Organizational learning is one area that is developing fast. This concept is ideal especially in the field of strategic management, as aims at improving organization’s competitive advantage in terms of market analysis, improvement of corporate performance and future forecasting.
Besides these benefits, organizational learning affects financial and non-financial sectors of the company. In embracing network interpretation of organizational learning, learning utilizes social network, thus, it is imperative for facilitators to ensure the learner plays a fundamental target for the entire learning process (Hakansson and Johnson, 2001).
Therefore, networks in organizational learning can be considered better learning objectives than conventional methods. According to Hakansson and Johnson (2001), network learning supports numerous advantages over the other types of learning. This is in terms of content, method, the organization and the level of research.
On content, network learning ensures that the learner obtains the skills and knowledge about the company hence, ends up becoming an experienced practitioner in the company. Moreover, networking learning encourages practical methods. Practical techniques used integrate the learner to interact with real- life situations while learning the theoretical parts hence shaping his or her knowledge.
This saves organizations time required to expose the employees to “real” working environment (Hakansson and Johnson, 2001). Consequently, it facilitates interaction with social worlds besides encouraging research. By encouraging research network learning combines different research levels which may include; multiple and the relational level.
Jones and Macpherson’s article articulates how developed SME’s with shortage of internal resources tend to source for external resources to facilitate possible strategic renewal. In organizational learning, it is considered of great importance for managers to distribute knowledge across the organization if competitive benefits are to be realized.
External knowledge holders which include; suppliers, customers and learning institutions strengthens the development of new concepts in the organization, hence, they then spread across the organization to be implemented, improving efficiency. The process of ensuring all people in the organization aware of new strategies being introduced, integrates the learning process.
In this sense, external resources are considered to complement internal strategies, because internal strategies sometimes fail to meet organization’s needs. External strategies ensure that organization is able to acquire information relating to market performance hence adjusting their operations accordingly.
Absorptive capacity refers to the ability of the organization to adapt to new policies and ideas being introduced in the organization (Mazzucto, 2002). This is determined by skills possessed by individuals within the organization as well as the time available for these new skills to be implemented.
In organization learning, absorptive capacity determines the time to be taken in implementing new ideas. In some cases such as; when the concepts are totally new to the organization, the management is expected to ensure that all staff members understand the general concept of what is being done. This simplifies learning process.
The other role played by absorption capacity organizational learning is the determination of the time taken for implementation of new ideas (Mazzucto, 2002). When the management has an overview of the absorptive capacity in the organization, they are more likely to device methods of improving the time taken for implementing the new strategies introduced promptly.
Organizational learning can enhance productivity in an organization if appropriate strategies are embraced. Networking learning for instance, provides a wider scope where organizations employees can amass wider knowledge.
This is in the sense that, an employee is exposed to the outer world thus; sharing of important business skills and information with others in a similar network can add value to him or herself besides boosting the organization productivity.
References
Hakansson, H., and Johnson, J., 2001. Business Network Learning, Emerald Group Publishing, Bradford
Mazzucto, M., 2002. Strategy for Business, Sage, California
Organizational learning has gained momentum in its definition, application and execution. It has a purpose of knowledge creation, transfer leading to behavior change organizational learning as a process does not happen once, but it has continuity.
It has been given another point of view that organizational learning involves a learning organization. On the contrary, any process that has a goal in it is a setting with associated barriers to its implementation or practicability. Consequently, there must be a significant consideration with respect factors that may impede Organizational learning as a process.
Journal dimension of organizational learning
Schilling and Kluge, (2009), give an explicit approach to organizational learning listing individual or group-based means as a vehicle to learning in an organization. The learning involves a relatively permanent change in knowledge which is a direct result of accumulated experience. The two authors assert that the learning process of an organization is related to the improvement of organization performance.
The dimension which has been given as much weight as organizational learning is the way of diffusion of knowledge in the organizational routines, processes and structures, and how the future learning activities of an organization’s members (Jacobson & Robertson, 2011).
Learning may be possible in an organization, yet a good learning activity must include permanent ways of retaining that knowledge in an organization so that the knowledge gained can be used for future learning needs. The suggested methods are creating the documents, and/or adopting it into the routines or structures of an organization.
Comparison of the barriers approaches
There is a meshing of the methods employed by Dierkes et al, (2003. Pp, 879), and Schilling & Kluge, (2009). In the first place, the two sources create a lead to future researchers in the field of organizational learning about the barriers to organizational learning.
Categories given in the two sources are centered to organizational culture as a major barrier to learning in an institution. This led to the categorization of barriers into three main divisions as discussed below.
Actual-personal barriers-it is asserted that these barriers are characterized by individual thinking, attitudes and behaviors. This occurs at an individual level particularly to an employee in an organization.
An individual may have an innovative idea which may create knowledge, individual postulates pertaining to rewards, coming from individual effort that led to the creation of knowledge. This hinders intuiting as a process developing insights from experience to create knowledge.
Structural-organizational barriers: – these are anchored in the organization’s strategies, technological, cultural and formal regulations. This part borrows so much from Dierkes et al, (2003. Pp, 879), as relates to organizational culture. This is an inhibitor to organizational learning and has, in fact, lethal impacts.
With respect to formal regulations and organizational culture, knew knowledge is not created but over-exploitation of existing knowledge. To back up this, I worked with a micro-finance company in Kenya, called Faulu (K), Ltd, as a field credit officer.
I knew so much of the market’s competitors thus leading to us, and my team members presented a proposal containing favorable strategies for recruitment and retention of clients (Easterby-Smith & Lyles, 2003). To our surprise, all we received was a reprimand that our job description did not involve business development but credit. Eventually, our client base was captured by competitors leading to heavy business losses.
Another barrier was classified as societal-environmental factors- this covers customers, competitors, social political environment and technological advancements outside the boundaries of an organization. The relationship of an organization and its external environment is a direct factor information flow, inside or outside that organization.
Changes in the external environmental acts as a stepping stone to learning about market trends, competitor’s new technological advances or strategies (Chung, 2005). This is a pool of new ideas and innovations in response to developments in the external environment. The lack of knowledge in the external environment fatally impedes knowledge transfer and/or acquisition for behavioral change.
Conclusion
In conclusion, barriers to organizational learning as given in the journal approach are centered in a three-fold system of an individual, organization as an entity and the external environment. The barriers at each level should be given a particular treatment in order to mitigate impacts to organizational learning and improve the process of learning.
Reference list
Chung, C., (2005). Technology transfer and competition: The Mobile Handset Industry in post-WTO. Hamburg: Springer Business media. Retrieved
Dierkes, et al., (2003). Handbook of Organizational Learning & Knowledge. NY: Oxford Publishers. Retrieved
Easterby-Smith, M. & Lyles,.M (2003). The Blackwell Handbook of organizational learning and knowledge management. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, Ltd. Retrieved
Jacobson, D & Robertson, L, (2011) Knowledge transfer and technology diffusion. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing limited. Retrieved
Schilling, J. & Kluge, A. (2009). Barriers to organizational learning: integration of theory and research. International Journal of Management Review. Vol.3: pp.337-357. Retrieved
The journal explores the role of trust, as well as, knowledge tacitness in mediating mechanisms involved in partner characteristics and the related alliance outcomes. It presents study results on the role of trust and knowledge tacitness in achieving learning and innovation between cooperating partners. The sample study had involved 120 International Strategic Alliances across 1851 companies. It also analyses background information on the already available literature.
Journal Analysis
Nielsen Bo and Nielsen Sabina (2009, 1050) established that learning and innovation can be achieved be simultaneously, although they result from different mix of relational quality, partner characteristics as well as knowledge characteristics. They demonstrate that inter-firm learning may create innovative outcomes.
However, this purely depends on the relation characteristics of the alliance and the quality of the relationship. These characteristics are classified as knowledge protectiveness and collaborative know-how. Knowledge protectiveness inhibits both learning and innovative outcomes of international strategic alliances since it creates mistrust, which in turn negatively impacts on open collaboration.
Collaborative know-how, on the other hand, enhances transfer and internalization of knowledge, as well as the ability to utilize effectively the acquired knowledge. It enhances innovation since it helps eliminate mistrust and perceptions of opportunism between cooperating partners.
Knowledge tacitness can hinder knowledge transfer as well as learning between cooperating firms, but at the same time, can create opportunities for innovation. According to Collinson (1999, 342) knowledge management practices may not be easily transferred between cooperating organizations due to differing organizational values, culture, and structure as well as knowledge resources.
For example, Gray and Yan (1994, 1486) established that Chinese firms always experienced significant problems in acquiring complex manufacturing skills from US Companies. More specific example is the differences in quality of Nokia and Huawei phones which are cooperating partners. Trust, on the other hand, increases knowledge transfer between the cooperating firms, and strengthens the potential advantages tacitness which is significant for innovation.
Trust reduces uncertainty, facilitates social interaction and increases transparency. This increases sharing of valuable information as well as knowledge. The study established positive interaction between trust and learning as well as trust and innovation. Most important, it established a positive correlation trust and knowledge tacitness versus learning, and the same for trust and knowledge tacitness versus innovation (Nielsen Bo & Nielsen Sabina 2009, 1049).
Implications of the results of the study
Innovation is highly related to knowledge sharing where each partner has access to its partner’s information reserve so as to exploit complementarities. Innovation, therefore, requires means of coordination which can reduce costs of extensive inter-firm learning. High costs of codifying tacit knowledge can undermine the benefits of mutual learning.
Close collaboration can enable partners to utilize their know-how in developing innovating outcomes without having to transfer the tacit knowledge. According to Serat (2009, 3) it is important to understand the requirements of joint task initiatives in order to develop a working interface with the partner. This should be enhanced by leadership commitment sharing, monitoring and evaluating the progress of joint innovation initiatives (Doz & Hamel 1998, 23).
The study reveals that it is possible to achieve innovative outcomes without codifying the partner’s knowledge (Nielsen Bo and Nielsen Sabina 2009, 1052). For an organization to benefit from tacit knowledge, it has to adopt ways codifying the knowledge so as to transfer it for its application.
It must also develop ways of retaining the information in its tacit form for purposes of innovative application. It should maintain a distinctive base for the tacit information and be able to codify the knowledge in a way that does not reduce its value.
Reference List
Collinson, S., 1999. Knowledge management capabilities for steel markers: a British–Japanese corporate alliance for organizational learning. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, Vol. 11, pp. 337–358.
Doz, Y., & Hamel, G., 1998, Alliance advantage: The art of creating value through partnering. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Gray, B., & Yan, A., 1994. Bargaining power, management control, and performance in United States–China joint ventures: a comparative case study. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37, pp.1478–1517.
Nielsen, B., B., & Nielsen, S., 2009. Learning and innovation in international strategic alliances: An empirical test of the role of trust and tacitness. Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 46, No. 6.
Serat, O., 2009, Learning in strategic alliances. Manila: Asian Development Bank.
The purpose of this study is to critically analyze organizational learning and strategy differences in the Chinese Based firms in Singapore, Taiwan and Hong Kong.
Review of literature
Many writers have provided information focusing on the Asian Policy Makers. Focus is given to the new strategic developmental strategies resulting from the economic Downturn that was been prevalent in the Asian countries for the last three decades.
Economic success of the Chinese based Firms is used as a Benchmark of these developmental strategies due to their Economic success despite economic downturn in the region. Unlike their regional competitors such as Japan and South Korea, with big Firms operating on a large scale, the Chinese firms have resilience (Dierkes et al, 2003, p 716).
There is a new focus shift from the Large Firms to small and medium sized ones on Market.
Characteristics of Chinese Based Firms
At present, the firms are mainly found in Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan. In the first place, these firms are small and medium in sizes. (Yeung, et al, 2011, p. 34.). Additionally, they are viewed as late comers to technology, thus they lack access to modern and advanced technology of large Western based firms. The firms have a high tendency of integration into global and local production networks.
Learning strategies and processes
Despite the economic down turn in the region, the firms remained a success. They have become a central focus due to their, economic progress. Chinese Firms uses adoptive and imitational forms of knowledge transfer (Yu, 2007, p.18). Imitations resulted to drastic growth, instead of using an innovative process despising the western concept of product life cycle. This is coupled with creation of learning in networks
Learning in networks
The firms are incorporated into regional as well as the global corporations networks based in the western enterprises of Japan Europe and the USA. The Chinese based firms have a characteristic of incorporating other highly developed western based firms in their technology and management systems unlike Japanese and other western based enterprises whose allied enterprises are centrally attached only to their mother companies/firms. Interfirm cooperation thus takes their center in learning.
Interfirm cooperation
The firms in this region of the world being late comers to the technological world of production strive to make their products better through knowledge accumulation and internalization leading to knowledge of producing goods already on market (Dierkes et al. 2003, p.721). There exist also strategic alliances.
Strategic alliances
Forming strategic alliances is also another learning strategy employed by Chinese firms as their Learning process. They target brand name leaders of through formation of joint ventures with these innovative Firms. Their governments also give them some support.
Government support
It is also characteristic of the Governments in these regions to provide and create favorable organizational learning conditions through provision of basic human resource training, provision and spreading required production and marketing knowledge and giving subsides to research and development targeting majorly, strategic industries and Firms for knowledge transfer. Despite this, these firms still face some barriers to organizational learning
Barriers to organizational learning
These firms have are vulnerable to under financing due to lack of technological underdevelopment thus they are exposed market fluctuations as compared to large enterprises found in Japan and South Korea.
On the overseas perspective, Chinese firms In Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore lack access to advanced technology used by large western enterprises, as well as large advanced markets of enjoyed by the western based models of organizational learning. The conclusion is therefore made at last as:
Conclusion
Chinese based firms are small and medium sized enterprises. Organizational learning characteristic to the through imitation of already existing technology in production and market conquest
Reference list
Dierkes, et al., 2003. Handbook of Organizational Learning & Knowledge. NY: Oxford Publishers.
Yeung, et al., 2011. The Globalization of Chinese Companies: Strategies for Conquering International Markets. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons.
Yu, F.T., 2007. Taiwan’s economic transformation in evolutionary perspective: Entrepreneurship, innovation systems and government. NY: Nova Publishers.
Organization learning is arguably one of the most important business concepts that any organization must embrace if it were to maintain a competitive edge during this volatile market trends.
Organization learning basically means the process of acquiring new business concepts, knowledge, experience and ideas and intelligently integrating what is learned with previous knowledge to create new and innovative products either technological, business ideas or management to gain a competitive edge over other competitors by offering excellent services to their invaluable customers.
This paper addresses how organization learning contributes to innovation, competitiveness, and economic-financial results and also how successful the article is in relating organization learning with business performance.
Contribution of organization learning to innovation
Organization learning involves well-planned acquisition, distribution, interpretation and comparison of knowledge with previous knowledge and experience in all organizational structures of the organization.
The knowledge obtained from organizational learning is used in developing superior products and services and also more effective management in all aspects of the organization. This results to dynamic innovation not only of new brands, products and services to customers but also excellent management that will leave the customers with customer experience (Serrat, 2009).
I concur with Lopez, Peon, and Ordas (2005) that “learning-oriented organizations are able to quickly reconfigure their architecture and reallocate their resources to focus on emerging opportunities or threats” (Lopez, Peon, and Ordas, 2005, p. 230).
Toyota industry has always applied this concept whereby they either learn from current demands of low emission more fuel-efficient policies and genius marketing strategies.
They have also continuously learned from mistakes as was seen when they recalled some of their models. The Toyota Company has continuously developed its brands to form better models that are always competitive at the market (Lopez, Peon, and Ordas, 2005).
Contribution of organization learning to competitiveness
We are living in a world where everything changes in a flash second. For organizations to maintain their brands on this dynamic market they have to employ organization learning. Organization learning ensures that organizations are well equipped with previous knowledge, experience and the acquired knowledge which they carefully organize to create dynamic products which are unique.
This is simply blending what you already know and newly acquired knowledge to predict the future needs of your customers and this makes sure organization will always remain competitive.
This is suggested by Lopez, Peon, and Ordas (2005) “learning, through better knowledge and understanding, facilitates behavior change that leads to improve performance” (Lopez, Peon, and Ordas, p. 230).
Successful organizations such as Microsoft continuously learn from previous models, marketing concepts and overall management strategies to continuously maintain a competitive edge in the most dynamic field of business (Lopez, Peon, and Ordas, 2005).
Economic financial result
Organization learning encompasses careful and guided employment of knowledge to make sure that every aspect of the organization works towards one common objective of delivering services that will create customer experience and confidence. This will ensure that the organization will remain relevant in the market and the outcome will be sustained profits.
Organization learning also ensures superior overall management of the organization whereby everyone in the organization works towards one common objective of realizing the vision and mission objectives that were set in the process of establishing organization learning.
The report by Lopez, Peon, and Ordas (2005) claimed that effective organization learning should “lead directly to superior outcomes, such as greater new product success, superior customer retention, higher customer-defined quality, and, ultimately superior growth and/or profitability” (Lopez, Peon, and Ordas p. 230).
Increased organizational performance
Organizational learning requires the participation of everyone in the organization in terms of continual learning from previous and current challenges of the organization and thinking of creative response. The organization is able to act as a unit towards a common objective.
This improves the overall management of the organization leading to increased organizational performance I concur with Lopez, Peon, and Ordas (2005) that “The knowledge generated in this way is translated into new models of activity, routines and logic in the organization” (Lopez, Peon, and Ordas, 2005, p. 230).
Perhaps this can be seen from the management of the Virgin brands, which have proved their worth with time. Through continuous organization learning, Virgin has been able to attain high levels of organizational performance despite the wide range of brands all over the world (Lopez, Peon, and Ordas, 2005).
Success of the article in relating organization learning with business performance
The article has well-outlined definition and interpretation of the concept of organization learning that was easy to relate to however the relation of organization learning to business performance though successful was a little bit too complex.
The article outlines the methods that were used to relate the two in terms of setting out hypothesis for the research and the methods of information gathering the statistics obtained were correlated to various aspects of business performance.
The article finally concludes that some of the results obtained are related to business performance “Therefore, these results indicate support for the notion that organizational learning influences financial performance both directly and indirectly through its impact on innovation and competitiveness” (Lopez, Peon, and Ordas, 2005, p. 238).
Conclusion
Organization learning is a core requirement of any organization that dreams of sustaining its prowess in the ever-changing market.
Effective organization learning was observed to positively contribute to competitiveness and economic-financial results by ensuring that learned knowledge is organized and used effectively for the benefit of the organization. The article though a little bit complex was effective in relating organization learning with business performance. It is therefore important that all business organizations embrace this concept.
References
Lopez, S., Peon, J. and Ordas, C. (2005) Organizational Learning as a Determining Factor in Business Performance. The Learning Organization Vol. 12 No. 3, 2005 pp. 227-245.
Serrat, O. (2009) Building a Learning Organization. Web.
Organization learning can be defined as organized acquiring of experience through controlled and managed trial of new strategies and intelligent use of the results to achieve the required objectives.
This is because the more dynamic an organization is the higher the chances of maintaining its prowess in current volatile market. This paper discusses the importance of learning to an organization, the necessary requirements and examples of organizations which have used this concept to maintain their brands in the current competitive market.
Importance of learning to an organization
The employment of this strategy will enable a company or the business empires realize its mission and vision statements. This is because organization learning empowers every member of the organization towards a common goal.
By either creating and trying new policies and strategies or learning and positively responding to current challenges the organizations can formulate mission and vision statements and incorporate everyone to achieve them.
Learning organization creates new challenges to the management and all the employees. The employees feel part and parcel of the organization. This makes them believe to be part of the solution and not the problem.
The shift from the tradition advertisement based on disseminating information is being replaced by interactive advertisement as seen in social site advertisement and employees are faced with new modern challenges. Learning and acting to these challenges becomes the dream of every employee.
Due to the volatility of the current marked the only way for organizations to stay afloat is to embrace organization learning. They take time to learn and implement better methods of doing things due to the continual change in the society. Car manufacturing companies such as Toyota learn from changes in international policies on emissions and fuel efficiency to invent more efficient automobiles.
Necessary requirements
An excellent communication system is essential in organization learning. A good communication structure is essential in disseminating information and knowledge throughout the whole organization from senior management to other levels of management, from one department to another and also forms one person to another.
This is especially important in large organizations that have different branches in different areas. Employment of communication tools such as web conferencing, instant messaging, cell phones and others enhance passing of information and knowledge within the organization (Eijkman, n.d; Janakiraman, 2008).
For an effective learning organization the kind of the work force matters a lot. Curious and intelligent people who have an intuitive thinking about work based problems are an advantage as suggested by Serrat:
Intellectually curious about their work, who actively reflect on their experience, who develop experience-based theories of change and continuously test these in practice with colleagues, and who use their understanding and initiative to contribute to knowledge development. (Serrat, 2009, p. 1)
Knowledge is one of the most important requirements for effective learning organization. Learning and knowledge cannot be separated. This is suggested by Serrat:
Knowledge is a critical asset in every learning organization. Because learning is both a product of knowledge and its source, a learning organization recognizes that the two are inextricably linked and manages them knowledge should encompass both the individual and corporate knowledge (Serrat, 2009, p. 1)
Technology is part and parcel of passing of information and knowledge in the organization. This is important in ensuring that there is effective communication and management of knowledge. The organizations must invest in terms of time, support personnel, relevant infrastructure, and expertise. These and other requirements are important in facilitating the learning process.
Conclusion
Learning organization is a very important concept for those organizations that want to remain in the market for long. Organizations learn from self made or prepared challenges or the challenges they face in order to brace themselves for the challenging future ahead. It is a very important concept that everyone should try.
References
Eijkman. H. (n.d.) The Learning Organization as concept and journal in the neo-millennial era: a plea for critical engagement. Web.
Janakiraman. S. (2008) The Importance of being a Learning Organization. Web.
Serrat O,(2009). Building a LearningOrganization. Web.
Work force within an organization needs to be developed, sharpened and its skills improved with time; organizational learning is a strategic managing tool that is used to nature, tap, develop, and utilize human resources potential. The main aim of organizational learning is to improve employees’ skills and expertise (Meinolf, Ariane, John and Ikujiro, 2003). This paper discusses how managers can use organizational learning to improve their organizational performance.
How managers utilize organizational learning and knowledge to construct better work systems
Organizational learning takes the form of three main forms, training, mentorship, and coaching; different situations calls for different systems and approaches, when new systems have been adopted, then an organization needs to inform their staffs and train them on how they will utilize the new ways of doing business for the good of the company.
For example at John Hospkins Hospital, after the facility adopted a health Record Management System (HRMS), the management had to organize some training lessons to ensure that employees use the system as expected. At this point, organizational learning is seen to facilitate change (Dulewicz and Malcolm, 2003).
Organizational learning is also used for strategic movements within an organization; this move was used by Barclays Bank in United states in 2008, were they embarked on training their human force on the effects that globalization has on the banking industry; they then asked employees to think of policies that could see the company through the hard economic time successfully.
With time, the company came up with stringent lending policies, embarked on debt collection and mobilized sales a move that saw the company succeed. Organizational learning has been used as a tool to nature creativity, invention and innovativeness.
Apple inc. used this approach in 2007 when it trained and mentored their staffs on the developments in the industry; with time, staffs were able to come-up with cost management policies, new products were developed and saw the development of a positive working environment (Parker, 2009).
Organizational learning frameworks
Human resources department assisted with line managers should be responsible of enacting appropriate policies that enhance learning within an organization (Schilling and Kluge, 2009). Learning should be a continuous process that occurs formally and informally, the following are the main forms that an effective organizational learning should have:
Training: when developing something new in an organization or there is a change in the business environment, management should ensure that its human capital are well trained on the new processes, for example Mitsubishi Motor Company has embarked on massive staff training on the need to conserve the environment.
Mentorship: this takes the form of guidance and instructing was leaders offer intellectual and technical assistance to their employees; this means that an organization should have leaders and supervisors who can mentor and show their subordinates the right pathway and direction to follow. It helps to share experiences and grow knowledge of both the leader and the employee.
Coaching: coaching mostly comes with something special with an employee or a certain point of strength that a company adopts; it calls for employees to be shown the right way to operate and undertake functions. For example, new entrants at Starbucks are trained on how to operate a fair business trading policy to ensure the company remains respected for its ethical business approach (Hornsby and Warkeoczeski, 2000).
Conclusion
Organizational learning is a strategic management tool that assists managers to improve their business through human force; it takes the form of training, mentorship, coaching, and sometimes counseling. When well managed, it offers an organization some competitive advantage.
References
Dulewicz, V. and Malcolm, H. ,2003.Leadership at the top: the need for emotional intelligence in organizations. International Journal of Organizational Analysis 11(3),pp. 193-210.
Hornsby, T. and Warkeoczeski, L. 2000. New roles for leaders: A step-by-step guide to competitive advantage. Franklin: Hillsboro Press.
Meinolf, D., Ariane, A., John, C. and Ikujiro, N.,2003. Handbook of Organisational Learning and Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Parker, G. ,2009.Team Leadership: 20 Proven Tools for Success. New Jersey: Human Resource Development Press.
Schilling, J. and Kluge, A.,2009. Barriers to organizational learning: An integration of theory and research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 11(3), pp. 337–360
Learning and development is an important element of human resource development. The world over, corporations and other organizations are increasingly appreciating the need to engage comprehensive plans for learning and development in a bid to improve the productivity of their workforce hence becoming more competitive. This competitiveness as a result of higher productive workforce gives these organizations added advantage in the market improving their ability to deliver products and services and hence the ability to generate returns. Holistically, the organization is also said to be engaged in a learning process through its experiences over its time of existence. This paper looks at the theoretical aspects of learning and development within the organizational context.
One important difference exhibited by scholars on learning and development in the organizational context boils down to whether emphasis is on technical process or social process. The technical aspect is based on the understanding that the process of learning and development in an organization is mainly aimed ensuring better interpretation, processing as well as response to information both within as well as without the organization. Indeed an organization is said to be engaged in a learning process if it manages to change a range of its behaviors as a result of efficient and accurate interpretation and processing of information. The different units of the organization can acquire valuable knowledge which has the potential to make the organization operate better (Bruhn, & Gibson, 2006, p34).
One important concept is the distinction between single and double-loop learning. Single loop learning entails the ability of the organization to detect and correct errors occurring in the processes and in consideration of the parameters established to control variables. An organization which has well devised mechanism to continually engage in corrective measures has a better chance of improving its efficiency internally.
Double-loop learning on the other hand involves making relevant alterations with the aim of improving the existing processes in the organization. This difference is critical as it spells out the process of organizational change. Consequently, single-loop learning entails incremental changes and adaptations while double-loop learning entails more radical adjustments often involving radical changes in strategy for the organization. The double-loop learning is thus superior to single-loop learning (Klein, & Kieslowski, 2000, p45).
The criteria to determine whether to apply single-loop or double-loop learning are also an important concern for many authors. Several challenges emerge from this requirement. An example is the exploration and exploitation of technology. Exploration should lead to the emergence of new knowledge which can lead to a radical shift in the organization.
This leans in the double-loop learning concept. Exploitation of technology is more likely to lead to an improvement in the organization’s performance in the short term meaning that it leans more towards single-loop learning. The most important hindrance to this perspective is the fact that many managers do not follow the logic presented by the information they have. This may alter or suppress information hence resulting in false validation of decisions (Hedberg, 1981, p56).
Organizational learning also applies the concept of ‘informating’. This implies that information technology can be used as a tool towards availing more information to employees thus making them more liberal or be used selectively to control as well as monitor individual behaviors. Most scholars favor the liberating aspect as opposed to the controlling application of information however it is clear that the later is more applied in the organizations today (Venkatraman & Grant, 1986 p25).
The social aspect if learning and development in the context of the organization looks at the various ways in which individuals interpret their experiences at the work place. The different experiences emerge from explicit sources such as financial information as well as tacit sources such as the intuition developed by experienced strategists.
Consequently, learning in this context occurs as a result of social interactions. Explicit sources entail more of interpretation of information in the organization while tacit sources entail learning processes which occur as a result of the general socialization process in the organization (Smith, Aráujo, & Burgoyne, 1999, p34).
This being the case, organizational learning and development can be viewed as a being socially constructed political process which has being implicated within the culture of the organization. The social process in organizational learning thus solves the imitation of the technical view of organizational learning.
Despite the differing views, learning in the context of the organization is an important consideration for managers keen on effecting changes with the aim of improving the organization. The overall effect of the many changes effected by the organization largely determines whether the organization in general has gained from the experiences as well as the available information to better itself. The technical aspect is the more sensitive one as it relates ore to the political rather than a social process. Defense from the need to protect oneself from threats posed by political processes is a major determinant of the success of this process.
Reference List
Bruhn, M. & Gibson, C. 2006. Multinational Organization Context: Implications For Team Learning And Performance. Academy of Management Journal Vol. 49(3).
Hedberg, B. 1981. How organizations learn and unlearn. Handbook of organizational design. Oxford University press, U.K
Klein, K. & Koslowski, S.2000. Multi-level theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions and new directions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Perry-Smith, J. & Shalley, C.2003. The social side of creativity: A static and dynamic social network per-2006 Zellmer-Bruhn and Gibson 517 spective. Academy of Management Review, Vol28.
Smith, M., Aráujo, L., Burgoyne, J. 1999. Organizational learning and the learning organization. MCB University Press.
Venkatraman, N., & Grant, J. H. 1986. Construct measurement in organizational strategy research: A critique and proposal. Academy of Management Review, Vol11.
In the modern world, continuous learning has become an essential pillar of successful leadership and organizational management. Apparently, the competitive environment requires leaders who can instigate a learning culture that promises opportunities both at organizational and individual levels. This article will explore the core of the learning organization grounded in various learning disciplines as analyzed by Peter Senge. A learning organization is one that often minds about its potential to influence its future performance (Senge 2006). These subjects naturally link to each other, and the coherence of the flow manifests as these disciplines play out within an organization. In this paper, the focus will be on three options that include personal mastery, mental models, and the shared vision. These three options, explore various aspects of a learning organization that can help to solve problems in the computer sector.
Personal mastery
Unlike in the past, today learning continues even when academicians receive credentials. Currently, education is continuous and deliberate to ensure that organizations remain relevant in the global markets. An inclusive career development system is essential to enable procedural career advancement and training for the workforce at all levels of their career (Rowley & Gibbs, 2008). Therefore, to attain this system, skills needed in each organizational level should be highlighted, and research done to improve on personal skill. Besides, research should be regular to identify training needs concerning the evolving business environment. As a result, individuals experience personal mastery and start enjoying what they practice.
Personal knowledge invokes a sense of effortlessness since a person has mastered the underlying aspects that bring forth the expected outcomes. According to Bailey and Black (2014) personal mastery can be used as a tool to win people to the desired point of view, repair broken systems and help solve issues that seemed intractable. Because of the intense pressure to achieve, organizations need individuals whose minds can work at peak potential without straining.
Within the computer industry, applying personal mastery can be of great help in clarifying what is the best practice and practicing how to face current issues concerning actualizing organization’s vision. In this industry, personal vision entails establishing new products that can fill the gaps that instigate cyber attacks. This vision does not only influence oneself, but also the world since cyber attacks pose a threat to global security.
Through personal mastery, it is easy to see what gaps exists and what behaviors one has to add to the team while seeking to fulfill organizational targets (Jyoti, Utpal, & Debasis, 2015). Some organizations do not embrace personal mastery among its workers with the fear of over-relying on certain individuals. It is worth noting that, for the teams to work successfully as a system, it has to have several members with the potential to think and act decisively. Gradually, this serves as the impetus upon which other members can learn and change a personal vision to a shared vision. Leaders should utilize the mastery and enthusiasm within employees to generate meaningful change to self and others.
Mental models
According to Senge (2006), mental models determine how individuals understand the world and how they respond to the changing business environment. The concept of mental models entails the perceptions and generalizations that individuals hold concerning the business community. Mental models require transparency and trust with oneself and with others. It is through openness that workers can learn from each other and enhance a sense of security within a team. When workers integrate what they share with what they do, a sense of connection emerges forming a systemic thinking across the network. However, it is discouraging to note that the best ideas rarely get into action. For instance, in the computer sector, brilliant changes are developed, but a widespread incorporation of the perceived model never happens. Conflict emerges when shifting from the familiar ways of production, thus limiting the integration of the new insights (Bailey & Black, 2014).
In the computer industry, the most prevalent mental models involve simple perceptions such as seeing people as not aggressive, as untrustworthy, and lacking self-confidence. When such negative connotations develop, workers act differently from the way they would if they perceived their colleagues as self-motivated and trustworthy. Such beliefs, ideas and descriptions that people grow from experience control their thinking and behavior (Rowley & Gibbs, 2008). In this industry, the predominant mental models are those cherished by the primary decision makers. Those models can derail change if unevaluated because managers act to what is familiar and accommodating. In this regard, the efforts to sustain systems thinking within an organization may inflate.
Aspects of mental models that hinder growth
Even though mental models enhance stability and momentum in a changing world, they also block leaders from seeing the facts and ideas that promise change (Senge 2006). In most cases, the models are self-reflective and incomplete. Since everyone has a unique way to solve problems, organizations should ensure team learning to find a way that accounts for everyone’s ideas. If workers do not participate in the decision-making process, it becomes hard to develop a shared vision. Lack of trust develops and workers may choose to stick to the usual ways of practice. Consequently, possible solutions to diagnose identified problems fade. In the computer industry, most decision makers aim at winning the argument rather than finding the best case collectively. When this happens, organizations miss the flaws that exist because workers are compelled to fit in others’ reasoning. Employees should be encouraged to offer different views based on shared understandings and goals.
Shared vision
The organization’s leadership must commit to creating a sense of devotion to workers by identifying a shared vision for the organization’s progress. In a bid to achieve this, the organization has to plan together and ensure learning that anchor a shared knowledge of the organization’s mission and vision (Bailey & Black, 2014). A common target can lead to increased productivity since resources flow towards a common direction. When individuals reflect on what they desire and develop personal mastery, they generate an innate sense of purpose that go beyond individual targets to address the concerns of their organization.
These visions emanate from an individual, but they stretch further to meet the organizational vision. When organizations embrace shared ideas, they invite this wider devotion and teamwork. When managed with care and consistency, creating a common goal starts to establish positive connotations among the personnel (Snow, 2014). Employees begin to trust each other, embrace each other’s dream and end up realizing the potential they have when they work as a team.
Linking personal vision to shared vision
In most cases, organizational ideas propagate from personal views of individuals within an organization. The origin of the idea does not matter but the effect it has in the process of developing a shared vision. For example, the personal goal in this situation is influencing lives through innovation. Ultimately, sharing this personal vision to the members of the organization may form the basis for building a shared vision. To link personal vision to shared vision, one has to ask for support from members and allow them to make changes if necessary. If the vision is comprehensive, members can see through the lens of their leader rather than following blindly without inquiring (Hess, 2014).
Organization’s vision, mission, and values
Vision provides the image of what the organization will shape to within the stipulated time. The idea, in this case, is to produce computers that fill the gaps that hackers use to cause cyber attacks. It is the work of the management to encourage workers to embrace this vision as their own and identify what aspects of the vision matter most. Testing is required to identify how members feel about the idea, and the results should determine what aspects need improvement. The purpose or mission explains the question “Why?” the organization exists. Focused organizations have well-defined goals such as meeting customer needs and employee satisfaction.
However, the mission of this organization is to offer excellent services and remain useful to the world through innovations. The computer industry seeks to add to the business community in a significant way and add what has been missing in this field (Hess, 2014). On the other hand, the core values respond to the question “How?” the personnel should behave to meet organization’s standards. The core values include honesty, trustworthy, transparency, integrity, and open-mindedness.
Ultimately, all the three governing ideas represent the company’s purpose. Organizations need not only visions but also shared insights to make the mission more sensible. Core values guide people in their daily endeavors and enable them to make helpful decisions. However, the connection with these governing ideas becomes inevitable when translating policies into actions. For instance, to foster a shared vision, the core values of openness and honesty have to prevail to ensure the purpose is successful. This vision can only succeed if members are willing to take it as their own and a source of aspiration towards achieving the organization’s mission. Continuous learning and cooperation assist members to develop a sense of responsibility that helps build companies to great heights (Burlingham, 2005).
Commitment, enrollment, and compliance
Commitment is a rare factor, but when achieved within an organization, it can bring forth tremendous changes. Members of this team understand the importance of taking responsibility towards attaining the shared vision. The organization is flexible and gives members the chance to alter structures and redesign approaches to suit their style in a bid to foster commitment. Enrollment entails working out of choice and having the freedom to embrace one’s style (Burlingham, 2005). Compliance happens to be the prevalent vice adopted by workers in most organizations. However, in this case, members can assess the benefits of the image, and if favorable, they act beyond expectations.
This company’s vision is compelling enough since it has the support of the members. Members view it as a shared vision and use it as a platform to create coherence to the divergent opinions. The common aspiration leads to commitment since members see the vision as a symbol that reflects their personal objectives.
Being the CEO of this organization can be challenging when identifying what changes to make to improve the vitality of the vision to the personnel. First, in articulating the vision, the CEO has to progress by coming up with the idea and presenting it to the members. Members use this chance to inquire and introduce changes that they deem necessary (Snow, 2014). This fundamental stage ensures balance and comprehensiveness of an organization’s policy.
Enrolling is the second step; the CEO should try to introduce members into the vision. If members fail to buy into the concept, then they should have the chance to state what aspects should be included or omitted. The CEO should use the feedback to redesign the concept by incorporating members’ views. The third stage should entail consultations. At this level, it is a fundamental stage for a CEO who reckons the importance of team learning and participation. The answers lie within the team members, and the CEO should just coordinate the process. Eventually, this leads to the creation of a future that all individuals cherish and collectively identify with (Covey, 2013).
Conclusion
The ideas presented in this paper are for terminating the perception that the world is built of distinct units. After dropping this illusion, it becomes possible to develop a learning organization. When such organizations develop, people will continually increase their capability to achieve personal visions and later through learning together, a shared vision thrives. Organizations can gain a competitive advantage if they discover how to ensure workers’ commitment and compliance at all levels. Organizations grow to significant entities rather than big bodies if mental models advocate for ideas that balance inquiry and advocacy. When all these aspects converge, they create systems thinking that enhance motivation and growth.
References
Bailey, S., & Black, O. (2014). Mind gym: Achieve more by thinking differently. New York: HarperOne. Web.
Burlingham, B. (2005). Small giants: Companies that choose to be great instead of big. New York: Portfolio. Web.
Covey, S. R. (2013). The 7 habits of highly effective people: Powerful lessons in personal change. New York: Simon & Schuster. Web.
Hess, E. D. (2014). Learn or die: Using science to build a leading-edge learning organization. New York: Columbia University Press. Web.
Jyoti, J., Utpal, B., & Debasis, M. (2015). A Framework for Communities of Practice in Learning Organizations. Business Perspectives & Research, 3(1), 1-20. Web.
Rowley, J., & Gibbs, P. (2008). From learning organization to practically wise organization. The Learning Organization, 15(5), 356-372. Web.
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday/Currency. Web.
Snow, S. (2014). Smartcuts: How Hackers, Innovators, and Icons Accelerate Business. New York: HarperCollins. Web.
Learning organization is a term commonly used among corporations that facilitate knowledge gaining to their members.
Such organizations endlessly transform themselves through acquisition, creation and transfer of knowledge by modifying the behavior of their members so as to reflect new knowledge and insights (Love, 2003). It develops as a result of the challenges facing contemporary organizations and helps them to stay aggressive in the business setting.
A learning organization has five characteristics which include; shared vision, team learning, system thinking, mental model and personal mastery. As organizations develop, they drop their capability to become skilled as company structures and personal thinking turn inflexible. As soon as troubles arise, the planned solution often revolves to be only small-term and recur in the future.
To stay competitive, many organizations have re-organized themselves with a smaller number of people in the corporation (Love 2000). This means that those who stay behind are required to work more effectively. To build a competitive benefit, companies are required to learn quicker than their competitors in order to widen a customer receptive culture.
Organizations have to maintain information about new products as well as processes; they should also understand what goes on in the external environment. A good organization creates creative solutions by means of the knowledge and skills acquired as a result of organizational learning. This calls for co-operation among individuals as well as groups, free and dependable communication, and a culture of trust.
Change management is defined as a planned move toward shifting of organizations, teams and individuals from an existing state to a preferred future state (Liebowitz 2001).
This organizational process is aimed at helping workers to recognize and accept changes in their present business environment. Change management is used when referring to project management courses in which changes to development are officially introduced and accepted.
Since change management is a multidisciplinary practice that has changed as a result of academic exploration, it begins with an organized analysis of the current situation in order to make a decision between the call for change and the ability to change.
Objectives, process and content of change should all be particular as element of a change management plan. It may include resourceful marketing to allow communication among change audiences. This should also enhance social understanding concerning leadership’s methods and group dynamics.
As a visible track on transformation projects, Organizational Change Management aligns groups’ expectations, communicates, integrates teams and manages people training (Liebowitz 2001).
It makes use of performance metrics, such as financial results, operational efficiency, leadership commitment, communication effectiveness, and the perceived need for change to design appropriate strategies so as to avoid change failures or solve troubled change projects.
For successful change management some things must be included. These include useful communication, which tells business personalities the importance of the change. An educational training that is meant to upgrade the schemes for the organization, oppose resistance from the staff of companies and make straight to them the general planned direction of the association (Love 89). Provision of personal counseling to ease any change associated doubts may also be necessary.
Organizations must create a climate that encourage learning, experimentation, and taking risks other than emphasizing on command and control processes, libraries should also adopt methods that will help the organization move ahead and develop practical responses to change.
They require employees, who are grateful for change, recognize challenges, can increase new skills, and are dedicated to the organization’s mission, ideas and objectives. The ideas of the learning organization should offer leaders, managers, as well as staff with the gear they want to widen organizations that can be successful in unstable times.
References
Love, H. Z. (2000), Total quality management and the learning organization: a dialogue for change. Construction Management & Economics, 87 (33),89-90.
Liebowitz, J.k.(2001), Knowledge management and its link to artificial intelligence. Expert Systems with Applications ,21 (10),78-84.