The role of creative action in organizational learning and change

Abstract

Organizational learning is depicted most frequently as an intra‐organizational information processing activity, but the role that experience plays in the development of organizational knowledge has recently become a more central focus of learning theories. The two primary perspectives on organizational learning present strikingly different depictions of the relationship between action and learning: systems‐structural models based on positivist epistemological assumptions emphasize internally‐directed information collection and distribution activities aimed at reducing uncertainty; interpretive models utilize an interpretivist epistemology that emphasizes the necessity of taking action in ambiguous circumstances as a means of creating knowledge. Proposes that neither of these alternative views of organizational learning describe how learning outcomes vary as a consequence of different types of action and that, specifically, previous models of organizational learning have not emphasized the critical role that creative actions play in the development of organizational knowledge. Delineates assumptions which serve to legitimize creative action taking within organizational contexts, and describes the learning outcomes which result from creative and routine actions. Extends previous models of organizational learning which emphasize cognition and communication processes by distinguishing the varied influences that different actions have on the production of knowledge.

Considerations of emotional intelligence (EI) in dealing with change decision management

“…It should give you an emotional charge, and you should take it seriously. Because significant change involves uncertainty (Moran and Brightman, 2000), the lack of clarity of the unknown will raise the anxiety levels of staff (Pritchett and Pound, 2005) which can be overcome with knowledge (Ford, 1996). It is logical that this anxiety would be reflected in behaviors when dealing with both internal and external customers.…”

Learning mechanisms in a technology based organisational change programme: an exploratory study between Chinese and Norwegian corporations

“…an absence of objective information), and other mechanisms used to smooth out ambiguous understandings (i.e. lack of understanding and the existence of multiple conflicting interpretations) (Daft and Huber, 1987;Ford and Ogilvie, 1996). Learning mechanisms aimed at reducing uncertainties propose that actions should be preceded by data collection and analysis to reduce potential risks.…”

Defending against rival innovation

“…Innovate-type defenses are considered in a number of streams in the innovation literature, from economics (Lee and Wilde 1980;Loury 1979;Reinganum 1982;Tirole 1988) to operations and technology management (Abernathy and Clark 1985;Afuah 1996;Christensen 1997;Henderson and Clark 1990;McGrath and MacMillan 1995;Tushman and Anderson 1986) to organizational behavior (Chesbrough and Teece 2002;Ford and Ogilvie 1996;Lawson and Samson 2001;Ogilvie 1998). Incumbents create differentiating improvements (i.e., from incremental to radical) to a rival's new innovation in order to compete.…”