Supporting successful communities of practice for older adults: a qualitative secondary analysis

ABSTRACT

Communities of Practice (CoPs) are a powerful strategy for supporting knowledge sharing amongst members working in a common field. Information, knowledge and evidence in the field of older adult healthcare and aging have grown exponentially over the past decade. This study reports results from a secondary qualitative analysis of ethnographic data to explore the cultural factors of two CoPs that members perceived to promote and constrain success. The CoPs, housed by the Seniors Health Knowledge Network (SHKN), were composed of stakeholders including formal care givers, and focused on wound care and complex care resolution for older adults. Participants spoke about five themes: 1) Hope and desire to cause real, effective change, 2) Appreciation for bringing together diverse people and experiences, 3) Aspiring to work together as a harmonious team, 4) Striving for strong work ethic and good practices to achieve efficiency and productivity and 5) Responses to tensions, worries and uncertainty. Drawing on the themes and the broader CoP literature, we provide strategies for developing, running and sustaining successful healthcare CoPs as an educational resource for formal care givers and other stakeholders. CoPs must be largely autonomous and self-organizing, and sponsoring bodies will need to restrict their activities to providing resources and support without imposing specific mandates. The most important implication of this work is that passion, work ethic, diversity and communication can help CoPs achieve harmony and success.

KEYWORDS:

• Care givers
• communities of practice
• older adults
• knowledge translation
• culture

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the members of the parent study team for collecting and providing the data analyzed in this study. We would also like thank Dr. Debbie Laliberte Rudman for her input and guidance in determining the methodology for our study. Thank you to the CoP members who participated in the study to lend their perspectives.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The authors have no funding to report.