Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
INTRODUCTION
In his book The Fifth Discipline, Peter Senge defined a learning organization as a place
where people continually expand their capacity to create results they truly desire, where
new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free
and where people are continually learning how to learn. Senge described the core of a
learning organizations work as based upon five learning disciplines that represented
lifelong programs of both personal and organizational learning and practice.
These include:
Personal Mastery individuals learn to expand their own personal capacity to create
results that they most desire. Employees also create an organizational environment that
encourages all fellow employees to develop themselves toward the goals and purposes that
they desire.
Mental Models this involves each individual reflecting upon, continually clarifying, and
improving his or her internal pictures of the world, and seeing how they shape personal
actions and decisions.
Shared Vision this involves individuals building a sense of commitment within particular
workgroups, developing shared images of common and desirable futures, and the principles
and guiding practices to support the journey to such futures.
Team Learning this involves relevant thinking skills that enable groups of people to
develop intelligence and an ability that is greater than the sum of individual members'
talents.
Systems Thinking this involves a way of thinking about, and a language for describing
and understanding forces and interrelationships that shape the behavior of systems. This
discipline helps managers and employees alike to see how to change systems more
effectively, and to act more in tune with the larger processes of the natural and economic
world.
David Garvin defines a leaning organization as "an organization skilled at creating,
acquiring, and transferring knowledge, and at modifying its behavior to reflect new
knowledge and insights."
The important component of this definition is the requirement that change occur in the way
work gets done. This test rules out a number of obvious candidates such as colleges. We in
colleges have been successful in creating knowledge (research) and transferring knowledge
(teaching) but have not been successful in applying that knowledge to our own activities.
www.hrfolks.com
The process of building a learning organization unleashes individual creativity, and fosters
collective learning, which is crucial for encouraging, and developing innovation and rapid
responsiveness to global competition (Millett 1998). In short, a learning organization is
continually getting smarter because learning is planned, systematic and in alignment with
the organization's strategic goals.
In order to get smarter, the organization needs to capture its organizational knowledge.
Prahalad and Hamel (1990) have described the process of how organizations learn, and
identify the outcomes of the process as the development of core competencies, which are
the collective learning in the organization. This occurs at all levels and functions within the
organization. On the surface, developing core competencies has an intuitive appeal, but it is
an extremely difficult process to maintain and manage, particularly as the organization
changes and adapts to its environment.
The McKinsey 7-S Framework provides a systems view for describing the major differences
between a traditional view of an organization and a learning organization. In the McKinsey
7-S Framework, seven key elements of an organization, namely, the structure, measurement
system, management style, staff characteristics, distinctive staff skills, strategy/action plan,
and shared values are identified. The first six elements are organized around the
organizations shared values. However, Hitt adds an eighth element synergistic teams
that he describes as the missing link. It is this element that Hitt regards as being at the
core of the learning organization. Synergistic teams provide the means for the members of
the organization to learn together, developing collective intelligence that is greater than the
sum of the intelligence of the individual members. Table below illustrates the characteristics
of the traditional view of an organization and the characteristics of a learning organization.
Traditional Organization
Learning organization
Shared Values
Efficiency
Effectiveness
Excellence
Organizational Renewal
Management Style
Strategy/Action Plan
Control
Top down approach
Road map
Hierarchy
Structure
Staff Characteristics
Distinctive Staff Skills
Measurement System
Teams
www.hrfolks.com
Facilitator Coach
Everyone is consulted
Learning map
Flat
structure
Dynamic networks
People who know (experts) Knowledge
is
power
People who learn
Mistakes tolerated as part of
learning
Adaptive learning
Generative learning
Financial measures
Both financial and
non-financial
measures
Working
groups Cross functional teams
Departmental boundaries
There is a considerable body of literature on the concept of the learning organization, but
much of it is theoretical or prescriptive. The practical steps taken by a medium sized to
evolve into a learning organization related to three main themes.
1) The organizations use of strategy as a learning process.
2) The organizational structures and systems in place and considers whether these support
the development of a learning organization.
3) The role of leadership and teams, as significant levers that influence the learning
processes.
www.hrfolks.com
Furthermore, every employee in the organization should have access to information about
the companys performance via a centrally located notice board that is updated every
month.
A process of organizational renewal, started with the implementation of a flatter
organizational structure. The process continues through alignment of the organization
vision and mission by encouraging individual teams to develop their own purpose (mission
statements) that align with the company vision. The implementation of business plans,
aimed at moving the company towards its vision, is managed under the umbrella of Critical
Success Factors (CSFs) and associated strategies. The CSFs represent the core competencies
associated with a number of key performance measures. These measures are both financial
(for example, profit) and non-financial.
Examples of non- financial measures are:
level of participation of people in continuous improvement projects;
number of mission awards presented; and
level of employee satisfaction as measured in the employee culture survey.
Two CSFs in particular are relevant to the evolution of any company as a learning
organization, namely:
Critical Success Factor 1: People
We must attract, motivate and develop talented people who are committed to our values
and vision.
Strategies supporting the CSF include:
the establishment of a working environment attractive to employees;
taking action to enable employees to develop their full potential; and
the commitment to developing effective leadership.
Progress in this area has been positive. The Covey 7 Habits Program is being used as a
foundation for developing people as individuals, fostering Senges self mastery, and as a
launching point for team development. The Covey program is seen as important in helping
people to cope with significant organizational changes that have been implemented in recent
years. For managers, a coaching skills program is being introduced to build on the learning,
using a management for performance program. The mission award process that
recognizes individual and team performance has wide acceptance. The development of team
purposes (mission statements) is being evolved to obtain greater involvement of all
employees in continuous improvement, and to achieve a shared vision.
Critical Success Factor 2: Continuous Improvement
We must entrench a culture of continuous improvement in everything we do.
Strategies supporting this CSF include:
the identification of improvement opportunities by measuring and analyzing work
processes;
enabling all employees to play an effective role in continuous improvement; and
benchmarking key work processes.
This CSF is a driver for cross- functional teamwork in the organization. It encourages
people from different departments to work together to solve specific problems. Teams are
encouraged to take a systems approach to problem solving and to use collective thinking
skills to build on the experience and creativity of individuals. There are a number of cases
where cross- functional teams have implemented innovative solutions to long-standing
problems previously attempted on an individual basis. It is a bottom- up process in which
individual teams come together to formulate future plans, based on their understanding of
the needs of the business. Individual team plans are then consolidated by the management
www.hrfolks.com
team, refined and communicated back to individual teams, prior to being finalized at an
annual management conference that takes place. The strategic planning process should be
reviewed annually and its effectiveness is measured in a survey. The vision, mission, and
values encourage a process of personal commitment on the part of the employees. It also
develops a collective sense of identity with the organization and its mission.
Various initiatives such as: Encouraging employees participation in the building of a
shared vision, mission and value statement.
Employees buy- in to this process via:
the organization of a competition to find the best mission statement supporting the vision;
extensive consultation with staff through team meetings and feedback sessions during the
values development process; and
the annual mission award process recognizing individual and team effort in activities
contributing to the achievement of the vision, mission and values.
Facilitating Personal Mastery
Much of this has centered on the use of the Covey 7-Habits program to help employees
achieve personal mastery in their personal and working lives. Measuring the effectiveness of
this aspect of the Covey program has not been easy. Informal feedback from employees to
team leaders, the management team and the HR Manager indicates that employees feel the
Covey program has helped them to cope with change in their personal lives, as well as in the
workplace. The HR Manager may also feel that the program had influenced a number of
individuals who were previously resistant to change in work practices to support such
change and even, in some instances, to drive the change.
Encouraging and developing teamwork
Change in the structure of the organization results in the development of a team- based
structure. Teamwork is reinforced via the performance management system that assesses
individual and team performance. Members of all teams participate in an annual review
process where they complete a standardized questionnaire relating to their perceptions of
each of their fellow team members performance. Feedback from other team members is
given to the team as a whole, and the individual, at their annual performance assessment
interview. There could also be an extensive training program, facilitated by the HR
manager and other members of the organization, to help employees improve their team
collaboration skills.
Flattening the organizational structure
The flatter organizational structure has allowed a larger number of employees to contribute
to the development of the business strategy. This is done on an annual basis using both a
bottom up and top down process. Individual teams develop strategies and plans for
functional areas that are then incorporated and formalized as an integral part of the
strategies and plans developed by senior management. The flatter organizational structure
has effectively facilitated the communication process required to align business objectives
with functional team plans.
Critical Success Factors (CSF) and Key Performance Measures
Apart from the overall CSFs for the organization, each team has developed a sub-set of
financial and non-financial CSFs applicable to their functional area. Team performance is
assessed on the achievement of key performance measures supporting their team CSFs.
www.hrfolks.com
Functional teams are, therefore, able to determine the impact of their activities on the
success of the team and hence the overall business. The strength of this approach is that it
does not focus only on one aspect of the organizational transformation, but includes many
aspects of the organization such as the organizational structure, human resource practices,
and technology. Companies should try to use this process as a dynamic and iterative
process aimed at providing the organization with a builtin capacity to change and redesign
themselves continually as the circumstances demand. At this stage they need to continue on
their path of continuous improvement using the strategies they have in place.
www.hrfolks.com
www.hrfolks.com
develop a unique "consciousness" designed for the purpose. But this consciousness can only
exist in the collective consciousness of the people, therefore dialogue is necessary to develop
an organizational "consciousness" that is proactive and effective.
Without shared understanding of information we will sense the environment differently,
causing confusion. Without shared understanding of experiences we will advocate different
responses, causing conflict. Without shared understanding of observations we will
remember different outcomes, exacerbating the confusion and conflict. Dialogue is people
coming together to share and analyze the information, ideas, and paradigms of their
organization for the purpose of improving the organization's ability to sense, respond,
observe/remember; for the purpose of improving the organization's capability to learn. In
The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook Bill Isaacs explains it this way:
Dialogue is not merely a set of techniques for improving organizations,
enhancing communications, building consensus, or solving problems. It is
based on the principle that conception and implementation are intimately
linked, with a core of common meaning. During the dialogue process, people
learn how to think together-not just in the sense of analyzing a shared
problem or creating new pieces of shared knowledge, but in the sense of
occupying a collective sensibility, in which the thoughts, emotions, and
resulting actions belong not to one individual, but to all of them together.
Our Strategic Conversations indeed are people coming together to share and analyze
information, ideas and paradigms that are of strategic importance to our organization.
These sorts of discussions generally lead to mutual understanding, and when we do a good
job, truly common understanding.
Some may ask, "But what about the fact that nothing really happens as a result of the
Strategic Conversations?" Ironically, that's sort of what we need. David Bohn, physicist and
dialogue theorist, claims dialogue does not need an immediate purpose.
Organizational learning actually happens in the innumerable interactions of the people and
manifests itself in their equally innumerable workplace activities. If 50 people at a Strategic
Conversation all learn one thing, how often will that unit of learning actually affect their
actions? How big an effect will it probably have even then? Small, to be sure. But dialogue's
nature, small increments of learning happening in many places, creating effects in even
more places, is generally not in the realm of short-term tangible change. It is in the realm of
systemic and evolutionary change.
Does this mean we shouldn't have bothered to learn from/with each other? No, it means
that we need to incorporate dialogue into our daily work and understand that any one
dialogue usually will not make an immediately discernible difference. Another concern
commonly arises about dialogue. Sometimes in Strategic Conversations it may feel like we
are just "sharing our ignorance." After all, we are discussing complicated subjects and may
or may not have any "real experts" in the room to guide us. But this too is natural. While
dialogue, in the learning organization context, may have been happening here and there for
years, creating it "on demand" is a new skill we are learning. We want to be a consciously
and proactively learning organization. Since we have not been doing it for very long we are
not very good at it yet. We understand that a student in a classroom will learn better if they
know how they learn.
www.hrfolks.com
www.hrfolks.com
SYSTEMS THINKING
Systems thinking is the fifth discipline of the learning organization. Which has been
explored for the improvement of instruction. Conclusions reached are as follows:
1. Discussions in Systems Thinking cause us to get out of and beyond conversations
that we have been having for quite a while. In several cases, we stopped bringing up
the same issues we have heard ourselves complain about for many semesters, and
gained a clear view of what we were all actually talking about. We didn't actually
resolve anything -- yet. But we now feel we are making forward progress in our
conversations and in our work improvement.
2. Knowledge of Systems Thinking definitely broadens a person's frame of reference,
and helps us understand each other better. The binocular perspective -understanding the big picture and the details, intrigues many of the staff members.
And, having the data to understand the "why" of many processes and decisions
helps many individuals. One staff member said that for the first time she could
really see her role in the system, and that she felt more important, more likely to
speak up, and more likely to take more responsibility for doing her work as
effectively as possible....
3. The value of a system diagram could be that it shows that people do affect the
college system -- which they can and do make a difference. (This kind of comment
was made several times.) This is an important realization; when this is understood
there might be fewer cases of snap judgments and limited decisions. Decisions and
individual responsibility might be better thought through. People would do a better
job, and have more self-esteem.
4. Applying the knowledge and tools of Systems Thinking after initial implementation
of TQM/CQI appears to be a very logical and important step. This would be
important to every member of the staff, not just the administration. Then the college
could make greater strides in becoming a learning organization, and in meeting its
Vision and Mission.
5. Knowledge of Systems Thinking and increased skills in sharing mental models
should enable the college to move from Strategic Conversations (which often stay on
the theoretical or abstract level) to the concrete levels of tactical and action plans. In
the past, I felt we did well in strategic planning and in specific process improvement.
But the areas in between, and the connections, were not always clearly understood.
Systems thinking provides a vehicle for this.
6. Many assessments of the college culture show effective levels of communication
within existing departments, and an increasing level of communication within
teams. However, it is important to value and increase the communication between
these groups. There is a growing interest across the country in building skills in
"dialoguing" so that people can communicate more clearly. I believe we have to
value this communication, and an understanding of where our departments and our
teams fit in the system would help this become more important. Therefore,
knowledge and skills in Systems Thinking can increase the effectiveness of
dialogues.
Between now and the year 2020, learning at the individual and organizational levels must
be a distinctive competence of our corporation. In these times of accelerating change and
www.hrfolks.com
uncertainty, we must be able to anticipate what we will need to know and then teach and
learn it faster and better than any other corporation on earth.
www.hrfolks.com
6. Procedures and policies are in place to ensure ongoing and timely reevaluation of
changing job skill sets and requirements. Job descriptions and job requirements are
examined regularly to accurately reflect the work being performed or skill sets
required.
www.hrfolks.com
Before a Learning Organizations can be implemented, taking into account the following can
make a solid foundation:
Awareness
Organizations must be aware that learning is necessary before they can develop into a
Learning Organization. This may seem to be a strange statement but this learning must
take place at all levels; not just the Management level. Once the company has accepted the
need for change, it is then responsible for creating the appropriate environment for this
change to occur in.
Environment
Centralized, mechanistic structures do not create a good environment. Individuals do not
have a comprehensive picture of the whole organization and its goals. This causes political
and parochial systems to be set up which stifle the learning process. Therefore a more
flexible, organic structure must be formed. By organic, we mean a flatter structure, which
encourages innovations. The flatter structure also promotes passing of information between
workers and so creating a more informed work force.
It is necessary for management to take on a new philosophy; to encourage openness,
reflectivity and accept error and uncertainty. Members need to be able to question decisions
without the fear of reprimand. This questioning can often highlight problems at an early
stage and reduce time consuming errors. One way of over-coming this fear is to introduce
anonymity so that questions can be asked or suggestions made but the source is not
necessarily known.
Leadership
Leaders should foster the Systems Thinking concept and encourage learning to help both
the individual and organization in learning. It is the leader's responsibility to help
restructure the individual views of team members. For example, they need to help the teams
understand that competition is a form of learning; not a hostile act.
Management must provide commitment for long-term learning in the form of resources.
The amount of resources available (money, personnel and time) determines the quantity
and quality of learning. This means that the organization must be prepared to support this.
Empowerment
The locus of control shifts from managers to workers. This is where the term Empowerment
is introduced. The workers become responsible for their actions; but the managers do not
lose their involvement. They still need to encourage, enthuse and co-ordinate the workers.
Equal participation must be allowed at all levels so that members can learn from each other
simultaneously. This is unlike traditionally learning that involves a top-down structure
(classroom-type example), which is time consuming.
Learning
www.hrfolks.com
Companies can learn to achieve these aims in Learning Labs. These are small-scale models
of real-life settings where management teams learn how to learn together through
simulation games. They need to find out what failure is like so that they can learn from
their mistakes in the future. These managers are then responsible for setting up an open,
flexible atmosphere in their organizations to encourage their workers to follow their
learning example.
Anonymity has already been mentioned and can be achieved through electronic
conferencing. This type of conferencing can also encourage different sites to communicate
and share knowledge, thus making a company truly a Learning Organization.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
Any organization that wants to implement a learning organization philosophy requires an
overall strategy with clear, well-defined goals. Once these have been established, the tools
needed to facilitate the strategy must be identified.
It is clear that everyone has their own interpretation of the "Learning Organization" idea,
so to produce an action plan that will transform groups into Learning Organizations might
seem impossible. However, it is possible to identify three generic strategies that highlight
possible routes to developing Learning Organizations. The specific tools required to
implement any of these depends on the strategy adopted, but the initiatives that they
represent are generic throughout. These initiatives are ably described using Peter Senge's
Five Disciplines of Learning Organizations (Senge, 1990). The three strategies are:
Accidental
For many companies, adopting a learning organization philosophy is the second step to
achieving this Holy Grail. They may already be taking steps to achieve their business goals
that, in hindsight, fit the framework for implementing a Learning Organization. This is the
accidental approach in that it was not initiated through awareness of the Learning
Organization concept.
Subversive
Once an organization has discovered the Learning Organization philosophy, they must
make a decision as to how they want to proceed. This is a choice between a subversive and a
declared strategy. The subversive strategy differs from an accidental one in the level of
awareness; but it is not secretive! Thus, while not openly endorsing the Learning
Organization ideal, they are able to exploit the ideas and techniques.
Declared
The other option is the declared approach. This is self-explanatory. The principles of
Learning Organizations are adopted as part of the company ethos, become company
"speak" and are manifest openly in all company initiatives.
www.hrfolks.com
8 A Sense of Caring
Care for the individual
www.hrfolks.com
www.hrfolks.com
creating
space
for
the
top
executives
to
question,
think
and
learn.
www.hrfolks.com
www.hrfolks.com
www.hrfolks.com
PEOPLE BEHAVIOR
The core of learning organization work is based upon five "learning disciplines" -- lifelong
programs of study and practice.
CONCEPTUAL LIMITATIONS:
The most significant problem resides at a quite fundamental conceptual level.
Through conceiving of the organization as in itself engaging in learning, as having an
intelligence of its own, he gives it (the organization, that is) an existence in and of itself, an
existence beyond the level of the individuals who are the units of its constitution. This is
something which is quite different from proposing that the whole is more than the sum of
its parts. To clarify, while it is one thing to claim that one cannot properly understand a
system if one does not conceive of it as a whole, and that organizational change cannot be
reduced to isolated individual actions, it is another implicitly to claim that the organization
has an existence beyond the level of human beings. It is almost as if the organization had a
life of its own. Such a formulation is highly problematic.
The voluntarism (i.e. that we can create the conditions of our own actions; that we
can create reality) might lead the practitioner towards believing that a mere act of will is
www.hrfolks.com
enough to change fundamentally the organization, and, moreover might lead the
practitioner to neglect how factors external to the organization which are outside of the
practitioners control, nonetheless, profoundly influence the direction of organizational
change. As has been extensively documented within the social sciences, factors such as
gender, social class and ethnicity can greatly impede learning in the workplace.
Organizations involve highly complex processes of change. The direction of change within,
say a business organization is influenced by much broader processes at the national and
global level, by changes in the market, by the complex interplay of formal and informal
relationships between people at all levels of its workforce, etc. While it may be possible to
steer the overall direction of change that an organization undergoes, it is rather misleading
to propose that one could, by act of will, think an alternative organizational reality into
existence.
At a more pragmatic level, a major problem with the ideal of the learning
organization is that it demands that senior management within organizations have an
almost boundless faith in the value of continuous development. Moreover, it gives the
practitioner few tools with which to assess the extent to which investment in development
has improved organizational competitiveness.
www.hrfolks.com
www.hrfolks.com
www.hrfolks.com
Moreover, this creativity gives rise to an increased synergy. The interaction between high
performing teams produces a result, which is higher than was planned or expected of them.
CONCLUSION
The concept of the learning organization arises out of ideas long held by leaders in
organizational development and systems dynamics. One of the specific contributions of
organizational development is its focus on the humanistic side of organizations. The
disciplines described, differ from more familiar management disciplines in that they are
personal disciplines. Each has to do with how we think, what we truly want, and how we
interact and learn with one another. We see learning organizations as part of the evolving
field of organizational development. There are no true learning organizations at this point.
However, some of todays most successful organizations are embracing these ideas to meet
the demands of a global economy where the value of the individual is increasingly
recognized as our most important resource.
www.hrfolks.com