Expert Opinion

Organisational Learning relates to the ability of organisations and their staff to learn new concepts and absorb new information and to adapt these effectively to fit their unique business environments. Change itself is recognised via the theory of organisational learning (Argyris and Schon, 1996) to be an instrument of learning, and of knowledge creation. Two types of learning are described by organisational learning theories i.e.

• Single Loop learning (also called adaptive or assimilative learning) through which facts are observed which agree with the learner's existing mental models, and which lead to behaviour being adjusted accordingly.

• Double Loop Learning (also called generative or accommodative learning) where facts are learned which require changes to the learner's existing mental models. With this type of learning individual beliefs are challenged creating an accompanying need for an explanation as to why the proposed changes are necessary. The following table outlines both types of learning and records the results envisaged:

Table Adapted from Korth (2000)

Donald Moynihan (2005), assistant professor from the Texas based A&M University writes that in order to develop more "results-oriented" government departments, performance based management initiatives were introduced, however these reforms occurred without any thought being given to allied changes in the affected organisational structures and environments. A key assumption was that decision makers would learn from the reported performance information received and thereby make better informed decisions which would logically lead to improvements in government performance. Unfortunately this "managing for results" model largely failed to consider how learning occurs within organisations. Single-loop learning is appropriate for routine, repetitive operations, where goals are clear and widely accepted. Moynihan states that this kind of learning can enable organisations to "do the same things better". Double-loop learning on the other hand can result in changes in the values of current theories, as well as in strategies, and assumptions.

Organisational learning methodologies emphasise the importance of an organisation's culture in the pursuit of learning. Such learning is based upon shared experiences, norms, and understandings that foster intelligent behaviour. Some of the characteristics associated with a "learning culture" include high employee empowerment, participation, and discretion.

Five disciplines associated with learning organisations have been identified (Senge 1990);

• Personal mastery;

• Shared vision;

• Team learning;

• Mental models; and

• Systems thinking.

These disciplines relate to three learning capabilities, which are described as

• Aspiration; developing a vision of how teams work together and the organisational practices used.

• Generative Conversations; understanding differing mental models and possible limitations.

• Understanding complexity; understanding the business as a system and using systems thinking skills.

Guoquan Chen (2005) from the Tsinghua University, Beijing, China defines organisational learning as, " the process through which an organisation continuously acquires new knowledge, and adjusts in order to successfully adapt to external and internal environmental changes and to maintain sustainable existence and development". Chen's definition emphasises that:

Organisational learning has two dimensions,

• Cognitive (acquiring new knowledge); and

• Behavioural (adjusting to change).

Organisational learning is used to enable organisations to:

• Adapt to environmental changes; and

• Continue to exist and to develop.

The following table outlines nine key aspects of the organisational learning process as proposed by Chen:

Table adapted from Chen (2005)

Knowledge Creation

The process of knowledge creation may be conceptually viewed as a spiralling or ongoing interaction involving:

• Explicit knowledge i.e. knowledge expressed in words, numbers, data, formulae, specifications; and

• Tacit,or informal knowledge i.e.subjective insights, intuitions and hunches (group activities are often used as a means of exploiting tacit knowledge).

Prof. Ikujiro Nonaka (1995) developed a model in which he depicted ideas being formed in the minds of individuals and then, through progressive interactions with others, the development of new ideas. Nonaka's model of knowledge creation contains the following interacting levels of knowledge.

• Socialisation (tacit to tacit knowledge exchange);

• Externalisation (tacit to explicit knowledge exchange);

• Combination (explicit to explicit knowledge exchange);

• Internalisation (explicit to tacit knowledge exchange).

According to Nonaka knowledge creation is multiplied when all of the above four forms of knowledge conversion are actively pursued and reflected against each other

In the pursuit of knowledge creation universities and industry have been drawn closer together. Research funding by business organisations and governments, the authorisation of universities to hold patents, and an expectation that research should culminate in ventures leading commercial returns have been some of the factors that have encouraged the closer relationship between universities and business organisations. In regard to this Professors Sara Rynes, Jean Bartunek and Richard Daft (2001), state that the transfer of knowledge between academics and practitioners is a matter of critical importance. The authors conducted a research forum to investigate knowledge creation and its diffusion between academics and practitioners and the following table summarises their findings:

Table adapted from Rynes et al, 2001

Market orientation, which is an important component of knowledge creation, has been defined by Narver and Slater (1990) as, "the organisation culture that most effectively creates the necessary behaviours for the creation of superior value for buyers and, thus, continuous superior performance for the business". Mark Farrell (2000) of Charles Sturt University, Australia writes that a strong market orientation alone may not be sufficient for organisations to maintain their competitiveness; they must also create situations in which they can learn faster than their competitors. Organisations which have only a limited market orientation tend to be limited to adaptive forms of learning only, and tend to focus strongly on expressed customer needs more than upon their latent needs. For this reason they may underestimate the potential contributions of other forms of learning; and importantly they may overlook the possibility of threats from non-traditional competitors. Citing Slater & Narver (1995), "A narrow construction of market orientation could lead to learning only within traditional boundaries". However an organisation having a solid marketing orientation is also in a good position to develop the characteristic of a successful learning organisation. Citing Garvin (1993), "Organisational learning occurs within an organisation skilled at creating, acquiring, and transferring knowledge, and at modifying its behaviour to reflect new knowledge and insights."

Learning organisations have the ability to continuously transform themselves; they are comprised of people/teams whose ambitions are aligned with those of the organisation. Hubert Rampersad (2004), president of Quality Management Consulting BV, writes that learning organisations consist of:

_________________________________________________________

You are reading a Management Brief Report in html-format. Become a member of the BPIR to receive a new report in PDF-format every month (see examples: Benchmarking & Business Excellence). PDF-format can be saved on your hard drive, emailed to work colleagues, and are much easier to read and print out!.. For BPIR updates and best practices sign up to our FREE newsletter.