Discover Education

Research

Developing a support model for hybrid work‑integrated continuous

professional development
Marcia Håkansson Lindqvist1 · Peter Mozelius2 · Jimmy Jaldemark1

Received: 27 December 2023 / Accepted: 21 May 2024

© The Author(s) 2024  OPEN

Abstract
In the contemporary digitalised knowledge society, work-integrated professional development is an important and
continuous activity. Continuous professional development should preferably be a hybrid format, where academia
collaborates with industry and the surrounding society in a multi-directed exchange of ideas. Continuous professional
development is today conducted in a blend of workplace activities, and in technology enhanced online environments.
A complex blend for professionals that at the same time are working full-time with their ordinary jobs. The need for
a support model to navigate in these new digital learning spaces is obvious, where the support model also should
include collaboration and a community of practice. A community where the members communicate regularly to improve
their skills and knowledge in their common professional domain. The aim of this paper is to describe and analyse the
development of a support model that involves these aspects. Findings confirm the necessity of the four steps in the
earlier model, at the same time as they indicate the need for a fifth step facilitating the creation of Communities and
Landscapes of Practice. The use of the model may support higher education institutions in creating beneficial conditions
for hybrid work-integrated continuous professional development for industry.

Keywords Learning support model · Continuous professional development · Hybrid learning · Work-integrated
learning · CHIM · CHIMP

1 Introduction

An essential part of the transformation to a knowledge society is professional development. In this transformation,
academia and industry need to have an ongoing investment in the development of human knowledge [1]. In the
knowledge society, it requires developing and renewing knowledge, both within practices and from academic sources,
throughout working life. In other words, for organisations continuous professional development (CPD) needs to be an
ongoing process that continuously adapt to and change conditions and practices. Scholars discuss CPD as a process
that can be described as "the systematic maintenance, improvement and broadening of knowledge and skills, and the
development of personal qualities necessary for the execution of professional and technical duties throughout the
practitioner’s working life" [2]. For higher education, this is an important task.
Employers must create conditions for CPD that build on practical and theoretical knowledge. In effect, these conditions
can be described as a continuum between a strong separation of practice and theory or the hybrid idea of CPD. On one

* Marcia Håkansson Lindqvist, [email protected]; Peter Mozelius, [email protected]; Jimmy Jaldemark,

[email protected] | 1Department of Education, Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden. 2Department of Communication,
Quality Management and Information Systems, Mid Sweden University, Östersund, Sweden.

Discover Education (2024) 3:62 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00147-1

Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Discover Education (2024) 3:62 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00147-1

end, CPD is built around a weak link between practice and theory. This end includes theoretical courses, with no link to
practise, taught at the universities and practical knowledge—developed by chance or without a direct link to theoretical
courses—at the workplace. At the other end of the continuum, CPD there is a strong link between practice and theory.
This can be described as a hybrid form that includes the breeding of working life conditions in the workplace and
conditions from academia [3]. This paper builds on hybrid conditions for CPD, including the importance of building on
practitioners’ everyday working life and workplace activities. Moreover, these workplace conditions should be combined
and merged with theoretical academic studies. Such hybrid conditions for CPD align with the idea of work-integrated
learning (WIL) [4]. Today, many forms of WIL apply digital information and communication technologies to link academia
and industry for supporting and facilitating teaching and learning activities in CPD.
WIL can open “for participation and engagement beyond the boundaries of the institution, classroom and learner role
in new ways … [if ] learners work to think ‘otherwise’ about time, space, materials, structures, contexts and roles to break
down traditional dichotomies and make new forms emerge. Consequently, hybridity demands change in institutional
practices, educational spaces and ways of learning” [3, p. 1714]. Therefore, a WIL that includes a strategic plan for change
in the practices of an organisation can be regarded as having a hybrid character when the plan encompasses industry
and academia.
For both academia and industry, applying digital information and communication technologies in WIL-based CPD
enables individual design, schedules and an individual study pace. It also involves continuous access to qualified teachers.
Further, it enables possibilities such as dynamic course content and the idea of more flexible teaching [5, 6]. Nevertheless,
for participants with medium to low earlier experience of using digital information and communication technologies to
enable learning, WIL in collaboration with academia is not completely self-explanatory or self-supported. Participants in
CPD may need support in technology and pedagogy for CPD for navigating in CPD in academy and industry. As the need
for WIL increases as well as the need for collaboration between academia and industry, higher education institutions will
need more knowledge regarding how these participants can be supported.

2 Aim and research questions

The aim of this paper is to describe and analyse the development of a support model for CPD in a WIL context combining
academia and industry from the teacher perspective. The following research questions are explored: (1) How do higher
education teachers describe the inception phases of a hybrid work-integrated continuous professional development effort? and
(2) How can higher education teachers’ descriptions be analysed and understood as a model to support hybrid work-integrated
continuous professional development? Thus, this paper explores a support model for hybrid work-integrated CPD.

3 The BUFFL project

The base of this paper is the BUFFL project (Translation of the Swedish acronym: Industry development at banks and
insurance companies through flexible lifelong learning) [7, 8]. The project was a three-year project with the aim of
strengthening professional competencies in the companies and organisation in the fields of banking and insurance. The
BUFFL project can be classified as WIL as well as lifelong learning. The needed CPD in the project was carried out with the
use of virtual technology-based methods to enable learning integrated with participants’ working life. Courses offered
were divided into smaller course modules to be better adapted to the participants, who work full time. Thus, the BUFFL
project offered employees to attend short courses to integrate theory and practice in academic course at their place of
work. In the Swedish context, this type of CPD which integrates academia and industry in collaboration is relatively rare.
Further the courses are offered several times, as organisations involved in the project seek to provide CPD for employees
systematically over a longer period of time.
The course participants worked in six private companies and one governmental agency and worked together with
researchers from Business Administration, Education and Informatics to develop a framework for work integration of
short university course modules for authentic, needs-based CPD. During the ongoing development phase, the course
modules were run in the Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) Moodle in collaboration between the various stakeholders.
An important part of the educational framework was to create a support model for the teachers and course participants.
Sharing knowledge is an important part of a support model where academia could provide a knowledge-sharing
structure that is aligned with the virtual classroom. Knowledge without skills is however not that valuable if it is not used

Vol:.(1234567890)
Discover Education (2024) 3:62 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00147-1 Research

and integrated in practice. In line with this thought, the use of own data has been used in the courses. This has meant that
course participants have brought their own data to courses, in a form of Bring Your Own Data (BYOD) [9]. Collaborative
sessions were scheduled during the course span, involving the idea that knowledge from lectures and course literature
should be further investigated in concrete group activities. Practical work is aligned to present tools and theories in the
BUFFL course modules. This work is crucial in order to meet the ambitious learning objectives on both individual and
organisational development. In online learning environments, participants can experience feelings of loneliness, and
group activities built around practical real-world problems seem like a good remedy to break the isolation. One rule in the
BUFFL project, is to strive to have a minimum of at least two participants from each organisation for each course module.

4 The CHIM model

The preliminary model developed in the BUFFL project is the CHIM model. Previously, in the initial inception phase of the
BUFFL project four crucial steps have been identified. The four steps are: Creating a common virtual space, the Handshake,
the Initial support and the Mentorship. This preliminary model is a further development of the draft presented at the
Networked Learning 2020 conference [7, 8]. This marked the start of the work to evaluate and more distinctly describe
the support model.
The CHIM model contains the four steps of (1) Creating a common virtual space (2) Handshake, (3) Initial teacher
support, and finally (4) Mentorship. Creating a common virtual space (C-step), involves the idea that learning activities
are better carried out in dedicated learning spaces, and the classroom for learning has to be a virtual one. Here, teachers
and participants may be new to the VLE. The implementation and design of teaching and learning activities should
be an ongoing discussion which takes place between teachers and facilitating researchers, and which also involves
the university technical support team. A virtual Handshake (H-step) might be even more important than an authentic
handshake, as first contact is crucial. A poor handshake can result in learners in online courses quitting immediately [10,
11]. A remedy against a poor handshake is to have early facilitating meetings, either face-to-face or online [12], which
leads to the next step of initial support. Initial support mitigates the C-step and the H-step. Initial support (I-step) for
the teachers, for example, should start one semester before the start of the teacher’s first-course module. A thorough
and friendly initial support can be a good stepping-stone toward a more long-lasting mentorship. Mentorship (M-step)
comprises enabling and supporting conditions for networked learning among mentors and other participants in the
project. Important ingredients in long-term mentorship are to exchange ideas, evaluate outcomes, and further to develop
the course modules in a networked mentorship. This step should also include how mentors develop, create and expand
networks to support individual work in mentorship with other mentors [7]. So far, the focus in the BUFFL project has
been on the first four steps in the model. These four steps comprise the CHIM model, which was first presented in line
with a study of the BUFFL project involving WIL in the bank and insurance sectors [7, 8]. Here, findings indicated that if
technology-enhanced teaching and learning fail in the inception phase, early drop-out rates for participants can reach
high levels.
In the fifth step of the CHIMP model, the P is for Practice in which academia and industry put new knowledge in place
in practice. This step is built around the concept of CoP for This paper builds upon the previous work regarding the CHIM
model in further efforts to explore, evaluate and expand the model. The research contribution is a model which can
support the design of hybrid work-integrated CPD and create beneficial conditions for this work in higher education.
In the BUFFL project, the Communities of Practice (CoP) concept builds a foundation for involving the social learning
theory that aligns learning with its social contexts, which in the CHIMP model means the workplace context. The
educational theorist Etienne Wenger, who is one of the founders of CoP, has defined learning as a social process, and
that CoP should be seen as a social learning theory [13]. This resembles how Bates [14] has claimed that knowledge is
either acquired through a social process or through institutions that are socially constructed. According to the social
learning theory, knowledge is constructed via social interaction, and learners learn from observing and interacting within
social learning environments. A fundamental idea in the described BUFFL project and the CHIMP model, as described in
Mozelius [15] is to have a multi-directed knowledge exchange between academia and the surrounding society. Finally,
how the social learning theory is related to cognitivism, since it admits the existence of individual intelligence and
reasoning [13], has also been part of the learning and teaching design in the BUFFL project.

Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Discover Education (2024) 3:62 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00147-1

5 Communities of practice

As noted above, during the 1990s, Wenger participated in the development of practice theory. First, the emphasis is on
the situated nature of the relationship between learning and practice. This relationship is later expanded by digging
deeper into how learning and practice relate to communities of learners. The theory was expanded to include the
relationship between practices by emphasising learners’ participation in a nexus of practices. In practice, learning is a
social phenomenon which depends on meaning-making and identity work within the practices a learner belongs to.
CoP as a concept has its roots in American pragmatism and was first presented by Lave and Wenger [16]. CoP builds
upon John Dewey’s idea of “learning through occupation” [17]. The concept is defined as groups of people sharing
a passion for something they do and having the interest to develop how they do it through regular interaction [18].
A CoP consists of members with a common responsibility for managing useful knowledge in a specific technical or
business domain. Within a CoP, members communicate regularly to improve their skills in their common domain. This
communication is organised in a user-friendly way with a minimum of formal structures or geographic boundaries.
CoPs should build upon informality, autonomy, open communication, and the importance of practitioner orientation.
This concept was first implemented and tested as a part of teacher training, where CoP-members were introduced to
peers and peer discussions. Furthermore, the idea of CoPs should involve the as involving an aspect of lifelong learning
and providing and encouraging sustainable continuous learning process after the completion of formal training.
Recommended CoP activities are: (1) Brainstorming and problem-solving, (2) Knowledge seeking and knowledge sharing,
(3) Experience sharing, (4) The reuse of resources, (5) Development discussions, (6) Project documentation, (7) Identifying
gaps and mapping knowledge, (8) Study visits and (9) Coordination for synergy [18, 19].
Later development of this practice theory included a shift from belonging in practices to the identification
of a landscape of different practices. Professional occupation can be said to constitute is a “complex landscape of
different communities of practice” [10, p. 15]. From such conceptualization, professional learning is an exploration
of a landscape where the learner should be competent in practices identified as being significant to the learner and
knowledgeable of the landscape. In this exploration, learners build their identities by identifying themselves in terms
of engagement, imagination and alignment. Engagement is the direct experience of competencies in communities
of practice. Imagination is the construction of images of the landscape. These images help learners to understand
who they are in the landscape. Alignment can be regarded as a two-way process, which coordinate “enterprises,
perspectives, interpretations, and contexts so that actions have the effects we expect” [10, p. 21].
The application of these modes of identification can lead to either misidentification or identification of practices
and provide ways for learners to position themselves in the landscape. The combination of practices in the landscape
supports the development of knowledgeability. Being a professional relates to the development of “a meaningful
identity of both competence and knowledgeability in a dynamic and varied landscape of relevant practices” [10, p.
23]. The negotiation of professionals’ knowledgeability is an important challenge for CPD.

6 Method

Using a case study approach, this study was carried out with a total of 23 course modules in the BUFFL project as case
units. Examples of courses are ’Digitalisation and business models’ and ’Organisational development’. Data was collected
in a combination of interviews and email conversations between teachers and course participants. The interviews were
conducted as online interviews via email. The informants in the study were teachers for the various course modules. Seven
teachers were interviewed, 6 men and one woman. The informants were identified as Interview Persons 1–7 (IP1-IP7).
Excerpts from course evaluations and e-mail correspondence were then analysed. The themes which emerged from the
analyses of the various data sources were compared with the case study concepts of data triangulation and investigator
triangulation. Firstly, data triangulation was conducted because "Different kinds of data may yield somewhat different
results because different types of inquiry are sensitive to different real-world nuances" [19, p. 248]. Secondly, investigator
triangulation was added with the idea of involving all authors in a triangulating analysis as described by Patton [20, p.
560] as "having two or more persons independently analyse the same qualitative data and compare their findings".
Striving for a systematic thematic analysis, the work was guided by the 6-step process recommended by Braun and
Clarke [21, 22]. The six important steps to follow where (1) Get familiar with the data, (2) Find initial codes, (3) Search

Vol:.(1234567890)
Discover Education (2024) 3:62 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00147-1 Research

for themes, (4) Revise the identified themes, (5) Naming and refining the themes, and finally, (6) Write a report where
the themes are presented and discussed [21, 22]. In the data analysis, the two triangulations described above were
carried out to strengthen the general deductive thematic analysis. The results were then analysed using the CHIM
Model. The results from the different data sources were compared and grouped into five categories. The categories
that were defined beforehand are the four CHIM steps that were found in an earlier study [23]. The fifth category
is ’Suggestions for improvements in practice’, which contains ideas on a more long-term and sustainable practical
collaboration that should have the potential to survive the project span.

7 Results

In this section, the results are presented in line with the CHIM model. These themes are: creating a common virtual space,
the handshake, the initial support and the mentorship. Suggestions for improvements in practices are also presented. First,
the interviews are presented (IP1-IP7), followed by e-mail correspondence.

7.1 Creating a common virtual space

Creating a common virtual space, i. e. creating a common workplace to work together and support networked learning,
was an important base for collaborative work with CPD. This common virtual space was a work space for the teachers
involved in the project who were preparing for the upstart of their courses. In this process, there were university teachers
assigned to act as mentors to support the teachers’ work. All of the course modules were developed in the university’s
VLE. The courses were developed with the support of the university technical support team.
In this step, creating and developing the new course modules in the VLE proved to be a challenge. The course
teachers in the organisations involved needed to be registered in the system. University work routines as well as strict
administrative rules created barriers for the teachers as external users. As external users they were not considered to be
students in the academic sense in the system. As one of the teachers explained about userids and passwords which must
work: “To have to wait for a week just to be able to get into the VLE… This was extremely frustrating for both teachers
and participants” (IP3.) Other barriers included a lack of information about the project among administrators who,
understandably, found it difficult to comprehend the project design and the need for flexible routines for connecting
teachers and users to the VLE:
For the participants and for me, the design of my profile and what I have access to should be completely steered by
the process. There shouldn’t be any documents that have to be sent out, just an e-mail, which most people have,
so all administration for my participants should be able to be done by email. I should be able to reset my password
without needing to contact IT support, and the password should be the same for e-mail and VLE. (IP1)
In this light, university protocol and administrative systems were compared to existing protocols and administrative
systems in the organisations.
The e-mail conversations indicate a certain irritation toward the bureaucracy that surrounds the VLE administration.
E-mails are formulated politely, but the inertia in the process is not appreciated. A detail that was questioned was that
a course room cannot be created without a course id number and a course session id number and that these numbers
only can be set after the official syllabus is approved. This clashes with the idea that most teachers and course developers
want to start early with the fundamental course design.

7.2 The handshake

The first phase, or the inception phase, is important. However, if the initial handshake fails, the result may lead to low
levels of motivation. This may also lead to a high dropout rate among first-time participants. In the initial contact with
technology-supported education and VLE’s, there are challenges which go beyond the learning content itself.
The need to deal with technology and the VLE interface may also cause frustration and cognitive overload. This may
be due to administrative routines, for example, the distribution of account information to online participants who are not
normal university students. The initial handshake and early in-person or virtual joint sessions are necessary to establish
contact and collaboration with participants and teachers. Although this can be considered to be a basic action and can be
carried out face-to-face or by videoconferencing, it is an important step. Here, teachers may also need support in getting

Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Discover Education (2024) 3:62 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00147-1

started. One teacher expressed this frustration: Another teacher noted: “It is mainly the registration of the participants
which must be done earlier and faster” (IP7). That login work is important (IP6). The same is true for information about
how to access the VLE and what support functions are available (IP5).
The same was true in regard to the teachers learning to teach in environments which are supported by technologies.
Therefore, it would have been better to address the initial problems through the corresponding initial support: “The
administration for all sorts of things for supporting the participants to get into the VLE and use it, some participants
need more [support] than others” (IP2). How teachers and participants experienced the usability of the VLE differed:
“Overall, the VLE has worked very well and has not had any larger problems in using the platform. Further, I feel that the
participants find the VLE easy to use” (IP7).
One teacher explained the challenges in the manual administration of participants and the need for central storage:
“So far, NN and I have emailed lists between us. This should be changed, so that the necessary information can be found
centrally and that I, as a teacher, should only have to fill in the necessary information in this central system” (IP1).
More systematic and digitalized routines alleviate these challenges. Another teacher noted the difficulties related to
a lack of technical competence:
For me, all of the preparations are carried out correctly so that things work since you don’t understand what the
problem is when you don’t have the competence: “the most important thing is quick and competent support” (IP4).
Many e-mails have been sent, followed up by phone calls in the strife to get all participants into the virtual classroom
before the course start. Some course participants reacted early and had a continuous dialogue with the facilitators until
they were able to log in. However, there were late responders as well, and the combination of course-starts on Mondays
and a closed IT helpdesk on Fridays were, on several occasions, a bad combination. This issue will be addressed for future
BUFFL courses, but as a course participant wondered in an e-mail: "Why is it more complicated to log in to the VLE than
to my Internet bank?".

7.3 The initial support

The value of an initial support group should not be underestimated. This is especially true if the majority of the teachers
in the teacher community are new in working with technology-supported teaching and learning activities. In the BUFFL
project a major part of the initial training has been to offer technical training and support for the VLE as well as the
employed video conferencing tool ZOOM. In order to achieve realistic training sessions for the use of the ZOOM tool, the
larger part of the initial distance support for teachers was carried out as ZOOM sessions. Two members of the support
group carried out a workshop which was conducted in a face-to-face format and which involved hands-on activities. This
was necessary especially for one of the collaborating universities for project participants, which did not have previous
experience with tools for technology-enhanced learning. One teacher expressed this: “For me, the most important thing
is that I know who is responsible if I have questions… For the participants, there needs to be clear instructions about
how to use the VLE” (IP2).
Alternative and supplementary forms of initial support were also provided. The initial support was planned to offer
pedagogical support, technical instructions, study guides, and examples of an online assessment. Although all teachers
have previous pedagogical knowledge, teaching with the help of digital technologies requires a modified instructional
design: “Pedagogical and didactical possibilities connected to functions in the VLE.” (IP5). Technical instructions which
were clear and concise were also needed in order to initiate the work with tools for recording lectures, video conferencing
tools such as ZOOM and the VLE itself. Learners who have not previously studied online or used VLEs may be supported
through the use of study guides. These study guides were aimed to illustrate and explain aspects such as course design,
collaboration tools and navigation in the VLE. However, teachers may need more support to increase pedagogical
competence: “I have done a course in higher education and flexible Learning, but my experience is that I need to study
more in the area of pedagogy” (IP2). In the same line as study guides provide support, the development of online
assignments also differs from the construction of traditional in-class assignments. For example, VLE modules for peer
review may be far from self-explanatory. Therefore, both teachers and learners may need support.

7.4 The mentorship

Noting that the initial support is an important pillar at the start of a project such as the BUFFL project, support through
mentorship is also important. This work involves creating beneficial conditions for learning within the project group. The

Vol:.(1234567890)
Discover Education (2024) 3:62 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00147-1 Research

project group as a CoP [24] can be described as comprising three levels. Creating conditions for learning among mentors,
which can be seen as the first level, is important in order to have possibilities to exchange, evaluate and develop the work
in mentorship. This form of mentorship provides support for the teachers in the different organisations. One teacher saw
mentorships as a way to “increase the accessibility to support, so this would be positive (IP4). This level comprises how
mentors develop and create networks to support individual work though practicing mentorship in collaboration with
other mentors. One teacher saw the idea of mentorships for teachers and participants:
Regarding subject content, I think it [mentorship] is a good idea for participants. A mentor can be a teacher or an
expert in the content area in the company at hand. This would also be a way to create better continuity after the
courses are finished. However, is also possible that the same effect could be seen by creating a network or networks
of course participants. (IP3)
The second level comprises how mentors, through their mentorship, support conditions for learning for teachers
working on the courses. In viewing mentorship as a community of practice these conditions are also vital for collaboration
between mentors: “I am not sure what is meant by my mentorship…. But a group for discussion experiences, etc., would
be of help” (IP6).
As the project continues, the third level, it will be important that conditions for learning are created for both mentors
and teachers. Mentors and teachers need to share, exchange experiences, collaborate and development work in the
intersection between mentorship and teaching. As one teacher expressed this: “I have a positive view of both pedagogical
and technical mentorship” (IP7). Thus, mentorship in different forms appears to be supportive for both teachers’ and
participants’ learning.

7.5 Suggestions for improvements in practice

When the teachers were asked to provide suggestions for participation in practice, the importance of support function,
pedagogical and technical development were noted as well as alignment and the balance between theory and
practice. Processes and support were important to develop: “A more systematic work process with support functions”
(IP1). Technical development was also noted as a point for development: “Interactive platforms and gamification are
very important” (IP2). Marketing was also seen to be an important take off the academic stamp on the courses: “Much
better IT-support and better marketing. The latter, I think, can be experienced as academic and boring since it is very
important to get participants to the courses. I think that this is something that should be financed for professional
support” (IP3). Another teacher expressed this as the balance between theory and practice which was a part of the
course content and which needed to be considered and evaluated: “The balance between theory and practice (practical
problems) in the courses concerning the content, given the group of participants, is something to think about” (IP5). Other
recommendations in practice were alignment: “Overall, to align the design and requirements levels for different types
of modules could be necessary” (IP4) and better conditions for the participants: “Giving the participants prerequisites in
the form of time for them to be able to participate in a proper way” (IP7).

8 Discussion

The aim of this paper was to describe and analyse the development of a support model for hybrid CPD in a WIL context
combining academia and industry from the teacher perspective. The following research questions were explored (1) How
do higher education teachers describe the inception phases of a hybrid work-integrated continuous professional development
effort? and (2) How can higher education teachers’ descriptions be analysed and understood as a model to support hybrid
work-integrated continuous professional development? In reference to the first research question, higher education teachers
describe the inception phases of a hybrid work-integrated CPD effort through identifying professional occupation as a
complex landscape of different communities of practice professional learning involves teachers supporting learners to
explore and understand a landscape as a landscape of practice. This might in the future also be aligned to the concept of
Communities of Inquiry, and especially the part of social presence and the suggested extension of emotional presence
[25].
In reference to the second research question, higher education teachers’ descriptions can be analysed and understood
as a model to support hybrid work-integrated CPD through the CHIMP model. The preliminary model in the BUFFL project
has been described as the CHIM model. In the inception phase of a BUFFL project four crucial steps were identified. The

Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Discover Education (2024) 3:62 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00147-1

four steps, as noted above, are: Creating a common virtual space, the Handshake, the Initial support and the Mentorship
[23]. Thus, regarding the BUFFL project as a project for CPD and WIL, the learner explores and understands a landscape
in the first two steps of the model, i.e. are the C-and the H-steps. Engagement can be seen in first two steps in the CHIM
model: the C-step and the H-step. The study by Hesterman [26] highlighted the importance of a digital handshake to
support authentic online learning and to create a contract between the teacher and the students. In these two steps,
engagement is present in the direct experience of competencies in communities of practice. These steps were crucial
aspects for teacher and learners in the project.
In this study, engagement can be said to be the direct experiences of competencies in the communities of practice as a
common virtual space is created and the initial handshake is carried out as a common agreement between teachers and
learners. Regarding the engagement, there are several other research studies that has pointed out that highly engaged
students have significantly better learning outcomes and grades than those with low engagement levels [27, 28].
In the third step of the model, the I-step, learners learn to acknowledge and make use of the initial support provided. As
stated by Hasan [29] it is obvious that the learners need initial support to explore e-learning effectively. Here, imagination
is the construction of images of the landscape in order to navigate and support learners in navigating in the landscape. In
the fourth step, the M-step, teachers support learners, and each other, working together to create common ground. The
study by Vauterin & Virrki-Hatakka [30] identified how the mentors’ teaching and research expertise were noticed in their
practical work. Here, alignment is defined as “a two-way process of coordinating enterprises, perspectives, interpretations,
and contexts so that actions have the effects we expect” [16, p. 21]. As argued by Bernhard and Olsson [31], alignment is
of importance when the negotiation of teachers’ and professionals’ knowledgeability is a challenge for CPD, especially
when academia meets industry.
Sharing knowledge is an important part of a support model where academia could provide a knowledge-sharing
structure aligned with the virtual classroom. However, knowledge without skills is not that valuable, and in the fifth step
of the CHIMP model, the P is for Practice. This step is built around the concept of CoP for collaborative sessions during
the course span, involving the idea that knowledge from lectures and course literature should be further investigated in
concrete group activities. In regard to the practical work carried out in courses it is crucial that this work and is aligned
to the presented tools and theories in the BUFFL course modules. Otherwise, there is a risk that the ambitious learning
objectives for individual and organisational development are not met. In online learning environments, participants can
experience feelings of loneliness. Group activities built around practical, real-world problems appear to be a remedy to
break the isolation and to create new landscapes of practice. One rule in the BUFFL project was to have a minimum of
two participants from each organisation for each course module. This is a good start for the creation of local CoPs, but
the long-term objective is cross-organisational and cross-boundary collaboration in Landscapes of Practice.

9 Conclusion

The findings in this study confirm several of our ideas about a support model for work-integrated CPD [7, 8, 23]. Moreover,
the findings confirm the need of expanding the support model to involve another fifth step, the extension from a CHIM
to a CHIMP model seems like an important and probably last step. It is most likely that this final step, the longer term,
will be of importance in order to phase out the BUFFL project support, for a creation of sustainable Communities and
Landscapes of Practice that can survive the project span. This final step offers further for support for CHIMP as a model
for hybrid work-integrated CPD. With the final step of the CHIMP model, the model may be used in future work to support
the work with implementing hybrid work-integrated CPD for industry. Further, the model can support the work in higher
education to design and implement courses in collaboration with industry as the interest in society for hybrid courses
increases.

10 Future research

Future research will include the study of the BUFFL course modules from the teacher and course participant perspectives
using the CHIMP model. Evaluations of course module questionnaires should be combined with interviews with teachers
and facilitators that have been involved in the course modules. Another idea for future research could be to investigate
how Communities and Landscapes of Practice could be integrated with the concept of Communities of Inquiry.

Vol:.(1234567890)
Discover Education (2024) 3:62 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00147-1 Research

Acknowledgements There are no acknowledgements related to this manuscript.

Author contributions All of authors, Marcia Håkansson Lindqvist, Peter Mozelius and Jimmy Jaldemark, have contributed equally in the
preparation of this manuscript.

Funding This research is a Mid Sweden University-funded study of an externally funded development project.

Data availability The data materials were collected, managed, and analyzed in accordance with GDPR. The datasets generated and analyzed
during the current study are not publicly available, due to securing the participants anonymity. Meta data are available from the corresponding
author on reasonable request.

Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate In this study, an ethics approval was deemed not necessary in line with national regulations according
to the Ethical Review Act, The Swedish Act (2003:460). In regard to accordance, all interviews were performed in accordance with relevant
guidelines and regulations in line with the recommendations by the Swedish Research Council. The respondents consented to participation
through informed consent.

Consent for publication Not applicable.

Competing interests There were no competing interests.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation,
distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source,
provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article
are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in
the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will
need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://c​ reati​ vecom
​ mons.o
​ rg/l​ icens​ es/b
​ y/4.0
​ /.

References
1. Chang V. Review and discussion: E-learning for academia and industry. Int J Inf Manage. 2016;36(3):476–85.
2. Friedman A, Phillips M. Continuing professional development: developing a vision. J Educ Work. 2004;17(3):361–76.
3. Nørgård RT. Theorising hybrid lifelong learning. Br J Edu Technol. 2021;52(4):1709–23.
4. Jackson D. Employability skill development in work-integrated learning: barriers and best practice. Stud High Educ. 2015;40(2):350–67.
5. Wood Y, Zegwaard K, Fox-Turnbull W. Conventional, remote, virtual and simulated work-integrated learning: a meta-analysis of existing
practice. Int J Work-Integr Learn. 2020;21(4):331–54.
6. Zegwaard K, Pretti T, Rowe A, Ferns S. Defining work-integrated learning. In: Zegwaard K, Pretti T, editors. The Routledge International
Handbook of Work-integrated Learning. 3rd ed. Milton Park: Routledge; 2023. p. 29–48.
7. Håkansson Lindqvist M, Mozelius P, Sundgren M, Jaldemark J, Öhman P. (2020). Building a network for collaborative support in professional
development In: de Laat M, Ryberg T, Bonderup Dohn N, Børsen Hansen S, Hansen JJ (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th International
Conference on Networked Learning. Vol. 12. Aalborg university. 2020; pp. 108-111
8. Jaldemark J, Öhman P. Developing a hybrid and networked educational approach to lifelong learning for organisations and employees.
In: T Ryberg, N Bonderup Dohn, S Børsen Hansen, JJ Hansen (Eds). Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Networked
Learning. Vol 12. Aalborg university 2020; pp. 47-50
9. Mozelius P, Olofsson AD, Håkansson Lindqvist M. Reinforcing work-integrated learning with technology enhancement and the concept
of bringing your own data. In: INTED2022: 16th Annual International Technology, Education and Development Conference, Valencia,
Spain. Montreal: IATED; 2022. p. 4238–44.
10. Sun PC, Tsai RJ, Finger G, Chen YY, Yeh D. What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing
learner satisfaction. Comput Educ. 2008;50(4):1183–202.
11. Monteiro S, Lencastre JA, Osório AJ, Silva BDD. Reducing attrition and dropout in e-learning: The development of a course design model.
In: ICERI2016 Proceedings 9th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation. Montreal: IATED; 2016. p. 2440–6.
12. Gregori P, Martínez V, Moyano-Fernández JJ. Basic actions to reduce dropout rates in distance learning. Eval Program Plann. 2018;66:48–52.
13. Farnsworth V, Kleanthous I, Wenger-Trayner E. Communities of practice as a social theory of learning: a conversation with Etienne Wenger.
Br J Educ Stud. 2016;64(2):139–60.
14. Bates AW. Teaching in a Digital Age. 2nd ed. Tony Bates Associates, Vancouver, CreativeCommons Attributions Non-Commercial
International License. 2019. https://​press​books.​bccam​pus.​ca/​teach​ingin​adigi​talag​ev2/. Accessed 26 Apr 2024.
15. Mozelius P. With the aim of multi-directed and work-integrated professional development. Electron J Knowl Manag. 2022;20(1):52–62.
16. Lave J, Wenger E. Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991.
17. Wallace DP. Knowledge management: Historical and cross-disciplinary themes. Libraries unlimited. 2007.
18. Wenger E. Communities of practice: A brief introduction. 2011.
19. Wenger-Trayner E, Wenger-Trayner B. Learning in a landscape of practice: A framework. In: Wenger-Trayner E, editor. Learning in landscapes
of practice. Milton Park: Routledge; 2014. p. 13–30.

Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Discover Education (2024) 3:62 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00147-1

20. Patton MQ. Qualitative research & evaluation methods. 3rd ed. Newcastle upon Tyne: Sage; 2002.
21. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.
22. Braun V, Clarke V. Thematic analysis. In: Cooper H, Camic PM, Long DL, Panter AT, Boyatzis D, editors. Transforming qualitative information:
thematic analysis and code development. Newcastle upon Tyne: Sage; 1998.
23. Mozelius P, Håkansson Lindqvist M, Jaldemark J, Öhman P. Towards a support model for work integrated professional development: a first
evaluation of the CHIM steps. In: ICERI 2020, vol. 13. Montreal: The International Academy of Technology, Education and Development;
2020. p. 64–9.
24. Wenger E. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998.
25. Sundgren M, Jaldemark J, Cleveland-Innes M. Disciplinary differences and emotional presence in communities of inquiry: teachers’
expressions of digital technology-enabled teaching. Comput Educ Open. 2023;4:100134.
26. Hesterman S. The digital handshake: a group contract for authentic elearning in higher education. J Univ Teach Learn Pract. 2016;13(3):85.
27. Bakker AB, Sanz Vergel AI, Kuntze J. Student engagement and performance: a weekly diary study on the role of openness. Motiv Emot.
2015;39:49–62.
28. Rajabalee BY, Santally MI, Rennie F. A study of the relationship between students’ engagement and their academic performances in an
eLearning environment. E-learn Digit Media. 2020;17(1):1–20.
29. Hasan M. The effectiveness of e-learning in staff training to gain hospitality organizational excellence. AIUB J Bus Econ. 2019;16(1):252–67.
30. Vauterin JJ, Virkki-Hatakka T. Mentoring PhD students working in industry: Using hermeneutics as a critical approach to the experience.
Ind High Educ. 2021;35(3):252–63.
31. Bernhard I, Olsson AK. One foot in academia and one in work-life–the case of Swedish industrial PhD students. J Work Learn.
2023;35(6):506–23.

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Vol:.(1234567890)