在現今知識經濟蔚為風潮的時代，越來越多的人將線上實務社群視為珍貴知識的來源地。值得注意的是，許多學者都支持線上實務社群不易依事先的設計來發展，使它的發展過程猶如黑盒子一般，迄今尚無有系統的線上實務社群發展理論。既存的團體發展理論或許可以作為發展過程的參考，畢竟線上實務社群的本質也是一個團體。然而，除了線上互動的特性之外，線上實務社群和一般團體發展理論中的團體不同之處在於它是個自營與開放的系統，因此它的壽命可以是無限的，沒有特定要完成的任務與既定期程；它的成員流動性通常很高，且彼此間大多互不認識。此外，文獻也指出過去的團體發展理論也有許多缺陷。

有鑑於此，本研究試圖採用生態學觀點針對三個線上實務社群進行三年以上的長期研究。採用生態學觀點有三點原因：
一、發展與演進本是生態學的核心研究問題，因此演進的機制可從生態學的角度來推導；而且生態學的觀點是比較巨觀與全面性的，因此較不會受到個別流動率的影響；
二、許多有關線上實務社群的文獻都不約而同使用諸如有機成長、有機體等生態學的名詞來描述線上實務社群；而作者參與多個線上實務社群已有多年的經驗，亦發現成員們經常使用例如活著與死亡、能量與營養等與生態相關的詞彙來描述成員與社群。
三、許多研究指出生態學方法可以提供強而有力的分析架構與描述工具，來幫助了解複雜的社會組織與議題。

在本研究中，我們把每一個線上實務社群類比為一個生態系，因為生態系是擁有根本元件與維持基本運作最低的生態層級。依據Odum((1971, 1983, 1993)的生態系模型與Pickett and Cadenasso (2002)的生態系模型建置步驟，生態系觀點下的線上實務社群包括三個組成元件：個體、能量與營養；三類連結：互動網絡、基石族群與生態角色；以及五種抑制生態系運作的限制。我們將依據這些維度來描述線上實務社群的發展。

本研究採用多重個案研究法來進行研究。首先，我們找出成長中、衰退中與時好時壞等三個符合本研究選擇標準的線上實務社群為研究對象。分析層級為生態系、分析單位為每六個月計算一次、從成立開始進行為期三到四年的追蹤。我們使用內容分析法與半結構性訪談來深入了解各個線上實務社群的發展過程。除了分析系統的紀錄之外，為了了解社群結構的改變，我們亦使用社會網絡分析工具來進行量的分析。最後，本研究遵循生態學觀點來詮釋所觀察到的變化與現象，藉此導出線上實務社群動態循環演化模式，並提出研究限制與未來可能研究方向。

In the era of knowledge economy, more and more people view online communities of practice (CoPs) as wellspring of precious knowledge. Interestingly, many researchers support the notion that CoPs must develop over time; they are not designed or made but grown, however, there is no systematic theory of online community development (Matzat, 2003). Furthermore, when changes with time are specialized concerned, several questions regarding CoPs development remain unanswered. Since online CoPs are formed by groups of people, existing group development models may provide valuable lens for us to understand the driving forces behind. Nevertheless, drawn on the autotrophic and open system of online CoPs, there exist several differences between traditional groups and online CoPs, such as self-select membership, high member fluidity, impossible to know all members in a large member base, unlimited life spans, and no given tasks have to complete. Furthermore, some defects in prior group development studies are also identified.

To answer the research question and avoid problems identified in prior group development studies, this study plans to conduct a longitudinal exploratory study on three online CoPs lasting at least three years by overcoming the defects of unreal subjects such as experimental student groups or arranged tasks. Besides, three years of longitudinal study may prevent from the bias drawn from single snapshot and limited life span. Furthermore, we decide to adopt the ecological perspective for several reasons: First, the evolutionary process is akin to the central theme of ecological theory. Therefore the mechanisms of change can be suitably inferred from ecological perspective. Moreover, the ecological perspective is more holistic and macroscopic, and accordingly the problem of high individual member fluidity can be easily tackled. Second, many ecological concepts are used in numerous CoPs-related literatures to describe CoPs. In addition, being immersed in some CoPs for several years, we found that members usually use some ecological terms to describe their CoPs or other members. Third, several studies indicated that the ecological approach provides a powerful framework for understanding complex human social issues. We view each CoP as an ecosystem because ecosystem is the lowest level in the ecological hierarchy that is complete with all the necessary components for function and survival over the long term.

This research also adopts the multiple case study approach. Firstly, online CoPs are categorized based on group member interaction statistics. Three categories of online CoPs are identified and three online CoP belonging to these three categories, respectively, are selected as representative cases. Every six months the aggregated data of targeted online CoPs are treating as the unit of analysis. The whole 'lives' of online CoPs under study are analyzed, by the way to avoid the problems of zero-history groups and drawn bias conclusion from observation of groups over different time periods. We attempted to detect and analyze the changes of community structures in the ecosystem using social network analysis tools. Moreover, since quantitative data may fail to capture some interaction modes, this study employs content analysis and semi-structural interviews as complementary vehicles to gain insights into the detailed evolutionary process.

Finally, this dissertation follows Yin's (1994) analytic strategy of descriptive framework, and thus uses the metaphor of an ecosystem to integrate and organize sets of dimensions in relation to the evolutionary process of online CoPs. Drawn on Odum’s (1971, 1983, 1993) model of ecosystem, this study proposes a descriptive framework based on ecosystem ecology and network analysis. There are primarily three components: organisms, energy, and nutrients; three types of connections: interactive network, keystone structure, and roles distribution. There are also five categories of constraints on the ecosystem functioning. They serve as dimensions of describing changes within an ecosystem over time. Further, these changes are interpreted from ecological perspectives, where insights into the mechanism governing the development process are generated to postulate the development model of online CoPs.

TABLE OF CONTENTS IV
LISTS OF FIGURES VI
LISTS OF TABLES VIII
LISTS OF TABLES VIII
LISTS OF APPENDIX IX
LISTS OF APPENDIX IX
ABSTRACT X
ABSTRACT X
中文摘要 XII
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 RESEARCH BACKGROUND 1
1.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS 5
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURES REVIEW 7
2.1 COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE 7
2.1.1 The Concept of Communities of Practice 7
2.1.2 Online Communities of Practice 9
2.1.3 Related Concepts about Online Communities of Practice 12
2.2 GROUP DEVELOPMENT MODELS 14
2.2.1 Sequential models 15
2.2.2 Non-sequential models 17
2.3 ECOSYSTEM ECOLOGY 18
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 25
3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN 25
3.2 COP ECOSYSTEM MODEL 28
CHAPTER 4 CASE DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS 40
4.1 BIOSPHERE - THE GENERAL CONTEXT OF TEACHERS IN COMPULSORY EDUCATION 40
4.2 LANDSCAPE - THE GENERAL CONTEXT OF ONLINE COPS ON SCTNET 41
4.3 ECOSYSTEMS - CASE A 41
4.3.1 Components of Online CoP Ecosystem A 42
4.3.2 Connections of Online CoP Ecosystem A 52
4.4 ECOSYSTEMS - CASE B 65
4.4.1 Components of Online CoP Ecosystem B 65
4.4.2 Connections of Online CoP Ecosystem B 73
4.5 ECOSYSTEMS - CASE C 80
4.5.1 Components of Online CoP Ecosystem C 80
4.5.2 Connections of Online CoP Ecosystem C 88
4.6 CONSTRAINTS OF ONLINE COP ECOSYSTEM 96
CHAPTER 5 RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 104
5.1 RESEARCH FINDINGS 104
5.1.1 Common Phenomena among Three Online CoP Ecosystems 104
5.1.2 Different Phenomena between Three Online CoP Ecosystems 114
5.2 ONLINE COP EVOLUTIONARY MODEL 118
CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH 124
6.1 CONCLUSIONS 124
6.2 RESEARCH LIMITATIONS 125
6.3 FUTURE RESEARCH 125
REFERENCES 127
APPENDIX 138

Ahuja, M. K. and Carley, K. M. (1999). “Network structure in virtual organizations,” Organization Science (10:6), pp.741-757.

Ahuja, M. K., Galletta, D. F., and Carley, K. M. (2003). “Individual centrality and performance in virtual R&D groups: an empirical study,” Management Science (49:1), pp.21-38.

Allen, T. F. H. and Hoekstra, T. W. (1992). Towards a Unified Ecology. New York: Columbia University Press.

Agren, G. and Bosatta, E. (1996). Theoretical Ecosystem Ecology: Understanding Element Cycles, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Astley, W. G. (1985). “The two ecologies: Population and community perspectives on organizational evolution,” Administrative Science Quarterly (30), pp.224-241.

Avia, R., Erlich, Z., and Ravid, G. (2003). “Network analysis of Knowledge Construction in Asynchronous Learning Networks,” Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks (7:3), pp.1-23.

Bales, R. F. and Strodtbeck, F. L. (1951). “Phases in group problem-solving,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology (46), pp.485-495.

Bales, R. F. (1970). Personality and Interpersonal Behavior, New York: Holt Rinehart & Winston.

Barab, S. A. and Duffy, T. (2000). “From practice fields to communities of practice,” In Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments, Jonassen, D. and Land, S. M. (eds.), NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum Associates.

Barab, S. A., Makinster, J.G. and Scheckler, R. (2004). “Designing system dualities: Characterizing an online professional development community,” In Barab, S. A., Kling, R., and Gray, J. (eds.), Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Barabasi, A. and Albert, R. (2001). "Emergence of scaling in random networks," Science (286), pp. 509-512.

Barnett, W. P., Mischke, G. A. and Ocasio, W. (2000). The evolution of collective strategies among organizations, Organization Studies (21:2), pp. 325-354.

Begon, M., Harper, J. L. and Townsend, C. R. (1990). Ecology, 2nd edn. Boston: Blackwell Scientific Publications.

Bennis, W. G. and Shepard, H. A. (1956). “A theory of group development,” Human Relations (9), pp.415-457.

Bieber, M.; Engelbart, D.; Furuta, R.; Hiltz, S.R.; Noll, J.; Preece, J.; Stohr, E.A.; Turoff, M.; and Walle, B.V.D. (2002a) Toward virtual community knowledge evolution. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(4), pp. 11-35.

Bion, W. R. (1961). Experiences in Groups, New York: Basic Books Inc.

Bormann, E. G. (1970). “The paradox and promise of small group research,” Speech Monographs (37), pp.211-217.

Bowes, J, (2002). “Building online communities for professional networks,” Proceedings of Global Summit Conference of Online Knowledge Networks, March 4, 2002, Adelaide.

Brass, D. (1985). “Technology and structuring of jobs: Employee satisfaction, performance, and influence,” Organization, Behavior and Human Decision Process (35:2), pp.216-240.

Bressler, S. E. (2000). Communities of Commerce: Building Internet Business Communities to Accelerate Growth, Minimize Risk, and Increase Customer Loyalty. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bronfenbrenner, U. and Ceci, S. J. (1994). “Nature-nurture reconceptualized: A bioecological model,” Psychological Review (101:4), pp. 568-586.

Bruce, B. C. and Hogan, M. P. (1998). “The disapperance of technology: Toward an ecological model of literacy,” In Reinking, D., McKenna, M. C., Labbo, L. D. and Kieffer, R. D. (Eds.), Handbook of Literacy and Technology: Transformations in a Post-Typographic World (pp. 281). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Buchanan, M. (2002). Nexus: Small Worlds and the Groundbreaking Science of Networks, The Garamond Agency through Arts & Licensing International, Inc., USA.

Burke, K. and Chidambaram, L. (1994). “Developmental differences between distributed and face-to-face groups in electronically supported meeting environments: An exploratory investigation,” Group Decision and Negotiation (4:3), pp. 213-234.

Burkhardt, M. and Brass, D. (1990). “Changing patterns or patterns of change: The effects of a change in technology on social network structure and power,” Administrative Science Quarterly (35), pp.104-127.

Burt, R.S. (1976). “Positions in networks,” Social Forces (55), pp.93-122.

Butler, B.S. (2001). Membership Size, Communication Activity, and Sustainability: A Resource-Based Model of Online Social Structures,” Information System Research (12: 4), pp. 346-262.

Chang, A. (2003). “Punctuated equilibrium and linear progression: Toward a new understanding of group development,” Academy of Management Journal (46:1), pp.106-117.

Chidambaram, L. and Bostrom, R. P. (1996). “Group Development (I): A Review and Synthesis of Development Models,” Group Decision and Negotiation (6), pp.159-187.

Christensen, N. L., Bartuska, A. M., Brown, J. H., Carpenter, S., D’Antonio, C., Francis, R., Franklin, J. F., MacMahon, J. A, Noss, R. F, Parsons, D. J, and others. (1996). “The report of the Ecological Society of America Committee on the scientific basis for ecosystem management,” Ecological Applications (6), pp.665-691.

Cohen, D. (1998). “Toward a knowledge context: Report on the first annual U. C. Berkeley Forum on knowledge and firm,” California Management Review (40:3), pp. 22-39.

Collison, G., Elbaum, B., Haavind, S. and Tinker, R. (2000). Facilitating Online Learning: Effective Strategies for Moderators, Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.

Costanza, R., Wainger, L., Folke, C., Maler, K. G. (1993). “Modeling complex economic systems: toward an evolutionary, dynamic understanding of people and nature,” BioScience (43), pp.545-555.

Cothrel, J. (2001). “Five ingredients for a successful online community,” Internet Executives Club: Internet Marketing Symposium.

Cothrel, J. and Williams, R. (1999). “On-line communities: Helping them form and grow,” Journal of Knowledge Management (3:1), pp. 54-60.

Cowan, D.D.; Mayfield, C.I.; Tompa, F.W.; and Gasparini, W. (1998) New role for community networks. Communications of the ACM, 41(4), pp. 61-63.

Dawkins, R. (1989). The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

DeSanctis, G. and Poole, M. S. (1994). “The hidden complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory,” Organization Science (14), pp.157-176.

Dies, R. R. (1985). “A multidimensional model for group process research, elaboration and critique,” Small Group Research (16), pp.427-446.

Dunphy, D. C. (1974). “The function of fantasy in groups,” In Gibbard, G. S., Hartman, J. J. and Mann, R. D. (eds.), Analysis of Groups, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Elton, C. S. (1927). Animal Ecology, London: Sidgwickand Jackson.

Endsley, M. R. (1995). “Towards a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems,” Human Factors (37:1), pp.32-64.

Everett, M. G. and Borgatti, S. P. (1991). “Role colouring a graph,” Mathematical Social Sciences (21), pp.183-188.

Faloutsos, M., Faloutsos, P., and Faloutsos, C. (2001). "On power-law relationships of the Internet topology," Computer Communications Review (29), pp.251.

Feather, S. R. (1999). “The impact of group support systems on collaborative learning groups' stages of development,” Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal (17), pp.23-34.

Fisher, B. A. (1975). “Decision emergence: Phases in group decision-making,” Speech Monographs (37), pp.53-66.

Frank, K. A. (2002). “The dynamics of social capital,” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Social Networks Association, New Orleans, Louisiana.

Gabbay, S. M. and Leenders, R. T. A. J. (2001). “Social capital of organizations: From social structure to the management of corporate social capital,” Social Capital of Organizations (18), pp.1-20.

Gersick, C. J. G. (1988). “Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development,” Academy of Management Journal (31:1), pp.9-41.

Ginnet, R. C. (1990). “The airline cockpit crew,” in J. R. Hackman (ed.), Groups That Work (and Those That Don’t): Crating Conditions for Effective Teamwork, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco: CA.

Golley, F. B. (1993). A History of the Ecosystem Concept in Ecology: More Than the Sum of the Parts. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Gongla, P. and Rizzuto, C. R. (2001). “Evolving communities of practice: IBM global services experience,” IBM System Journal (40:4), pp.842-862.

Goodenough, W. H. (1969). “Rethinking “status” and “role”: Toward a general model of the cultural organization of social relationships,” In Tyler, S. A. (ed.), Cognitive Anthropology, New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, pp.311-330.

Grimm, N. B, Grove, J. M, Pickett, S.T..A, Redman, C. L. (2000). “Integrated approaches to long-term studies of urban ecological systems,” BioScience (50), pp.571-584.

Grzywacz, J. G. and Fuqua, J. (2000). “The social ecology of health: Leverage points and linkages,” Behavioral Medicine (26:3), pp. 101-115.

Hagel III, J. and Armstrong, A.G. (1997) Net Gain：Expanding Markets through Virtual Communities. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Hakken, D. (1999). Cyborgs@cyberspace: An Ethnographor Looks to the Future, New York: Routledge.

Hambrick, D. C. and D'aveni, R. A. (1992). “Top team deterioration as part of the downward spiral of large corporate bankruptcies,” Management Science (38:10), pp.1445-1466.

Hare, A. P. (1973). “Theories of group development and categories for interaction analysis,” Small Group Behavior (4:3), pp. 259-304.

Hare, P. A., Blumberg, H. H., Davis, M. F. and Kent, M. V. (1994). Small Group Research: A Handbook, Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Heinicke, C. M. and Bales, R. F. (1953). “Developmental trends in the structure of small groups,” Sociometry (16), pp.7-38.

Holling, C. S. (1995). “What barriers? What bridges?” In Gunderson, L. H., Holling, C. S., Light, S. S. (eds.), Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions, New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 3-34.

Huisman, M. and van Duijn, M.A.J. (2003). “Software for Social Network Analysis,” Available at: http://stat.gamma.rug.nl/snijders/Software%20for%20Social%20Network
%20Analysis%20CUP_ch13_Oct2003.pdf.

Ishida, T. (1998). Community Computing. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Jantsch, E. (1979). The Self-Organizing Universe: Scientific and Human Implications of the Emerging Paradigm of Evolution, Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Jax, K. (1998). “Holocoen and ecosystem: On the origin and historical consequences of two concepts,” Journal of the History of Biology (31), pp.113-142.

Jax, K., Jones, C., Pickett, S. T. A. (1998). “The self-identity of ecological units,” Oikos (82), pp.253-264.

Johnson, D. W. and Johnson, F. P. (1997). Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills, Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Jones, S. (1995). Understanding community in the information age. In G.Jones, S. (ed.), CyberSociety: Computer-mediated Communication and Community. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 10-35.

Jones, S. (1999). Doing Internet Research, Thousand Oak, CA: Sage.

Jones, Q. and Rafaeli, S. (1999).“User Population and User Contributions to Virtual Publics: A Systems Model,”GROUP 99, Phoenix Arizona.

Jones, Q. and Rafaeli, S. (2000).“What Do Virtual ‘Tells’ Tell? Placing Cybersociety research Into a Hierarchy of Social Explanation,”Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.

Kacen, L. and Rozovski, U. (1998). “Assessing group processes: A comparison among group participants’, direct observers’, and indirect observers’ assessment,” Small Group Research (29), pp.179-197.

Kauffman S. A. (1993). The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution, New York : Oxford University Press.

Kay, J. J., Graham, L. A. and Ulanowicz, R. E. (1989). “A detailed guide to network analysis,” in F. Wulff, J. G. Field, and K. H. Mann. Network Analysis in Marine Ecology: Methods and Applications, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Kim, A. J. (2000). Community Building on the Web: Secret Strategies for Successful Online Communities, Berkeley: Peachpit Press, USA.

Klang, M. and Olsson, S. (1999) Virtual communities. In Kakola, T. K. (Ed.), Proceedings of 22nd Information Research in Scandinavia, 249-260.

Krackhardt, D. (1991). “The strength of strong ties: The importance of philos in organizations,” N. Nohira, R. Eccles, eds. Organizations and Networks: Theory and Practice, Harvard Bussiness School Press, Cambridge, MA.

Krackhardt, D. and Porter, M. (1985). “When friends leave: A structural analysis of the relationship between turnover and stayers’ attitudes,” Administrative Science Quarterly (34), pp.38-67.

Lacoursiere, R. B. (1974). “A group method to facilitate learning during the stages of a psychiatric affiliation,” International Journal of Group Psychotherapy (24), pp.342-351.

Lacoursiere, R. B. (1980). The Life Cycle of Groups: Group Developmental Stage Theory, New York: Human Sciences Press.

Lee, S.L.; Vogel, D.; and Limayem, M. (2002) Virtual community informatics: What we know and what we need to know. In Sprague, R.H. (ed.), Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 2863-2872.

Lemke, J. L. (1994). “Discourse, Dynamics, and Social Change,” Cultural Dynamics (6:1), pp. 243-275.

Likens, G. E. (1992). Excellence in Ecology, III: The Ecosystem Approach: Its Use and Abuse. Oldendorf/Luhe (Germany): Ecology Institute.

Lin, S. C., Lin, F. R., Huang, T. P., and Yeh, M. C. “The reality of team-based knowledge sharing and creation in professional cyber community,” Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS2003), Hawaii, January 6-9, 2003.

Luczkovich, J. J., Borgatti, S. P., Johnson, J. C. and Everett, M. G. (2003). “Defining and measuring trophic role similarity in food webs using regular equivalence,” Journal of Theoretical Biology (220:3), pp.303-321.

Marsden, P. V. (1989). “Methods for the characterization of role structures in network analysis,” In Freeman, L.C., White, D.R., and Romney, A.K. (eds.), Research Methods in Social Network Analysis, Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Press.

Matzat, U., (2003). “Cooperation and community on the Internet: Past issues and present perspectives for theoretical-empirical Internet research,” Proceedings of Conference on Trust and Community on the Internet, Center for Interdisciplinary Research, Germany.

McDermott, R. (2000). “Knowing in community: 10 critical success factors in building communities of practice,” IHRIM Journal, The International Association for Human Resource Information, pp. 1-12.

McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and Performance, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

McGrath, J. E. (1986). “Studying groups at work: Ten critical needs for theory and practice,” In Goodman, P. S. and Associates (eds.) Designing Effective Work Groups, pp.363-392, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

McGrath, J. E. (1991). “ Time, interaction and performance (TIP): A theory of groups,” Small Group Research (23), pp.524-572.

Merton, R. K. (1957). Social Theory and Social Structure, New York: Free Press.

Miller, D. L. (2003). “The stages of group development: A retrospective study of dynamic team process,” Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences (20:2), pp.121-134.

Miller, D. R., Fontaine, M. A. and Muller, M. J. (2002). “Understanding the benefit and costs of communities of practice,” Communications of the ACM (45:4), pp.69-73.

Mohr, W. K. and Tulman, L. J. (2000). “Children exposed to violence: Measurement considerations within an ecological framework,” Advances in Nursing Science (23:1), pp. 59-67.
Nadel, S. F. (1957). The Theory of Social Structure, New York: Free Press.

Obert, S. L. (1983). "Developmental Patterns of Organizational Task Groups: A Preliminary Study," Human Relations (36:1), pp.37-52.

Odum, E. P. (1969). “The strategy of ecosystem development,” Science (164), pp.262-270.

Odum, H. T. (1971). Environment, Power, and Society. New York: Wiley.

Odum, E. P. (1977). “The emergence of ecology as a new integrative discipline,” Science (195), pp.1289-1293.

Odum, E. P. (1983). Systems Ecology, New York: Wiley.

Odum, E. P. (1993). Ecology and Endangered Life-Support Systems, Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, Inc.

Odum, H. T., Odum, E. P. (1976). Energy Basis for Man and Nature, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Odum, H. T., Odum, E. C. (2000). Modeling for All Scales: An Introduction to System Simulation, San Diego (CA): Academic Press.

Pearsall, J. and Trumble, B. (1996). The Oxford English reference dictionary, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pettigrew, A. M., Woodman, R. W., and Cameron, K. S. (2001). “Studying organizational change and development: challenges for future research,” Academy of Management Journal (44:4), pp.697-713.

Pickett, S. T. A. (1999). “The culture of synthesis: habits of mind in novel ecological integration,” Oikos (87), pp.479-487.

Pickett, S. T. A. and Cadenasso, M. L. (2002). “The ecosystem as a multidimensional concept: Meaning, model, and metaphor,” Ecosystems (5), pp.1-10.

Pickett, S. T. A., Kolasa, J., Jones, C. G. (1994). Ecological Understanding: The Nature of Theory and the Theory of Nature, San Diego (CA): Academic Press.

Preece, J. (2000). Online Communities: Designing Usability, Supporting Sociability, Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, England.

Quinn, J.B.; Anderson, P.; and Finkelstein, S. (1996). Managing professional intellect: Making the most of the best. Harvard Business Review, 74(2), pp. 71-80.

Rajasekaran, M. S., Zaphiris, P. (2003). “Social network analysis of a participatory designed online foreign language course,” In Jacko, J. and Stephanidis, C. (ed.), Human-Computer Interaction, Theory and Practice, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mehwah, USA, pp. 218-222.

Ricklefs, R. E. (1990). Ecology, 3rd ed., WH: Freeman and Company.

Sarkar, S. and Sahay, S. (2002). “Understanding virtual team development: An interpretive study,” Journal of the Association for Information Systems (3), pp.247-285.

Schlager, M., Fusco, J. and Schank, P. (2002). “Evolution of an on-line education community of practice,” In Renninger, K. A. and Shumar (eds.), Building Virtual Communities: Learning and Change in Cyberspace, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp.129-158.

Schoberth, T., Preece, J. and Heinzl, A. (2003). “Online communities: a longitudinal analysis of communication activities,” Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

Schutz, W. C. (1958). FIRO: A Three-Dimensional Theory of Interpersonal Behavior, New York: Holt Rinehart & Winston.

Scribner, J.P.; Cockrell, K. S.; Cockrell, D.H.; and Valentine, J.W. (1999). Creating professional communities in schools through organizational learning: An evaluation of a school improvement process. Educational Administration Quarterly (35:1), pp. 130-160.

Seely Brown, J. and Duguid, P. (2000). The Social Life of Information, Harvard Business School Press, USA.

Seers, A. (1997). “Temporal pacing in task forces: Group development or deadline pressure?” Journal of Management (23:2), pp.169-187.

Seers, A. and Woodruff, S. (1997). “Temporal pacing in task forces: Group development or deadline pressure?” Journal of Management (23:2), pp.169-187.

Serim, F. (1996) Building virtual communities for professional development. Workshop of the Future of Networking Technologies for Learning. Available: http://www.ed.gov/Technology/Futures/serim.html.

Simon, D. (1998). “Ecological metaphors of security: World politics in the biosphere,” Alternatives: Social Transformation and Humane Governance (23:3), pp. 291-320.
Smith, M. and Kollock, P. (1999). Communities in cyberspace, London: Routledge.

Smith, H. A., and McKeen, J. D. (2003). “Creating and facilitating Communities of Practice,” In Holsapple, C. W. (ed.), Handbook on Knowledge Management: Knowledge Matters (Vol. 1, pp. 393-407). Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer.

Spitz, H. and Sadock, B. J. (1973). “Small interactional groups in the psychiatric training of graduate nursing students,” Journal of Nursing Education (12), pp.6-13.

Staber, U. H. (1992). “Organizational interdependence and organizational mortality in the cooperative sector: A community ecology perspective,” Human Relations (45:11), pp.1191-1212.

Stiling, P. D. (1992). Introductory Ecology, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Stuckey, B. (2004). “Making the most of the good advice: Meta-analysis Of guidelines for establishing an Internet-mediated community of practice,” IADIS Web Based Communities Conference, Lisbon Portugal.

Suitor, J. J., Wellman, B., and Morgan, D. L. (1997). “It’s about time: how, why, and when networks change,” Social Networks (19), pp.1-7.

Synder, W. (1997). “Communities of practice: Combining organizational learning and strategy insights to create a bridge to the 21st century,” Presented at the 1997 Academy of Management Conference, Boston, MA.

Tansley, A. G. (1935). “The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms,” Ecology (16), pp.284-307.

Tatnall, A. and Davey, B. (2003). “ICT and training: A proposal for an ecological model of innovation,” Educational Technology & Society (6:1), pp. 14-17.

Tatnall, A. and Davey, B. (2004). “Improving the chances of getting your IT curriculum innovation successfully adopted by the application of an ecological approach to innovation,” Informing Science Journal (7), pp.87-103.

Tichy, N. M., Tushman, M., and Fombrun, C. (1979). “Social network analysis for organizations,” Academy of Management Review (4), pp.507-519.

Tuckman, B. W. (1965). “Developing Sequence in Small Groups,” Psychological Bulletin (63), pp.384-399.

Ulanowicz, R.E. (1986). Growth and Development: Ecosystems Phenomenology. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Ulanowicz, R. E. (1997). Ecology, the Ascendent Perspective. New York: Columbia University Press.

Wasserman, S. and Faust, K. (1995). Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Watson-Manheim, M. B., Crowston, K. and Chudoba, K.M. (2002). “Discontinuities and continuities: A new way to understand virtual work,” Information, Technology and People 15(3), pp.191-209.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wenger, E. and Snyder, W. M. (2000). “Communities of practice: The organisational frontier,” Harvard Business Review, pp 139-145.

Wenger, E., McDermott, R. A. and Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Werry, C. and Mowbray, M. (2001). Online Communities: Commerce, Community Action, and the Virtual University, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Westley, F. (1995). “Governing design: the management of social systems and ecosystems management,” In Gunderson, L. H., Holling, C. S., Light, S. S. (eds.), Barriers and Bridges to the Renewal of Ecosystems and Institutions, New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 391-427.

Westheimer, J. and Cuban, L., (1998). Among School Teachers: Community Autonomy and Ideology in Teachers’ Work, New York: Teachers College Press.

Wheeler, L. (2001). “Learning network models – A practitioner’s view,” NET*Working Conference.

Wellman, B. and Frank, K. (2001). "Network capital in a multilevel world: Getting support from personal communities," pp. 233-273 in Social Capital, Nan Lin, Ronald S. Burt and Karen Cook (eds.), Hawthorne, NY: Aldine De Gruyter.

Wheelan, S. A. and Kaeser, R. M. (1997). “The influence of task type and designed leaders on development patterns in groups,” Small Group Research (28), pp.94-121.

Wheelan, S. A. and Hochberger, J. M. (1996). “Validation studies of the group development questionnaire,” Small Group Research (27), pp.143-170.

Whittaker, S.; Terveen, L.; Hill, H. and Cherny, L. (1998).“The dynamics of mass interaction,”Proceedings of CSCW 98, Seattle Washington.

Worchel, S., Coutant-Sassic, D. and Grossman, M. (1992). “A developmental approach to group dynamics: A model and illustrative research,” In S. Worchel, W. Wood, and J. A. Simpson (Eds.), Group Process and Productivity (pp.181-202), Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Wright, R. (1994). The Moral Animal: The New Science of Evolutionary Psychology, New York: Vintage Books.

Yalom, I. D. (1975). The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy, 2nd ed., NewYork: Basic Books.

Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 2nd ed., Thousand Oak, London: Sage.

Zboralski, K.,Gemu"nden, H. G. and Lettl, C. (2004). "A members' perspective on the success of Communities of Practice - Preliminary empirical results," in Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Organizational Knowledge, Learning and Capabilities, Innsbruck, Austria.