The Learning Organization: Learning and Empowerment for Whom?

Abstract

In this article we develop a framework to assess organizational learning and the depth, breadth and spread of members' involvement. The framework incorporates the Morgan (1986) metaphors and the `learning company' characteristics of Pedler et al. (1991), along with the notions of single-, double-, and triple-loop learning. We draw up competing hypotheses setting Coopey's (1995a, 1995b) constitutionalist argument that a `learning organization' will enhance only the power of the `ruling court' unless democratic arrangements are explicitly laid down, against ideas of developmental leadership. Using case studies of two blue-chip companies-both cited as learning organizations, one claiming to have a democratically-oriented constitution-we illustrate how the framework may be used to assemble data for use in testing hypotheses in more empirically-grounded studies of empowerment in learning organizations. Our study compared the perspectives of top management, reflected in popular and professional publications, with grass-roots accounts from Hong Kong subsidiaries. While the data is inconclusive because it was collected opportunistically and from very few sources, it lends support to the constitutionalist position.

The impact of approaches to learning and cognition on academic performance in business and management

“…These three are not alone in identifying two levels of learning. There exists a range of alternative two level descriptors of learning, which all broadly represent alternatives for the same concept (Fiol and Lyles 1985;Senge 1990;Snell & Chak 1996). This research incorporates Senge's (1990) description of learning at the Adaptive and Generative levels.…”

Organizational Culture as the Glue between People and Organization: A Competence-based View on Learning and Competence Building

“…Proposition 1b: Intuition increases with an organizational culture with a high willingness to interact with each other. People who are intensively monitored and have little room for action will hardly find new ways to act (Snell/Man-Kuen Chak 1998;Winter et al 1997). Instead, employees should be given support, mentoring and coaching (Tierney et al 1999) and, over and above this, some degree of discretion.…”

How Intellectual Capital and Learning Organization Can Foster Organizational Competitiveness?

“…The literature on LO has been suspected of colluding with the 'ruling courts' which govern organizations (Coopey, 1995) and of employing ideologically a discourse of democracy and liberation (Snell and Chak, 1998). Easterby-Smith (1997: 1086 defines the literature on LO as having 'an action orientation', and being 'geared toward creating an ideal type, an organization in which learning is maximized' (Gheradi, 2006).…”