Suggestions for Future Research on the Learning Organization

This chapter suggests some areas for further research on the learning organization. The suggestions, which in one way or another all are connected to the need for a discussion on what the learning organization actually means/how it is and should be defined, are presented under four sub-headings: “defining the learning organization,” “demarcating the learning organization,” “concretizing the learning organization through action research,” and “paradigm shift?” The chapter ends with a list of some less developed research suggestions. One of the most important research areas that is suggested in the chapter is figuring out whether there is reason to try to give the learning organization one definition that all could agree upon and accept, or whether it would be more reasonable to construct some kind of overview definition, which could include several somewhat different definitions and make these comparable.

The Learning Organization Survey: Validation of an Instrument to Augment Research on Organizational Learning

Many scholars have proposed factors that inhibit or facilitate organizational learning, yet few of these claims have been tested empirically. To measure differences in learning across organizations or work units within the same organization, this chapters draws on existing perspectives in the organizational learning literature to create and test a Learning Organization Survey (LOS) in two studies. The LOS presents ten constructs in three clusters – learning environment, processes, and leadership. Study 1 examines the reliability and validity of the ten theory-based constructs comprising the learning organization. Study 2 provides further validation that the LOS is a reliable, stable instrument containing items that suit the theoretical criteria for components of learning organizations. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Building Learning Organizations With Action Learning

Very few organizations have ever been able to achieve their goal of becoming a learning organization due to the complexity of organizational learning and the impatience and lack of skills of organizational leaders. Over the past twenty-five years, the author of this chapter has discovered that the introduction of action learning programs into the organization is the most effective way of building a learning organization. This chapter briefly summarizes the five subsystems of a learning organization: (1) learning, (2) organization, (3) people, (4) knowledge, and (5) technology. Action learning is a powerful tool that enables a group to learn while in action. It has the unique ability to solve complex problems while simultaneously creating leaders, building teams, and developing each of the five learning organization subsystems.

Pegasus or Clever White Horse? In Pursuit of Real Learning Organizations

This chapter reports on a search for real learning organizations. After reviewing ninety articles from the last decade that refer prominently to learning organizations, it identifies and closely scrutinizes eight potentially credible accounts. However, all eight accounts are found wanting, most commonly because of the inadequacy of the criteria used and/or because of the absence of trustworthy evidence. This leads to the conclusion that learning organizations are best treated as a Pegasus-like ideal rather than as something that really exists. Nevertheless, given the likelihood that claims about particular organizations being “learning organizations” will continue to be made, the chapter suggests ways that investigators can support such claims with more trustworthy evidence.

The Topicality of the Learning Organization: is the Concept Still Relevant Today?

This chapter introduces the current level of interest in the learning organization and usefulness of the concept at the present time. It reviews authors who have recently and explicitly commented on the topicality of the learning organization, offers a qualitative content analysis of recent journal publications on learning organizations justifying the need for the concept, and uses quantitative research using print media indicators and Google Trends to identify the number of publications related to the learning organization over time. The results suggest that while the level of interest in the learning organization among scientific researchers has grown, the level of interest among casual researchers has declined. There is also relatively more interest in the concept outside of the United States and among healthcare and education organizations. The justifications for the usefulness of the concept today are mainly based on its role in improving organizational culture, performance, and innovation capacity.

The Future of the Learning Organization

The essence of a learning organization involves not only the development of new capacities, but also fundamental shifts of mind. This chapter presents seven individual developmental Modes of Being and Learning, which are associated with four organizational Stances—ways of standing in the world. Stance 1, Doing Things Well, calls for Modes 1, 2, and 3, Adhering, Adapting, Accepting. Stance 2, Doing Things Better, requires Modes 4 and 5, Experiencing and Experimenting. Stance 3, Doing Better Things—Together, also involves Mode 6, Connecting; Mode 7, Dedicating, is further needed to move into Stance 4, Doing Things that Matter to the World. The Stances are Weberian “ideal types”, described by referring to a number of characteristics typically experienced in each Stance, but which may not actually be found in every case. A learning organization is in a process of transformation from one Stance to another; a temporary state.

Contextualizing the Learning Organization: Towards Differentiated Standards

This chapter suggests there is a need to develop a contingency model containing differentiated standards of the learning organization, fit for organization in different generalized contexts (such as a certain industry, sector, national culture, or religion). It is suggested that such differentiated standards would help those who have a real aim to implement the learning organization in practice. It would also make it more difficult for those who “misuse” the learning organization concept, by simply claiming that their organization is a learning organization without having taken any measures for it to actually become one. The chapter argues why it is important to develop a contingency model of differentiated standards, presents some previous studies that could contribute to such a contingency model, and suggests how further studies that could contribute with knowledge to such a contingency model could be conducted.

Measurement of the Learning Organization Construct: A Critical Perspective and Future Directions for Research

This chapter explores and reviews the development of survey research instruments to measure the learning organization construct. Some examples of such measures are presented and discussed to illustrate the approach used by researchers to establish the reliability and construct validity of these instruments. The contribution in the use of such measures to empirical research in linking the learning organization to outcomes such as organizational performance is also reviewed. A critical perspective is provided as to some of the potential issues for research in the use and further development of such survey instruments. Lastly, some suggested future research directions are proposed on how, using such measures, the field can advance our knowledge of the learning organization through more novel research methods and approaches.

From Learning Organizations to Learning Cultures and More: Evolutions in Theory, Changes in Practice, Continuity of Purpose

This chapter examines the evolution of concepts pertaining to the criticality of learning in the pursuit of organizational transformation and effectiveness. Over time, the popularity of the learning organization, learning portfolios, learning cultures, and organizational reliability has waned. Some scholars have considered these concepts within a descriptive perspective, others in a prescriptive manner. This chapter does not advocate for one perspective or paradigm over another but promotes awareness of their distinctions and how they offer different frames for comparing “organizational learning” versus the “learning organization” and “learning culture.” While scholars and practitioners are all concerned with organizational effectiveness, they point towards it in unique ways using conceptual labels that can be interpreted in diverse fashions. That often contributes to intellectual churn and further evolutions in conceptual development and popularity. Implications for the morality of learning processes and their benefit to society are considered.

Glimpses of Organizations in the Act of Learning

Although much has been written about the learning organization, there are few examples of specific practices that are implemented within learning organizations. In this chapter, the author provides authentic and descriptive glimpses of the learning practices in two organizations, one that has been a learning organization for over twenty years and one that is just three years into that journey. The practices in each are unique to their own mission, yet they are encompassed within the three blocks of a learning organization identified by Garvin, Edmondson, and Gino (2008): (1) a supportive environment, (2) concrete learning processes and practices, and (3) leadership behavior that provides reinforcement. What is common to both organizations is the fundamental belief that employees have both the intelligence and the will to act for the good of the whole which gives them the capability and the responsibility to fully participate in addressing their organization’s problems and guiding its strategy.