http://blog.leeromero.org/2008/11/10/community-of-practice-metrics-and-membership/ On Content, Collaboration and Findability Tue, 23 Feb 2010 18:35:33 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 http://blog.leeromero.org/2008/11/10/community-of-practice-metrics-and-membership/comment-page-1/#comment-1824 Lee Romero » Blog Archive » Community of Practice Metrics and Membership, Part 3 Wed, 12 Nov 2008 14:40:31 +0000 http://blog.leeromero.org/?p=137#comment-1824 [...] previously shared our general strategy with regard to answering the question about who is a member of a community of practice and, given our answer, how we actually implemented a solution to support our understanding of [...] [...] previously shared our general strategy with regard to answering the question about who is a member of a community of practice and, given our answer, how we actually implemented a solution to support our understanding of [...]

]]> http://blog.leeromero.org/2008/11/10/community-of-practice-metrics-and-membership/comment-page-1/#comment-1823 Lee Romero Wed, 12 Nov 2008 14:23:25 +0000 http://blog.leeromero.org/?p=137#comment-1823 joitske - Yes, you're absolutely right - the use of the mailing list subscribers definitely represents a "loose" definition of membership and includes more than what one might normally think of as the active or core membership. I do believe they need to be identified and some level of understanding of how large that population is (and who are the specific individuals as it's usually relatively small) is important. I'll write a bit more about the "active" membership, but the concept of what I'd call the "core" membership is not (yet) in my plans to write about. joitske – Yes, you’re absolutely right – the use of the mailing list subscribers definitely represents a “loose” definition of membership and includes more than what one might normally think of as the active or core membership. I do believe they need to be identified and some level of understanding of how large that population is (and who are the specific individuals as it’s usually relatively small) is important. I’ll write a bit more about the “active” membership, but the concept of what I’d call the “core” membership is not (yet) in my plans to write about.

]]> http://blog.leeromero.org/2008/11/10/community-of-practice-metrics-and-membership/comment-page-1/#comment-1822 joitske Wed, 12 Nov 2008 09:21:38 +0000 http://blog.leeromero.org/?p=137#comment-1822 I am part of a community using f2f meetings, mailing list, weblog and ofcourse a lot of informal conversations. I found the mailing list number also a good basic metric (now 120 members). However, even though the mailing list subscribers is growing, you can see that between 20-25 people come to meeting, a rather stable number. These are the people much more engaged in teh community. So a mailing list may be the widest count? I am part of a community using f2f meetings, mailing list, weblog and ofcourse a lot of informal conversations. I found the mailing list number also a good basic metric (now 120 members). However, even though the mailing list subscribers is growing, you can see that between 20-25 people come to meeting, a rather stable number. These are the people much more engaged in teh community. So a mailing list may be the widest count?

]]> http://blog.leeromero.org/2008/11/10/community-of-practice-metrics-and-membership/comment-page-1/#comment-1818 Lee Romero » Blog Archive » Community of Practice Metrics and Membership, Part 2 Tue, 11 Nov 2008 15:27:06 +0000 http://blog.leeromero.org/?p=137#comment-1818 [...] my last post, I described an effort to define “community membership” and how we came upon the [...] [...] my last post, I described an effort to define “community membership” and how we came upon the [...]

]]>