CREATION OF A VIRTUAL COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE FOR CSR RESEARCHERS

WELCOME

Master thesis presentationKevin RijkeArjen Kleinherenbrink

TutorsDr. J.J. JonkerDr. W.P.M. Martens

Part I

CSR Introduction Early phases of the research Literature studies

Part II

Methodology Execution Conclusions and recommendations

Going beyond financial profit

Considering people, the environment and society as a whole

‘Balancing profit and principles’

What is the current status of CSR research?

Can we improve upon this situation?CSR needs further development in both theory and practice

Questions

Assumptions

A community of practice is an adequate means of realising this development

Burchell & Cook, 2006; Waddock, 2004; Caroll, 1999; Marberg, 2007; Jonker & Marberg, 2007; Betz, 2006; Roome et al., 2006; Pinkston & Carroll, 1996; Garriga & Melé, 2004; Tencati et al., 2004; Graafland & Eiiffinger, 2004; Quazi & O’Brien, 2000; Jonker & Marberg 2007, 7; Nahapiet, 1998; Goshal, 1998; Cannon, 1994; Caroll, 1993; Solomon, 1997; Blair, 1998; Donaldson & Preston 1995

1Conceptual ambiguity

Corporate governance?

Ethics?

Sustainable development?

Corporate citizenship?

Corporate reputation?

2Endless categories

EcologicalLegalEthicalPhilosophicalPhilantropicalSpiritualReputationPoliticalHumanistic

3Do ‘x’

‘take a visible role in society’

‘focus on public prosperity’

‘work with employees and their families’

‘integrate social and environmental concerns’

‘interact with stakeholders on voluntary basis’

Conclusion:

CSR is ‘fuzzy’, ‘ondefinieerbaar’, ‘fragmented’, unco-ordinated and divided.

CSR literature study: 1926 - 2007

Conclusion:

Constant growth of perspectives and concepts

Increasing fragmentation

Lack of elaboration and testing of concepts

Friedman – Individuals must take responsibility

Barnard, Bowen - Organisations must take responsibility

Galbraith – Government and organisations are responsible

1950-1970

CSR characterised by:

Lack of coördination

Fragmentation

Inefficiencies

Lack of identity

Lack of focus

This results in two problems:

MVO does not contribute as much practically

applicable knowledge as it should

Concepts are not elaborated upon or tested

empirically, negatively influencing research

quality

A community of practice is an adequate means of realising the needed development in CSR.

McGovern (2005) – Individuals acting collectively with some degree of organization and continuity, partially outside the normal political processes and institutions, to bring about social change.

CSR is a movement– semi-coherent, normative motives, conflicting perspectives.

As a movement, CSR experiences the aforementioned problems.

Diani & Bison (2004):

Individuals group themselves as:

Movement

Coalition

Organisation

DISCOURSEDiverse Shared

MOVEMENT

COALITION

ORGANISATION

CSR

Desired future location: CSR as a community?

Waddock (2004), Marberg (2007) and Jonker

(2005) suggest so.

Een community to facilitate diverse content,

without discourse becoming too diverse for

interaction

Groups sharing certain values, maintaining social relations and frequently interacting with each other.

A geographic component is not a prerequisite for the existence of a community.

A CSR community is rational (Blokland, 2000): relations are purposeful, with specific goals, engaged by conscious actors.

A ‘community of practice’ is the community type best suited for CSR (Gläser, 2001):

Common activities

Embedded in institutions

Facilitates developments in both theory and

practice

CSR benefits from developments in theory and practice

A community of practice can facilitate such developments

How can a ‘community of practice’ (CoP) for CSR researchers be created?

This research aims to find whether and to what extent a CoP for CSR researchers can be created,

in order to contribute to knowledge and practice development around CSR and to offer her practitioners a professional network to do so.

Communities of practice ‐ an aggregate of people who come together around mutual engagement in

an endeavor.

Practices emerge in the course of this mutual endeavor. As a social construct, a CoP is different from the traditional community, primarily because it is defined simultaneously by its membership and by the practice in which that membership engages.

Characteristics:

Joint enterprise

Mutual engagement

Shared Repertoire

For CSR, the best type of COP is a Virtual Community of Practice (VCoP)

A virtual network to eliminate time and space that separate researchers.

Group of individuals that uses a virtual infrastructure for a specific knowledge domain, emphasizing the creation and exchange of knowlege.

Stimulates sharing knowledge

Eliminates time and space

Takes advantage of ‘weak ties’

Swift exchange of information

These characteristics are thought to eliminate or at least lessen:

The lack of practically applicable knowledge

The lack of concept elaboration and testing

Rules-of-thumb in design Contextual enquiry User-based design Participatory design Direct manipulation Focused content Social protocols Institutional memory

A VCoP can only be facilitated, never fully created.

This research deviates from academic standards:

2.No division between researchers and research object

1. No chronological division between theory and practice

This means we are performing action research

Action research is a research methodology(Peters & Robinson, 1984: 54) in which action and research happen simultaneously(Altrichter et al., 2002).

This creates overlap between researcher and the research object, the ‘field’ and the ‘laboratory’ (Whyte et al., 1989; Altrichter et al., 2002).

Why action research?

Practical problem

Developing a CoP parallel to literature studies

Need to facilitate knowledge processes

Aiming to realise a radical transformation

All action research is an intervention(Schein, 1995)

A VCoP for CSR is a Large Scale Intervention:

Platform for communication and interaction

Emphasizing knowledge sharing

No agenda or predetermined content

‘Whole scale change’: open to all actors

Offering students of CSR a central platform for:

Sharing and creating knowledge

Interaction

Co-operation

Reaching out to companies, governments,

etc.

Sharing and creating knowledge

Interaction

Co-operation

Reaching out

Circa 250.000 visitors after six months.

1000 library items after six months.

Worldwide standard for CSR students.

Further development of job offerings and

resumes.

CSR Center Business Challenge.

CSR needs development in theory and

practice.

A VCoP can facilitate this development.

This should result in more applicable

practical knowledge and elaboration / testing

of concepts.

Literature study confirms CSR Center

adheres to VCoP design specifications.

Recommeded research:

Empirical research into how VCoPs come into existence

If a VCoP is realised, how does this affect the 5 CSR characteristics?

And how does it affect the to identified problems of CSR?

Questions?

info@csrcenter.net