Managing boundaries in primary care service improvement: a developmental approach to communities of practice.
BACKGROUND
Effective implementation of change in healthcare organisations involves multiple professional and organisational groups and is often impeded by professional and organisational boundaries that present relatively impermeable barriers to sharing knowledge and spreading work practices. Informed by the theory of communities of practice (CoPs), this study explored the effects of intra-organisational and inter-organisational boundaries on the implementation of service improvement within and across primary healthcare settings and on the development of multiprofessional and multi-organisational CoPs during this process.


METHODS
The study was conducted within the Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) for Greater Manchester-a collaborative partnership between the University of Manchester and local National Health Service organisations aiming to undertake applied health research and enhance its implementation in clinical practice. It deployed a qualitative embedded case study design, encompassing semistructured interviews, direct observation and documentary analysis, conducted in 2010-2011. The sample included practice doctors, nurses, managers and members of the CLAHRC implementation team.


RESULTS
The study showed that in spite of epistemic and status differences, professional boundaries between general practitioners, practice nurses and practice managers co-located in the same practice over a relatively long period of time could be successfully bridged, leading to the formation of multiprofessional CoPs. While knowledge circulated relatively easily within these CoPs, barriers to knowledge sharing emerged at the boundary separating them from other groups existing in the same primary care setting. The strongest boundaries, however, lay between individual general practices, with inter-organisational knowledge sharing and collaboration between them remaining unequally developed across different areas due to historical factors, competition and strong organisational identification. Manipulated emergence of multi-organisational CoPs in the context of primary care may thus be problematic.


CONCLUSIONS
In cases when manipulated emergence of new CoPs is problematic, boundary issues could be addressed by adopting a developmental perspective on CoPs, which provides an alternative to the analytical and instrumental perspectives previously described in the CoP literature. This perspective implies a pragmatic, situational approach to mapping existing CoPs and their characteristics and potentially modifying them in the process of service improvement through the combination of internal and external facilitation.
Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester, Booth Street West, Manchester, M15 6PB, UK. roman.kislov@mbs.ac.uk
Roman
R
Kislov
Kieran
K
Walshe
Gill
G
Harvey
D003299:Cooperative Behavior; D006302:Health Services Research; D006801:Humans; D033181:Information Dissemination / Q000379:methods*; D007857:Leadership; D009936:Organizational Innovation; D011320:Primary Health Care / Q000379:methods*; D058996:Quality Improvement / Q000458:organization & administration*; D006113:United Kingdom