Engagement in Communities

The purpose of this article is to discuss the engagement of members of a mission led community and its significance concerning project success.

While extensive research exists in the realm of formal organisations within the business environment, this discussion aims to highlight the unique characteristics of mission-led open communities.

Both business organisations and mission-led open communities strive for the success of their objectives - so performance matters.

What Sets Apart an Open Community

A mission led open community diverges from formal organisations through its flatter management hierarchy, decentralised structure and participatory governance. Unlike formal setups, it may be challenging to pinpoint the source of direction due to the community's more fluid structure.

Membership is open to all, devoid of specific alignment criteria with the mission or values. The entry path and commitment requirements remain unclear as individuals join, often remaining anonymous with unknown capacities and willingness to contribute.

Informality extends to communication, channeled through various platforms, characterized by irregular and chaotic postings.

Welcoming new members

Understanding participants and their motivations, skills, and potential roles becomes even more challenging in this context. Unlike formal organisations with compliance-driven inductions and in-person interactions, online communities lack these structured onboarding processes.

Getting Involved in an Open Community

The absence of a framework for involvement and guidance on navigating the organisational and human aspects poses challenges. Teams within the community may work in silos on undisclosed projects, contributing to a lack of transparency.

Considering the community's goal of effecting paradigmatic change, it becomes imperative for the structure to embody the values and ideas it seeks to project onto society.

Conway's Law emphasises that organisations designing systems are constrained to produce designs reflecting the communication structures of those organizations. Any deficiencies in the community's organisation may manifest as flaws in its designs.

Understanding Engagement

What is engagement?

  1. Engagement signifies a certain behaviour that leads to performance
  2. It is a concept for energy, involvement, and efficiency

Evaluation of engagement requires contextual consideration of performance parameters within defined roles and cultural norms.

If there are no roles - what is the expected engagement? If there is no culture - what is acceptable engagement?

If someone engages outside the norms of the culture or the expectations - is that disruption?

What is the opposite of engagement?

Disengagement involves a lack of commitment, enthusiasm, or involvement, along with apathy, indifference, inattention, isolation, and a lack of communication.

Utrecht Work Engagement Scale Theory

The general work engagement is through the UWES measured as a multidimensional construct by three sub-scales (Bakker & Schaufeli, 2004).

The first factor and scale of engagement is vigour. This demonstrates in a person as the opposite pole of exhaustion and reflects high energy levels, resilience, the motivation to invest effort and less chance of fatigue in the face of challenges (Schaufeli, Salanova, GonĂĄles-RomĂĄ & Bakker, 2002). Bakker et al. (2007) further explained those with vigour as a person with stamina, zest and high energy. Which is the opposite of those with low vigour that shows less energy and stamina in consideration of work.

The second subscale dedication is the opposite pole of cynicism. It is characterized by a person's sense of significance and pride in their work where one is particularly strongly involved. It can be further be seen in people that identify with their work experience meaningfulness at their job and are enthusiastic to the challenges (Schaufeli et al., 2002.; Bakker et al., 2007).

Third and the last subscale is absorption, different from the other two subscales the construct of absorption is an important aspect of engagement but not either a direct opposite of reduced efficiency. It is characterized by concentration and immersion in one's work (a state of complete focus and a clear mind). A person with high absorption score shows them being positively preoccupied with their work and would easily get carried away at work, in contrast to one with a low score which would have problems with being immersed with their work (Schaufeli et al., 2002.; Bakker et al., 2007).

Why do people engage?

Motivations for engagement include genuine interest, recognition, social connection, personal growth, having fun, a sense of purpose, escape, distraction, and competition.

Nurturing a Culture of Engagement

  1. Identify and analyse stakeholders to understand their motivations, expectations, skills, interests and potential impact on the project (Rodney Turner)

Turner emphasises the importance of a thorough stakeholder analysis at the beginning of a project. This involves identifying all individuals, groups, or entities that can affect or be affected by the project.

  1. Design and allocate roles to align with members' motivations and aptitude within the project objectives

Harness the member with their role. This means that this member is aware of the expectations of their role and has a strong relationship with their co-members and leaders.

The more the employee is aligned with their work role, the more motivated they are and will strive to perform excellently in their tasks, which should root in willingness to help the organisation’s success (Taneja et al., 2015).

  1. Effectively convey the mission statement, objectives, roadmap, and strategies

Clearly communicate the mission, objectives, and strategies to foster a shared understanding among team members.

Ensure alignment in both ideology and operations, fostering a collective mindset.

  1. Provide Psychological Safety (Amy C. Edmondson / Khan)

Engagement levels of the employees are affected by how supportive the environment is of failure and trials. When the employees feel as if they can share ideas without fear and can obtain positive constructive feedback they engage more in their work. Further, this relates to the mentoring and career development that is given through constructive feedback and supportive environment which has a positive influence on engagement (Khan)

  1. Establish good leader - member relationship (Leader Member Exchange LMX - George Graen and Fred Dansereau)

Hale (2016) emphasised that the subordinates perceived working relationship with superiors is the greatest predictor of engagement. To further emphasise the importance of managing a healthy perceived relationship from the subordinate with their superior, the manager as mentioned by Parimalam and Mahadevan (2012) influence the subordinates on an emotional level

  1. Provide resources (Khan)

There is an important condition that employees of a project team are provided with the right amount of resources, such as the flow of information from management, support in work, better processes and technical resources, together with an appreciation for their investment of effort.

That said, it is much related to Khan (1990) explaining that when the task performance made by an employee include rewarding interactions it brings meaningfulness, one of the conditions for engagement. The key to this is communicated appreciation that promotes the employee’s dignity, self-appreciation and worthwhileness.

Matthews et al. (2018) further carried on to support Khan’s work by mentioning that when there are feedback and recognition the engagement of the employees is supported. More specifically the positive opinions of colleagues also support one’s ongoing investment of energy. Therefore job resources are crucial for the employees’ development and to achieve goals which would engage them more, so that one is challenged but not exhausted from the physical and psychological investment (Bakker et al., 2007.; Demerouti et al., 2001)

  1. Encourage collaboration (Amy C. Edmondson)
  2. Work on Team Learning and Adaptability (Amy C. Edmondson)
  3. Instil sense of ownership and accountability (Peter Block)
  4. Empower members to participate in decision making (Peter Block)
  5. Make member feel like they are co-creators (Peter Block)
  6. Encourage small group conversations to build relationships (Peter Block)

Block suggests that small group conversations provide an intimate setting where individuals can engage in open, honest, and meaningful dialogue. In these settings, people are often more comfortable expressing their thoughts and feelings, fostering a deeper level of connection.

  1. Strategies for conflict resolution and fostering collaboration (Rodney Turner)
  2. Maintaining involvement as a continuous process