In the Coherent Organization model that we (the ITA) came up with, it talks about how work teams are fed by and feed up to communities as they too feed up to and are fed from social networks. And while this is all good, it may not be completely clear. So I tried to take a pass at representing it another way.
So, at the center are people, the individuals who constitute the organization. They are the ones who form teams. Ideally, for the most powerful outcomes, they come with different backgrounds, as we know diversity helps. And they’ll work together in those teams, for short term needs or on an ongoing basis.
Those background are tied into the Communities of Improvement that they are members of. A good team member will bring their community expertise into the team, and likewise feedback their learning from their team work. Note that most folks are usually members of several communities.
Those communities span both internal to the organization (if it is big enough), but also across the firewall out to other practitioners that are in other organizations. There are obviously things you can, and can’t, share across the boundaries, but the communities should be continuing to evolve across boundaries. Proprietary approaches may not, but general learning should be.
And the individuals are, or should be, learning on their own as well, tapping into personal searches inside and outside the organization for immediate needs and ongoing development. Similarly, communities should be looking for ideas and practices from other communities that can be absorbed, and sharing out to other communities as well.
The main change here is showing how people are members of different teams and diverse communities, and how the links are to communities and to one’s own development. Not enough, I know (should I show links between people as well), and certainly I’ve got a sparse representation of interconnections here to be indicative, not representative. Does this help?