THE LEARNING ORGANIZATION 42238
a. Learning organization and its relation with organizations.
II. Donald Schon (1930 i?? 1997) and the Emergence of Learning Organization
a. Crucial role of Donald Schon in designing learning organization.
b. Schons analysis that this process doesni??t have any strong theoretical base.
III. The Learning Organization and Peter Senge
a. Peter Sengei??s impact on organizational learning.
b. Describes learning organization as the continuous process of learning.
IV. Limitations of the Theory of Learning Organization by Senge
a. The researches are not inevitable.
b. There is problem in the perception of peter Senge.
V. Organizational Necessities for Successful Implementation
a. There are very few companies that resemble the blend of characters needed according to Senge for being a part of learning organization.
b. The primary focus of organizations is on income.
VI. Practical Applications in United Kingdom
a. The notion is deep-rooted in the administration domain since the last decade when Senge introduced the theory.
b. Resembling the awareness about knowledge organization is the execution of lessons-learned capture schemes.
a. Currently the theory does not exist; still it is implied in organizations.
Many experts, management consultants, big organizations have identified and realized the viable consequence of organizational learning i?? and the concept of the i??learning organizationi?? is a vital functioning part of this total system. The authors have strived to recognize the perfect patterns, or model structures, which could be followed and emulated by the real Organizations (Araujo and Easterby-Smith, 1999). This learning organization is a principle around which the Organizations revolve for being able to work under various difficulties and incredible pressure. In short this ideal is defined as a model where people from all rank and stage, separately and cooperatively, are constantly raising their ability to fabricate results they are actually concerned about.
Donald Schon (1930 i?? 1997) and the Emergence of Learning Organization
The coming out of the thought of i??learning organizationi?? is covered up with philosophies such as the birth of a learning civilization i.e. society. Possibly Donald Schon played a crucial role behind the entire emergence process of the concept of learning society. He offered a theoretical support by involving the experience and skill of staying in circumstances of a budding transformation with the requirement of learning. One of the great advancement of Schon was to research on the level to which business houses and leading bodies including the government were gaining knowledge of organizations i?? and the process in which those organizations could be improved (Geppert, 1996)
He recommends that the progress toward learning organizations is essential, and remarked that it is a process of alliance and induction which has no sufficient theoretical base. According, Donald Schon the business firm was a prominent pattern of learning system. He mapped the process of movement of the firms from being planned around its productions towards combining around business organizations. He pointed out that many organizations no longer contain a steady base of technologies in case of some products or the scheme built surrounding them. Then Donald Schon followed the way of Chris Argyris (born July 16, 1923) to expand numerous significant notions regarding organizational learning.
The Learning Organization and Peter Senge (born 1947)
Following the research of Donald Schon, Peter Senge, another expert on learning organization began his survey about the system. He is referred to as the strategist of the century for having a large impact on the manner in which businesses are progressing today. Peter Senge pointed out that this organization will be successful as it will teach people to work on their commitments and help them to learn continually at all levels. He described learning organization as
the organizations in which people constantly develop their ability to produce the outcomes they actually long for, where fresh and expansive prototypes of thoughts are cultivated, where combined goal is set open, and people are constantly acquiring knowledge for seeing the whole collectively (Senge, 1990).
Sengei??s research explained that people possess the aptitude to learn, but the systems based on which they perform are mostly not encouraging and beneficial to manifestation and engagement. In addition to this, people might fall short of the apparatus and guidance for making sense of the circumstances they encounter. Organizations those are constantly increasing their capacity for creating their future need an essential change of mind of their members (Dr Hughes, 2002)
Actual learning enters the heart of the creature that is implied to as human being. Reconstruction of the organizations is done with the aid of learning. The organizations successfully perform their jobs they never could have done with the aid of learning. They recognize the world and their connection with it with the aid of learning and increase their ability to generate, being a part of creative means of life also with the aid of learning. There is a deep desire within each of us for this kind of learning (Senge, 1990).
Limitations of the Theory of the Learning Organization by Senge
While formulating analysis of the work of Peter Senge, and the thoughts promoted by him, his contributions should always be taken into context. His researches are not inevitable to be a perfect addition for the edifying literature of organizational learning. Peter Sengei??s writings are for active executives and leaders. The basic idea is to make out how involvements can be used to convert the organizations of business into i??learning organizationsi??. A large part of his effort along with that of related researchers, have been dedicated to for identification of patterns which the people followed.
In the works of Senge based on learning organization there are a few specific problems related to his perception. These consist of failure to completely value and include the essentials that move the contemporary organizations; the absence of relative classiness of the thinking he required for management officials; and queries around his conduct of organizational policies. It is definitely hard to locate real-life instances of learning organizations (Thomsen, 2001).
There is also a lack of significant scrutiny of the theoretical structure. The study on attempts of reformation of The Swiss Postal Service provides us with a list of more vital shortcomings of this system. The study concludes that it is impossible to change a bureaucratic association by learning programs only. It revealed that by mentioning about the concept of learning organization it is possible to create alterations less intimidating and more tolerable to participants. However, collective and individual learning has certainly taken place and not really been related to organizational changes and conversions. Part of this issue, as the study suggested, deals with the notion of learning organization (Watkins and Marsick, 1996).
While experts have the same opinion that learning organization idea is a significant one for organizational science, two apparently conflicting research groups are in disagreement about whether the scheme of learning organization is a dream or a frightening nightmare for its associates, mainly regarding three decisive factors: potentially painful employee experiences, ideology and control. . Both the negative and positive impacts of this concept are judged. Based on this assessment, the researchers aims to manufacture a innovative middle-ground point of view based on the learning organization, formally known as the ‘fluorescent light’ view, including constituents from both positive and critical observation in expectation of causing a dialogue among them which will supply fresh research queries on, potentially painful employee experiences, ideology and control in learning organizations (Driver, 2002).
Organizational Necessities for Successful Implementation
Here the point opposing Peter Senge is moderately simple. There are very few business houses that resemble to some extent with the blend of characters that he categorized for being a part of learning organization. Within an entrepreneur system his idea of organizations and companies turning enthusiastically to the development of the learning of their employees and associates can only be brought to execution in a restricted number of occasions. While the people who are in charge of the companies will generally in some way or other look forward to the long-standing expansion and sustainability of the organization, they might not concentrate on raising the human resources of the business houses.
The primary focus might be on increasing brand acknowledgment and rank; building rational resources and awareness (Leadbeater, 2000); delivering merchandise modernization; and making sure that manufacture and delivery expenses are kept back down. British enterpriseri??s main concerns are mainly monetary. Moreover, the aims for earnings are very high and time duration is too little (Hancock, 2004). Such circumstances are scarcely favorable to build the kind of organization proposed by Peter Senge. Here the point colliding with Senge is that inside entrepreneurial organizations, where the main aim is earnings, a basic concern with learning and progress of workers and associates is basically too unrealistic. The capability of becoming skilled, at a faster rate than the opponents can be the single sustainable spirited gain.
Practical Applications in United Kingdom
The alteration of companies from manufacture-oriented bodies to practical learning bodies constantly influence the awareness of the personnel is a chief purpose of organization researchers. This factor has important application to the production and construction business where manufacture-related study has principally surpassed managerial and organizational enhancement research.
As one attempt to modify this condition, the there is a research effort designed to keep into knowledge the current organization learning methods and skills fielded by official associations both within and exterior of the construction business. Through a sequence of investigative case studies, the experts constructed a maturity ideal along with the Construction Industry Institute that supplies construction companies with a structure for setting a culture and atmosphere suitable for learning organization (Barlow and Jashapara, 1998). This maturity ideal concentrates on learning organization character of management, progressions and communications, partnership and teamwork, education, cultures and traditions at the company, society and community, and personal levels. This theory brings in the outcome of the attempt including a framework of the maturity model, implementation, and the overall uniqueness of the learning organization.
Although the notion of learning organization might be new to construction organizations, the
notion is deep-rooted in the administration domain since the last decade when Senge introduced the theory. In this work, Senge puts emphasis on that the organizations must look into less on daily incident and much more on the fundamental styles and motions of alteration that cause daily events to take place. From this study, organizations can concentrate on learning fresh innovative ways to deal with issues and organized sophisticated actions to advance course of actions.
This idea takes up the notion that both creative and adaptive learning should be arranged in the learning organization. In particular, creative learning puts emphasis on an organization generating fresh knowledge, while the adaptive kind focuses on the way of changing process of the organization adapts to altering circumstances. The implementation of both point of views are the differentiating factor between executed learning organizations and the related active or interactive ideas of knowledge organization and knowledge gained. The stress of this effort is on the scheme that enterprisers of all masses constantly generate knowledge, as they follow their basic industry model (Vakola and Rezgui, 2005).
This knowledge is counted among one of two groups; implied knowledge which is that which the individuals acquire through work experience and is reserved in their heads, and explicit or precise knowledge which can be written and stocked in the form of documents or drawings. The aim of knowledge organization is finding the way to store the gained knowledge and make it accessible and obtainable to others who might find it helpful to generate solutions in case of other problems. A number of organizations are utilizing major resources on the capacity to achieve this capture, classification, and distribution process. As by data of one survey, 40% of design and construction companies in the United Kingdom have a knowledge organization policy in place (Carrillo and Robinson, 2004).
Resembling the awareness about knowledge organization is the execution of lessons-learned capture schemes. In this case, knowledge from assignment members is collected in a venture of building libraries of knowledge that was taught on individual assignments. In turn these lessons are classified and made accessible to organization employees through different ways such as business intranets. Like in knowledge organization systems, the lessons-learned scheme also focuses on an interactive form of learning where people get knowledge from an assignment after a particular lesson has been taught and then conveyed to other fellows present.
The benefit to both lessons-learned system and knowledge organization system to learning is that both of them can be categorized as technology related troubles or social network disturbances. Particularly, companies which are actively following these alternatives can either pursue the scheme of emphasizing on generating Intranets, database system and other assorted systems that permit people to access data when required, or stay focused on the conventional one-to-one transmission of knowledge that represents social networks (Cummings and Worley, 1997).
As pointed out by current study, the technology scheme is gaining some extra attention as the enterprises are concentrating on searching a i??silver bulleti?? to knowledge organization gifted by technology. Although this growing focus on technical arena gives construction companies an entry point towards the learning sphere, it does not fulfill the needs of learning organization. Particularly, a reactive approach towards learning does not force the organization ahead to acquire knowledge constantly and learn up-to-date processes for development. (Cummings and Worley, 1997)
It is a matter of dispute that the idea of learning organization provides organization heads and others with an image of how things should have been within the organization. Following this concept, authors like Peter Senge initiated a number of motivating magnitudes that could be individually developmental, and could also boost organizational efficiency i?? in particular where the enterprise is deep-rooted within knowledge economy.
On the other hand, as it is true that there are many limitations to the ideal i?? it has been underpowered theoretically and there are a few queries to check whether the dream can be recognized and understood within the natures of dynamics that survive in between and within companies in a globalizing entrepreneurial economy. It may have well been that the notion is oversold as an easy to acquire universal solution for an extensive variety of managerial difficulties.
There are various efforts made by authors to proceed beyond learning organization. The cynics may draw the conclusion that there is an enormous deal of wealth in it for authors who can make the coming big thing admired and accepted in organizational development and management. (Satu and Lahteenmaki, 2001). At this point of time, no exact learning organizations exist. Still, many of todayi??s most booming organizations are taking on these thoughts to attain their desired goals and requirements of the global market where the importance of the individual is more and more known as our most significant resource. Thus it can be easily concluded that the entire process of learning organization along with its theories and researches, merits and demerits can not be absolutely kept away from execution.
Barlow J, Jashapara A, 1998, Title: Organisational learning and inter-firm i??partneringi?? in the
UK construction industry; The Learning Organization, Vol.-5, Issue 2, pages- 84-92
Dr. Hughes, February 2, 2002, lectures about Peter Sengei??s i??The Fifth Disciplinei?? recorded by V. Montemurro.
Driver, M., 2002, The learning organization: Foucauldian gloom or Utopian sunshine, Human Relations, Vol. 55, No. 1, 39-52
Easterby-Smith, MPV, Araujo LM and Snell R, 1999 ‘Organizational learning: current debates and opportunities’. in Organizational Learning and the Learning Organization: Developments in Theory and Practice, London, Sage, Vol. 1, pages1-12.
Geppert M, 1996, Paths of Managerial Learning in the East German Context, Organization Studies, London, Vol. 17, pages 255-266
Hancock DJ, 18th to 21st October 2004. i??What new skills must project managers master to deliver successful project outcomes for the future? i??, Vol. 3, pages: 940- 947
Leadbeater, C., 2000, Mind over Matter: Greening the New Economy, London, Publishers: Green Alliance.
Robinson, H.S., Al-Ghasani, A.M., Carrillo, P.M., Anumba, C.J., 2004 i??Knowledge Management in UK Construction Strategies, Resources and Barriers.i?? Project Management Journal, Vol. 35, pages: 44-54
Satu, Lahteenmaki, 2001 i??Critical Aspects of Organizational Learning Research and Proposals
for its Measurement.i?? British Journal of Management, Vol. 12, pages 130-145.
Senge, P.1990, The Fifth Discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization, 1st edition, New York, Doubleday.
Thomsen, H.K., 2001 Employees’ Perception of the Learning Organization: Management Learning, Vol. 32, No. 4, 476-490
Vakola M., Rezgui Y., 2005, Title: Organisational learning and innovation in the construction industry; The Learning Organization, Vol. 7, issue-4, pages170-179
Worley, C.G. Cummings, T.G., 1997. Organizational Development and Change
Publisher: South-Western College Publishing
Get access to
Guarantee No Hidden