Title |
The development, design, testing, refinement, simulation and application of an evaluation framework for communities of practice and social-professional networks
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, September 2009
|
DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-9-162 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Jeffrey Braithwaite, Johanna I Westbrook, Geetha Ranmuthugala, Frances Cunningham, Jennifer Plumb, Janice Wiley, Dianne Ball, Sue Huckson, Cliff Hughes, Brian Johnston, Joanne Callen, Nerida Creswick, Andrew Georgiou, Luc Betbeder-Matibet, Deborah Debono |
Abstract |
Communities of practice and social-professional networks are generally considered to enhance workplace experience and enable organizational success. However, despite the remarkable growth in interest in the role of collaborating structures in a range of industries, there is a paucity of empirical research to support this view. Nor is there a convincing model for their systematic evaluation, despite the significant potential benefits in answering the core question: how well do groups of professionals work together and how could they be organised to work together more effectively? This research project will produce a rigorous evaluation methodology and deliver supporting tools for the benefit of researchers, policymakers, practitioners and consumers within the health system and other sectors. Given the prevalence and importance of communities of practice and social networks, and the extent of investments in them, this project represents a scientific innovation of national and international significance. |
Twitter Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 3 | 2% |
Netherlands | 2 | 1% |
Canada | 2 | 1% |
Spain | 2 | 1% |
Brazil | 1 | <1% |
Australia | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 146 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 18% |
Researcher | 26 | 17% |
Student > Master | 22 | 14% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 10% |
Other | 11 | 7% |
Other | 31 | 20% |
Unknown | 23 | 15% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 22% |
Social Sciences | 24 | 15% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 8% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 11 | 7% |
Computer Science | 11 | 7% |
Other | 42 | 27% |
Unknown | 23 | 15% |