The Learning Organization

A learning process model to achieve continuous improvement and innovation

Bill Buckler

Article information:
To cite this document:
Bill Buckler, (1996),"A learning process model to achieve continuous improvement and innovation", The Learning
Organization, Vol. 3 Iss 3 pp. 31 - 39
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09696479610119660

Downloaded by UNIVERSITI PENDIDIKAN SULTAN IDRIS At 18:33 25 September 2014 (PT)

Downloaded on: 25 September 2014, At: 18:33 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 17 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 3059 times since 2006*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:

Knud Illeris, (2004),"A model for learning in working life", Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 16 Iss 8 pp. 431-441
Ian Cunningham, (2006),"A declaration on learning: how do you respond?", Development and Learning in Organizations: An
International Journal, Vol. 20 Iss 6 pp. 18-23
Alan Mumford, (2001),"Facilitating Learning Organizations: Making Learning Count20011Victoria Marsick, Karen Watkins, .
Facilitating Learning Organizations: Making Learning Count. Aldershot: Gower 1999. 45.00 (paperback)", Industrial and
Commercial Training, Vol. 33 Iss 7 pp. 270-273

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 531990 []

For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com

Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Objectives

A learning process
model to achieve
continuous
improvement and
innovation

The management philosophy of W. Edwards

Deming[1] with its profound implications for
management-led business transformation, is
underpinned by the practice of innovation
and continuous improvement of systems and
processes, based on understanding and
knowledge. More recently, business process
re-engineering has been adopted by many
organizations as a tool for a fundamental
review of their key business processes, and is
providing many opportunities for significant
step change improvements. It can also provide
the added opportunity to design into the new
process the capability of continuous ongoing
improvement. Success in this area will depend
on the ability of leaders, working in the
process, and the overall system in which it
operates, to create an environment where
learning and innovation can be facilitated.
This article seeks to help practising
managers:
Develop an understanding of how learning
can be stimulated, by examining various
relevant theories, concepts and techniques
of learning.
Examine how this knowledge can be
applied to the design of processes, so that
learning, and thereby continuous improvement and innovation, is maximized.

Downloaded by UNIVERSITI PENDIDIKAN SULTAN IDRIS At 18:33 25 September 2014 (PT)

Bill Buckler

The author
Bill Buckler is at Marton House, Marton, Rugby,
Warwickshire, UK.
Abstract
According to Revans, for an organization to be successful
in todays rapidly changing environment, its capacity to
learn must exceed the rate of change imposed on it.
Through an examination of the processes by which
individuals in organizations learn, develops a learning
process model to facilitate continuous improvement and
innovation in business processes. Draws on relevant
theories which provide an understanding of how and why
people learn, barriers which prevent learning, and the role
managers need to play in the learning process. Provides a
vision of what may be achieved by the systematic implementation of the learning process model. Demings system
of profound knowledge provides a focus for learning
activity. The model has been developed in a way which will
be of practical use to managers working in organizations.

Learning as a process that results in

changed behaviour
Figure 1 shows learning as a process. Three
ingredients are needed for this process to be
effective:
(1) focus to plot a course for the learning
effort;
(2) an environment which facilitates
learning;
(3) techniques which enable learning to be
efficient.
The interlocking circles on the model imply
that the ingredients are not discrete, but
overlap, and are interdependent if the
whole learning process is to be optimized.
In simple terms these are the hows, whys,
and whats of learning, and these will be examined in more detail. Readers are invited to
relate the hows and whys to their own lifetime
learning experiences, to establish a ring of
truth, before going on to examine what has
to be learned to achieve continuous improvement and innovation in business processes.

Authors address
Authors name here
Address 1
Address 2
Address 3
Address 4
Address 5
e mail: insert here
The Learning Organization
Volume 3 Number 3 1996 pp. 3139
MCB University Press ISSN 0969-6474

31

A learning process model

The Learning Organization

Bill Buckler

Volume 3 Number 3 1996 3139

Figure 1 Learning as a process

What should I learn?

What will be
the result?
The learning process

Focus

Why should I learn?

Environment

Technique

Downloaded by UNIVERSITI PENDIDIKAN SULTAN IDRIS At 18:33 25 September 2014 (PT)

How can I learn?

The hows of learning techniques to

help the learning process

or gestalt in the case of discovery learning.

The extreme versions of the models, together
with the characteristics which seem to accompany them, are shown in Table I.
Each model has a distinct set of advantages
and disadvantages. I believe it is useful to
consider the models as the opposite ends of a
spectrum, with an infinite range of options in
between. This approach allows us to relate the
relative benefits of each learning model, more
precisely to the objectives of the business
process being considered, rather than take
up a black/white, good/bad position.

The learning debate centres on two models,

which reflect profound differences in values
and ideology. In very simple terms the first
model, which I have called the taught
model, sees learning as something which is
done to people, whereas the second, the
discovery model, sees it as something which
people do for themselves. Each model
appears to be based on sound theory; mainly
behaviourism in the case of the taught model
Table I Learning methods two extremes

Taught

Discovery

Model

Learn theory based on research.

Test by application. Change behaviour.
Teach others, until better theory is
developed

Identify problems. Experiment to

discover solutions. Develop theory.
Change behaviour. Apply to
similar situations

Focus

Teacher-centred
Learning managed by the organization

Learner-centred
Learning managed by the
individual

Motivation

Extrinsic

Intrinsic

Culture

Controlled
Bureaucratic

Empowered
Autonomous

Theoretical basis

Behaviourist school Skinner et al.

Determinism

Gestalt school Kohler et al.

Free will

Advantages

Consistency
Conformity
Low risk

Creativity
Innovation
Responsiveness to customers

Disadvantages

Can stifle intrinsic motivation

Can cause conditioned responses which
create barriers to change and learning

Can focus on personal rather than

organizational objectives
Higher risk of failure

32

Downloaded by UNIVERSITI PENDIDIKAN SULTAN IDRIS At 18:33 25 September 2014 (PT)

A learning process model

The Learning Organization

Bill Buckler

Volume 3 Number 3 1996 3139

To implement the learning company concept[2], seems to require a move through the
spectrum towards the discovery model, to
gain the benefits of creativity, innovation,
customer responsiveness, and continuous
improvement, which this style of learning
can deliver. At the same time it is necessary
to manage the disadvantages of discovery
learning, namely aligning organizational and
personal objectives, and minimizing the risk
of failure. A move too far along the spectrum
will lose some of the benefits of the taught
model, such as consistency and conformity.
Also, the move away from the taught model
will be resisted by conditioned responses
which that model has itself created, and which
show themselves as learning disabilities and
barriers to change.
I do not believe that the taught model is
bad, per se, and that the discovery model is
good. It is more a case of what is appropriate
to the business requirements. For instance, in
a matter relating to the safety of staff or the
public, there may be a need to adhere strictly
to safety procedures, and a taught learning
process may be the only effective way of
ensuring such conformity. A key requirement
in developing organizational learning will be
to achieve an optimum balance between the
learning systems described, which meets the
detailed requirements of the business process.
Nevertheless the release of individual

potential, resulting in behavioural change and

creative and innovative process improvements
will only really happen if existing learning
systems move radically towards the discovery
model.

The whys of learning creating an

environment which provides meaning
Whichever learning method is appropriate, it
is useful to consider the learning process as
taking place in stages, and the model developed to explain this is shown in Figure 2.
In concept, learning requires a movement
through the stages, but for this to happen, the
individual will need to be motivated to expend
the effort necessary. Motivation can be
intrinsic, i.e. from within the individual,
or extrinsic, i.e. imposed from outside, usually by the organization. Theory suggests that
individuals will be intrinsically motivated to
move through the model, and the strength of
this motivation will vary from individual to
individual. Also, individuals will be prevented
from moving through the model by inbuilt
attitudes, values, beliefs and responses, of
which they are often not aware. These
responses may be the direct result of conditioning, by the organization, or taught
learning systems in general. An individual
will only move through the model while the

Figure 2 The stages of learning

I want to know more

I am not good enough to do this

5 Enactment
What have we learned?
How have we learned?

I do not believe this will work

This is not my job

4 Commitment

3 Understanding

I want to
try this

6 Reflection

I want to know about this

I now have a better understanding

I do not need to change

I do not know
and do not care

2 Awareness

1 Ignorance

I need to know about this

I ought to know about this

33

A learning process model

The Learning Organization

Bill Buckler

Volume 3 Number 3 1996 3139

to learn. This desire cannot be directed, but

must come from within the individual. However, it can be nurtured and encouraged. To
be most effective, learning at this level must
be pulled by the individual, not pushed by the
organization. Also, the barriers preventing
the transition from commitment to enactment
can be formidable. Usually, they will require
the individual to change behaviour. Often this
will bring into play a powerful, inbuilt, and
unconscious defence mechanism. Argyris[6]
calls this defensive reasoning. The individual will need to develop a high level of selfawareness if this barrier is to be breached.

Downloaded by UNIVERSITI PENDIDIKAN SULTAN IDRIS At 18:33 25 September 2014 (PT)

driving forces exceed the restraining forces,

and will become stuck when the forces are
exactly matched[3]. Typical expressions
which describe the driving and restraining
forces at each stage of the process are shown
on the model, but it is important to understand that these will be unique to each individual[4]. It will be useful to look at each
stage of the model in turn, and explore some
of the issues which may surround it.
Ignorance
No one knows what they dont know, so
no blame can be attached to individuals who
finds themselves in a state of ignorance.
Indeed, this stage is, or was, the starting point
for everyone. It can be argued that it is also
the easiest stage to move from by enquiring.

Enactment
When individuals, working within teams,
move to enactment, real improvements to
working processes will start to emerge.
However, this involves a degree of risk, and
the working environment must allow this if
benefits are to be gained. Development of
this environment will facilitate insight learning[10], and increase the probability of innovation and creative solutions to problems[11].
The release of this creativity will be the source
of future competitive advantage. Effective
discovery learning systems can enable individuals to move very quickly to this stage, and
Revans action learning concepts[12] are
based on this. On the other hand, the environment created by taught learning systems may
inhibit changes to processes and limit their
capacity to improve. For instance, quality
management systems, such as BS 5750 and
ISO 9000, can create a culture of conformance, where changes to processes and
new ideas are discouraged, and would be
criticized by auditing procedures.

Awareness
Having developed an awareness, motivation
will be needed for the individual to input
sufficient effort to gain an understanding of
the subject[5]. Barriers to learning are likely
to be a legacy from rigid organizational and
wage structures Its not my job, and Im
not paid to know that being typical responses. The development of supportive teamworking, and peer recognition for the effort of selfdevelopment may be powerful antidotes.
Conversely, ill-considered reward systems and
team structures reinforce the barriers.
Understanding
The development of understanding will take
place in stages, as the depth of knowledge
increases. Shallow understanding will generally result from single-loop learning[6], but
double-loop learning will be needed if deep
understanding is to be achieved. Commitment will start to develop provided the knowledge is perceived as meeting the needs of the
individual and the organization[7,8]. On the
other hand, as the depth of understanding
increases, it may start to challenge deeply held
beliefs and values, which either overtly or subconsciously may limit the move to commitment. Senge[9] calls this creative tension.

Reflection
This is probably the most important part of
the learning process which is often missing in
taught organizations. This is where actions,
outcomes and theories are evaluated, and
deep learning takes place. The compliant
nature of taught systems often means that
individuals are not encouraged to question or
challenge theories, and inappropriate actions
continue to be taken long after those theories
have been discredited. In extreme cases of
operant conditioning, where actions are a
result of learning by rote, the difficulties
in achieving a change in behaviour needed to
enable deep learning to take place should not
be underestimated. When effective, reflection

Commitment
Commitment will not be achieved without
intrinsic interest and curiosity[9]. If this is
not present, the move to action may not take
place. Many training courses do not have the
desired effect because they are imposed, and
are not attended because of an intrinsic desire
34

A learning process model

The Learning Organization

Bill Buckler

Volume 3 Number 3 1996 3139

may be of benefit to both the individual and

the organization. The leader will need to have
this knowledge already, and the enthusiasm
and commitment to put it into practice. The
leaders position as a role model[13] will
therefore be vital in gaining the attention
and interest of the team. Other team members
may also have greater understanding, and can
provide help as mentors and role models.

The role of leadership in creating a

learning environment
My experience has shown me that success in
achieving the learning company vision
depends greatly on the effectiveness of managers and team leaders in creating an environment where individual, team, and thereby,
organizational learning is facilitated. In order
to do this they will need a deep understanding
of the learning process, to be able to identify
an individuals position on the stages of learning model, to understand the driving and
restraining forces applicable to the individual
at that time, and have intervention strategies
to facilitate movement through the stages.
Figure 3 shows the stages of learning
model, with the role of leadership superimposed. The various aspects of the leadership role will be examined in more detail.

Developing shared vision and ownership

Senge[9] sees developing a shared vision as
one of the five disciplines of learning, and an
ability to do this in a participative way with
the team will be a key requirement of the
leader. This will be a two stage process, as the
level of understanding of the team develops.
Initially the leader will concentrate of the
whats of the vision, and the role that learning will play in its achievement. As learning
develops, the debate will increasingly move
into the why areas, and the facilitation of
this process up and down the organization will
enhance organizational learning. It will also
start to expose the barriers preventing movement up the learning ladder, and enable the
leader to evolve his own understanding and
develop strategies to minimize their effects.

Questioning
The first step up the learning ladder is to
move from a state of ignorance to being aware
that an area of knowledge exists, and that it

Figure 3 The role of leadership

Enable
I want to know more

Le

ad
er

sh
ip

Develop ownership

Allow risk taking

I am not good enough

to do this

5 Enactment
What have we learned?
How have we learned?

Remove barriers

Develop shared
vision whys
This is not my job

4 Commitment

3 Understanding

I want to
try this

6 Reflection

I want to know about this

I now have a better understanding

2 Awareness

I need to know about this

ip

Le

ad
e

rsh

ip

Le

ad
er

sh

ip

I do not believe this

will work

Develop shared
vision whats I do not need
to change

sh
ad
er
Le

Downloaded by UNIVERSITI PENDIDIKAN SULTAN IDRIS At 18:33 25 September 2014 (PT)

increases understanding, which, in turn

increases commitment and action, and a
virtuous cycle of learning is unleashed.

Question

I do not
know and
do not
care

1 Ignorance

I ought to know about this

Learning requirements
Deming

35

Process
redesign

A learning process model

The Learning Organization

Bill Buckler

Volume 3 Number 3 1996 3139

Downloaded by UNIVERSITI PENDIDIKAN SULTAN IDRIS At 18:33 25 September 2014 (PT)

The participative approach[14] will help

unlock intrinsic motivation, by enabling
individuals to satisfy their inner needs[7,8].

to come directly from the requirements of the

business process to which they relate, and the
needs of the individuals working within that
process. By applying the four areas of learning
outlined in Demings system of profound
knowledge[4] to a business process, a
menu of learning, as shown in the
Appendix, can be developed. This will form a
basis from which detailed, prioritized learning
plans can be formulated.
The menu contains a mixture of knowledge, attitudes and skills, and different
approaches will be needed to assess, and
provide learning opportunities in these areas.

Enabling
At some stage there will be a need to try
something new. We can develop an understanding and commitment to riding a bicycle,
but until we try we will never be able to ride.
However, the first few attempts involve a high
risk of falling off. The leader must, at this
stage, provide both opportunity and encouragement, if the benefits are to be achieved.
Strategies must also be developed to minimize
risk, and ensure that failure does not prevent
the individual from trying again. The more
quickly individuals can be moved to the enactment stage, the more quickly experiential
learning will start.

A learning process model

The learning process model, Figure 4, has
been developed as a tool for systematically
applying the various concepts which have
been outlined to achieve improvement of
business processes.
The various components of the model
will be examined in more detail.

Removing barriers
Probably the most important role of the
leader is to identify and minimize the effects
of barriers to learning[3]. These will be present at each stage of the learning process, but
will become more challenging as the higher
stages of the ladder are reached. The leader
will need to understand the sort of things
which cause individuals to become stuck on
the ladder, and develop an awareness of when
and why this is happening. Individuals will
not necessarily be aware of the high level
barriers which are operating within themselves, and these will need to be drawn into
conscious awareness before they can be managed. This is a very complex area to delve
into, and to be effective, leaders will require a
high level of understanding of psychology.
The level of understanding needed is very rare
in most organizations. Clearly we have here a
chicken and egg situation, where leaders
from the top down will need to be highly
motivated to learn about psychology, without
yet having the very understanding which will
be needed to remove the barriers to such
learning. The work of Senge[9], Argyris[6]
and Goldratt[15] will help to start this learning process, but as high level barriers are
encountered, outside help may be needed to
understand and manage them.

The learning support system

The learning support system will need to be
designed to provide the environment in which
learning will be facilitated, and its success will
depend heavily on the quality of leadership
provided by managers and team leaders. Consideration will need to be given to the learning
styles of the individuals concerned[16,17]
and other learning techniques to enable tailored support to be developed which will
enable learning experiences to meet individual and team needs.
The main features of the learning support
system are described next.
Systematic approach
While discovery learning requires a minimum
of control and direction to be effective, nevertheless a systematic approach to learning
support will be needed if individual learning is
to contribute towards achieving and developing the aims of the organization. Also it will
demonstrate the organizations commitment
to supporting individual learning.
Leadership
It is clear that effective leadership is the key
ingredient for the success of the learning
model. A participative leadership style will be
required, with high levels of facilitation and
coaching skills. Leadership behaviours which
stifle learning will need to be recognized and

The whats of learning enabling a

focus on organizational goals
The learning requirements, which will provide the focus for learning activity, will need
36

A learning process model

The Learning Organization

Bill Buckler

Volume 3 Number 3 1996 3139

Figure 4 A learning process model

Learning support system
Individual learning support

Company policy
deployment process

Mentoring programme
Self-managed learning
Distance learning

Personal development

Downloaded by UNIVERSITI PENDIDIKAN SULTAN IDRIS At 18:33 25 September 2014 (PT)

Learning needs diagnosis

Business process requirements
Individual and team assessment
Prioritized learning needs

Learning resource
Learning resource database
Multimedia PC interface

Progress review

Team development

Team learning support

Action learning support
Facilitator development
Action learning groups

avoided. Extensive work will be needed with

managers and team leaders during the implementation of the model.

motivation. At the same time, activities

will need to be aligned with business objectives.

Team learning support

Flatter structures, with fewer tiers of management, and greater empowerment of teams, are
a feature of business process re-engineering.
These structures require changes in the way
people work together, and support each other.
Support for these changes towards effective
teamworking will be necessary. The move of
leaders from a directive role to a facilitating
role, and the greater responsibility placed on
team members will need to be supported by
team building and group learning activities.
There will be a need to move teams more
quickly towards action mode, with effective
what have we learned? reviews.

Experimentation opportunities
Discovery learning requires that opportunities
for individuals and teams to experiment are
maximized. This will require a creative
approach to problem solving, which initially
will not sit easily with the existing culture of
most organizations. Careful management of
risk will be needed, which will include identifying and minimizing exposure to risk.
Learning resource information systems
Recent developments in computer systems
present exciting opportunities to develop
learning resource material, which can be
accessed according to need. This enables
training and learning material to be pulled
by individuals and teams on a just-in-time
basis. Multimedia systems open up enormous
potential for demonstrations to support the
learning of skills. Feedback from learners can
be added to the database. The result can be an
organic learning resource, capable of rapid
response to changing circumstances, which
will help to maximize the effectiveness of
organizational learning.

Individual learning support

Support for individual learning will come
from coaching and mentoring, assisting with
self-managed learning, and making opportunities available for distance learning where
this is appropriate. The emphasis will need to
be on identifying and removing barriers to
learning, and allowing individuals sufficient
freedom to maintain high levels of intrinsic
37

Downloaded by UNIVERSITI PENDIDIKAN SULTAN IDRIS At 18:33 25 September 2014 (PT)

A learning process model

The Learning Organization

Bill Buckler

Volume 3 Number 3 1996 3139

Learning needs diagnosis

Successful diagnosis and prioritization of
organizational learning needs should be
directly related to the companys strategy via
its policy deployment process. The diagnosis
will take place in three stages:
(1) Defining the process requirements: The
shopping list of learning, outlined
earlier, can be used as a basis for developing detailed learning requirements for the
people in a particular business process.
(2) Individual and team assessment: Using the
stages of learning model as a guide, team
leaders and individuals can jointly make
an assessment of the level of knowledge or
skill in each area. By summating the levels
of understanding of individuals, it should
be possible to build up a profile of the
whole team. Mentors, who have high
levels of skills and knowledge, can be
identified during this stage of the process,
to help individuals with their learning.
(3) Prioritizing learning needs: A process will
be needed to merge individual and team
learning priorities with the priorities of
the organization, again using a participative style. A little and often approach is
recommended here, so that individuals
and teams are not swamped with a daunting list of activities, but focus on a few
vital areas, within a short timescale.

Company policy deployment process

This is the process by which the company
develops, communicates, and implements the
strategies and policies necessary to meet its
business objectives.

Conclusions
The models and processes outlined have been
developed following many years experience
in managing change and process improvement in a large organization. They seek to
provide an explanation why some initiatives
were successful, while others were less so.
They should not be considered as models to
be rigidly followed, in a taught manner, but
rather as a framework against which past
experience can be assessed. All managers
have experiences of actions which produced
successful outcomes, and actions which
failed. So often, however, we omit the reflection stage of the learning process, and continue to take inappropriate actions, destined to
fail. Worse still, we copy initiatives which have
worked elsewhere, and do not understand
why they do not work for us.
Instead, it will be more useful to view the
models using a discovery learning process, to
help evaluate successful initiatives, and experiment with other ideas which are of interest,
always adding a reflection stage to our
thought process.
Ideally managers will be stimulated to
follow up some of the references, to increase
their depth of understanding.
In todays uncertain economic times, it is
essential that our capacity to improve and
innovate exceeds the rate of change imposed
on our organizations. It is essential, therefore,
that managers understand the learning
process and know how to facilitate its application throughout their areas of responsibility.

Progress review
Probably the most important feature of the
model, is the progress review process. By
questioning What have we learned? and
How have we learned?, and feeding this
information back into the learning process,
a cycle of continuous improvement will be
established. More importantly, by establishing a feedback loop to the company policy
deployment process, company policy can be
questioned, challenged and modified as learning takes place. Such double-loop learning[6] is the hallmark of a learning organization, and is the vital mechanism for converting individual and team learning into organizational learning.
The review process will only be truly effective in an environment where challenge and
criticism are not perceived as threat, and
where the views and considered opinions of
everyone working in the business process are
valued by managers at all levels.

References
1 Neave, H.R., The Deming Dimension, SPC Press,
Knoxville, TN, 1990.
2 Pedler, M., Boydell, T. and Burgoyne, J., Learning
Company Project Report, Department of Employment,
Sheffield, 1988.
3 Lewin, K., Group Decision and Social Change , Readings in Social Psychology, Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
New York, NY, 1958.
4 Deming, W.E., A System of Profound Knowledge ,
British Deming Association Booklet No. 9, Salisbury,
1990.

38

A learning process model

The Learning Organization

Bill Buckler

Volume 3 Number 3 1996 3139

Project management;
The competitive environment.

5 Vroom, V.H., Work and Motivation, Wiley, New York,

NY, 1964.
6 Argyris, C., On Organizational Learning , Blackwell,
Oxford, 1992.

Learning/knowledge acquisition;
Learning processes;
Learning styles: how we learn;
Learning process model: how to use it; how
to extend knowledge database;
Personal development opportunities.

7 Maslow, A., A theory of human motivation, Psychological Review, Vol. 50, 1942.
8 Herzberg, F., Mauser, B., Peterson, R.O. and Capwell,
D.F., Job Attitudes: Review of Research and Opinion,
Psychological Service of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA,
1957.
9 Senge, P.M., The Fifth Discipline The Art and Practice
of the Learning Organization, Century Business, New
York, NY, 1990.

Variation/data analysis;
Quality management tools:
brainstorming;
Pareto;
histograms;
check lists;
cause and effect diagrams;
scatter diagrams;
flowcharts.
Statistical process control: control charts;
Benchmarking data;
Customer research;
Staff opinion research;
Quality function deployment;
Failure modes and effects analysis;
Design of experiments;
Process and performance measurement:
identifying/eliminating variation.

Downloaded by UNIVERSITI PENDIDIKAN SULTAN IDRIS At 18:33 25 September 2014 (PT)

10 Kohler, W., The Mentality of Apes, Harcourt Brace

Jovanovich, New York, NY, 1925.
11 Koestler, A., The Act of Creation, Pan Books, London,
1970.
12 Revans, R., The A.B.C. of Action Learning, ChartwellBratt, Bromley, 1983.
13 Bandura, A., Social Learning Theory, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1977.
14 Lewin, K., Lippitt, R. and White, R., Patterns of
aggressive behaviour in experimentally created social
climates, Journal of Social Psychology, 1939.
15 Goldratt, E., Its Not Luck, Gower, Aldershot, 1994.
16 Kolb, D.A., Experiential Learning, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1984.
17 Honey, P. and Mumford, A., The Manual of Learning
Styles, Honey, Maidenhead, 1986.

Appendix: process requirements menu

People/psychology;
Team working model: definition of roles;
Team skills;
Motivation: intrinsic vs. extrinsic;
Removing barriers to learning;
Leadership: transition to self directed
teams;
Facilitation skills;
Coaching skills;
Directive vs. process management;
Effective behaviours;
Managing change;
Performance counselling;
Team briefing (including feedback);
Transactional analysis.

Systems/processes
Company mission/values;
Strategy/business plans;
High level business processes;
Policy deployment process;
Policy deployment plans;
Policy statements/instructions;
Budgeting instructions;
Investment management process;
Manuals of procedure;
Design standards/manuals;
Low level business processes;
Process flowcharting ;
Process management understanding;

39

Downloaded by UNIVERSITI PENDIDIKAN SULTAN IDRIS At 18:33 25 September 2014 (PT)

This article has been cited by:

1. Junxiao Liu, Peter E. D. Love, Jim Smith, Michael Regan, Peter R. Davis. 2014. Life Cycle Critical Success Factors for
Public-Private Partnership Infrastructure Projects. Journal of Management in Engineering 04014073. [CrossRef]
2. Junxiao Liu, Peter E. D. Love, Peter R. Davis, Jim Smith, Michael Regan. 2014. Conceptual Framework for the Performance
Measurement of Public-Private Partnerships. Journal of Infrastructure Systems 04014023. [CrossRef]
3. Daowei Sun, Paul Hyland, Ockie Bosch. 2014. A Systemic View of Innovation Adoption in the Australian Beef Industry.
Systems Research and Behavioral Science n/a-n/a. [CrossRef]
4. Tomohiro Yamaguchi, Kouki Takemori, Keiki TakadamaModeling a Human's Learning Processes toward Continuous
Learning Support System 69-94. [CrossRef]
5. Mazlum Celik, Omer Turunc, Necdet Bilgin. 2012. Moderating Role of the Ethic. Journal of Applied Sciences 12:6, 544-552.
[CrossRef]
6. Heli AramoImmonen, Kaj U. Koskinen, Pasi L. Porkka. 2011. The significance of formal training in projectbased
companies. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business 4:2, 257-273. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
7. Karl W Sandberg, Gerth Ohman. 2011. Learning in Innovation Development. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 28,
379-383. [CrossRef]
8. Paul Parboteeah, Thomas W. Jackson, Gillian RagsdellChapter 14 Autopoiesis as the Foundation for Knowledge Management
243-261. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
9. Mahmoud Mohammad Migdadi. 2009. A knowledgecentered culture as an antecedent of effective knowledge management
at information technology centers in the Jordanian universities. Journal of Systems and Information Technology 11:2, 89-116.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
10. Judi Brownell. 2008. Exploring the Strategic Ground for Listening and Organizational Effectiveness. Scandinavian Journal
of Hospitality and Tourism 8:3, 211-229. [CrossRef]
11. M.Y. Lam, Gary K.K. Poon, K.S. Chin. 2008. An organizational learning model for vocational education in the context of
TQM culture. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 25:3, 238-255. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
12. Sonal Minocha, George Stonehouse. 2006. The learning trap: a Bollywood frame for strategic learning. Management Decision
44:10, 1344-1362. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
13. Marah F. Abu Khadra, Ibrahim A. Rawabdeh. 2006. Assessment of development of the learning organization concept in
Jordanian industrial companies. The Learning Organization 13:5, 455-474. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
14. Roland K. Yeo. 2005. Revisiting the roots of learning organization. The Learning Organization 12:4, 368-382. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
15. Peter E.D. Love, Jimmy C. Huang, David J. Edwards, Zahir Irani. 2004. Nurturing a learning organization in construction:
a focus on strategic shift, organizational transformation, customer orientation and quality centered learning. Construction
Innovation 4:2, 113-126. [Abstract] [PDF]
16. Catherine L. Wang, Pervaiz K. Ahmed. 2003. Organisational learning: a critical review. The Learning Organization 10:1,
8-17. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
17. Roland Yeo. 2002. Learning within organisations: linking the theoretical and empirical perspectives. Journal of Workplace
Learning 14:3, 109-122. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
18. Richard Teare, Jim OHern. 2000. Challenges for service leaders: setting the agenda for the virtual learning organization.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 12:2, 97-106. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
19. Peter E.D. Love, Heng Li, Zahir Irani, Gary D. Holt. 2000. Rethinking TQM: toward a framework for facilitating learning
and change in construction organizations. The TQM Magazine 12:2, 107-117. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
20. Hideo T. Ikehara. 1999. Implications of gestalt theory and practice for the learning organisation. The Learning Organization
6:2, 63-69. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
21. Richard Teare, Richard Dealtry. 1998. Building and sustaining a learning organization. The Learning Organization 5:1,
47-60. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
22. Bill Buckler. 1998. Practical steps towards a learning organisation: applying academic knowledge to improvement and
innovation in business processes. The Learning Organization 5:1, 15-23. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
23. Steven Henderson. 1997. Black swans dont fly double loops: the limits of the learning organization?. The Learning
Organization 4:3, 99-105. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]