Community development in coworking spaces

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Franke, Simone
Data de Publicação: 2020
Tipo de documento: Dissertação
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.14/34302
Resumo: Due to factors of a changing, multinational labour market and the pandemic situation, shared and mobile offices are more requested than ever before. We set out to explore Lisbon’s coworking-communities, as well as the most beneficial resources available to foster and support flexible work practices worldwide. The goals of this research are: 1) to seek a clear definition of coworking and networks; 2) to understand the role of social capital, collaboration, and organizational leadership within coworking communities; 3) to identify community factors, motivations, and user preferences that allow business leaders and customers to make more suitable decisions regarding their unique contexts. Therefore the topic has been approached from a broad to a narrow perspective, which includes social, network, and leadership theories from Bourdieu (1986) Putnam (1993; 1995), Latour (1996; 2005; 2007), and Goleman (2000; 2004), as well as recent coworking studies like Gandini (2015), Weijs-Perrée et al. (2019), Orel & Dvoulety (2020). After considering case-study examples, key findings were made to discover the motivations and tools from the professionals at CW facilities. Based on the identified opportunities, suggestions were made to develop their communities and social performances. Considering the diverse background of scientific possibilities, the empirical part belongs to the field of interpretivism, containing a mixed-method methodology: A survey of 102 Lisbon's co-workers has been conducted, followed by semi-structured expert interviews of 9 community leading roles. Factors of collaborative networks, innovation, and leadership structures stood out as the focus of the work. The results should generate useful and credible outcomes in order to uncover new opportunities for communities’ implementation. Discovered member preferences can be seen as a contribution of already applied theories and knowledge of the status quo in Lisbon. Prioritizing a set of working & environmental assets, for example professional networking, and the identification of different member-types represents an extension to proceeded case studies like Back & Josef (2016), Fuzi (2015), or Kyrö & Arto (2015). Because its outcome could not be analysed concerning CW-locations specifically, it also proposes challenges and opportunities for future research.
id RCAP_6060797ea75efc9fcf69963ba5b8634b
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.ucp.pt:10400.14/34302
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Community development in coworking spacesCoworkingCommunity developmentNetworksCollaborationOrganizational leadershipDesenvolvimento de comunidadesRedesColaboraçãoLiderança organizacionalDomínio/Área Científica::Ciências Sociais::Ciências da ComunicaçãoDue to factors of a changing, multinational labour market and the pandemic situation, shared and mobile offices are more requested than ever before. We set out to explore Lisbon’s coworking-communities, as well as the most beneficial resources available to foster and support flexible work practices worldwide. The goals of this research are: 1) to seek a clear definition of coworking and networks; 2) to understand the role of social capital, collaboration, and organizational leadership within coworking communities; 3) to identify community factors, motivations, and user preferences that allow business leaders and customers to make more suitable decisions regarding their unique contexts. Therefore the topic has been approached from a broad to a narrow perspective, which includes social, network, and leadership theories from Bourdieu (1986) Putnam (1993; 1995), Latour (1996; 2005; 2007), and Goleman (2000; 2004), as well as recent coworking studies like Gandini (2015), Weijs-Perrée et al. (2019), Orel & Dvoulety (2020). After considering case-study examples, key findings were made to discover the motivations and tools from the professionals at CW facilities. Based on the identified opportunities, suggestions were made to develop their communities and social performances. Considering the diverse background of scientific possibilities, the empirical part belongs to the field of interpretivism, containing a mixed-method methodology: A survey of 102 Lisbon's co-workers has been conducted, followed by semi-structured expert interviews of 9 community leading roles. Factors of collaborative networks, innovation, and leadership structures stood out as the focus of the work. The results should generate useful and credible outcomes in order to uncover new opportunities for communities’ implementation. Discovered member preferences can be seen as a contribution of already applied theories and knowledge of the status quo in Lisbon. Prioritizing a set of working & environmental assets, for example professional networking, and the identification of different member-types represents an extension to proceeded case studies like Back & Josef (2016), Fuzi (2015), or Kyrö & Arto (2015). Because its outcome could not be analysed concerning CW-locations specifically, it also proposes challenges and opportunities for future research.Um mercado de trabalho multinacional em mutação, aliado à situações de pandemia atual levou a que os espaços de escritórios móveis e partilhados fossem mais procurados que nunca. To explore Lisbon's coworking (CW) communities to find out the most beneficial resources to develop them should support flexible work practices worldwide. Com esta investigação propusemo-nos a explorar as comunidades de Coworking (CW) de Lisboa para descobrir quais os recursos mais benéficos para as desenvolver e para apoiar práticas de trabalho flexível em todo o mundo. Os objetivos desta pesquisa são: 1) procurar uma definição clara de Coworking e redes; 2) compreender o papel do capital social, da colaboração e da liderança organizacional dentro das comunidades de Coworking; 3) identificar fatores comunitários, motivações e preferências dos utilizadores que permitam aos líderes empresariais e clientes tomar as decisões mais adequadas aos seus contextos únicos. Assim, o tema foi abordado partindo de uma perspetiva mais ampla para uma perspetiva mais específica, que inclui teorias sociais, de rede e de liderança de autores como Bourdieu (1986), Putnam (1993; 1995), Latour (1996; 2005) e Goleman (2000;2004), bem como estudos recentes sobre Coworking de Gandini (2015), Weijs-Perrée et al. (2019), Orel & Dvoulety (2020) entre outros. Após analisar exemplos de estudos de caso, descobriram-se as principais motivações e ferramentas dos profissionais que trabalham nestes locais hibridizados. Com base nas oportunidades identificadas, foram desenvolvidas sugestões para desenvolver comunidades de Coworking e as suas performances sociais. Após considerar a diversidade das possibilidades de abordagem científica, definiu-se que a parte empírica se insere no campo do interpretivismo, utilizando uma metodologia mista: foi realizado um inquérito a 102 profissionais de CW de Lisboa, seguido de entrevistas semiestruturadas a especialistas - 9 anfitriões e/ou gestores comunitários. Os conceitos de redes colaborativas, inovação e estruturas de liderança destacaram-se como sendo o foco do trabalho. Com a informação obtida pretende-se chegar a resultados úteis e credíveis, que permitam descobrir novas oportunidades para implementação nos espaços comunitários. A identificação de motivações e preferências dos utilizadores pode ser vista como uma contribuição para as teorias já aplicadas e como extensão dos estudos de casos como os apresentados por Back & Josef (2016), Fuzi (2015), ou Kyrö & Arto (2015). Uma vez que os resultados não podem ser analisados especificamente no que diz respeito a instalações de CW, ficam lançadas as bases para futuras investigações.Victorino, Mariana Hidalgo Barata MartinsVeritati - Repositório Institucional da Universidade Católica PortuguesaFranke, Simone2021-07-28T10:50:55Z2021-05-1220202021-05-12T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesisapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.14/34302TID:202730468enginfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-07-12T17:39:47Zoai:repositorio.ucp.pt:10400.14/34302Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T18:27:47.885400Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Community development in coworking spaces
title Community development in coworking spaces
spellingShingle Community development in coworking spaces
Franke, Simone
Coworking
Community development
Networks
Collaboration
Organizational leadership
Desenvolvimento de comunidades
Redes
Colaboração
Liderança organizacional
Domínio/Área Científica::Ciências Sociais::Ciências da Comunicação
title_short Community development in coworking spaces
title_full Community development in coworking spaces
title_fullStr Community development in coworking spaces
title_full_unstemmed Community development in coworking spaces
title_sort Community development in coworking spaces
author Franke, Simone
author_facet Franke, Simone
author_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Victorino, Mariana Hidalgo Barata Martins
Veritati - Repositório Institucional da Universidade Católica Portuguesa
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Franke, Simone
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Coworking
Community development
Networks
Collaboration
Organizational leadership
Desenvolvimento de comunidades
Redes
Colaboração
Liderança organizacional
Domínio/Área Científica::Ciências Sociais::Ciências da Comunicação
topic Coworking
Community development
Networks
Collaboration
Organizational leadership
Desenvolvimento de comunidades
Redes
Colaboração
Liderança organizacional
Domínio/Área Científica::Ciências Sociais::Ciências da Comunicação
description Due to factors of a changing, multinational labour market and the pandemic situation, shared and mobile offices are more requested than ever before. We set out to explore Lisbon’s coworking-communities, as well as the most beneficial resources available to foster and support flexible work practices worldwide. The goals of this research are: 1) to seek a clear definition of coworking and networks; 2) to understand the role of social capital, collaboration, and organizational leadership within coworking communities; 3) to identify community factors, motivations, and user preferences that allow business leaders and customers to make more suitable decisions regarding their unique contexts. Therefore the topic has been approached from a broad to a narrow perspective, which includes social, network, and leadership theories from Bourdieu (1986) Putnam (1993; 1995), Latour (1996; 2005; 2007), and Goleman (2000; 2004), as well as recent coworking studies like Gandini (2015), Weijs-Perrée et al. (2019), Orel & Dvoulety (2020). After considering case-study examples, key findings were made to discover the motivations and tools from the professionals at CW facilities. Based on the identified opportunities, suggestions were made to develop their communities and social performances. Considering the diverse background of scientific possibilities, the empirical part belongs to the field of interpretivism, containing a mixed-method methodology: A survey of 102 Lisbon's co-workers has been conducted, followed by semi-structured expert interviews of 9 community leading roles. Factors of collaborative networks, innovation, and leadership structures stood out as the focus of the work. The results should generate useful and credible outcomes in order to uncover new opportunities for communities’ implementation. Discovered member preferences can be seen as a contribution of already applied theories and knowledge of the status quo in Lisbon. Prioritizing a set of working & environmental assets, for example professional networking, and the identification of different member-types represents an extension to proceeded case studies like Back & Josef (2016), Fuzi (2015), or Kyrö & Arto (2015). Because its outcome could not be analysed concerning CW-locations specifically, it also proposes challenges and opportunities for future research.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020
2021-07-28T10:50:55Z
2021-05-12
2021-05-12T00:00:00Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis
format masterThesis
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10400.14/34302
TID:202730468
url http://hdl.handle.net/10400.14/34302
identifier_str_mv TID:202730468
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799131995622604800