Over the last decade, there has been an intensification of the use of “communities of practice (COP)” and “communities” in the water and related fields (including in WASH and development). In this blog, I would like to share my thoughts that came to the surface when I was interviewed about effective community engagement by WaterProf. 

The form of community you choose affects the goals you and the participants aim to achieve. 

A community can take various forms, differing in levels of collaboration and activity. These forms of community pursue different objectives and are therefore structured accordingly. It’s important to be clear about the type of community so that participants understand what they can expect from it.

The key is making a distinction is between a ‘community’ and a ‘Community of Practice’.

A community primarily focuses on knowledge exchange, with the central goal being the dissemination of the latest knowledge, innovations, and information. This type of network has an open character, remaining continually accessible to new parties. Participants jointly decide on topics of focus, areas that are now important to the community, and therefore the community can evolve and change over time. Participants in communities can assume various roles, from leader in the core group, to participating at times, to more passive participation. Hence not everyone needs to contribute actively and some just join to receive information.

A Community of Practice, on the other hand, is a specific form of community focused on addressing issues, innovating, and learning together through practice. It is an active network comprising a defined group of participants who focus on a concrete topic or question. These participants hold a high level of ownership, are responsible for determining the topics to discuss, and share their practical knowledge and experiences. Participants collaborate over a period of time to develop and apply new solutions or practices to overcome certain challenges. Once this has been achieved, and evaluated, CoPs can also be dissolved.

Overall, the lifespan of a community tends to be longer than a CoP, and CoPs can even be formed as one of the activities under a community.

Participants each have their own level of (desired) engagement, and that is ok!

Before developing a community think through the types of participants you wish to attract and offer room for varying forms of engagement. For a community of practice, you can be more demanding (e.g. you can only become a member if you commit to xyz). But even there you can have two types of engagement – leaders of the group (the core group) and participants (who actively engage in the discussions).

For communities, you may have more levels of engagement. At one end of the spectrum is the passive participant (I like to call this the reader). The reader receives information from the community (e.g. newsletter, social media) but does engage in activities or contribute content. Still a reader may be an important member, as they may be starters in the community and first looking what is on offer. A reader may also be a silent advocate for the network if the information they get is valuable to them. 

At the other end is the core group of the network, everyone who actively participates in working groups and committees. They are part of shaping the program and actively involved in research and knowledge creation. Their input often goes beyond their specific area of expertise and they clearly understand the opportunities that being an active member brings (recognition, network, strategic oversight on the topic at hand, and learning by doing (e.g. leadership, event organization)).

Between the readers and the core group is the participants group that selectively contributes to the network, occasionally stepping forward to participate in an activity (attending an online/ onsite event, presenting their work, or writing an opinion piece and submitting it to the community.

The importance for those in community management roles is that you recognise and cater for these different groups. At the same time, seek ways to identify motivated and passionate professionals in the participants group, and invite them or steer them towards working groups/ core groups. This will help continuity of the community once the core group needs to rotate.

Participants are driven by different motivating factors.

And the more of these factors are present in the network, the higher the level of engagement. Different types of participants have different needs and expectations of the community. Their motivating factors—the reasons participants want to be involved or refrain from being active—also vary. Examples include professional development, networking opportunities, access to resources, opportunities and information, and visibility for the participant and their organization. The presence of these motivating factors determines whether and how much participants contribute to the community (see levels of engagement). Therefore, it’s important to understand what motivates the participants and to ensure that the right incentives are present in the network.

Every community has a motivated core group that can drive the network forward. Make sure you leverage this group. 

When the community includes an active core group motivated to contribute to the goal, this group can be used to energize the community. They are willing to invest in building a program and generating new insights that make the program visible. Additionally, their energy can be contagious for more passive or potential members and therefore assigning them as ambassadors that support and mentor others in the community to take more action can really lead to success. At the same time, you should make sure you recognise them, give them the credits and provide profile to them that could be useful for them and their careers. 

Conclusion

Whilst I could write a series of blogs on community management, I decided to pick out these things as the most important to make a community thrive. Understanding your (potential) participants, their needs, interests and drivers, developing activities that allow participants with varying levels of desired engagement,  using the core motivated group as a vehicle to motivate others, as well as forming a proper goal for the community (or deciding if it is a community or community of practice) for me seem to be the most essential. 

If you are interested to get advice or support in developing a community or community of practice reach out to me.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

About the author: Kirsten de Vette, owner of this website, and independent consultant and facilitator working in water, sanitation, and hygiene (related) sectors for over 15 years. I am a sociologist with business background who connects people, facilitates knowledge and expertise exchange, facilitates partnerships, collaboration and or change processes and facilitates capacity assessment/ development. My expertise is in capacity development, stakeholder engagement & facilitation of change processes and learning.