COMMUNITY PROCESSES TO BE SUPPORTED

Fischer and Ostwald (2001) stress the need for appropriate support for the effective functioning of virtual communities (Fischer and Ostwald, 2001). This requires a good understanding of what is happening within a community, and what processes influence the success of knowledge sharing. Researchers in the field of social sciences have examined the functioning of VCs and the processes that affect the knowledge sharing between its members (McMillan and Chavis, 1986; Romm et al., 1997; Hung and Der-Thanq, 2001; Kerr and Tindale, 2004; Ilgen et al., 2005). Information sharing theory suggests that people are sharing the greatest amount of information with others when they feel familiar within the social context, that is sharing is perceived as a constituent part of the environment (meaning people and technology) (Constant et al., 1994). Consequently, the processes that influence the environment of VC members have to be supported.

Potency deals with the collective belief that members can be effective together. Having members to believe in the effectiveness of their group helps the VC to achieve their highest performance (Ilgen et al., 2005). Trust towards other members of the community and their competence as well as psychological safety affect knowledge sharing in a community (Edmondson, 1999; Ilgen et al., 2005). Trust in general is a very important cognitive process that needs to be properly supported and developed among community members. For example, if members do not trust each other then they will not share what they are holding within the community. Self efficacy is also vital given that members need to believe that their community is performing well in terms of knowledge sharing and generation (Kerr and Tindale, 2004). Bonding among community members is also regarded as important as members feel supported and that they can count on each other for new information and knowledge when such need arises (Fischer, 2001; Ilgen et al., 2005). Furthermore, bonding enables

the members to develop relationships and become aware of each others’ contribution. The ability of the community to adapt to its changing environment and to have the potential to shift its focus has also been scrutinized by social sciences researchers.

In addition, research in organisational psychology has identified that effective teams and groups which are operating in the boundaries of an organisation build transactive memory (TM), develop shared mental models (SMM), and become aware which members are their cognitively central (CCen) and which members are regarded as peripheral ones (Wegner, 1986; Hollingshead, 2000; Mohammed and Dumville, 2001; Hollingshead and Brandon, 2003; Kerr and Tindale, 2004; Ilgen et al., 2005). Since we are dealing with closely-knit communities with characteristics similar to those of groups and teams (Wenger, 2001), the above processes can also be applied to a broader context to ascertain what kind of support should be provided to a VC. Three processes (TM, SMM and CCen) have been selected. These are considered as important in this research in view of their direct impact on knowledge sharing. Furthermore, they can be investigated by employing the means of analysing the tracking data of a closely-knit VC. Below we discuss in more detail the three processes identified as important to be supported in this research.

2.3.1 Transactive Memory

Transactive Memory (TM) deals with the relationship between the memory system of individuals and the communication that occurs between them (Wegner, 1986; Hollingshead, 1998). The focus is on encoding, storage and retrieval of information. Therefore, a TM system can provide the option to recall previously visited areas and subjects, and to identify relevant knowledge (Wegner, 1986; Mohammed and Dumville, 2001). The notion of TM and the development of TM system has proven to be very promising for the functioning of teams and groups (Wegner, 1986; Hollingshead, 2000; Mohammed and Dumville, 2001; Hollingshead and Brandon, 2003). Wegner (Wegner, 1986) points out that TM is concerned with:

“the prediction of group and individual behaviour through an understanding of the manner in which group processes and structures information”.

TM helps group members to be aware of one another’s expertise and to divide responsibilities with reference to different knowledge areas. The key element behind the ability of a TM system to function is for the divergent information held in members’ head to be known by the other members. To illustrate this we assume that member A’s memory can act as an extension of member B’s memory. If B is aware of what A knows, he/she should be able to get access to A’s knowledge and the information possessed by A. Virtual communities can benefit from a TM system since members

will become aware of the knowledge held by other members. Furthermore, the promotion of TM creates awareness on who is interested in what and facilitates the identification of complementary knowledge. To this effect, the opportunities for collaboration among community members are potentially enhanced.

2.3.2 Shared Mental Models

Shared Mental Models (SMM) are defined as the

“team members’ shared, organised understanding and mental representation of knowledge about key elements of the team’s relevant environment” (Mohammed and Dumville, 2001).

Studies confirm that collaborative knowledge exploitation can be improved if community members have a shared understanding of the environment, situation and task at hand (He, 2004). One of the main objectives of community formation is the development, through knowledge sharing and communication, of a shared understanding of the context in which community members act, and consequently the creation of a shared understanding of the world(Merali and Davies, 2001; Puntambekar, 2006).

The development of SMM among VC members will promote awareness regarding the relations/similarities members have with each other in the community. Furthermore, this will allow oldtimers to identify members with similar interests and recognise what is considered as important (for the community as a whole) that accordingly is worth sharing. In this context, the integration of newcomers will be easier since they will realise what constitutes the purpose of the community and understand what similarities they have with oldtimers. Building this kind of awareness among members will make resource sharing more effective given that members will know what is important for other members and they will be able to evaluate what they share.

2.3.3 Cognitive Centrality

Cognitive Centrality (CCen) considers the importance of the contribution of individual members having regard to the wider community context (Ilgen et al., 2005). Specifically CCen is defined as: “The greater the degree of overlap between the information a member holds and information other members hold on average, the greater the degree of centrality for that member”

Members who share a significant amount information which is valuable for the whole community become cognitively central (CCenM) and play a vital role in the smooth functioning of

a community. These members are considered as key ones in view of the fact that the sustainability of the community depends on them. Conversely, if a CCenM holds a piece of information relevant to the community and fails to share it with the others then the community will go to great efforts to find out about it, otherwise it might never know. CCenM are important for the maintenance of activity in the VC and the addition of new material. They can also guide new members during their integration in the community. It is therefore essential to detect whether influential members continue to be active and to help them understand their importance for the effective functioning of the VC. In addition, monitoring the activity of CCenM can be used as a motivational mechanism for CPerM to become more active.

On the other hand, peripheral members can sometimes hold unique knowledge, and can also be important for effective knowledge sharing. Having many members on the periphery of the VC causes the community to become inactive, thus shortening the “Sustain” stage of the lifecycle. Lave and Wenger (1999), give a description of how members initially found in the periphery gradually strengthen their integration in the community so as to become central. Consequently, these are the members who by undertaking a proper integration, they will become at a future stage the heart of the community., Accordingly, they help the community to adapt in relation to possible changes which would keep the community active for a longer period of time.