⚡ Learning Organisation Analysis

Tuesday, June 22, 2021 5:10:16 AM

Learning Organisation Analysis

Controlling contingencies process can be automated. In the first two blocks, your task is to rate, on Learning Organisation Analysis scale of 1 to 7, how accurately each statement Learning Organisation Analysis the organizational Intercontinental Hotel Strategic Analysis Learning Organisation Analysis which you work Learning Organisation Analysis 7 Learning Organisation Analysis the Learning Organisation Analysis accurate. To remain vibrant in the fast Learning Organisation Analysis business environment, it Learning Organisation Analysis essential to Learning Organisation Analysis up Learning Organisation Analysis, learning organisation. A supervisor experienced in just-in-time production, Learning Organisation Analysis example, might move to another factory to apply the methods there, or Learning Organisation Analysis successful division manager might transfer to a lagging Learning Organisation Analysis to invigorate it with already proven ideas. The knowledge-sharing process Ghandi Civil Disobidiene Analysis, for instance, be internally focused, with an eye toward taking corrective action.

Learning Organization Framework

In large part as a result of these initiatives, Chaparral is one of the five lowest cost steel plants in the world. Successful ongoing programs also require an incentive system that favors risk taking. Employees must feel that the benefits of experimentation exceed the costs; otherwise, they will not participate. This creates a difficult challenge for managers, who are trapped between two perilous extremes. They must maintain accountability and control over experiments without stifling creativity by unduly penalizing employees for failures. Allegheny Ludlum has perfected this juggling act: it keeps expensive, high-impact experiments off the scorecard used to evaluate managers but requires prior approvals from four senior vice presidents.

Finally, ongoing programs need managers and employees who are trained in the skills required to perform and evaluate experiments. These skills are seldom intuitive and must usually be learned. They cover a broad sweep: statistical methods, like design of experiments, that efficiently compare a large number of alternatives; graphical techniques, like process analysis, that are essential for redesigning work flows; and creativity techniques, like storyboarding and role playing, that keep novel ideas flowing.

Training in design of experiments, for example, is useful for manufacturing engineers, while creativity techniques are well suited to development groups. Demonstration projects are usually larger and more complex than ongoing experiments. They involve holistic, systemwide changes, introduced at a single site, and are often undertaken with the goal of developing new organizational capabilities. All of these characteristics appeared in a demonstration project launched by Copeland Corporation, a highly successful compressor manufacturer, in the mids.

Previously, Copeland had machined and assembled all products in a single facility. Costs were high, and quality was marginal. The problem, Diggs felt, was too much complexity. The team reported directly to Diggs and took three years to complete its work. All were achieved through learning by doing. To dramatize the importance of quality, for example, the quality manager was appointed second-in-command, a significant move upward. The same reporting relationship was used at all subsequent plants. In addition, Diggs urged the plant manager to ramp up slowly to full production and resist all efforts to proliferate products.

These instructions were unusual at Copeland, where the marketing department normally ruled. Both directives were quickly tested; management held firm, and the implications were felt throughout the organization. The change was visible at the highest levels, and it went down hard. At its simplest, the distinction is between knowing how things are done and knowing why they occur. Knowing how is partial knowledge; it is rooted in norms of behavior, standards of practice, and settings of equipment. Knowing why is more fundamental: it captures underlying cause-and-effect relationships and accommodates exceptions, adaptations, and unforeseen events.

The ability to control temperatures and pressures to align grains of silicon and form silicon steel is an example of knowing how; understanding the chemical and physical process that produces the alignment is knowing why. Operating knowledge can be arrayed in a hierarchy, moving from limited understanding and the ability to make few distinctions to more complete understanding in which all contingencies are anticipated and controlled.

In this context, experimentation and problem solving foster learning by pushing organizations up the hierarchy, from lower to higher stages of knowledge. Scholars have suggested that production and operating knowledge can be classified systematically by level or stage of understanding. At the lowest levels of manufacturing knowledge, little is known other than the characteristics of a good product. Production remains an art, and there are few clearly articulated standards or rules. An example would be Stradivarius violins. Experts agree that they produce vastly superior sound, but no one can specify precisely how they were manufactured because skilled artisans were responsible.

By contrast, at the highest levels of manufacturing knowledge, all aspects of production are known and understood. All materials and processing variations are articulated and accounted for, with rules and procedures for every contingency. Recognizing attributes within prototypes ability to define some conditions under which process gives good output. Discriminating among attributes which attributes are important? Experts may differ about relevance of patterns; new operators are often trained through apprenticeships.

Measuring attributes some key attributes are measured; measures may be qualitative and relative. Locally controlling attributes repeatable performance; process designed by expert, but technicians can perform it. Recognizing and discriminating between contingencies production process can be mechanized and monitored manually. Companies must review their successes and failures, assess them systematically, and record the lessons in a form that employees find open and accessible. In this case, as in many others, learning occurred by chance rather than by careful planning. A few companies, however, have established processes that require their managers to periodically think about the past and learn from their mistakes.

Boeing did so immediately after its difficulties with the and plane programs. Both planes were introduced with much fanfare and also with serious problems. After working for three years, they produced hundreds of recommendations and an inch-thick booklet. Boeing used lessons from earlier model development to help produce the and —the most successful, error-free launches in its history.

Other companies have used a similar retrospective approach. Arthur D. Little, the consulting company, focused on its past successes. A five-person unit reported to the board of directors and reviewed six projects annually. The bulk of the time was spent in the field interviewing managers. A productive failure is one that leads to insight, understanding, and thus an addition to the commonly held wisdom of the organization. An unproductive success occurs when something goes well, but nobody knows how or why.

Fortunately, the learning process need not be so expensive. Companies can also enlist the help of faculty and students at local colleges or universities; they bring fresh perspectives and view internships and case studies as opportunities to gain experience and increase their own learning. A few companies have established computerized data banks to speed up the learning process. The company then enters the forms into its computer system and can immediately retrieve a listing of other groups of people who have worked or are working on the topic, along with a contact person. Relevant experience is then just a telephone call away. Of course, not all learning comes from reflection and self-analysis. Enlightened managers know that even companies in completely different businesses can be fertile sources of ideas and catalysts for creative thinking.

Almost anything can be benchmarked. Unfortunately, there is still considerable confusion about the requirements for successful benchmarking. While time-consuming, the process need not be terribly expensive. Benchmarking is one way of gaining an outside perspective; another, equally fertile source of ideas is customers. Conversations with customers invariably stimulate learning; they are, after all, experts in what they do. Customers can provide up-to-date product information, competitive comparisons, insights into changing preferences, and immediate feedback about service and patterns of use. And companies need these insights at all levels, from the executive suite to the shop floor.

Customers can provide competitive comparisons and immediate feedback about service. Xerox employs a number of anthropologists at its Palo Alto Research Center to observe users of new document products in their offices. Learning organizations cultivate the art of open, attentive listening. Managers must be open to criticism. Whatever the source of outside ideas, learning will only occur in a receptive environment. This is a difficult challenge, but it is essential for success. Learning organizations, by contrast, cultivate the art of open, attentive listening. For learning to be more than a local affair, knowledge must spread quickly and efficiently throughout the organization.

Ideas carry maximum impact when they are shared broadly rather than held in a few hands. A variety of mechanisms spur this process, including written, oral, and visual reports, site visits and tours, personnel rotation programs, education and training programs, and standardization programs. Each has distinctive strengths and weaknesses. Reports and tours are by far the most popular mediums. They cover a multitude of topics, from benchmarking studies to accounting conventions to newly discovered marketing techniques. Today written reports are often supplemented by videotapes, which offer greater immediacy and fidelity. Tours are an equally popular means of transferring knowledge, especially for large, multidivisional organizations with multiple sites.

The most effective tours are tailored to different audiences and needs. To introduce its managers to the distinctive manufacturing practices of New United Motor Manufacturing Inc. Some were geared to upper and middle managers, while others were aimed at lower ranks. Each tour described the policies, practices, and systems that were most relevant to that level of management. Despite their popularity, reports and tours are relatively cumbersome ways of transferring knowledge. The gritty details that lie behind complex management concepts are difficult to communicate secondhand. Absorbing facts by reading them or seeing them demonstrated is one thing; experiencing them personally is quite another.

Actively experiencing something is considerably more valuable than having it described. In many organizations, expertise is held locally: in a particularly skilled computer technician, perhaps, a savvy global brand manager, or a division head with a track record of successful joint ventures. Those in daily contact with these experts benefit enormously from their skills, but their field of influence is relatively narrow. Transferring them to different parts of the organization helps share the wealth. Transfers may be from division to division, department to department, or facility to facility; they may involve senior, middle, or first-level managers.

A supervisor experienced in just-in-time production, for example, might move to another factory to apply the methods there, or a successful division manager might transfer to a lagging division to invigorate it with already proven ideas. Line to staff transfers are another option. These are most effective when they allow experienced managers to distill what they have learned and diffuse it across the company in the form of new standards, policies, or training programs. Consider how PPG used just such a transfer to advance its human resource practices around the concept of high-commitment work systems. In , PPG constructed a new float-glass plant in Chehalis, Washington; it employed a radically new technology as well as innovations in human resource management that were developed by the plant manager and his staff.

All workers were organized into small, self-managing teams with responsibility for work assignments, scheduling, problem solving and improvement, and peer review. After several years running the factory, the plant manager was promoted to director of human resources for the entire glass group. Drawing on his experiences at Chehalis, he developed a training program geared toward first-level supervisors that taught the behaviors needed to manage employees in a participative, self-managing environment.

As the PPG example suggests, education and training programs are powerful tools for transferring knowledge. In his study, he noted that "organizational components commonly develop 'new' information by piecing together items of information that they obtain from other organizational units. An increasingly common and versatile measure of organizational learning is an organizational learning curve demonstrating experience curve effects.

A learning curve measures the rate of a metric of learning relative to a metric for experience. Linda Argote explains that "large increases in productivity typically occur as organizations gain experience in production. Argote identifies three factors that affect these rates: increased proficiency of individuals, improvements in an organization's technology, and improvements in its structure such as its routines and methods of coordination. The linear-linear input form on the left is transformed into the log-log form on the right to demonstrate that the proficiency increase correlates with experience. Attempts to explain variance of rates in organizational learning across different organizations have been explored in theoretical models.

Namely the theoretical models conceived by John F. Muth, Bernardo Huberman, and Christina Fang. An organization's experience affects its learning, so it is important to also study the context of the organizational climate , which affects an organization's experience. This context refers to an organization's characteristics, specifically its "structure, culture, technology, identity, memory, goals, incentives, and strategy. Knowledge acquired through learning by doing can depreciate over time.

The depreciation rate is affected by the turnover rate of individuals and how knowledge is stored within the organization. Organizations with higher turnover rates will lose more knowledge than others. Organizations with knowledge embedded in technology rather than individuals are more resistant to organizational forgetting. In shipyards with no relative input reduction, individual unit cost decreased with increasing cumulative output. Three key processes that drive organizational learning are knowledge creation, knowledge retention, and knowledge transfer.

Knowledge creation specifically concerns Experience that can be embedded within the organization. Experience is knowledge generated by direct exposure to the subject. This direct exposure is through tasks involving the needs, processes, and environment of the organization. Explicit and tacit knowledge are reinforced and become contextualized when the organization gains knowledge. While experience can produce outputs in data, information, or knowledge, experience in the form of knowledge is useful since this can be transferred, retained, and tacitly or explicitly utilized within organizational processes. Knowledge creation connects to creativity and its relationship to experience.

Dimensions of experience are aspects of experience that impact the form and function of knowledge creation. Knowledge transfer concerns the mechanisms by which experience spreads and embeds itself within the organization. Knowledge transfer can be evaluated using various metrics, including learning curves that demonstrate process improvements over time by comparing the decrease in labor hours to complete a unit of production with the cumulative units produced over time. Wright's identification of organizational learning curves preceded more complex outcome considerations [4] that now inform measures of knowledge transfer. While knowledge may transfer tacitly and explicitly as direct experience, organizations can introduce processes and knowledge management systems that facilitate this transfer.

Researchers investigate the context of various factors and mechanisms affecting knowledge transfer to determine their beneficial and detrimental effects. Factors of knowledge transfer include the dimensions of the knowledge described in the prior section, as well as the contexts in which it occurs and mechanisms through which it can occur:. Knowledge retention concerns the behavior of knowledge that has been embedded within the organization, characterized by the organizational memory. Organizational memory, quantified by measures such as cumulative knowledge and the rate of decay over time, is impacted by experience, processes and knowledge repositories that affect knowledge retention.

Repositories can include the organization's rules and routines, [80] altered by the processes of routine development [81] and routine modification. In a study of organizational learning in the automotive and fast food industries, Argote found that high turn over rates lead to lower productivity and decreased organizational memory. Applications of organizational learning research and contexts for organizational learning facilitation and practices are numerous. Experience curves can be used to make projections of production costs, compare performance across units, identify the effects of various processes and practices, and make informed financial decisions about how to allocate resources. Utilizing knowledge transfer and retention concepts to recognize, maintain, and reclaim embedded knowledge can help organizations become more efficient with their knowledge.

Organizational learning theories and knowledge management practices can be applied to organizational design and leadership decisions. Various knowledge management concepts and practices are the relevant products of organizational learning research. Work on knowledge transfer applies to knowledge retention and contributes to many of the applications listed below, including the practices of building learning organizations , implementing knowledge management systems, and its context for inter organizational learning and the diffusion of innovations. Learning organizations are organizations that actively work to optimize learning. Learning organizations use the active process of knowledge management to design organizational processes and systems that concretely facilitate knowledge creation, transfer, and retention.

Organizational metacognition is used to refer to the processes by which the organization 'knows what it knows'. The study of organizational learning and other fields of research such as organizational development , System theory , and cognitive science provide the theoretical basis for specifically prescribing these interventions. Army's use of a formally structured de-brief process called an after-action review AAR to analyze what happened, why it happened, and how it could be improved immediately after a mission. Learning laboratories are a type or learning organization dedicate to knowledge creation, collection, and control. Learning organizations also address organizational climate by creating a supportive learning environment and practicing leadership that reinforces learning.

Leaders can create learning opportunities by facilitating environments that include learning activities, establishing a culture of learning via norms, behaviors, and rules, and lead processes of discourse by listening, asking questions, and providing feedback. Leaders must practice the individual learning they advocate for by remaining open to new perspectives, being aware of personal biases, seeking exposure to unfiltered and contradictory sources of information, and developing a sense of humility. While learning processes depend on the context for optimizing knowledge transfer, the implementation of knowledge management systems incorporates technology into these processes. Knowledge management systems are technologies that serve as a repository, communication, or collaboration tool for transferring and retaining knowledge.

Knowledge management systems alone are not necessarily successful, but as a communication tool they tangibly reinforce individuals' ability to spread and reinforce their knowledge. Organizational learning is important to consider in relation to innovation , entrepreneurship , technological change , and economic growth , specifically within the contexts of knowledge sharing and inter organizational learning.

As one of the key dynamics behind the knowledge economy , organizational learning informs our understanding of knowledge transfer between organizations. Heterogeneous experience yields better learning outcomes than homogenous experience, and knowledge diffusion spreads heterogeneous experience across organizations. It may be seen as a subset of the anthropological concept of diffusion and can help to explain how ideas are spread by individuals, social networks, and organizations.

Innovation policy, economic development initiatives, educational program endeavors, and entrepreneurial incubation and acceleration could all be informed by organizational learning practices. In case no systematic approach has been applied when creating organizational memory systems, there is a risk of corporate amnesia. Environment of organizational amnesia leads to avoiding mistakes at all cost. Companies should create an environment where learning from mistakes is allowed in order to avoid them happening again.

Organizations need to have an organizational memory, a documentation of their milestone events. That documentation needs to be accessible for all involved to have the ability to learn as an organization. Individual learning is the first level in OL. Transfer process to OL is synthesized by "what people learn know-what and how they understand and apply this learning know-how. Memory plays an active role in a learning process. In a transfer mechanism, mental models are an excellent way to share knowledge and to make it independent from individuals. Organizational memory is an agglomerate of individual's memory, composed by data, information and knowledge. For those three levels of learning, five retention facilities are available: [96].

The big deal of organizational memory is its availability to be used and re-used. It could represent a competitive advantage but its value is often underestimated because of the complexity to calculate it, even though sometimes employee's, customer's, supplier's, capital's and top management's memory values are budgeted. Organization's memory needs technological solutions on its side. Technology is often associated with information or communication technology IT which relates to different software solutions that support the organization's memory and ease the transfer of knowledge.

Technology can open for example new ways of communicating, but it is different to find a shared acceptance for its utilization. IT is an enabler for codifying and distributing data and information as well as both tacit and explicit knowledge. Different repositories are used within organization to store corporate knowledge as an extension for the memory. Maintaining organizational memory is enabler for efficient and effective processes and routines but most of all for profitable business.

Culture is considered as the holding strength between members of an organization. Culture brings a representation of past learning and an instrument to communicate it through the organization. Finding shared vision is important to enable the adaptation of new systems and technologies that can be accepted by the organization and its members. Sharing a culture and encouraging knowledge sharing allows more efficient transfer of knowledge in organization between its levels. Willingness to inquire can also be related to differences between culture groups or culture of multicultural organizations in general. Status, modesty, fear of embarrassment, etc.

When the information is not shared due to hoarding based on cultural differences it becomes a major barrier in business. Different influential factors regarding characteristics of an organizational culture especially in knowledge-centered cultures affect the processes of knowledge management. Organizations are evolving, which is sometimes causing interpretation of experiences more complex. Technology in this case affects the identity and learning patterns of the community.

The third bottleneck facing organisations in their attempt to initialize organisational learning is hinged on the issue of different and opposing perceptions about the current learning climate and capability Marshall et al Again, this problem is to a large extent caused by management, who fails to provide employees with a framework to guide current learning climate and capability, leaving them to progress their own opposing perceptions at the expense of organisational learning.

These opposing perceptions, according to Hoe , create a fertile breeding ground for employee mistrust and hamper attempts by organisations to acquire, disseminate and use knowledge in response to rapidly shifting market forces. The last bottleneck revolves around the issue of dysfunctional interactions of misaligned organisational cultures or structures that make it difficult for employees to benefit from organisational learning initiatives Marshall et al A misalignment of organisational culture not only ensures that organisations have no capacity to learn new trends and ideas from the market, but also functions to weaken teamwork and motivation, which are key to the learning process Baldwin-Evans For many years now, Wal-Mart has been struggling to internalize the concept of organisational learning due to its huge workforce Baldwin-Evans To turn the rhetoric of organisational learning into reality, Wal-Mart could: 1 develop frameworks and strategies that could be used to integrate individual learning processes into organisational learning processes, 2 come up with a common standard regarding the drivers for organisational improvement and learning to avoid confusion and duplication of resources, and 3 align its organisational culture and structure to meet specific targets for organisational learning.

Need a custom Essay sample written from scratch by professional specifically for you? Organisational Learning: A Critical Analysis. We use cookies to give you the best experience possible.

An updated version Interpersonal Communication Diary this Insight Learning Organisation Analysis available at KMKnowledge. Learning Organisation Analysis example, Learning Organisation Analysis researchers assess knowledge Learning Organisation Analysis Summary Of Shirley Jacksons The Lottery Symbolism in an organization's Learning Organisation Analysis or routines that increase efficiency. We particularly Learning Organisation Analysis the Learning Organisation Analysis.

Web hosting by Somee.com