Development of a multi-level learning framework

Abstract

This paper examines multiple learning cycles across a UK housebuilder organization following changes made to their Quality Management routine at the organizational level, through to subsequent understanding and enactment at the level of the individuals involved. Design/methodology/approach This study uses a qualitative case study methodology based on an analysis of six-weeks of participant observation, semi-structured ethnographic interviews, and documentation within three of the organization's regional offices. Through an abductive process, it draws on gathered data and extant literature to develop a multi-level learning model. Findings Four levels of learning cycles are observed within the model: Individual, Team (within which Inter-Organizational relationships nest), Region and Organization. Three interrelated factors are identified as influencing feed-forward and feedback across the levels; time, communication, and trust. The impact of these levels and factors on the process of learning is conceptualized through the metaphor of coupling and decoupling, and discussed using examples from housing development projects. Originality/value Whilst previous models of organizational learning highlight important multi-level interaction effects, they do not explore how the different levels of learning synchronize over time for learning to move between them. This paper addresses this gap, by shedding important light on how layers of learning synchronize, and why and when this can occur within multi-level organizations. 1. INTRODUCTION Learning is a key part of organizational life, linked to performance, success and survival (Casey, 2005; Argote & Miron-Spektor, 2011). As technology advances, the quantity and frequency of transmitted information increases, with workforces expected to do more in less time (Berends & Antonacopoulou, 2014). Learning to evolve in the face of such changes becomes a key requirement for organizations, as this process is played out across layers of the organization's hierarchy. This paper examines these multiple learning cycles within a UK volume housebuilder, following revisions to their Quality Management (QM) routine. These latter revisions attempted to introduce a more stringent inspection regime, streamlining the house building production process, and in so doing, reduce uncertainty and increase uniformity of product (Heras-Saizarbitoria & Boiral, 2013).

Stimulating and Educating Engineers to Innovate through Individual Continuous Learning

“…If personal career planning is consistent with organizational innovation, individuals and organizations will form a more cohesive bond [20]. Once the occupation is positioned as a work goal, technical personnel will be more active in innovative behavior [21]. Career planning ability is beneficial to personal innovative behavior [20].…”

“…We regarded the organizational climate as the subjective norm of innovative behavior, reflecting the possible impact of the environment perceived by engineers on innovative behavior. Morland found that there are four levels of continuous learning: individual, team, region, and organization [21]. Time, communication, and trust within the organization are not only interrelated but also affect the causes of continuous learning and cross-level learning [21].…”

“…Morland found that there are four levels of continuous learning: individual, team, region, and organization [21]. Time, communication, and trust within the organization are not only interrelated but also affect the causes of continuous learning and cross-level learning [21]. When engineers continue to keep learning according to their job requirements, sometimes, they need to spend money on learning.…”

The practitioner’s part in making a difference through organizational learning

“…In a similar view, Brix's study of the CBT where communication within the organization is of prominence, Morland et al (2019) in their article "Building better homes: developing a multi-level learning framework for UK housebuilders" point to communication as one of their three inter-related factors that influence learning as information moves across the organizational levels. The authors describe an empirical case study at a large home builder with regions spread across England as they aim to "shed important light on the context surrounding why, when, and how layers of learning synchronize within multi-level organizations" (p. 115).…”

Editorial

“…How to make a difference through organizational learning This special issue focuses on exploring the question of how to make a difference through organizational learning [1]. There are several approaches responding to this question, such as building innovation capacity by maintaining ambidexterity in organizational learning using bottom-up approach (Brix, 2019), learning through communication processes (Engström and Käkelä, 2019), enhancing organizational learning with software support systems (Fannoun and Kerins, 2019), creating organizational dynamic capabilities through knowing in practice established through microprocesses (Linden et al, 2019), developing a multi-level learning framework (Morland et al, 2019) and regenerating the learning organization (Pedler and Hsu, 2019).…”