Page 188 -

THE ROLE OF SOCIAL NETWORKS AND BOUNDARY-SPANNERS 177

process was driven not by managers but by the customer service reps themselves.
It was reps, not managers, who both supplied and vetted the tips. This ensured
that the content of the database was relevant, reliable and up to date. With this
kind of content, Xerox had no problems in ensuring that reps made use of the
information available – these tips made the reps’ work life easier, not harder, and
in the process brought considerable savings to the company. Xerox estimated
that Eureka saved the corporation around $100 million within a few years of its
inception (Brown and Duguid, 2000a).
As yet, the factors which make some online communities successful while
many others fail are still uncertain and complex. It is clear that the technol-
ogy or Internet systems involved, though important pre-requisites, are far from
being the primary drivers of success. Brown and Duguid (2000b), for example,
highlight the importance of what they term ‘cultural objects’. These can be
texts, stories or problems as in the Xerox case. Where members of an online
community share such objects, and are able to develop meaningful dialogue
around them, the community is more likely to develop a distinctive meaning and
value to its participants. In this respect, by facilitating conversations amongst
groups and individuals, ICT systems can help to extend the experience of shared
meanings and understandings beyond the realm of physical co-location into the
virtual space of the company intranet or e-mail forum.
This insight underlines the different and often intangible benefits which
online communities provide to their participants. For individuals they can be
an important way of achieving status and identity within a particular group
(McLure et al., 2005). They may also provide valuable sources of knowledge
and information from other members. For the organization too, online com-
munities can provide benefits by enabling the sharing of knowledge and col-
laboration across organizational boundaries. Such knowledge sharing is seen as
important in transferring best practice, spreading innovations and improving
processes (Wenger et al., 2002).
Clearly, these benefits are often linked to the connectivity which the commu-
nity provides. By the same token, this is one reason why many communities fail.
Communities which do not reach a critical mass – that is, having a sufficiently
large and diverse membership – ultimately lose the interest and engagement of
their participants. Where communities do achieve such critical mass, however,
they can really take off, experiencing an upward spiral in membership growth.
Such momentum can be maintained as long as the growth in participant num-
bers is matched by increases in the quality of the community dialogue and the
forms of knowledge shared (McDermott, 2004).

>> CONCLUSIONS

This chapter has reviewed the major role which social networks play in knowl-
edge work. Such networks are important because they represent one of the most
effective means of sharing knowledge, and are often an important means of over-
coming the limitations which functional silos and hierarchies place on knowledge
sharing. As we have discussed, networks should not be seen as a panacea for the

6/5/09 7:19:35 AM
9780230_522015_09_cha08.indd 177 6/5/09 7:19:35 AM
9780230_522015_09_cha08.indd 177