Content uploaded by Azi Lev-On
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Azi Lev-On on Apr 19, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
E. Tambouris et al. (Eds.): ePart 2014, LNCS 8654, pp. 38–51, 2014.
© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2014
Starting a Conversation: The Place of Managers
in Opening Discussions in Communities of Practice
Azi Lev-On and Nili Steinfeld
Ariel University, Ariel, Israel
{azilevon,nilisteinfeld}@gmail.com
Abstract. Online communities of practice are becoming significant discursive
arenas in many organizations. Much literature about online communities depicts
them as peer-based environments based on user-generated content, where
community members take a central role in starting conversations. The current
study shifts the focus from community members into managers, and asks who
starts conversations in communities of practice, and if there are differences be-
tween discussions opened by managers and by community members in terms of
scope, topics of discussion, engagement and level of participation. Findings
demonstrate the importance of managers in starting conversations and setting
the discursive environment of communities of practice.
Keywords: Communities of Practice, Managers, Engagement, Online Discus-
sions, Conversations, Social Media.
1 Theoretical Background
Organizations and systems of governance are characterized by horizontal and vertical
dimensions of command and control [16]. Communities, online as well as offline,
attract public and scholarly attention due to their focus on the horizontal dimension of
governance, which is expressed by peer production, monitoring and sanctioning, col-
laborative systems of moderation and conflict resolution, and communication between
peers [3, 17, 9, 15, 10, 14, 8]. However, communities also have a vertical dimension,
which may be even more evident in online than in offline communities. Online com-
munities can have owners, managers, designers, technical professionals and modera-
tors which allow the very existence of the community and perform operations which
are essential for creating and maintaining the platform and advance content around
which the community evolves and is maintained [2, 14, 8]. But despite the centrality
of the vertical dimension in the ongoing activities of online communities, research
focuses almost exclusively on their horizontal dimension [5]. This article helps filling
the void by studying the vertical dimension of online communities of practice, focus-
ing on the impact of community managers’ actions on the dynamics of conversations
within the community.
The small literature about management of online communities demonstrates the
central role of community managers and their significant impact on attaining the
The Place of Managers in Opening Discussions in Communities of Practice 39
community’s goals and on the community's success, in several domains: member
management, i.e. recruiting new members, removing members if necessary, encourag-
ing users' engagement in the community [1, 2, 13]; content management, i.e. oversee-
ing the agenda of discussions, initiating and encouraging discussions, facilitating
engagement, moderating and preventing "flaming", ensuring that discussions are “on
topic” and preventing information overload [8, 11, 12,13]; handling social and tech-
nological issues, i.e. clarifying the norms of conduct in the community to members,
sanctioning members if needed, and covering other types of administration, such as
handling the financial and material infrastructure of the community [14, 8].
Studies also indicate that community members perceive the functioning of manag-
ers as critical to the success of the community, and their activity is perceived to con-
tribute to the development from a platform for information sharing to a space where
knowledge is constructed through mutual learning between community members [7].
The limited academic literature about the functioning and impact of the manage-
ment of online communities of practice is mostly based on interviews or studies
carried out in small groups. This is, to the best of our knowledge, the first empirical
research that focuses on the management of online communities using large-scale
quantitative content analysis of more than 7,000 posts. Thus, it contributes to a com-
prehensive methodological study of the role and impact of managers in online
communities of practice- by analyzing their behavior in the community rather than
illustrating a perceived importance given to the role of managers, which was the focus
of previous research. Furthermore, this study is aimed specifically at learning about
the role of community managers in opening discussions, dictating and advancing the
discourse in the community. The quantitative data is complemented by interviews
with community members and managers, which shed some light on the way members
and managers see the importance and role of the manager in the community.
2 Communities of Practice of the Ministry of Social
Affairs – Background
The research arena of the current study is the communities of practice established by
the Israeli Ministry of Social Affairs. The communities were established in September
2006, to promote learning amongst social workers who are employed in different
organizations [4], and utilize the penetration of ICT technologies into the welfare
services to promote cross-organizational learning and conversations. Although estab-
lished by the ministry, most of the members in the communities are not employees of
the ministry. In a survey conducted by the website administrators in 2009, only a
quarter of the members were employees of the ministry of social affairs, a percentage
which is likely even smaller today. The ministry hosts the website but the communi-
ties involve practitioners and professionals in positions related to the communities'
field of practice from variant backgrounds and positions in municipalities, NGOs and
more. At the time of data collection (early 2012), 31 communities existed with more
than 7,700 members.
40 A. Lev-On and N. Steinfeld
The communities bring together professionals to address issues related to the
social services, and function as an arena for encounters between different stake-
holders involved in similar endeavors (i.e. adoption, juvenile delinquency, vi-
olence in the family and more). Entering the communities requires login using a
password, and all communication is identified by members’ name and position.
The list of members is visible and available to all members of the community, so
members know who may read the content they upload, and comment on it. Every
community has a manager who volunteered for the mission, and receives a small
payback in the form of vouchers [4]. Each day a digest that summarizes the new
content which was uploaded to the community is distributed amongst members, to
allow them to easily be updated about what goes on in the community, without
entering the website itself [6].
3 Hypotheses
Based on the small academic literature surveyed above, the following hypotheses
were formulated:
• H1: Since one of the manager's roles is in initiating and advancing discussions, we
expect to find that managers open more discussions compared to members, while
members are more active in responding to first posts (relative to the entire content
created by managers and members, respectively).
• H2: Managers are especially vital at the beginning of the community's life cycle, in
presenting an example of desired conduct and types of discussions, and in streng-
thening a sense of community among the members. Therefore, we expect to find
that managers open more discussions in the first year of the community, while
members are more dominant in starting discussions in later years.
• H3: Since all members are familiar with the community manager, but usually not
with all of the members, and since the managers are perceived as important and
central to the community as previous research suggests, we expect to find that dis-
cussions opened by managers attract more engagement (i.e. more comments) than
discussions opened by members.
• H4: In the same manner, discussions opened by managers would attract more par-
ticipants than discussions opened by members
And finally, at the absence of supporting literature, the following research questions
were formulated:
• RQ1: What are the topics of first messages posted by managers and members?
• RQ2: What are the topics of the discussions that follow from first messages posted
by managers and members?
The Place of Managers in Opening Discussions in Communities of Practice 41
4 Methodology
The study focuses on 11 of the 31 communities of practice which were online at the
time of data collection. The communities which were selected for analysis are diverse
and present different types of communities, on several grounds: The date of estab-
lishment (older communities vs. newer ones), the scope of activity within the com-
munity (measured by the percentage of active members out of all members of the
community), the size of the community (measured by the number of members in the
community) and the areas of practice of the community (therapeutic communities,
centered around support to clients, compared to communities engaged in formal is-
sues and procedures). This way, different types of communities are represented in the
study, which enables us to learn about the project in general, on its various domains.
After considering the variables described above, the following communities were
selected for the study: Intellectual Disability (1777 members), Children at Risk (1549
members), Immigrants and Inter-Cultural Issues (234 members), Blind and the Vi-
sually Impaired (554 members), Domestic Violence (1672 members), Foster care
(550 members), Juvenile Delinquency (637 members), Community Work (1239
members), Policy and Performance (626 members), Welfare Management at Munici-
palities (335 members) and Organizational Learning (1558 members). In total, the
communities selected for research involve between 234 and 1777 members. Each
community has usually only one manager, and in some cases may have two managers.
The research was conducted using a mixed-method approach: A quantitative con-
tent analysis of posts from the communities selected allows us to learn about the kind
of content posted by managers and by members, and how the communities function
with relevance to our research questions. In addition, interviews with members and
managers were conducted, which added depth to the results of the content analysis
and allowed us to ask members and managers about the way the manager's role is
perceived by them, understanding the views behind members' and managers' behavior
in the communities.
In each community of practice which was included in the sample, all posts were
available from the day the community was established until early 2012 when data was
delivered to the researchers. In order to get a comprehensive understanding of the way
the communities are used by different types of members, throughout the years of their
existence, all 7,248 posts which were included in the sample were analyzed using a
coding book which was developed for the study and included 25 sections.
The study involves two units of analysis: posts, and threaded discussions (a first
post and at least one additional comment related to it). Thus, some of the categories in
the coding book relate to posts and others to discussions. The main focus of the cod-
ing book was related to the content of the post or discussion. In particular, the follow-
ing categories were used to code the content of posts:
• Practical advice, which is directly related to daily work with clients, for example,
what is the impact of certain kinds of interventions?
• Organizational advice, related to employees’ daily work unrelated to working with
clients, for example concerning forms, procedures, programs and courses
42 A. Lev-On and N. Steinfeld
• Statements about the community’s theme, which are statements that relate not to
employees’ daily work, but to more general issues related to the community’s main
theme, for example: How to improve service for patients? How to improve the sta-
tus of blind people in the Israeli society?
• Emotional support- addressing community members’ manifestations of charged
emotions (anger, frustration, fear, sadness, etc.) that are related to their work.
• Additional categories were: academic advice, informing on an event or conference,
greetings and gratitude, publication of a project or organization, submitting contact
details, and finally- other topics.
In addition to the content of posts, other relevant categories in the coding book in-
cluded time of publication (measured by the time from the community's establish-
ment. For example: Within one year of the community's establishment), and on the
discussion level- number of participants in the entire discussion, and number of posts
posted to the entire discussion. In addition, every post was coded as being either a
regular post or a first post (first posts are posts that start a new discussion and do not
comment on a previous post).
The dataset includes 308 first posts by managers of the communities, and 1,201
first posts by the other members of the communities. The study focuses on first posts,
because if indeed community managers behave differently than other members of the
communities, this would be manifested first and foremost in posts that open new
discussions. Although some of the roles of community members as the literature
suggests are in intervening in ongoing discussions (ensuring that discussions are "on-
topic", for example), we believe that focusing on posts that initiate new discussions
can tell us something specific about the way managers dictate the discourse of the
community and influence the agenda. The contents of first posts dictate to a great
extent the nature of the rest of the discussion. This is where managers and members
can have the most influence on the discussion that evolves from their post. Further-
more, comparing first posts by managers and members, and the discussions that
evolve from them- in terms of number of responses or participants in the discussion,
provides an indication about the relative success of managers to initiate discussions
and engage members in comparison to other members.
To complete the picture received from the content analysis, 71 in-depth, semi-
structured interviews were conducted with members and managers of the communi-
ties, when 5 of the interviewees were community managers and 66 were "regular"
members. The main goal of the interviews was to examine how community members
and managers perceive the discussion in the community and its effects, as well as
their views of the managers and their desired functioning. This can shed light on the
dynamics in the community and explain the background of the findings from the con-
tent analysis. The interviewees were sampled from the database of the Ministry of
Social Affairs, which included exactly 7,777 members at the time of data collection
(the beginning of 2012). Community members were selected based on their different
scope of involvement in the community, measured by number of times users logged
in to the communities, and the overall number of posts they published, in order to
receive input from active and passive users, on different levels of involvement.
The Place of Managers in Opening Discussions in Communities of Practice 43
The interviews focused on usage patterns, views of community manager’s actual
and desirable functioning, influence of interactions in the community on everyday
professional practices etc.
5 Findings- Content Analysis: Comparison of Posts by
Managers and by Members
The literature review suggests that a great importance is attributed to the role of
community managers, and their functioning can greatly affect the performance of the
community and its ability to attain its goals. The general findings suggest that manag-
ers are indeed dominant in the communities in terms of content creation. Thus, 17.9%
of the posts in the sample were written by managers, although each community, hav-
ing hundreds to more than a thousand members, has just one or two managers, while
only 39.7% of the posts are nested in threaded discussions conducted only among
community members without the participation of managers. 51.3% of the posts are
embedded in discussions which involved both community managers and “regular”
members. In the following sections, detailed quantitative findings illustrate the central
role of managers in starting conversations.
5.1 Type of Messages Posted by Managers: First Posts, First-Order Comments
or Higher-Order Comments?
The distribution of type of messages that are posted to the communities (first posts,
first-order comments or higher-order comments, i.e. replies to comment), may be a
result of a few processes that occur in the communities. On the one hand, a relatively
high percentage of first messages out of all messages posted by managers can indicate
that managers deliberately perceive their role as one of generating, stimulating and
“steering” discussions among community members that might have occurred even
without managers’ involvement. On other cases, a high percentage of first posts by
managers may actually indicate a fairly “dormant” community, in which no debates
emerge spontaneously and managers need to intervene.
Table 1 shows the distribution of first posts, first-order comments and higher-order
comments (comments to comments) posted by managers and members. A chi-square
test was performed to examine the relation between the identity of the author of a post
(the manager or a member of the community) and the type of posts (a first post, first-
order comment or higher-order comment). The relation between these variables was
significant (χ2= 38.98, p<0.01). The effect size was calculated using Cramer's v and
was found to be weak (r=0.07). The table shows that managers post first posts and
higher-order posts in higher percentages out of all of their posts, compared to the
distribution of posts by members, where first-order responses are more common
among them.
44 A. Lev-On and N. Steinfeld
Table 1. Distribution of posts by managers and members
Percentage of
higher-order
comments
Percentage of
first-order com-
ments
Percentage of
first posts
Author of post
49.6% 26.6% 23.8% Managers
44.2% 35.7% 20.2% Members
5.2 Timing of Posting First Messages by Managers and Members
A chi-square test was performed to examine the relation between the identity of
the author (manager vs. member) of a first message initiating a new discussion, and
the publication date of the message- relative to the establishment of the community.
The purpose of the test is to analyze whether managers tend to open new conversa-
tions more at the beginning of the community's activity than later on.
The relation between these variables was significant (χ2= 23.67, p<0.01). The ef-
fect size was calculated using Cramer's v and was found to be weak (r=0.13). Table 2
summarizes the distribution of first massages by authors and date of publication. We
see from the table that managers are more active in opening discussions in the first
two years, then in the third year the level of their activity decreases. The fourth year
seems to be a more active year- but in the fifth year, again, we see a significant
decrease in initiating discussions. As for members, they are most active in opening
discussions in the second year, while less active at the first year of the community's
establishment. The level of activity in initiating discussions decreases from the third
year on.
Table 2. Distribution of first posts by managers and members according to date of publication
(after the community’s establishment)
Author of
first post
Pub-
lished
during the
first year
Pub-
lished
during the
second
year
Pub-
lished
during the
third year
Pub-
lished
during the
fourth year
Pub-
lished
more than
4 years
from the
communi-
ty's estab-
lishment
Managers 24.6% 24.7% 14.9% 24.4% 11.4%
members 17.1% 28.2% 19.7% 17.7% 17.3%
The Place of Managers in Opening Discussions in Communities of Practice 45
5.3 Engagement in Discussions Opened by Managers and Members
In order to learn whether first posts by managers have had more responses in the en-
tire discussion that followed than first posts by other community members, a T-test
for independent samples was used. The test found significant differences
(t(358.30)=3.25, p<0.01) between the amount of comments in discussions opened by
managers (mean=5.31 responses, SD=9.78), and the amount of comments in discus-
sions opened by members (mean=3.43, SD=5.5).
5.4 Number of Participants in Discussions Opened by Managers and Members
In order to learn whether discussions initiated by managers result in more participants
than discussions initiated by members, a T-test for independent samples was used.
The test found no significant differences (t(1507)= 0.73, p= n.s). Discussions opened by
managers attracted on average 3.42 participants (SD=3.67), while discussions opened
by members attracted on average 3.28 participants (SD=2.88).1
5.5 Topics of First Messages Posted by Managers and Members
Next, we analyzed the content of first posts (posts that opened discussion) by manag-
ers and members. Chi-square tests were performed to examine the relation between
the initiator of a discussion and the topics of the first posts. In the following cases,
significant correlations were found:
• Practical advice (χ2= 38.18, p<0.01). The effect size was calculated using Cramer's
v and was found to be weak (r=0.16).
• Informing on an event or conference (χ2= 9.42, p<0.01). The effect size was calcu-
lated using Cramer's v and was found to be weak (r=0.08).
• Publication of a project or organization (χ2= 12.12, p<0.01. The effect size was
calculated using Cramer's v and was found to be weak (r=0.09).
• Giving contact details (χ2= 4.44, p<0.05. The effect size was calculated using
Cramer's v and was found to be weak (r=0.05).
• Expressing personal opinions on an issue (χ2= 26, p<0.01. The effect size was
calculated using Cramer's v and was found to be weak (r=0.13).
Table 3 summarizes the distribution of message topics in first messages (messages
that opened discussions) posted by managers and members. It seems that messages by
members include a higher rate of practical advice, while messages by managers have
a higher percentage of personal opinions or publicize events or projects. No signifi-
cant differences between the groups were found in terms of organizational advice,
academic advice or emotional support.
1 It should be noted, however, that the number of participants in discussions where managers
were involved (but not necessarily where they opened the discussion) was 4.87 (SD=3.82),
and was significantly higher (t(765.86)=-4.61, p<0.01) than the number of participants in discus-
sions where managers were not involved (3.93, SD=2.46).
46 A. Lev-On and N. Steinfeld
Table 3. Topics of first messages by managers and members (*=significant difference between
managers and members)
Topic of post
% in first
messages by
managers
% in first
messages by
members
Practical advice* 20.1% 39%
Organizational advice 26.6% 25.9%
Academic advice 9.7% 10.6%
Emotional support 4.5% 3.2%
Informing on an event or conference* 17.5% 11.1%
Greetings and gratitude 3.9% 3.7%
Publication of a project or organization* 23.4% 15.1%
Submitting contact details* 6.2% 10.1%
Expressing personal opinions on an issue* 21.1% 10.3%
Other topics* 10.4% 6.2%
5.6 Topics of Messages Included in Discussions Opened by Managers and
Members
Next, we analyzed the content of posts in discussions that followed from first posts by
managers (n=1805), compared to the content of posts in discussions that followed
from first posts by members (n=4961). Chi-square tests were performed to examine
the relation between the identity of the initiator of a discussion (the manager or a
member of the community) and the topics discussed in messages posted within the
discussion. In the following cases, significant correlations were found:
• Practical advice (χ2= 65.55, p<0.01). The effect size was calculated using Cramer's
v and was found to be weak (r=0.1).
• Organizational advice (χ2= 4.91, p<0.05). The effect size was calculated using
Cramer's v and was found to be weak (r=0.03).
• Academic advice (χ2= 10.51, p<0.01). The effect size was calculated using Cra-
mer's v and was found to be weak (r=0.04).
• Informing on an event or conference (χ2= 23.21, p<0.01). The effect size was cal-
culated using Cramer's v and was found to be weak (r=0.06).
• Publication of a project or organization (χ2= 4.76, p<0.05). The effect size was
calculated using Cramer's v and was found to be weak (r=0.03).
The Place of Managers in Opening Discussions in Communities of Practice 47
• Giving contact details (χ2= 110.03, p<0.01). The effect size was calculated using
Cramer's v and was found to be weak (r=0.13).
• Expressing personal opinions on an issue (χ2= 14.95, p<0.01). The effect size was
calculated using Cramer's v and was found to be weak (r=0.05).
Table 4. Topics of messages in discussions that were initiated by managers and members
(*=significant difference between managers and members)
Topic of message % within messages
posted in discussions
initiated by the manager
% within messages
posted in discussions
initiated by members of
the community
Practical advice* 32.7% 43.6%
Organizational advice* 27.9% 25.2%
Academic advice* 4.5% 6.6%
Emotional support 3.5% 3.6%
Informing on an event
or conference*
9.9% 6.4%
Greeting and gratitude 11% 11.6%
Publication of a project
or organization*
8.5% 6.9%
Giving contact details* 1.5% 8.8%
Expressing personal
opinions on an issue*
27.4% 22.9%
Other topics* 13.9% 6.9%
Table 4 above summarizes the distribution of message topics in discussions which
were initiated by managers and members. Messages in discussions initiated by mem-
bers include a higher rate of practical and academic advice, while messages by man-
agers have a higher percentage of organizational advice, personal opinions and events
or projects publicity. No significant differences between managers and members
were found in terms of emotional support.
6 Findings- Interviews: Perceived Importance of Managers and
Their Behind-the-Scenes Activity
The analysis so far demonstrates the dominance of community managers in terms of
contributing content, initiating discussions and engaging in conversations. In closing
48 A. Lev-On and N. Steinfeld
this paper, we decided to investigate whether the content analysis findings are com-
patible with the perceptions of members and managers, and if they perceive a central
place in the community for managers, especially with regard to initiating discussions.
The interviews indicate that the members unanimously, recognize that managers
are the basis for the community and an anchor for content and conversations. For the
interviewees, the managers should develop community discussions even if artificially,
maintain the discussion so that it is dynamic and engaging, and act in a way that
would encourage members to participate. One of the manager's roles, for members, is
to make sure that a shared knowledge relevant to the community's field of practice
develops within the community. Some members specified that managers sometimes
even work “behind the scenes” and privately encourage members to contribute con-
tent and respond (which of course cannot be analyzed using content analysis above).
Z: "if it wasn’t for her [the manager]- I
,
for example, wouldn’t even be slightly in-
volved[…] She is doing all she can, trying to reach each and every one of us […] She
is with a hand on the pulse at all times, asking to upload materials to the site."
G: "[the manager] stimulates the responses. I mean that when she writes the first
reaction it makes you want to respond more and more ..."
D: "First of all, [the manager] personally encourages the use of the community.
[…] She keeps trying to attract people to this medium."
The vitality of the manager for the success and preservation of the community is
demonstrated in the words of S: "I'm afraid if she wasn't there- the community
wouldn't exist."
A sees the importance of the managers in being seen and heard in the community:
"You need visibility. A community manager needs to be seen all the time". N agrees:
"You feel like there's someone floating above it all… She puts everything to order".
When the manager isn’t dominant, members feel the community is dysfunctional:
"Managers of [some] communities are like freelance managers", says A., which is a
member of several communities. "They live in a dream world. For me it seems insuffi-
cient, their involvement. It's a very technical involvement of a sort".
M: "You needed someone to be more… to be the manager. To operate it for others
to be more… it's a fact that it didn't work once the manager was not active".
The managers interviewed also reported that they not only post in the community
but also act “behind the scenes” to generate content and initiate conversations. One
manager describes some of this activity: mapping of relevant and less relevant discus-
sion topics, and attempted to convince members to participate:
"A lot of times I'm asking what [members] read and what interests them, such as
what were the things that caught their eyes and they spent more time reading them ...
And many times I ask Ok, really I sort of see you less often in discussion groups, is
there a special reason for that?"
S adds: "I emphasize that everything that's being published in the community is im-
portant. Input from everyone is important […] and we take everyone very seriously".
The role of the manager as keeping the order in the community was also brought
up by managers. A says: "It sometimes happens that someone crosses the lines. […] it
The Place of Managers in Opening Discussions in Communities of Practice 49
once got to a point where I removed someone from the community. […] In some cas-
es, people tried to post comments anonymously. I said: 'In here we all write under our
real names. If you're willing to participate with your real name- we'll invite you. If
not- then not'".
7 Discussion and Conclusions
This study is aimed at demonstrating the importance and role of community manage-
ment and managers in online communities. Despite the widespread perception that
social media platforms are driven and controlled by users, which leads researchers to
focus mainly on the horizontal dimension of governance in these spheres, the findings
of this study suggest that the picture is more complex.
The interviews indicate that community members overwhelmingly recognize the
critical role of community managers in initiating discussions and engagement. Even
in places where communities were perceived as less successful and fewer discussions
occurred, members of the community attributed this to the managers who were less
successful in initiating discussions, in members’ view. Community managers, for
their part, may run into a dilemma: on the one hand they want to encourage conversa-
tions and to route them to directions they consider to be vital to the community, and
on the other hand, they fear that if they do so on their own, members would not react
to the content they uploaded.
However, according to the content analysis it seems that these concerns are unsup-
ported. Content analysis demonstrates the importance of managers in generating
content and initiating discussions, and shed light on several important functions of
managers:
Managers as Content Producers: Managers are very productive in initiating discus-
sions and uploading content. 17.9% of posts in the sample were posted by managers
of the communities, while less than 40% of the posts were part of discussions con-
ducted without the involvement of managers. The percentage of first posts by manag-
ers is significantly higher than first posts by members. Managers also tend to open
more discussions in the first and formative year of the community, compared to
members of the communities.
Managers as Catalysts of Engagement: First messages posted by managers received
more responses than first messages post by members. Still, the number of participants
in discussions opened by the manager does not differ significantly from the number of
participants in discussions opened by members of the community.
Managers as Organizational Mentors: It should also be noted that the discussions
that develop from the first posts by managers and members, evolve in different direc-
tions. Messages posted in discussions initiated by managers of the communities
tended to include more organizational advice and more personal opinions of the dis-
cussants. In discussions initiated by the members, messages tended to address topics
like practical and academic advice more than within managers-initiated discussions.
50 A. Lev-On and N. Steinfeld
Future studies can continue to examine the functioning of managers in comparable
online communities of practice. An interesting comparison can be made with less
organized communities, open projects not led or organized by a government ministry.
These projects may have less structure, and the managers in these communities may
be less central and distinguished from other members. It would also be interesting to
compare the communities studied here to communities where management is purely
voluntary. Based on the accumulated body of knowledge, it should be possible to
construct a collection of best practices and recommendations for managers to generate
more engagement, trust and sense of community in social media platforms, given the
control and influence held by the community managers over the content and dynamics
of conversations in these communities.
Acknowledgements. The study was supported by the Center for the Study of New
Media, Society and Politics at Ariel University. The authors thank Keren Sereno and
Odelia Adler for their assistance in analyzing the data and finalizing the manuscript.
References
1. Bateman, P.J.: Online Community Referrals and Commitment: How Two Aspects of
Community Life Impact Member Participation. Doctoral Dissertation, University of
Pittsburgh (2008)
2. Butler, B., Sproull, L., Kiesler, S., Kraut, R.: Community effort in online groups: Who
does the work and why? In: Weisband, S. (ed.) Leadership at a Distance, pp. 171–194.
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New York (2007)
3. Connolly, R.: The rise and persistence of the technological community ideal. In: Werry,
C., Mowbray, M. (eds.) Online Communities: Commerce, Community Action and the
Virtual University, pp. 317–364. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2001)
4. Cook-Craig, P.G., Sabah, Y.: The role of virtual communities of practice in supporting
collaborative learning among social workers. British Journal of Social Work 39(4),
725–739 (2009)
5. Fallah, N.: Distributed form of leadership in communities of practice. International Journal
of Emerging Science 1(3), 357–370 (2011)
6. Fein, T.: Online Communities of Practice in the Social Services: A Tool for Sharing and
Knowledge Circulation between Employees. MA Thesis, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
(2011)
7. Gray, B.: Informal learning in an online community of practice. Journal of Distance
Education 19(1), 20–35 (2004)
8. Kim, A.J.: Community Building on the Web: Secret Strategies for Successful Online
Communities. Peachpit Press, Berkeley (2000)
9. Kollock, P.: The economies of online cooperation: Gifts and public goods in cyberspace.
In: Smith, M.A., Kollock, P. (eds.) Communities in Cyberspace, pp. 220–239. Routledge,
New York (1999)
10. Komito, L.: The net as a foraging society: Flexible communities. The Information
Society 14, 97–106 (1998)
11. Meier, A.: Inventing new models of social support groups: A feasibility study of an online
stress management support group for social workers. Social Work with Groups 20(4),
35–53 (1997)
The Place of Managers in Opening Discussions in Communities of Practice 51
12. Meier, A.: Offering social support via the internet: A case study of an online support group
for social workers. Journal of Technology in Human Services 17(2-3), 237–266 (2000)
13. Osimo, D.: Web 2.0 in government: Why and how. Institute for Prospective Technological
Studies (IPTS), JRC. European Commission, EUR 23358 (2008)
14. Preece, J.: Online Communities: Designing Usability and Supporting Sociability. Wiley,
New York (2000)
15. Resnick, P.: Beyond bowling together: SocioTechnical capital. In: Carroll, J.M. (ed.) HCI
in the New Millennium, pp. 647–672. Addison-Wesley, New York (2002)
16. Sartori, G.: The Theory of Democracy Revisited, vol. 1. Chatham House Publishers, NJ
(1987)
17. Wellman, B., Gulia, M.: Virtual communities as communities. In: Smith, M.A., Kollock,
P. (eds.) Communities in Cyberspace, pp. 167–194. Routledge, New York (1999)
