Organizational learning Where do we stand? Where do we want to go? (original) (raw)

Organizational Learning: Debates Past, Present And Future

Journal of Management Studies, 2000

In this paper we attempt to map the development of organizational learning as a field of academic study by examining the rise and fall of specific debates. This does not pretend to be a comprehensive review of the field since there is now far too much material available to allow full coverage in any single publication. Rather, we have identified some of the key debates, and these have been organized along the simplistic time-line of past, present and future. Our purpose is twofold: first, to note how the nature and language of the key ideas in organizational learning have changed over time; and second, to locate the papers in this Special Issue within the context of the developing field. It is perhaps no accident that we see most of the papers as closely associated with new, and emerging, issues, but we also find it interesting to note that many of these current or emergent issues actually have roots within some of the earlier debates.

EXPANDING THE MODEL OF ORGANIZATIONAL LEARNING: SCOPE, CONTINGENCIES, AND DYNAMICS

Economic and Business Research, 2016

Our paper seeks to contribute to the understanding of organizational learning by (a) integrating existing models of organizational learning into a single model and (b) expanding the model to include inter-organizational learning, adding key contingencies suggested by the growing literature on neuroleadership, and incorporating a process dimension to reflect the fact that organizational learning is continuous and dynamic. The resulting expanded model of organizational learning encompasses four levels on which learning can occur: individual, team, organizational, and inter-organizational. The overall validity of the model is illustrated by applying it to two knowledge-intensive Slovenian firms. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

Organizational Learning: A Review of Some Literatures

Organizational learning is currently the focus of considerable attention, and it is addressed by a broad range of literatures. Organization theory, industrial econ omics, economic history, and business, management and innovation studies all approach the question of how organizations learn. A number of branches of psychology are also revealing on the issue. This paper assesses these various literatures by examining the insights they allow in three main areas: first, the goals of organizational learning; second, the learning processes in organizations; and third, the ways in which organizational learning may be facilitated and impeded. It contends that while the various literatures are revealing in particular aspects of organizational learning, a more complete understanding of its complexity requires a multidisciplinary approach. The contributions of the different approaches are analyzed, and some areas are suggested where the transfer of analytical concepts may improve understanding.

A Multifacet Model of Organizational Learning

The objective of this article is to map the many facets of organizational learning into an inte-grative and parsimonious conceptual framework that can help researchers and practicioners identify, study, and introduce organizational learning to organizations. The article addresses the gap between theory and practice of organizational learning by providing a working definition of "productive organizational learning" and then describing the conditions under which organizations are likely to learn. The model presented draws on scholarly organizational learning literature, practicioner accounts, and our own experiences as researchers and practitioners. It argues that learning by organization, as distinct from learning in organizations, requires the existence of organizational learning mechanisms. These mechanisms, which represent the "structural facet," are necessary but not sufficient for generating productive organizational learning. The quality of organizational learning depends on additional facets of organizational learning (cultural, psychological, policy, and contextual), which facilitate or inhibit learning and are also explored in this article. The authors of several seminal works on organizational learning have been skeptical about the ability of organizations to learn. March and Olsen (1976) asked what organizations actually could learn in the face of barriers such as superstitious learning and the 78 Raanan Lipshitz is an associate professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of Haifa. Micha Popper is a senior lecturer in the

OrganizatiOnal learning: an evaluatiOn Of relevant literature

abstract This theoretical study is an attempt to provide an overview of literature on organizational learning by covering the concepts of prominent scholars from Cangelosi and Dill (1965) to Fang et al., (2010). In the last two decades, the multi-facets of the concept have emerged in academic as well as in corporate world. The field of organizational learning can be considered in several perspectives and dimensions. The aim of the study is to evaluate the salient aspects of the field while exploring the different perspectives and approaches of organizational learning namely individual/cognitive, objective, technical, social, cultural, humanistic, and political. This paper also expounds various processes like single-loop, double-loop and experiential through which organizations learn.

Theoretical and Historical Prospective of Organizational Learning

2018

This article reviews and evaluates the concepts regarding the theoretical and historical prospective of the organizational learning. Drawing on established literature in the field of organizational learning, the authors analyze learning from three theoretical perspectives—cognitive, behavioral and social. They argue that how different internal and external phenomenon give birth to learning in organization and how the organization can benefit from them while utilizing them for the better management and productive engagement of the employees. The study concludes with some practical suggestions about how organizations can increase their ability to learn. It also describes different methods for learning and different measures

Journal of Applied Behavioral Science-2002-Lipshitz-78-98 Multifaceted Model of organizational learning

The objective of this article is to map the many facets of organizational learning into an integrative and parsimonious conceptual framework that can help researchers and practicioners identify, study, and introduce organizational learning to organizations. The article addresses the gap between theory and practice of organizational learning by providing a working definition of "productive organizational learning" and then describing the conditions under which organizations are likely to learn. The model presented draws on scholarly organizational learning literature, practicioner accounts, and our own experiences as researchers and practitioners. It argues that learning by organization, as distinct from learning in organizations, requires the existence of organizational learning mechanisms. These mechanisms, which represent the "structural facet," are necessary but not sufficient for generating productive organizational learning. The quality of organizational learning depends on additional facets of organizational learning (cultural, psychological, policy, and contextual), which facilitate or inhibit learning and are also explored in this article.

To Come of Age: The Antecedents of Organizational Learning

Journal of Management Studies, 1999

The twin ideas of organizational learning and the learning organization have recently ®red the imagination of many academics, consultants and practising managers. There is, however, a pressing need for empirical research to examine the origins and development of these closely related concepts. The qualitative research underpinning this paper was conducted over a three-year period (1994± 97) and involved detailed examination of organizational learning aspirations and practices within the UK operations of ®ve major manufacturing companies. Sixtysix interviewees were classi®ed into three groups ± strategy, human resources, and research and development ± and the data gathered were analysed using the conceptually clustered matrix technique. This led to the identi®cation of a set of six antecedents which together explain the rise to prominence of organizational learning. These six antecedents are: the shift in the relative importance of factors of production away from capital towards labour, particularly intellectual labour; the ever more rapid pace of change in the business environment; widespread acceptance of knowledge as a prime source of competitive advantage; the greater demands being placed on all businesses by customers; increasing dissatisfaction, among managers and employees, with the traditional, command-and-control, management paradigm; and the intensely competitive nature of global business. A model is unfolded which explains the ready acceptance and rise to prominence of the organizational learning phenomenon. A valuable feature of the model is that it demonstrates the interplay of thoughts and feelings between management practitioners and theorists.