Network learning: An empirically derived model of learning by groups of organizations

Abstract

A B S T R AC TBuilding on a previous conceptual article, we present an empirically derived model of network learning -learning by a group of organizations as a group. Based on a qualitative, longitudinal, multiplemethod empirical investigation, five episodes of network learning were identified. Treating each episode as a discrete analytic case, through cross-case comparison, a model of network learning is developed which reflects the common, critical features of the episodes. The model comprises three conceptual themes relating to learning outcomes, and three conceptual themes of learning process. Although closely related to conceptualizations that emphasize the social and political character of organizational learning, the model of network learning is derived from, and specifically for, more extensive networks in which relations among numerous actors may be arms-length or collaborative, and may be expected to change over time.

Contingent factors affecting network learning

“…A cognitive theoretical approach to understanding networks allows exploration of such relationships. Cognitive theoretical approaches, when applied to networks, focus on shared interpretations for message content, such as network goals and stories (Knight & Pye, 2005). In business settings, the significance of these mental models, defined as a shared cognitive belief system or an interpretive scheme (Giddens, 1984) held by key actors (individuals, teams and/or companies), is that they filter the attention of managers and guide corporate decisions and behavior (Strandvik, Holmlund, & Grönroos, 2014).…”

“…Coverage of this topic, however, often fails to capture important dynamics in the learning of inter-firm collaborations by not recognizing that learning by a group of organizations may have distinct characteristics (Knight & Pye, 2005). Biggemann, Kowalkowski, Maley, and Brege (2013) urge a refocus away from simple customer-supplier dyads to a network perspective that recognizes the interdependence of companies.…”

“…In this specifically network-centered view, changing network level properties, such as shared practices and processes, would indicate network learning". These authors also make a critical distinction between learning in different network contexts: network learning outcomes may occur across the wider network, whereas network learning processes are local (Knight & Pye, 2005).…”

Small-Firm Networks and strategies for consolidation: evidence from the Brazilian context

“…The evidence shows that, over time, members learn how to cooperate and interact among themselves (Knight & Pye, 2005;Albers, 2010). Such a learning process allows the SFNs to reorganize its operation and adopt a governance which is less dependent on the constant managers' participation.…”

“…Relationships among SFN members are primarily non-hierarchical, and participants often have substantial operating autonomy and may ask to leave the network once it is perceived as most convenient. Through cooperation, the firm may obtain benefits such as access to services, risk sharing, legitimacy and status (Podolny & Page, 1998;Lotia & Hardy, 2008), access to new knowledge (Dagnino, Levanti, Minà, & Picone, 2015), learning (Powell 1990;Knight & Pye, 2005) and social capital development (Inkpen & Tsang, 2005). Knowledge exchange among network members minimizes uncertainty and the risk of opportunistic behaviors (Pereira, Brito, & Mariotto, 2013).…”