IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/vikjou/v49y2024i1p7-24.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Projectized Community of Practice: A Case Study of Globally Distributed Information Technology Organization

Author

Listed:
  • Rajeev Sharma
  • Soumendra Narain Bagchi

Abstract

The execution of globally distributed information technology service projects (GDITP) by globally distributed teams, while inherently complex, offers the advantages of swift implementation and seamless service delivery to global clients. The numerous challenges including the intangibility of customer specifications, the iterative nature of information technology (IT) activities and coordination difficulties arising from diverse teams contribute to complexity in managing these projects. Moreover, the organizational complexity is compounded by competing power centres, turning project delivery into a politically contested process. In traditional projects such as construction or customized manufacturing, overcoming aforementioned challenges through strong top-down leadership is typical in many time-bound projects. However, in the realm of IT projects, which are inherently people-centric, enforcing a command-and-control environment is challenging. Communities-of-practice (CoP) offer an alternative structure that engages highly skilled employees in a collaborative community, navigating the challenges posed by IT projects. Our study explores this innovative approach, focusing on a product firm effectively leveraging CoPs to successfully execute global service projects. Delving into the functioning of CoPs, our research illustrates how they scale up using both formal and informal networks to meet diverse global customer requirements. Despite operating globally, CoPs exhibit emergent collective mindfulness, adapting tools, processes and products to the demands of the projects. The study also details how the organization manages complexity while adhering to product architecture and a uniform project framework.

Suggested Citation

  • Rajeev Sharma & Soumendra Narain Bagchi, 2024. "Projectized Community of Practice: A Case Study of Globally Distributed Information Technology Organization," Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, , vol. 49(1), pages 7-24, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:vikjou:v:49:y:2024:i:1:p:7-24
    DOI: 10.1177/02560909241232499
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/02560909241232499
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/02560909241232499?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ariño, Africa & de la Torre, Jose & Ring, Peter S., 2001. "Relational quality: Managing trust in corporate alliances," IESE Research Papers D/434, IESE Business School.
    2. Engwall, Mats, 2003. "No project is an island: linking projects to history and context," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 789-808, May.
    3. Paul R. Carlile & Eric S. Rebentisch, 2003. "Into the Black Box: The Knowledge Transformation Cycle," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(9), pages 1180-1195, September.
    4. Probst, Gilbert & Borzillo, Stefano, 2008. "Why communities of practice succeed and why they fail," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 335-347, October.
    5. Prencipe, Andrea & Tell, Fredrik, 2001. "Inter-project learning: processes and outcomes of knowledge codification in project-based firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1373-1394, December.
    6. Karin Bredin & Jonas Soderlund, 2006. "Perspectives on Human Resource Management: an explorative study of the consequences of projectification in four firms," International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(1), pages 92-113.
    7. Manuel E. Sosa & Steven D. Eppinger & Craig M. Rowles, 2004. "The Misalignment of Product Architecture and Organizational Structure in Complex Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(12), pages 1674-1689, December.
    8. Aurore Haas & David Abonneau & Stefano Borzillo & Louis-Pierre Guillaume, 2020. "Afraid of engagement? Towards an understanding of engagement in virtual communities of practice," Post-Print hal-02571760, HAL.
    9. Henk W. Volberda & Nicolai J. Foss & Marjorie A. Lyles, 2010. "PERSPECTIVE---Absorbing the Concept of Absorptive Capacity: How to Realize Its Potential in the Organization Field," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 931-951, August.
    10. Ayu Pratiwi & Aya Suzuki, 2017. "Effects of farmers’ social networks on knowledge acquisition: lessons from agricultural training in rural Indonesia," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 6(1), pages 1-23, December.
    11. Amin, Ash & Roberts, Joanne, 2008. "Knowing in action: Beyond communities of practice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 353-369, March.
    12. Pamela A. Mischen, 2015. "Collaborative Network Capacity," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 380-403, March.
    13. Dubois, Anna & Gadde, Lars-Erik, 2002. "Systematic combining: an abductive approach to case research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(7), pages 553-560, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cacciatori, Eugenia, 2008. "Memory objects in project environments: Storing, retrieving and adapting learning in project-based firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1591-1601, October.
    2. Kazadi, Kande & Lievens, Annouk & Mahr, Dominik, 2016. "Stakeholder co-creation during the innovation process: Identifying capabilities for knowledge creation among multiple stakeholders," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 525-540.
    3. Thierry Burger-Helmchen & Patrick Llerena, 2008. "A case study of a creative start-up: governance, communities and knowledge management," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(2), pages 125-146.
    4. Cristina Páez-Avilés & Esteve Juanola-Feliu & Islam Bogachan-Tahirbegi & Mónica Mir & Manel González-Piñero & Josep Samitier, 2015. "Innovation And Technology Transfer Of Medical Devices Fostered By Cross-Disciplinary Communities Of Practitioners," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(06), pages 1-27, December.
    5. Linda Argote & Sunkee Lee & Jisoo Park, 2021. "Organizational Learning Processes and Outcomes: Major Findings and Future Research Directions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5399-5429, September.
    6. Sylvain Lenfle & Jonas Söderlund, 2019. "Large-Scale Innovative Projects as Temporary Trading Zones: Toward an Interlanguage Theory," Post-Print hal-02390158, HAL.
    7. van Bekkum, Sjoerd & Pennings, Enrico & Smit, Han, 2009. "A real options perspective on R&D portfolio diversification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1150-1158, September.
    8. Aslam, Muhammad Shakeel & O’Reilly, Dermot & Shah, Uzair, 2023. "Taking the rough with the smooth: A qualitative inquiry into social and cultural practices of knowledge-sharing work in international consultancy alliances," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(4).
    9. Nanik Kustiningsih & Bambang Tjahjadi & Noorlailie Soewarno, 2022. "Projecting Experience of Technology-Based MSMEs in Indonesia: Role of Absorptive Capacity Matter in Strategic Alliances and Organizational Performance Relationship," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-19, September.
    10. Silvestri, Raffaele & Bocconcelli, Roberta & Carloni, Elisa & Pagano, Alessandro, 2022. "Interorganizational R&D projects in clustering contexts: A resource interaction perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 343-355.
    11. Hilda Bø Lyng & Eric Christian Brun, 2020. "Innovating with Strangers; Managing Knowledge Barriers Across Distances in Cross-Industry Innovation," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(01), pages 1-33, February.
    12. Davies, Andrew & Manning, Stephan & Söderlund, Jonas, 2018. "When neighboring disciplines fail to learn from each other: The case of innovation and project management research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 965-979.
    13. Ibert, Oliver, 2004. "Projects and firms as discordant complements: organisational learning in the Munich software ecology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1529-1546, December.
    14. Wen-Bing Gau, 2022. "Forming a Learning Environment Within a Senior-Citizen Community of Practice," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(3), pages 21582440221, September.
    15. Serghei Floricel & Sorin Piperca & Richard Tee, 2018. "Strategies for Managing the Structural and Dynamic Consequences of Project Complexity," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-17, May.
    16. Gil, Nuno, 2007. "On the value of project safeguards: Embedding real options in complex products and systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 980-999, September.
    17. Gil, Nuno & Pinto, Jeffrey K., 2018. "Polycentric organizing and performance: A contingency model and evidence from megaproject planning in the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 717-734.
    18. Víctor Hermano & Natalia Martín-Cruz, 2020. "The Project-Based Firm: A Theoretical Framework for Building Dynamic Capabilities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-14, August.
    19. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    20. Gil, Nuno & Miozzo, Marcela & Massini, Silvia, 2012. "The innovation potential of new infrastructure development: An empirical study of Heathrow airport's T5 project," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 452-466.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:vikjou:v:49:y:2024:i:1:p:7-24. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.