Communities of commitment: The heart of learning organizations

Kofman, Fred; Senge, Peter M.

doi:10.1016/0090-2616(93)90050-b

Cited by 488 publications

(379 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

332

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is however, less than obvious what it means, except that clearly it is a good thing to strive to be'' (Handy, 1990); Senge, the LO's principal popularizer says:`T here is no such thing as a Learning Organization. Learning organization is a category that I create in language....we are taking a stand for a vision F F F it is not the vision but what it does that matters F F F'' (Kofman and Senge, 1993). For my part, I have followed Pedler et al (1989) in viewing the LO as a metaphor which must be interpreted by each organization/practitioner to suit their own context; an example is given in Drew and Smith (1995).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The learning organization ten years on: a case study

Smith¹

1999

The Learning Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Asserts that in dealing with change the mindsets of an enterprise’s managers are key to its viability. States that by developing a learning organization an enterprise attempts to avoid the mindset problem by fostering a climate of learning; however, claims that over the last decade such development has not in general been successful and contends that this has been largely because of impractical implementation approaches. Based on the author’s practice, maintains that the learning organization is indeed a useful metaphor for successfully dealing with change. Describes the author’s implementation approach which is based on two simple notions: first, that the best way to deal with mindsets is to keep them from hardening; second, that by changing activities and tools one can change habits of thinking and learning. Illustrates the approach by detailing a long‐term case study involving a large and very successful financial services enterprise which has successfully adopted learning organization principles.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The learning organization ten years on: a case study

Smith¹

1999

The Learning Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…La experimentación constituye la bús-queda de soluciones innovadoras y flexibles a los problemas actuales y futuros (Slocum et al, 1994), fomentando la apertura y la entrada de nuevas ideas, la renovación, ampliación y mejora de los conocimientos individuales (Sinkula et al 1997). La transferencia implica la difusión interna de los conocimientos adquiridos a nivel individual a través de interacciones entre los individuos (Kofman y Senge, 1993). La integración supone el desarrollo de mecanismos que permitan comprender los conocimientos adquiridos y transformarlos en memoria organizativa a través de rutinas, procesos y demás elementos facilitadores de dicha integración (Huber, 1991).…”

Section: Compromiso Afectivo Percibido Por El Directivo Y Confianza Cunclassified

Trust as a consequence of perceived commitment: Implications on learning and innovation

Cruz¹,

Fernández²

2013

cuadernosgestion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we try to achieve a double objective. On one hand, we try to figure out how employee's affective commitment perceived by the manager influence on her/his level of trust and also on the organizational learning capability (OLC). In addition, we analyze how manager trust influences on OLC. On the other hand, we study how these variables (affective commitment of employees, manager trust and OLC) determine product innovation. Applying structural equation model (Partial Least Squares -PLS-) on a sample of 92 firms we obtain the next results: employee's affective commitment perceived by manager determine her/his level of trust and well we check that affective commitment and trust explain OLC. Finally, we probe that both variables (affective commitment and trust) are related with product innovation through OLC.

show abstract

“…In these firms, much of the KM activity worked within two common implementation models: managing knowledge as an asset through explication and distribution, and managing knowledge as a facilitated social network, using communities of practice, skill directories and other communications tools [19]. At first, efforts to collect deliverables and project materials were dominant.…”

Section: Investigating Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%