initiates an exploration of novel interactions, eventually leading to higher performance for the community as a whole.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Allen, T. (1984),Managing the Flow of Technology. MIT Press.

  • Argote, L., and D. Epple. (1990), “Learning Curves in Manufacturing.Science, 247(4945)920–924.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P.M., and W.R. Scott (1962).Formal Organizations. Chandler, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boorman, S. and H.C. White. (1976), “Social Structures from Multiple Networks: II. Role Structures.American Journal of Sociology, 81:1384–1446.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, T., and G.M. Stalker. (1961),The management of Innovation. Tavistok, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R.S. (1980), “Models of Network Structure.Annual Review of Sociology, 6:79–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clearwater, S.H., B.A. Huberman, and T. Hogg. (1991), “Cooperative Solution of Constraint Satisfaction Problems.Science, 254:1181–1183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J.E., and C.M. Newman. (1984), “The Stability of Large Random Matrices and Their Products.”Annals of Probability, 12:283–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crane, D. (1972),Invisible colleges, diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crozier, M. (1964),The Phenomenon of Bureaucracy. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckert, P. (1994), “Trajectory and Forms of Institutional Participation.” In Lisa Crockett and Ann Crouter (eds.),Pathways Through Adolescence: Individual Developments in Relation to Social Contexts. Lawrence Erlbaum

  • Furedi, Z., and K. Komlos. (1981), “The Eigenvalues of Random Symmetric Matrices.Combinatorica, 1: 233–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glance, N.S., and B.A. Huberman. (1994), “Dynamics of Social Dilemmas.Scientific American, 270(3): 76–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glance, N.S., and B.A. Huberman. (1994), “Social Dilemmas and Fluid Organizations.” In K. Carley and M. Prietula (eds.),Computational Organization Theory, pages 217–239. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, E. (1953), “Some Functional Consequences of Primary Controls in Formal Work Organizations.”American Sociological Review, 18:368–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, F.A. (1937), “Economics and Knowledge,”Economica, New Series, 4:33–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, T., and C.P. Williams. (1993), “Solving the Really Hard Problems with Cooperative Search. InProc. of the 11th Natl. Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI93), pages 231–236, Menlo Park, CA. AAAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, T., B.A. Huberman, and J.M. McGlade. (1989), “The Stability of Ecosystems.”Proc. of the Royal Society of London, B237:43–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmstrom, B., and P. Milgrom. (1950), “The Firm as an Incentive System.”American Economic Review, 84:972–991.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homans, G.C. (1988),The Human Group. Harcourt, 1950.

  • Huberman, Bernardo (1988),The Ecology of Computation. North-Holland, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Huberman, B.A. (1989), “The Adaptation of Complex Systems.” In B. Goodwin and P. Saunders (eds.),Theoretical Biology. Epigenetic and Evolutionary Order from Complex Systems Edinburgh University Press, Great Britain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, E. (1991), “Organizing Work by Adaptation.”Organization Science, 2:14–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juhasz, F. (1982), “On the Asymptotic Behavior of the Spectra of Non-symmetric Random (0, 1) Matrices.”Discrete Mathematics, 41:161–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufer, D.S. (1993),Communication at a Distance. Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Kissinger, H.A. (1979),The White House Years Little, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kornfeld, W. (1981). “The Use of Parallelism to Implement Heuristic Search.” Technical Report 627, MIT AI Lab.

  • Kreiner, K., and M. Schultz. (1993), “Informal Collaboration in R&D: The Formation of Networks Across Organizations.Organization Studies, 14:189–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J. and E. Wenger. (1991),Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.

  • Levinthal, D., and J.G. March (1981), “A Model of Adaptive Organizational Change.”Journal of Economic Behavior and Organizations, 2:307–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malone, T.W., and S.A. Smith. (1988), “Modeling the Performance of Organizational Structures.Operations Research, 36(3):421.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J.G. (1981), “Footnotes to Organizational Change.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 26:536–577.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehta, M.L. (1967),Random Matrices and the Statistical Theory of Energy Levels. Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orr, J.E. (1986), “Narratives at Work: Storytelling as Cooperative Diagnostic Activity.” InProceedings of the conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work.

  • Ouchi, W.G. (1980), “Markets, Bureaucracies and Clans.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 25:129–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E.M. (1983),Diffusion of Innovations. Free Press, 3rd edition.

  • Salas, S.L., and E. Hille (1978),Calculas: One and Several Variables. John Wiley, NY, 3rd edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schelling, T.C. (1978),Micromotives and Macrobehavior, W.W. Norton and Company, Inc. United States.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W.R. (1992),Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrager, J., T. Hogg, and B.A. Huberman. (1988), “A graph-dynamic model of the power law of practice and the problem-solving fan-effect.”Science, 242(4877):414–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weidlich, W., and G. Haag. (1983),Concepts and Models of a Quantitative Sociology. The Dynamics of Interacting Populations. Springer, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zelditch, M. (1969), “Can You Really Study an Army in the Laboratory?” In Amitai Etzioni (ed.),A Sociological Reader on Complex Organizations. Holt, Reinehart and Winston.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Huberman, B.A., Hogg, T. Communities of practice: Performance and evolution. Comput Math Organiz Theor 1, 73–92 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01307829

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01307829

Keywords

Navigation