Blog
Unlocking a Community of Practice
27 March 2025
Since IGL launched the Unlocking Innovative Potential: Experimentation Programme, we have been working and collaborating with our partners to deliver the programme’s objectives. A key part of this effort has been testing a collaborative approach to identifying evidence gaps and sharing knowledge, particularly by bringing together our policy, research and delivery partners. We wanted active and thoughtful participation which could grow beyond the immediate project and a method that could bridge the gap between policy, practice and research. Specifically, a space where all of our partners, even those not involved in delivering the pilots through the project, could offer their perspectives while also benefitting from ideas exchanges. In order to do this, we have set up a community of practice, which allows us to make the most of our partners’ experiences and knowledge. This blog will delve into why we took this approach and what we learned throughout.
Building a community of practice: What we did and why
The programme brings together researchers, policymakers, and practitioners who deliver programmes that are aligned with UK policy objectives of diversifying talent within the innovation sector and creating more inclusive pathways. The programme sets out to test the feasibility of using experimental research methods to generate new insights and to close evidence gaps. As we are working with two specific organisations to develop experimental pilots, we did not want to stop engaging with everyone who was initially interested. So instead of communicating only the results, and believing in the importance of peer learning, we set out to build a community enabling all of our programme partners to share their experiences and learn from each other.
The CoP became a bridge which connected the sometimes distant worlds of research, policy and practice. We were looking for ideas that were actionable for delivery partners and relevant and beneficial to others. This could be achieved by either encouraging people to be more experimental in their approaches or using the evidence to inform their decisions. Thus, by creating this space, we could gain insights and deliver better results while also driving more lasting change by generating ideas and connections.
Our approach
To set up our community of practice, we first looked at both the community and IGL’s needs: in which ways did the two interact? How could we combine them to achieve what we wanted? IGL’s main objectives were to create an engaged community willing to embed experimentation, to upskill this community through knowledge sharing and to maximise matching opportunities. We wanted to scope out ideas and spread lessons learnt, with the aim of enabling a step change in the use of experimental approaches to address this important challenge.
The community wanted to have their policy and research questions answered as well as to gain access to this specific network. As such, we were keen to create a space that facilitated the sharing of ideas and fostered interaction regarding experimentation in this field. We also wanted to ensure that our different partners had a chance to get to know each other in a way that maximised their opportunities for collaboration – beyond matches that might require IGL’s inclusion.
In order to do this, in the first community of practice meeting, we divided the meeting into various sections. For example, we set up a “rapid pairing” section where we matched participants according to their focus, urging them to share their thoughts on the policy challenges they faced. For another format, the “Hot Seat”, we asked our delivery partners to share their experiences of how the pilot and the process had been proceeding. You can read more about this through our blog written with Suzanna Gamwell, from the East Kent Colleges (EKC) Group, with whom we have been working to deliver the pilot. Both formats were revealed to be extremely useful, with partners reaching out for further engagement and questions regarding others’ work. We also followed up with summaries to those who did not attend so that the information could be shared with all participants.
What have we learnt
Through this experience, we’ve learnt quite a few things regarding managing a community of practice. We were very happy to witness the willingness of people to share their experiences, which played a fundamental role in creating engaged discussions. Hearing directly from partners through formats such as the “Hot Seat” made for a stronger case towards becoming more experimental and creating connections. This was great to hear for us as it demonstrated that our matchmaking and the content showcased created interesting connections that people were keen to follow up on.
However, we have also encountered a number of challenges that we have tried to counter or take into account for our next attempts at organising these spaces. For example, consistent attendance for such a large number was a struggle. Thus, we kept our programme partners updated via summaries and blogs. Some other issues were the heterogeneity of the group which while extremely relevant for gaining different perspectives, also did not necessarily allow the same standard approach or more specific in-depth discussions. Due to the nature of the project, ideating and carrying out pilots with specific organisations, we also inevitably worked more closely with them than with others. Reviewing how the past sessions went, in the future, we aim to target topic-specific policy discussions, which will enable specific members to discuss more at length specific aspects of the unlocking innovative potential challenge – although we would still keep this open to everyone.
Feedback from participants highlighted that in-person meetups would be valuable, so we are looking to schedule these soon. Although the virtual format can be useful, it cannot entirely replicate all the aspects of in-person meetings, particularly more organic connections that partners might form without IGL’s facilitation. Organising events was beyond the scope of this project but is something we are actively considering as we develop this area of work. But we can also look at tweaking or introducing new formats for interaction in virtual meetings.
What happens next
We were motivated to set up this community of practice by knowing the importance of opening space for both peer learning on experimental methods and individual deep dives on context-specific barriers and enablers to experimentation with each organisation. We cultivated a space which can expand after this programme while keeping the same objective of knowledge sharing and driving experimentation. We used this as a pilot for our future community building and we hope to keep creating spaces which can be beneficial to our partners and the wider community.
