Organizational learning is currently the focus of considerable attention, and it is addressed by a broad range of literatures. Organization theory, industrial econ omics, economic history, and business, management and innovation studies all approach the question of how organizations learn. A number of branches of psychology are also revealing on the issue. This paper assesses these various literatures by examining the insights they allow in three main areas: first, the goals of organizational learning; second, the learning processes in organizations; and third, the ways in which organizational learning may be facilitated and impeded. It contends that while the various literatures are revealing in particular aspects of organizational learning, a more complete understanding of its complexity requires a multi-disciplinary approach. The contributions of the different approaches are analyzed, and some areas are suggested where the transfer of analytical concepts may improve understanding.

As with all new ideas, the concept of Open Innovation requires extensive empirical investigation, testing and development. This paper analyzes Procter and Gamble's 'Connect and Develop' strategy as a case study of the major organizational and technological changes associated with open innovation. It argues that although some of the organizational changes accompanying open innovation are beginning to be described in the literature, more analysis is warranted into the ways technological changes have facilitated open innovation strategies, particularly related to new product development. Information and communications technologies enable the exchange of distributed sources of information in the open innovation process. The case study shows that furthermore a suite of new technologies for data mining, simulation, prototyping and visual representation, what we call 'innovation technology', help to support open innovation in Procter and Gamble. The paper concludes with a suggested research agenda for furthering understanding of the role played by and consequences of this technology. The role of technology in the shift towards open innovation r

Companies increasingly collaborate in their technological activities. Collaboration enables firms to learn about uncertain and turbulent technological change, and enhances their ability to deal with novelty. A number of studies reveal the importance for successful collaboration of high levels of inter-personal trust between scientists, engineers, and managers in the different partners. However, these individual relationships are vulnerable to labor turnover and inter-personal difficulties. Using two examples of highly successful technological collaborations, it is argued that the survival of such relationships in the face of these inevitable inter-personal problems requires the establishment of interorganizational trust. Such trust is characterized by community of interest, organizational cultures receptive to external inputs, and widespread and continually supplemented knowledge among employees of the status and purpose of the collaboration.

No abstract

Whereas existing approaches and empirical studies of dynamic capabilities focus on the strategic innovation activities of firms (i.e., permanent organizations executing multiple projects and programs), this article identifies how certain types of dynamic capabilities are required to deliver large, complex, and risky projects involving multiple parties. Our longitudinal study of the design and construction of Heathrow Airport Terminal 5 by the British Airports Authority (BAA) makes three main contributions to the literature: (1) It contributes to the project management literature by identifying how specific dynamic capabilities (BAA’s “T5 Agreement,” strategic behaviors, and collaborative processes) are developed through a three‐phase process (learning, codifying, and mobilizing) to support the strategic management of complex projects. (2) While emphasizing their importance for the successful management of complex projects, our findings also underline the continuing fragility of dynamic capabilities. (3) The case study reveals their fluidity and balancing role with respect to demands for stability and change in complex, uncertain, and volatile project environments.