Developing a

Community of Practice (CoP) with

Healthcare Evaluators

in British Columbia

James Coyle, BAH, MA

Leader-Evaluation, Interior Health Authority, BC

May 4, 2010 - Victoria, BC

The Galapagos reminded me of my

journey as an evaluator…

Yum!

Although, what I was really looking for was

… an Evaluation Community of Practice (CoP)!

From: www.idea.gov.uk/idk/aio/8191688

• Who‟s heard of a Community of

Practice?

• Anyone here belong to a CoP?

• Has anyone started up a CoP?

What is a „Community of Practice‟ (CoP)?

• Communities of Practice (CoPs) have been defined as:– “groups of people who share a concern, a set

of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise in this area by interacting on an ongoing basis”

(Wenger et al., 2002, p. 4).

• CoPs are shaped by 3 elements:– domain, practice and community.

(Wenger et al., 2002).

• A CoP often evolves naturally…but some are created purposely to gain knowledge in a specific field or to accomplish a time bound interest.

Etienne Wenger

Jean Lave

What Happens in a CoP?

…Where do CoP‟s Exist?

• Individuals share information and experiences with the group.

• Members learn from each other, and have an opportunity to develop.(Lave & Wenger 1991).

• Usually take place „in person‟ in a workplace lunchroom, a hairdressing studio, a butcher‟s shop…or a Health Authority meeting room…

– However, CoPs can exist online in the form of discussion boards and newsgroups and over teleconference, etc.

• The term “CoP” emerged in the 1990s…but similar learning has been taking place ever since people engaged in storytelling and learning from one another‟s experiences.

• Research Literature is growing…including evaluations.

CoPs Compared to Other Structures

From:

Wenger, Etienne C., McDermott, Richard, and Snyder, Williams C., Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing

Knowledge, Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, USA, 2002, 304 pages (ISBN 1-5781-330-8).

Background of „BC Healthcare Evaluation

Community of Practice‟

• Need identified by a number of individual health care evaluators in BC

• BC‟s Health Evaluators are spread out over a large geographic area

• My own journey…thanks to Donna Mendel [IH]

• December 2008 – informal discussions with other BC Health Authority Evaluators…then branched out to academic and MoHS colleagues…etc.

• Acknowledgements– Tanis Hampe [NHA], Derek Wilson [FHA], Tamara MacDonald

[FHA], Marla Steinberg [SFU-Capture Project], Janet Joy [VCHA], Lihong Sun [VIHA], Judith Krajnak [now in AB], Susan Chunick [FHA]…and many more over time!

Activities by „BC Healthcare Evaluation

CoP‟ - Since January 2009

1. Circulated CoP information and articles,

etc., to introduce concept and set

course

2. We decided we would meet monthly by

teleconference

3. Confirmed some roles…others are emerging

4. The CoP Members main focus: knowledge sharing and learning together

• *More on topics in a minute…

5. Snowball membership• currently over 30 people

6. Membership Needs Survey• October 2009

7. Developed an online discussion board• Post questions and answers, announcements

(including info on CES events!), tools, resources…

Activities by „BC Healthcare Evaluation

CoP‟ - Since January 2009 (Continued)

Online GoogleGroups Site

Examples of Topics Discussed

• Members‟ Favourite Evaluation resources

• Evaluation vs. QI, Performance Monitoring, Research, Auditing

• BC Health Authority and system context for evaluation

• Developing Logic Models with healthcare stakeholders

• Evaluation and Knowledge Exchange

• Helping Senior Executives understand Evaluation

• Evaluation checklists

• Evaluating our customers'‟ experience

• Lean and Evaluation

• Links with CES

• Evaluation and Mentorship

…and more!

Lessons Learned

• Members Survey:– Many report they value having a network with others to share and

stay connected

– Appreciate opportunity to discuss evaluation practice; incl. feedback on evaluations underway

– Value staying connected and getting summaries of discussions even if not able to attend

– Would like to „dig down‟ into our topics with practice examples

• My own key learnings:– A sense of community is important; less isolation

– All of my evaluation colleagues love learning

– Relationships can take place over time and distance

– We may require gaining an increase in some involvement and commitment to strengthen the Core membership

– A CoP can provide a strong base when the opportunity to collaborate on evaluation work together arrives

Next Steps?

• Continue to embrace CoP approach in an organic way?

– Review roles and opportunities for individuals to lead topics

– Return to the CoP Literature

• Shared review of Case Studies

• Examples of resources being applied

• Review of CES experiences with our CoP

• Evaluation of our CoP?

Your Turn

…Questions?

…Comments?

…Suggestions?

...Protests???!!

Thank You!

James Coyle, BAH, MA

james.coyle@interiorhealth.ca

Leader-Evaluation; Interior Health Authority, BC

May 4, 2010 - Victoria, BC

Actions to cultivate a Successful

Community of Practice (CoP)

• What makes a community of practice succeed depends on the purpose and objective of the community as well as the interests and resources of the members of that community. Wenger identified seven actions that could be taken in order to cultivate communities of practice:

• Design the community to evolve naturally - Because the nature of a Community of Practice is dynamic, in that the interests, goals, and members are subject to change, CoP forums should be designed to support shifts in focus.

• Create opportunities for open dialog within and with outside perspectives - While the members and their knowledge are the CoP's most valuable resource, it is also beneficial to look outside of the CoP to understand the different possibilities for achieving their learning goals.

• Welcome and allow different levels of participation - Wenger identifies 3 main levels of participation. 1) The core group who participate intensely in the community through discussions and projects. This group typically takes on leadership roles in guiding the group 2) The active group who attend and participate regularly, but not to the level of the leaders. 3) The peripheral group who, while they are passive participants in the community, still learn from their level of involvement. Wenger notes the third group typically represents the majority of the community.

• Develop both public and private community spaces - While CoP's typically operate in public spaces where all members share, discuss and explore ideas, they should also offer private exchanges. Different members of the CoP could coordinate relationships among members and resources in an individualized approach based on specific needs.

• Focus on the value of the community - CoP's should create opportunities for participants to explicitly discuss the value and productivity of their participation in the group.

• Combine familiarity and excitement - CoP's should offer the expected learning opportunities as part of their structure, and opportunities for members to shape their learning experience together by brainstorming and examining the conventional and radical wisdom related to their topic.

• Find and nurture a regular rhythm for the community - CoP's should coordinate a thriving cycle of activities and events that allow for the members to regularly meet, reflect, and evolve. The rhythm, or pace, should maintain an anticipated level of engagement to sustain the vibrancy of the community, yet not be so fast-paced that it becomes unwieldy and overwhelming in its intensity.

(Wenger, McDermott & Snyder 2002)