Organizational Learning: A Review of Some Literatures

Abstract

Organizational learning is currently the focus of considerable attention, and it is addressed by a broad range of literatures. Organization theory, industrial econ omics, economic history, and business, management and innovation studies all approach the question of how organizations learn. A number of branches of psychology are also revealing on the issue. This paper assesses these various literatures by examining the insights they allow in three main areas: first, the goals of organizational learning; second, the learning processes in organizations; and third, the ways in which organizational learning may be facilitated and impeded. It contends that while the various literatures are revealing in particular aspects of organizational learning, a more complete understanding of its complexity requires a multi-disciplinary approach. The contributions of the different approaches are analyzed, and some areas are suggested where the transfer of analytical concepts may improve understanding.

Rethinking organizational learning: analyzing learning processes of information system designers

“…and 'Why do they learn?' Reviewing the literature with these questions in mind confirms earlier findings that there exist many different viewpoints on the subject (e.g., Dodgson, 1993;Levitt & March, 1988, Huber, 1991Fiol & Lyles, 1985;Thatchenkery, 1996). More important for the present study is that posing these questions also shows that these contributions to the field of organizational learning are in various respects biased.…”

“…Perhaps the most cited controversy within the field of organizational learning is the difference between individual learning and organizational learning (e.g., Kim, 1993;Fiol & Lyles, 1985;Jones, 1995;Hedberg, 1981). Table 1 Biases within the literature on organizational learning Some authors support the idea that it is the individual who acts and learns within the organizational framework (e.g., Simon, 1991;Dodgson, 1993). "Individuals are the primary learning entity in firms and it is individuals which create organizational forms that enables learning in ways which facilitate organizational transformation" (Dodgson, 1993, p. 377).…”

The Effect of University Culture and Stakeholders' Perceptions on University-Business Linking Activities

“…However, reaching consensus within a large community is a difficult process and requires the prior generation of a shared vision particularly with regards to issues that pertain to cultural and structural changes (Levitt and March., 1988;Senge, 1990;Schein, 1992;Dogson, 1993). In this case, there was no consensus available on how transfer activities should be conducted, and no shared vision of what these activities implied, how they should be promoted, or even if they should be encouraged at all.…”

The Dimensions of Learning Organization Questionnaire (DLOQ): A validation study in a Korean context

“…

The purpose of this study is to assess the validity and reliability of the measurement scores of the learning organization culture, the Dimensions ofTo survive and thrive in a world characterized by turbulent change and fierce competition due to technological advancement and the knowledgebased economy (Dodgson, 1993;Kim & Mauborgne, 2005;Joo, 2007), an organization must always be ready to adapt. Thus many organizations strive to have a learning organization culture of creating, acquiring, and transferring knowledge and modifying its behavior to reflect new knowledge and insights (Garvin, 1993).

There has been growing awareness of the importance of individual knowledge, or human capital, created in an organization that plays a key role in

…”