This paper reviews the literature on organizational learning. Organizational learning is viewed as routine-based, history-dependent, and target-oriented. Organizations are seen as learning by encoding inferences from history into routines that guide behavior. Within this perspective on organizational learning, topics covered include how organizations learn from direct experience, how organizations learn from the experience of others, and how organizations develop conceptual frameworks or paradigms for interpreting that experience. The section on organizational memory discusses how organizations encode, store, and retrieve the lessons of history despite the turnover of personnel and the passage of time. Organizational learning is further complicated by the ecological structure of the simultaneously adapting behavior of other organizations, and by an endogenously changing environment. The final section discusses the limitations as well as the possibilities of organizational learning as a form of intelligence.

No abstract

To generate ideas about how theories of distributive and procedural justice might be usefully expanded, this article content analyzes the ways leaders of violent, 20th-century revolutions describe the injustice of a status quo system of reward distribution, justify bloodshed, assess the balance of power, and envision a perfectly just future. Results suggest that conceptualizations of injustice should be broadened by incorporating emotional and ideological concerns, by examining the effects of legitimated and delegitimated contexts for assessments of outcome distribution, and by specifying conditions under which complex and simplified justice judgments are likely.Methodological and ethical concerns make it difficult to study injustice under conditions in which economic inequality is extreme, people are severely disadvantaged. livelihoods are at risk, the surrounding context is delegitimated, and feelings of injustice are sufficiently intense to provoke bloodshed. We can circumvent some of these difficulties and expand theories of justice by studying how leaders of violent 20th-century revolutions used injustice claims to delegitimate a status quo system of reward distribution, to justify bloodshed, to assess the balance of power, and to envision a perfectly just future. This focus on a revolutionary context is quite different from the legitimated settings-student evaluations, pay for short-term tasks, and courts-so frequently the focus of previous research.The Past: Delineating the Injustice of the Status QuoIn accord with theories of justice such as equity, exchange, and relative deprivation (e.g, AdamsStouffer et al, 1949), we expected that revolutionary leaders would use social comparisons to map the terrain of similarities and differences within the revolutionary group and between the revolutionary group and their enemies. In addition, we expected that

No abstract

No abstract