Learning organization

the learning organization

Just what constitutes a ‘learning organization is a matter of some debate.We explore some of the themes that have emerged in the literature and thecontributions of key thinkers like Donald Schon and Peter Senge. Is it anything more than rhetoric? Can it be realized?

Many consultants and organizations have recognized the commercialsignificance of organizational learning – and the notion of the ‘learningorganization’ has been a central orienting point in this. Writers have soughtto identify templates, or ideal forms, ‘which real organizations could attemptto emulate’ (Easterby-Smith and Araujo 1999: 2). In this sense the learningorganization is an ideal, ‘towards which organizations have to evolve inorder to be able to respond to the various pressures [they face] (Finger andBrand 1999: 136). It is characterized by a recognition that ‘individual andcollective learning are key’ (

op. cit.

). Two important things result from this. First, while there has been a lot of talkabout learning organizations it is very difficult to identify real-life examples. This might be because the vision is ‘too ideal’ or because it isn’t relevant tothe requirements and dynamics of organizations. Second, the focus oncreating a template and upon the need to present it in a form that iscommercially attractive to the consultants and writers has led to asignificant under-powering of the theoretical framework for the learning

organization. Here there is a distinct contrast with the study of organizational learning.Although theorists of learning organizations have often drawn on ideas fromorganizational learning, there has been little traffic in the reverse direction.Moreover, since the central concerns have been somewhat different, the twoliteratures have developed along divergent tracks. The literature on

organizational learning

has concentrated on the detached collection andanalysis of the processes involved in individual and collective learning insideorganizations; whereas the

learning organizations

literature has an actionorientation, and is geared toward using specific diagnostic and evaluativemethodological tools which can help to identify, promote and evaluate thequality of learning processes inside organizations. (Easterby-Smith andAraujo 1999: 2; see also Tsang 1997).We could argue that organizational learning is the ‘

activity

and the

process

by which organizations eventually reach th[e] ideal of a learningorganization’ (Finger and Brand 1999: 136).On this page we examine the path-breaking work of Donald Schon on firmsas learning systems and then go on to explore Peter Senge’s deeplyinfluential treatment of the learning organization (and it’s focus on systemicthinking and dialogue). We finish with a brief exploration of the contributionof social capital to the functioning of organizations.

The learning society and the knowledge economy

The emergence of the idea of the ‘learning organization’ is wrapped up withnotions such as ‘the learning society’. Perhaps the defining contribution herewas made byDonald Schon

.

He provided a theoretical framework linking theexperience of living in a situation of an increasing change with the need forlearning. The loss of the stable state means that our society and all of its institutionsare in

continuous

processes of transformation. We cannot expect new stablestates that will endure for our own lifetimes.

We must learn to understand, guide, influence and manage thesetransformations. We must make the capacity for undertaking them integralto ourselves and to our institutions.We must, in other words, become adept at learning. We must become ablenot only to transform our institutions, in response to changing situations andrequirements; we must invent and develop institutions which are ‘learningsystems’, that is to say, systems capable of bringing about their owncontinuing transformation. (Schon 1973: 28)One of Schon’s great innovations was to explore the extent to whichcompanies, social movements and governments were learning systems –and how those systems could be enhanced. He suggests that the movementtoward learning systems is, of necessity, ‘a groping and inductive processfor which there is no adequate theoretical basis’ (

ibid.

: 57). The businessfirm, Donald Schon argued, was a striking example of a learning system. Hecharted how firms moved from being organized around products towardintegration around ‘business systems’ (

ibid.

: 64). He made the case thatmany companies no longer have a stable base in the technologies of particular products or the systems build around them. Crucially DonaldSchon then went on withChris Argyristo develop a number of importantconcepts with regard toorganizational learning. Of particular importance forlater developments was their interest in feedback and single- anddouble-loop learning

.

Subsequently, we have seen very significant changes in the nature andorganization of production and services. Companies, organizations andgovernments have to operate in a global environment that has altered itscharacter in significant ways.Productivity and competitiveness are, by and large, a functionof knowledge generation and information processing: firms andterritories are organized in networks of production,management and distribution; the core economic activities areglobal – that is they have the capacity to work as a unit in realtime, or chosen time, on a planetary scale. (Castells 2001: 52)A failure to attend to the learning of groups and individuals in theorganization spells disaster in this context. As Leadbeater (2000: 70) has

Category:	Uncategorized.
Rating:	(2 Ratings)
Upload Date:	03/20/2008
Copyright:	Attribution Non-commercial
Tags:	Science Science (fewer)

Documents

People