Communities of practice are a possible mechanism for improving knowledge sharing among project managers, both within and between organizations. Based on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, we theorize a model of participation intensity in communities of practice by project managers and explore the use of Web 2.0 technologies to increase this participation. Using structural equation modeling, we test the research model and find that the factors of reputation, enjoyment, and management support impact the participation intensity of project managers in communities of practice. However, we do not find support for the impact of Web 2.0 technologies on participation intensity. This study provides evidence that participation in communities of practice can result in individual benefits for the project manager, as well as in more far-reaching organizational benefits.
AjmalM. M., & KoskinenK.U. (2008). Knowledge transfer in project-based organizations: An organizational culture perspective. Project Management Journal, 39(1), 7–15.
2.
AlgeoC. (2014). Exploring project knowledge acquisition and exchange through action research. Project Management Journal, 45(3), 46–56.
3.
AubryM., HobbsB., & ThuillierD. (2009). Organisational project management: An historical approach to the study of PMOs. International Journal of Project Management, 26, 38–43.
4.
BlackmoreC. (2012). Landscapes of practices, social learning systems, and rural innovation. The 10th European IFSA Symposium: Producing and Reproducing Farming Systems: New Modes of Organisation for Sustainable Food Systems of Tomorrow, 1–4 July 2012, Aarhus, Denmark.
5.
BrownJ. S., & DuguidP. (1991). Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 2(1), 40–57.
6.
ChinW. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In MarcoulidesG. A. (Ed.), Modern business research methods.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
7.
Cooke-DaviesT. (2002). The “real” success factors on projects. International Journal of Project Management, 20, 185–190.
8.
CoxA.M. (2005). What are communities of practice? A comparative review of four seminal works. Journal of Information Science, 31(6), 527–540.
9.
DavenportT. H., & PrusakL. (1998). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know.Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
10.
DeciE.L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation.New York, NY: Plenum Press.
11.
DeciE., & RyanR. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior.New York, NY: Plenum Press.
12.
DeLoneW. H., & McLeanE.R. (1992). Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 60–95.
13.
DiamantopoulosA., & WinklhoferH.M. (2001). Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development. Journal of Marketing Research, 38, 269–277.
14.
DietrichP., KujalaJ., & ArttoK. (2013). Inter-team coordination patterns and outcomes in multi-team projects. Project Management Journal, 44(6), 6–19.
15.
GarretyK., RobertsonP.L., & BadhamR. (2004). Integrating communities of practice in technology development projects. International Journal of Project Management, 22(5), 351–358.
16.
HargadonA.B. (1998). Firms as knowledge brokers: Lessons in pursuing continuous innovation. California Management Review, 40(3), 209–227.
17.
JepsenL. (2013). Complex new product development projects: How the project manager's information sharing with core actors changes over time. Project Management Journal, 44(6), 20–35.
18.
KankanhalliA., TanB., & WeiK. (2005). Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 113–143.
LampelJ., & BhallaA. (2007). The role of status seeking in online communities: Giving the gift of experience. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2), 434–455.
MillenD. R., FontaineM. A., & MullerM.J. (2002). Understanding the benefits and costs of communities of practice. Communications of the ACM, 45(4), 69–73.
NunnallyJ.C., (1978). Psychometric theory.New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
29.
PetterS., StraubD., & RaiA. (2007). Specifying formative constructs in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 31, 623–656.
30.
PintoJ. K., & SlevinD.P. (1987). Critical factors in successful project implementation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 34(1), 22–27.
31.
RingleC. M., WendeS., & WillW. (2005). SmartPLS 2.0 (M3) Beta, Hamburg. Retrieved from http://www.smartpls.de
32.
RobertsJ. (2006). Limits to communities of practice. Journal of Management Studies, 43(3), 623–639.
33.
RuuskaI., & VartiainenM. (2005). Characteristics of knowledge sharing communities in project organizations. International Journal of Project Management, 23(5), 374–379.
34.
RyanR., & DeciE. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.
35.
Saint-OngeH., & WallaceD. (2003). Leveraging communities of practice for strategic advantage.London, UK: Butterworth Heinemann.
36.
SharmaR., & YettonP. (2003). The contingent effects of management support and task interdependence on successful information systems implementation. MIS Quarterly, 27(4), 533–555.
37.
TedjamuliaS.J.J., OlsenD. R., DeanD. L., & AlbrechtC.C. (2005). Motivating content contributions to online communities: Toward a more comprehensive theory. In Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS).
38.
VenkateshV. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 342–365.
39.
WaskoM., & FarajS. (2000). “It is what one does:” Why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9(2-3), 155–173.
40.
WaskoM., & FarajS. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 35–57.
41.
WengerE. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, identity.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
42.
WengerE. (2010). Communities of practice and social learning systems: The career of a concept. In BlackmoreC. (Ed.), Social learning systems and communities of practice (pp. 179–198). London, UK: Springer.
43.
WengerE. C., McDermottR., & SnyderW.C. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge.Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
44.
WengerE. C., & SnyderW.M. (2000). Communications of practice: The organizational frontier. Harvard Business Review, January–February, 139–145.
45.
WollebaekD., & SelleP. (2002). Does participation in voluntary associations contribute to social capital? The impact of intensity, scope, and type. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 31(1), 32–61.
