Browsing by Author "Julia Storberg-Walker, Committee Co-Chair"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Toward a Social Network-Based Theory of Large-Group Interventions
    (2008-12-08) Garcia, Stephen K.; Julia Storberg-Walker, Committee Co-Chair; Tony O'Driscoll, Committee Member; James Bartlett, Committee Co-Chair; Samuel B Pond III, Committee Member
    GARCIA, STEPHEN KING. Toward a Social Network-Based Theory of Large-Group Interventions. (Under the direction of Julia Storberg-Walker.) Increasing environmental complexity requires organizations to adapt and change at an accelerated pace (Burke, 2002). In response, organizations are employing new organization change approaches that promise more rapid, whole-system change (Dewey and Carter, 2003; Marshak, 2004). One such approach is large-group interventions (Bunker & Alban, 1992a, 1997, 2005). Large-group intervention proponents suggest that the methods are fast and effective because they engage greater numbers of organizational stakeholders, tap into the collective wisdom of the organization, and quickly generate broad-based commitment to change. However, while large-group intervention practice is increasing (Worley and Feyerherm, 2003), many researchers contend that the theory underpinning large-group interventions is not adequately articulated (Austin & Bartunek, 2003; Bryson and Anderson, 2000; Weber & Manning, 1998). As a result, it difficult to say with certainty how large-group interventions work, in which situations they are appropriate, or how they might be integrated with other forms of organization development. This study was conducted to address this gap. A social network perspective was adopted as an explanation for how large-group interventions work. In this view, large group interventions work because of the ability to restructure the networks of social relationships existing within organizations (Clarke, 2005; Garcia, 2007; Tenkasi & Chesmore, 2003). From this perspective, the study conceptualized and operationalized "A Social Network-Based Theory of Large-Group Interventions" using Dubin’s (1978) eight-step theory building research methodology. The theory generated by this study offers implications for large group intervention research and practice, as well as adds to the knowledge base of theory building research methods. Specifically, the study provided new theoretically-informed knowledge about what kinds of social network changes result from large-group interventions, under what circumstances these network changes occur, and how these network changes can generate organizational change. Researchers are also provided with theoretically-justified social network variables that could be used to operationalize Lewin's (1947) 3-Step Model of Change. Further, new opportunities to develop a mid-range theory of organizational change are presented through the social network perspective. The study offers compelling evidence for understanding the limitations of applying Dubin's (1978) method to the development of new theory. The theory building research methods undertaken in the study exposed a critical shortcoming in developing a theory about a process. Dubin’s (1978) methodology was developed during a time when social scientific research was focused on explaining differences between, rather than processes of. Consequently, Dubin’s explanation of and methods for developing system states (e.g., theories in action) removed the process of change from the theory building process. Change, to Dubin, was moving from one system state to another, and his methods are not structured to explain movement between system states. Movement between system states was beyond the scope of theory building research at that time. This key finding offers future researchers a point of departure for future theory building research studies seeking to understand change processes. Finally, the study offers theoretically justified opportunities for improving the practice of large group interventions. "A Social Network-Based Theory of Large-Group Interventions" provides specific recommendations for the design and implementation of large-group interventions including decision criteria to identify key social network change levers, steps to accelerate the collaboration and buy-in of those involved, and tactics to evaluate the degree of change generated by large group interventions.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    The usefulness of Wenger's framework in understanding a community of practice
    (2008-12-02) Bozarth, Jane; Diane Chapman, Committee Co-Chair; Bonnie Fusarelli, Committee Member; Colleen Wiessner, Committee Member; Julia Storberg-Walker, Committee Co-Chair
    ABSTRACT BOZARTH, JANE. The Usefulness of Wenger’s Framework in Understanding a Community of Practice. (Under the direction of Julia Storberg-Walker and Diane Chapman.) ABSTRACT BOZARTH, JANE. The Usefulness of Wenger’s Framework in Understanding a Community of Practice. (Under the direction of Julia Storberg-Walker and Diane Chapman.) Communities of practice (CoPs) are self-managed groups of individuals who share a common interest, often a work role, and interact with the intention of improving practice. As 21st-century American businesses face global expansion and the exodus of the Baby Boomer generation from the workforce, developing new knowledge management strategies, particularly those capable of capturing hard-to-document tacit knowledge, is a critical need. Extant literature deals heavily with the formation and attempted management of communities of practice, but is sparse on what actually takes place inside them; that is, how they “work,†information that could prove invaluable to business leaders. Etienne Wenger (1998) is widely cited for his work on the topic of communities of practice. However, the framework he developed in his seminal book Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity is overlooked in the academic and popular business press, where the focus is most typically on managing a community of practice, rather than understanding their internal dynamics. Further, no study since the book was published has ever tested Wenger’s framework to see whether, or the degree to which, the framework is useful when applied to another context. This instrumental case study is an attempt to fill this gap in the research literature. It tested the framework to determine the extent to which it was useful in understanding the internal dynamics of a community of practice. While the findings of this study confirmed a generic adequacy of Wenger’s framework, the study suggests important enhancements to the Wenger framework for future researchers. A refined framework for understanding the internal dynamics of a community of practice was generated in this study. This refined framework contributes to the existing knowledge of CoPs by extending the understanding of how a successful CoP “works,†informs new means for transmitting tacit knowledge, establishes new guidelines for future researchers, and paves the way for the eventual development of a fully operationalized theory of CoPs. Implications for practice may include consideration of the CoP not only as possessing knowledge which might be harnessed, but as a means of retaining high-performing staff by providing them a space in which they can excel. It is hoped that future research on communities of practice will be influenced by the refined framework generated by this study. Further, scholars and practitioners now have research findings that support a shift in focus from managing a community of practice, to nurturing and understanding the significant internal dynamics of learning, meaning, and identity.