Symbiosis Center for Management & Human Resources

Development
[Constituent of SYMBIOSIS INTERNATIONAL (DEEMED
UNIVERSITY), SI(DU)] (Established u/s 3 of the UGC Act 1956, by
notification No.F.9-12/2001 – U.3 of the Government of India)

MBA 2018-20 Sem-II

Learning and Development Project

Organizational Learning in Educational Institutes

By

Abhyudai Dwivedi (18020341006)

Deepali Samtani (18020341020)
Diksha Ravi (18020341070)
Maitrayee Kutum (18020341080)
Sonal (18020341100)
Pranay Mohta (18020341128)

Under the Guidance of

Dr. Netra Neelam

Objective

To understand the extent to which the LO concept is applicable to faculty and students of

educational institutions at the UG and PG level.

Introduction

A Learning organization is any organization that promotes and facilitates continuous learning.

Continuous learning atmosphere is required for any organization to survive and prosper in

uncertain business environment. Building a learning culture helps individuals to better adapt to

change and make informed decisions. A learning organization creates, captures, transfers and

mobilizes knowledge that helps in generating new ideas, innovation. An organization that

fosters continuous learning helps its employees or members to continuously expand their

capabilities thus feeling a sense of commitment to the organization. A learning organization

will always have a competitive advantage over others as it promotes free flow of ideas and

accepts constructive criticism and will be able to not survive but excel during change. A

learning organization always learns from its past and take it as a lesson, it doesn’t get bounded

by its past experiences thus it’s a key ingredient of any learning organization to look at the

managerial experiences that it processes. A learning organization promotes a fundamental shift

of mind which is required to execute decisions effectively through proper reflection of the

learned knowledge.

Peter Senge addressed five disciplines or characteristics that should be present to create a

learning organization:

1) Systems Thinking

2) Personal Mastery

3) Mental Models

4) Building Shared Vision

5) Team Learning

Systems Thinking involves collaborative learning culture which means understanding system

as a whole and in individual level also thus honouring different views and fostering an efficient

workplace. Personal mastery means developing a lifelong learning perspective and forward-

thinking mindset wherein they value and understand importance of continuous learning and

growth. Mental models deal with the shift in the fixed mindset and making a room for

innovation by new theories and approaches thus fitting into bigger picture. Building shared

vision includes forward-thinking leaders who focus on long term vision and are not hindered

by imposing the organizational goal because a learning organization tends to have a flat and

decentralized structure. Team learning involves better access to knowledge through open

communication, shared meaning, dialogues and discussion which helps in problem solving

quickly and efficiently thus making the employees learn and grow faster.

All the five characteristics of learning organization should be available to foster a learning

culture. Together these disciplines will help an organization to maintain innovation and remain

competitive, better handling of external pressures and change, improved quality of inputs and

better understanding of the objectives and vision of the organizational growth.

To build a learning culture at educational institutions, it is important that students should

actively get involved in learning new things and have interactions with the teachers/professors

to get conceptual clarity and build different perspectives to visualize a problem statement and

generate new ideas and ways to solve the problems rather than solving through traditional

methods. There should be open communication between the students and professors and

students should constantly be emphasized on understanding the importance of continuous

learning.
Literature Review

Learning organizations are organizations where individuals constantly improve their capacity

to accomplish the desired results. In such organisations, new thinking patterns are cultivated,

cooperative objectives are freed and everyone learns the art of learning together (Senge, 1990).

A recent explanation emphasized that organizational learning (Robelo & Gomes, 2011) is a

capacity or process within a particular organization that helps the organisation in acquiring,

accessing and revising organizational memory thereby giving way for organizational action

(Lin, 2008). While a research work concluded that learning oriented organizations searched for

ways of capturing learned notions to perform continually (Alipour, Khairuddin, & Karimi,

2011), a different study was of the view that team learning is an important part of developing

a learning organization (Norliya & Azizah, 2007). In addition to this, Norashikin and

Noormala (2006) proposed that learning in an organisation benefits in improving an

organization’s agility and change responsiveness and thereby helping them in gaining a

competitive advantage. The idea of developing a learning organization has been directly linked

to the level of performance and innovation in organizations (Power & Waddell, 2004; Watkins

& Marsick, 1993; 1999).

Kalsom and Ching (2011) thus, emphasized that for educational institutes striving for academic

excellence, it is of utmost significance that they become learning organizations. This in turn

will take care of their objective of attaining academic excellence among its students.

Transforming into learning organisations will also help these institutes to improve their overall

level of innovation and performance. Various studies indicated that learning organization have

strong relationship with organizational performance (Dunphy & Griffths, 1998; Khandekar &

Sharma, 2006; Robinson, Clemson, & Keating, 1997; Ho, 2011; Akhtar et al., 2012) whereby

learning organization is represented by seven dimensions developed by Watkins and Marsick

(1993). This was attributed to the parallel improvement of performance of organization and

change, subsequently leading to improved organizational performance.

Furthermore, organizations that learn also experience improvement in performance because the

trade of helpful knowledge occurs. This is because in a learning organization, there is a

continuous and harmonious learning environment (Akhtar, Arif, Rubi, & Naveed, 2012). It is

becoming increasingly important for organizations to adopt the learning orientation as it could

help contribute to organizational success. However, as the capability to learn does not naturally

and readily occur within organizations, it is imperative that organizations ensure that resources

allocated and efforts made to instil learning within organizations.

Levels of organisational learning:

In every organisation, there are basically three levels of organisational learning:

The Individual Level: Learning at the individual level entails getting a person cumulative or

new ideas and information belonging to his environment, understanding them, interpreting and

experimenting them and then, adjusting his behaviour in terms of obtained results using

conceptual and cognitive processes. According to Hollingshead, specialisation and distribution

of knowledge among organisational members create barriers for them to effectively identify,

retrieve and transfer knowledge when in need.

The Group Level: When individuals share and interact with other individuals what they have

learnt at the individual level, it becomes group level learning. Here, individual share their

learning with another individual, interprets together, and obtains a group assumption. The

essence here is on communication. Reagans, et al. studied group learning by examining joint-

replacement surgery in teaching hospitals. They concluded that "increased experience working

together in a team promoted better coordination and teamwork.

The Organisational level: When groups come together to share their knowledge they have

acquired through the process of communication, these learning are now transformed into an

acceptable instruction for all organisational members and will be made accessible to everyone

who needs them.

Methodology

The research project’s objective was to understand the learning styles in various colleges across

the country. This study is pertinent to faculties and students. The approach followed was to

select some undergraduate colleges and perform a quantitative research. The Undergraduate

Colleges selected were:

 Master School of Management, Meerut

 Amity University, Lucknow

 Invertis Institute of Management Studies, Bareilly

Data Collection

A Google Questionnaire was prepared to be circulated to the students and the faculties. The

questions were framed using the Funnel approach, where more open-ended questions were put
at the beginning and more specific questions were put at the bottom end of the questionnaire.

44 questions were sent to the faculties and 25 questions were sent to the students to understand

the quality of learning styles followed in various institutions.

Questions sent to the Faculties:

1. Learning and teaching processes are oriented towards realizing the vision

2. Vision ideation is the outcome of a process involving all faculty

3. Vision ideation is the outcome of a process involving feedback of student

4. Vision ideation is the outcome of a process involving feedback of parent

5. Vision ideation is the outcome of a process involving the external community

6. All faculty engage in continuous professional learning

7. New faculty receive induction and mentoring support

8. Professional learning is focused on teaching pedagogy and area of specialization

9. Faculty have autonomy for setting up aims and priorities for their own professional

learning

10. Professional learning process instils creative and innovative thinking

11. Professional learning is a balanced mix of on the job learning/mentoring and external

expertise

12. Professional learning is based on student feedback and past performance

13. Time and financial support are provided to promote professional learning

14. Faculty get scope of working and learning as a team

15. Teaching and learning process give enough scope for face-to-face interaction as well as

use of ICT

16. There is mutual trust and respect among faculty

17. Faculty reflect together on how to make their own learning more powerful
18. The institute allocates time and other resources for collaborative working and collective

learning

19. Faculty are encouraged to experiment and innovate in their practice

20. The institute recognizes faculty for taking academic initiatives

21. Faculty engage in continuous research & consultancy for enhancing teaching and learning

experience, knowledge generation and innovation

22. Faculty engage in experimenting and doing things differently

23. Problems and mistakes are seen as opportunities for learning

24. Students are actively engaged in research

25. Systems are in place to examine process of continuous improvement

26. Institutional best practices are made available to all faculty

27. Sufficient research databases and statistical software are available for supporting research

28. There are institutional forums for exchange of knowledge and research ideas

29. Faculty have the capacity and opportunities for engaging in continuous improvement of

curriculum and teaching and learning process

30. The institute has a system in place for benchmarking, assessing and updating academic

process

31. The institute continuously engages in review and assessment of mission, learning goals

and outcomes

32. The institute is flexible to respond quickly to challenges and opportunities of external

environment

33. The institute collaborates with industry experts for curriculum development, research and

teaching and learning process

34. The institute collaborates and interacts with local community as partners in the education

process and the organisation of the school

35. Faculty collaborate, learn and exchange knowledge with peers from other institutes

36. The institute has faculty and student exchange programs for learning and research

37. ICT tools such as MOODLE is widely used to facilitate communication, knowledge

exchange and collaboration with the external environment

38. The institute encourages leadership development among faculty, non-teaching staff and

students

39. Institute leaders are proactive and creative change agents

40. The institute has a culture and well defined structure to facilitate professional dialogue,

collaboration and knowledge exchange

41. Institute leaders ensure that the organisation’s actions are consistent with its

vision, missions goals and values

42. Institute leaders encourage continuous learning, research and innovation

43. Institute leaders promote collaboration with other institutes, the community, higher

education institutions and industry partners

44. School leaders promote experiential learning

Questions sent to the Students:

1. Engaged in active learning outside of classroom settings

2. Engaged in active learning in classroom settings

3. Encouraged to participate in classroom discussions

4. Encouraged to participate in self-reflection activities

5. Engaged in positive interactions with faculty

6. Was led to re-think my views of myself and others

7. Encouraged to consider different perspectives and points of view

8. Had influential interaction with peers

9. Encouraged to consider issues related to social justice and diversity

The next 16 questions focussed on the individualistic style of learning and the importance

they attach to self-directed learning:

1. I prefer to have others plan my learning

2. I prefer problems for which there is only one solution

3. I can deal with the unexpected and solve problems as they arise

4. I feel uncomfortable under conditions of uncertainty

5. I am able to impose meaning upon what others see as disorder

6. I seldom think about my own learning and how to improve it

7. I feel I am a self-directed learner

8. I feel others are in a better position than I am to evaluate my success as a student

9. I love learning for its own sake

10. I try to relate academic learning to practical issues

11. I often find it difficult to locate information when I need it

12. When I approach new material, I try to relate it to what I already know

13. It is my responsibility to make sense of what I learn at college

14. When I learn something new, I try to focus on the details rather than on the big picture

15. I use mobile phones in accessing to new information

16. I am able to professionally benefit from social utility websites such as Facebook, Twitter

etc.

The students and the faculties had to record their responses on a 7-point Likert scale which

represented:
1-Strongly Disagree

2-Disagree

3-Somewhat Disagree

4- Neither Disagree nor Agree

5-Somewhat Agree

6-Agree

7-Strongly Agree

Once the google questionnaire was sent, students and faculties were also contacted via Social

Media Platforms like LinkedIn and mails were also sent to get the responses timely.

Analysis and Interpretation

After getting the responses, the information was analysed to get some meaningful result for the

research. The responses file was imported in SPSS and Factor Analysis was performed on the

data.

Factor Analysis Method was chosen to group the similar learning responses together and to

better comprehend and segregate the specific learning methodology used in the various

institutions.

Method Used: Principal Component Method with Varimax Rotation

Analysis:

1. Student Responses:

Through the results of Factor Analysis, it was found that eight (8) components were extracted

from the responses. The responses could be grouped into 8 separate components and each

component was independent of each other. This finding was based on the Eigen Values

generated in the output table.

Eigenvalue: The amount of variance that each component/factor explains is known as the

eigenvalue of that component/factor. Eigen Value should be >1 to form a separate

Component/Factor.

To find out the correlation between the responses and the components and how strong is the

impact of the responses, we analysed the Rotated Component Matrix in SPSS, which gives

the simple correlation of each response with the particular component.

Similar responses are grouped in the 1st Factor - Students in this component actively engaged

in learning and have a fruitful interaction with their peers.

Similar responses are grouped in the 2nd Factor - Students in this component tried to relate to

the information and considered it their responsibility to understand the key takeaways from the

subjects taught at the institutions.

Similar responses are grouped in the 3rd Factor - Students in this component tried to relate to

solve the problems and issues on their own with the help of self-directed learning.
Similar responses are grouped in the 4th Factor - Students in this component dealt with

uncertainty in cases where they were not given sufficient information for a task to be

completed.

Similar responses are grouped in the 5th Factor - Students in this component preferred a

traditional method of learning and were generally dependent on others to plan things for them.
Similar responses are grouped in the 6th Factor - Students in this component did not think of

ways to improve themselves.

Similar responses are grouped in the 7th Factor - Students in this component could solve

problems by themselves and would inherently learn to comprehend and understand the subject

matter at hand.

Similar responses are grouped in the 8th Factor - Students in this component have a

meaningful discussion with their peers to get conceptual clarity and different thinking

perspective.

2. Faculty Responses:

We got 1 response from the faculty of Invertis Institute of Management, Bareilly and these

were the observations:

The institute follows a methodology to instil a culture of collective learning and constantly

strive to achieve the vision for the institute. The various practices followed are:
Pros:

1. Feedback of students is taken on a regular basis to improve the current practices.

2. Faculties have freedom to take courses for personal development.

3. Innovation and Creative thinking are encouraged.

4. Time and financial support are provided to all faculties interested in learning and

improving themselves.

5. Faculties’ efforts are recognised.

6. Sufficient Support (in terms of updated software) is provided to students for engaging

in research.

7. Focus is on continuous improvement providing leadership development programs

where faculties can become the change agents.

8. Impetus is given on experiential learning.

Cons:

1. Feedback from parents and external community is not taken into consideration

vigorously

2. No presence of forums to exchange ideas and enhance learning experience

Findings

The institutes foster an environment of collaboration and knowledge sharing among students.

They often engage in self-directed learning and are open to solving issues independently.

They are willing to experiment but deal with uncertainty in cases where they are not given

sufficient information for a task to be completed. Moreover, some students are more

comfortable in keeping themselves restricted to their comfort zone and depend on others to

plan things for them.

The institutes also embrace change and innovation. Pedagogies and practices equip the
students with the skills for success. They place learning at the centre. There is a practice of

continuous feedback which enables the institutes to take into account the opinions of students

and take necessary steps. The faculties are given the opportunity to experiment and learn

from their mistakes. Personal and Leadership Development Programs along with financial

support are encouraged for faculties to recognise their quality efforts and ensure their

growth.

Suggestions

Institutes can adopt the following recommendations:

• Develop shared mission/vision to enhance the learning experience and outcomes of all

students by inviting students, parents and other partners to contribute.

• A continuous feedback mechanism can be developed on the basis of on campus education

and research which shall help the institutes in providing a holistic learning environment that

focus not only gaining knowledge but also on developing skills like communication, problem

solving, flexibility as well as analytical abilities.

• Encourage cross functional teams.

• Incorporate feedback from parents and external faculty.

• Develop online forums to exchange ideas and opinions.

• Organise seminars and conferences to facilitate peer learning among faculties.

• A good system should be in place to examine progress and gaps between current and

expected impact.

• Staff should have the capacity to analyse and use multiple sources of data for feedback.
Conclusion

The findings from the study provide valuable insights on the extent to which the concepts of a

learning organisations are applicable to the faculties and students of Under Graduate level

educational institutions. It also gives a fair idea on existing practices in some of the educational

institutes in Uttar Pradesh.

The report shows both, the faculty and the student perspective with respect to the applicability

of learning organisation concepts. It highlights both the positive and negative practices and

provides recommendations which the institutes can adopt in order to further improve their

practices. Future studies can be carried out with a more meticulous

questionnaire and by taking into consideration a wider pool of respondent. Such studies will

not only help the institutes in identifying various gaps in their method of operation but will also

create a positive learning environment for the students.

References

1. Alipour, F., Khairuddin Idris, & Karimi, R. (2011). Knowledge creation and transfer: role

of learning organization. International Journal of Business Administration, 2(3), 61-67.

2. Akhtar, S., Arif, A., Rubi, E., & Naveed, S. (2011). Impact of Organizational Learning on

Organizational Performance: Study of Higher Education Institutes. International Journal of

Academic Research, 3(5), 327-331.

3. Armstrong, A. & Foley, P. (2003). Foundations of a learning organization: Organization

learning mechanism. Learning Organization, 10, 74-82. Burgelman, R. A., Christensen, C.

4. M., & Wheelwright, S. C. (2009). Strategic Management of Technology and Innovation.

New York City, New York: McGraw-Hill.

5. Victoria Konidari, Yvan Abernot, (2006) "From TQM to learning organisation: Another way

for quality management in educational institutions", International Journal of Quality &

Reliability Management, Vol. 23 Issue: 1, pp.8-26

6. Garvin, (1993) “Building a learning organization”, Harvard Business Review, 71 (4) (1993),

pp. 78-91