Managing the Learning Organization - Report Example

Managing the Learning Organization Name Institution Date Assessment 1 Introduction For organization aspiring to remain relevant, learning better and decisively is of great importance. Most organizations’ leadership apply a speedy and straightforward fixes often driven by technology in practicing what is widely known as ‘the learning organization’. More often this concept is developed as a result of pressure facing the modern organizations and it creates the strategy desired by organizations enabling them to stay aggressively competitive in their business environment. In developing a learning organization, there are five critical features that have to be reversed. Senge (1990) proposes that within the organization people have to put aside their old ways of thinking, learn to be open with others, understand the way their company works, develop a shared vision and ultimately work together objectively to realize that vision as a team. None of the five features are new. However, developing them in this manner creates new ideas that are powerful through combining them. More often there are several factors triggering this change. It is in this sense that learning organization remains ideal for organization to evolve in order to respond to various challenges they face, it is therefore identified that individual and collective learning are key. There are two basic things resulting from this first; while there exist varied form of debates involving learning organizations it remains difficult to identify real life examples. The case may differ as the reason might be the vision is too ideal or it is simply is not relevant to the requirements and dynamics of the identified organization. The second issue touches on the workforce focus on creating a model needed to present in a form that is commercially attractive to the consultants and writers who has led to a significant under-powering the theoretical framework for learning organization (Dixon, 1999). Learning Organization It is in these contexts that we attempt to explore the art and practice of this popular notion ‘learning organization’, there is no clear definition for this with many authors clearly proving the term to be elusive. In understanding the real meaning of the learning organization we can exhibit three varied definitions (Hodgkinson, 2000). According to Mathews, (1999), learning organizations are business entities where individuals constantly expand their capacity in creating results that they truly yearn for. In this case new and unreserved model of thinking are nurtured, where joint employees aspiration achieved freely, while people within the organizations persistently learn to achieve their desires together. The learning organization in our second definition is viewed to be a vision that might be a probable idea which is not brought about basically, by training individuals but rather happens as a result of learning at organization level. Hence, learning company in this context is perceived by an organization that facilitates learning of all its members and on a continuous basis it transforms its self (Cummings, 2008). The learning organization is portrayed by total workers involvement in a course that is collaboratively done, in a communally and responsible to change that is focused in achieving shared principles (Mathews, 1999, 118). Much is shared among all these definitions and partly contrast too is revealed. In the first definition Pedler et al approaches learning organization as something that is imitated and developed by senior management, involving top-down leadership hierarchy across the managerial level they are obligated to. The context in this definition can be contrasted with a more to self-ruled approaches for instance, in the case hinted by (Tsang, 1997). There is a varied assumption over ‘learning organization’ with most writers suggesting that a learning organization falls to any given organization. Learning Community Emergence of idea of ‘learning organization’ is enfolded in to nations such as the learning society. On this we borrow defined contributions from (Smith, 1999). In his work, Smith provides a speculative framework connecting the experience of living in a situation of an increasing change with an increased need for learning. In his works he reveals that loss of an established state means that our people and all institutions in it are involved in a continuous process of transformation, it remains difficult for organization to expect new stable state that will carry on in lifetime. In this sense, it remains crucial that we have to recognize, guide, influence and direct these forms of revolution. The organization employees have to develop capacity for undertaking them in a way that is essential to them and to the institutions in question. This can be achieved only if the employees become proficient at learning, in a way that they are able to transform institutions responding to the changing situations and needs. It therefore calls for individuals to invent and develop organizations which are able to pass in a continued makeover. On this we do explore the extent to which organizations, social arrangements and management are designed and viewed as learning systems and even better, on how these systems are enhanced. The progress toward learning systems is of necessity and is looked upon to be a groping and transformation course of action where there is no adequate speculative basis. Business firms are typical examples of learning systems Cummings, 2008, pp. 52). Borrowing arguments of Smith that reveals how firms are able to move from being controlled around products toward assimilation within business systems. It is evident that many firms no longer have a steady base in expertise of particular yield or systems fabricated around them. The author develops a number of important concepts with regard to organization learning. Of particular value, organizational learning and developments was of interest in gaining criticism and evaluation and double-loop learning. There are significant changes in nature and business serving in product creation and services. Organizations particularly government institutions have to operate in a global environment that often alters its character in a significant way. For instance, productivity and competitiveness are critical and part of knowledge invention and information processing. Firms and regions are organized in set of connections involving production, management and supply being the central part in business trade and industry practices that are global approved and have a capacity of working as a unit in real life time on a planetary scale (Senge, 1990). Failure to focus on these learning grouping and individuals in any given business, imply disaster in this context. Hodgkinson, 2000, pp.70) argues that firms need to invest not just in new machinery to make manufacturing more efficient in a flow that uphold their business. Organizations need to be good at knowledge invention, appropriation and utilization. Organization Theory and Learning Organization Systemic thinking is a conceptual cornerstone in learning organization concept. It defines the discipline that integrates with others, blending them into a consistent body of theory and practice. This theory presents the ability to realize, deal with and examine the whole interrelationship among the parts providing both incentive and means to put together the disciplines Cummings, 2008, pp. 52). Throughout this concept, looks at connections of the whole organization system as it allows people to get beyond immediate context and appreciate the impact of their dealings towards others. To this level the concept cling to the possibility of achieving more holistic consideration, while building a structured block of systemic theory in a relatively simple and rather sophisticated model than what is currently practiced in many organizations. When the two elements are added together, it generates the possibility of organization moving beyond a focus on the component and rather involve worker across the business functions to see and value the system in place, as it may leading to suitable actions being taken. The third reveals a systemic thinking as suggested by Senge (1990) this is created by allowing individuals in the business to realize the significance of response mechanisms in organizations. In his arguments, Senge (1990) affirms that the system viewpoint has a general orientation towards the organization long term view. In this case, delays and feedback loops are critical. In the short term the two can be ignored as they are perceived inconsequential, but ultimately they come back to haunt either individuals or organization in the long run. While other authors lay emphasis on organization learning as a system presumption, Senge’s ideas develops the model providing an integration of the regulations, where he identifies dialogue element as part of organization learning processes. Dialogue More emphasis on dialogue in organizations, especially when it regard to team learning, this concept that brings out true characteristic of every conversation where individuals open up to others accepting other people point of view as worth of consideration, in this sense the idea creates a better understanding to the objective rightness in agreeing with each other on a subject (Senge, 1990). The main concern here is to win the argument and further advance the consideration and human well being. It is established that arguments in this context can never be forced but rather breaks on common conviction. Dialogue as a social relationship entails certain qualities and passion. This gives a clear and easy way to why proponents of learning organization would place a strong emphasis upon dialogue. It is through conversation that other disciplines such as individual shared vision and development of mental models deemed necessary. On the contrary, there are risks that are significant that are brought about through dialogues within the organization as to a certain extend dialogue can degenerate to a Subversive ends. Assessment 2 Introduction Our interest in organizational learning is driven from an increased desire in understanding better how organizations can support the growth and development of individuals and teams, while enhancing work environments. Organization learning is one concept that permeated the glossary of workplace learning and change. Healthcare organizations face challenges as any other organizations, concerning handling these complex issues that translate in to their daily activities. Following increased change in the health care system, their different health care systems that are currently working to drive in organizational learning context within their structure. These institutions have largely succeed in creating realizable changes in their organizational culture, that so far embraced employee learning and commitment to the institution while providing the needed foundation to both efficiency and innovation. These kind institutions have increasingly viewed complex organizations. Introduction of organizational learning systems within an identified institution is a significant challenge. At the moment, much of healthcare literature on organizational learning focuses solely on coaching and professional growth (Grey, 2004, pp. 114). Given the current in-house and outside pressures facing healthcares, it is important for other institutions to learn from healthcare organizations have continually experienced success. The Research Background A research conducted on a health care institution whose management deliberately embraces a structure process that was committed to organizational learning. The management attempt to reverse the culture of the institution developed the mandated changes to the healthcare infrastructure and operations throughout the region. This resulted not from the legislation but rather from the administration’s yearning in designing an innovative organization that would truly support both working and learning and development process of the institution’s employees (Senge, 1990). The research project objectives were to identify and examine Australian healthcare organizations that were engaged in developing and supporting organizational learning strategies. In the study we exploring how these kinds of organizations were working to implant on-going learning within the actual work processes at individual, team and at top management level. Finding The phenomena investigated were knowledge growth and organization learning inside the healthcare communities of practice. The reported challenge in the research was to understand how healths care community of practice influences organizational learning. The study found out that community formation more often occurred when groups do engage in similar functions and need to share what they know (Tsang, 1997). It is also identified that knowledge can be alienated from the communities that develop it, use it and ultimately transform it. This is a proven, especially in comprehensive knowledge of work in place naturally necessitates human interaction. Communities of practice manipulate organizational understanding, establishment and learning. However, their critical elements that has to be taken into consideration, an essential element being invisible socially constructed knowledge as it has greater tendency that flows within a given organization. This is in comparison to explicit knowledge. Conclusion This case presents a typical example on organizational learning. The organization in question maintains its focus and ability in developing a successful healthcare environment. This is achieved through adopting strategic and a more proactive organization learning objectives, the management plays a critical role in designing a proactive, long-term approach that will ensure its own organizational health serves at a great potential. The culture created ensures that the institutional functioning and performance creates baseline information necessary in developing organizational change and improvement. Evident from the case, it can only be achieved through shared principles with support given to employees to act upon as they are rewarded for their success. Reference Cummings,T G. & Werlay,C. G. (2008). Organization development & change. London: Cengage Learning. Dixon, N. M. (1999). The organizational learning cycle: how we can learn collectively. Gower Londo: Publishing, Ltd. Easterby-Smith, M. A. (1999). Organisational Learning and the Learning Organisation:Developments in theory and practice. London: Sage Publications. Grey, C. (2004). Essential readings in management learning. London: SAGE. Hodgkinson, M. (2000). Managerial perceptions to barriers to becoming a “learning organisation. The Learning Organization , 7 (3), pp 156-166. Mathews, P. (1999). Workplace Learning: developing an holistic model. The Learning Organization , 6 (1), pp 18-29. Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline:The art and practice of the learning organization. London: Random House. Smith, P. &. (1999). Assessing the learning organisation: part 1 – theoretical foundations. The Learning Organization , 6 (2), pp 70-75. Tsang, E. (1997). Organisational Learning and the learning organisation: a dichotomy between descriptive and prescriptive research. Human Relations , 50 (1): 73-89. Read More