The ultimate goal in terms of development might be for an organization to be
described as "a learning organization". Discuss the concept of the learning
organization and the practical difficulties in achieving this status.

In this essay I intend to define what a learning organization is and list some of their key
features. I also intend to cite a number of examples of learning organizations and to
discuss the practical difficulties in reaching this status.

Much of the literature that we would associate with the learning organization has been
derived from the work of Chris Argyris and Donald Schön (Argyris and Schön, 1974,
1978; Argyris, 1982, cited in Buchanan and Hucynski 2004:127) A lot of their work was
focused on Single loop and double loop learning within organizations. Fred Luthans
(2005, 99-100) defines these concepts as follows "Single loop learning involves
improving the organization's capacity to achieve known objectives. It is associated with
routine and behavioural learning. Under single loop learning the organization is learning
without significant change in its basic assumptions." "Double loop learning re-evaluates
the nature of the organization's objectives and the values and beliefs surrounding them.
This type of learning involves changing the organization's culture. Importantly double
loop consist of the organization learning how it's learning." At this early stage Argyris
(1982, cited in Buchanan and Hucynski) defines organizational learning as the process of
"detection and correction of errors." His view was that organizations learn through
individuals acting as agents for them.

Building upon the foundation laid by Argyris and Schön the concept of the learning
organization gained real notoriety in the 1990's as a result of the works of Pedler,
Boydell and Burgoyne (1988, cited in Buchanan and Hucynski 2004:128) but more
significantly the book "The Fifth Discipline" by Peter Senge (1990) that became a
international best seller.

In his book, Senge took the concepts of single and double loop learning developed by
Argyris and Schön and expanded them. He introduced the terms adaptive learning, "the
first stage of the learning organization, adopting to environmental changes." (Luthans,2005, p 100.) And Generative learning which "involves creativity and innovation, going
beyond just adapting to change to being ahead of and anticipating change." (Luthans,
2005, p 100.)

Since the 1990's many definitions for a learning organization have been developed.
Senge (1990) defined it as "a group of people continually enhancing their capacity to
create what they want to create," also "an organization with an ingrained philosophy for
anticipating, reacting and responding to change complexity and uncertainty." Buchanan
and Hucynski (2004, p 127) offer up a definition from Marleen Huysman (1999, p.61)
"An organizational form that enables individual learning to create valued outcomes, such
as innovation, efficiency, environmental alignment and competitive advantage." Fulop
and Linstead (1999, p 33) describe it as a "euphemism for a new culture or 'brainwork'
or 'not parking your brains at the door' - means being a team player, continuously
innovative, creative and problem solving but also having a mindset that the corporation
approves of.

Since the development of the concept of the learning organization it has been difficult for
academics to hold to one definition, as Buchanan and Hucynski (2004, p 129) put it "The
image of the learning organization is an ideal, something to which to aspire, rather than
any particular organization." Much of the work on this subject however, attempts to
define some of the features of a learning organization.

Pedler, Burgoyne and Boydell identify eleven such features (1997). A learning approach
to strategy , participative policy-making, informative, formative accounting and control,
internal exchange, rewards flexibility, enabling structures, boundary workers as
environmental scanners, inter-company learning, a learning climate and self-development
opportunities for all. They group these features under 5 headings, strategy, structure,
looking in, looking out and learning opportunities. Senge (1990) introduces the features
as five 'disciplines' namely Personal mastery, mental models, shared vision, team
learning and systems thinking.Another key ingredient of a learning organization is the concept of the knowledge
worker. Buchanan and Hucynski (2004, p 128) claim that "'boundary workers' are
typically employed in poorly paid jobs and their customer intelligence is often
overlooked as their positions are distant, in terms of physical locations as well as
organization structure, from management decision makers." Nonake and Takeuchi (1995,
cited in Buchanan and Hucynski) believe that everyone within the organization has
knowledge to pass on and therefore everyone should be regarded as a 'knowledge
worker' not just those who work with books or computers.

Bearing all these features of a learning organization in mind I think Professor Swee C.
Goh (1997) provides an excellent summary which he labels as five core strategic building
blocks. They are "Mission and Vision - Clarity and support of the mission, strategy and
espoused values of the organization. Leadership - that is perceived as empowering
employees, encouraging an experimenting culture and showing strong commitment to the
organization. Experimentation - A strong culture of experimentation that is rewarded and
supported at all levels in the organization. Transfer of Knowledge - the ability of an
organization to transfer knowledge from within and from outside the organization and to
learn from failures, and to view all workers as knowledge workers with valuable
information to share (italics mine.) Teamwork and Co-operation - An emphasis on
teamwork and group problem-solving as the mode of operation and for developing
innovative ideas.

As stated earlier it's difficult to identify an organization that embodies all the features and
characteristics of a learning organization. As Buchanan and Hucynski (2004) said it's
more of an "ideal." The best we can hope for is to point to some organizations that
embody particular features of a learning organization. General Electric, Motorola, IBM
3M, Hewlett Packard, AT&T and Xerox have all been cited as examples of organizations
that have adopted the one or more features of a learning organization.Having defined what a learning organization is and identifying some of its key features, I
would now like to turn our attention to some of the problems that may be encountered
whilst trying to achieve the status of a learning organization.

First is the issue of power and politics. Much of the literature regarding OL and in
particular "The fifth Discipline" (Senge, 1990) seems to want to eradicate organizational
politics, it portrays it as "aberrant or deviant, a source of unnecessary distraction and
dysfunction….nor does it view power and politics as a likely source of creative tension
and innovation" (Fulop and Linstead, 1999.) Fiona Wilson (2004, 228) points out that in
fact "some authors would argue that organizations are political systems made up of
subgroups with their own interest and powers, engaged in a battle for control, or
avoidance of control, and incapable of acting as agents of learning." A problem will arise
for an organization if they don't take into consideration the fact that there is power and
politics within organizations, it shouldn't be subdued. In fact as Mark Smith (2001) puts
it, "difference is good for organizational life provided that we cultivate a sense of
reciprocity, and ways of working that encourages deliberation.

The second issue links in with the first, it concerns teamwork. Fulop and Linstead (1999,
40) tell us that "teamwork is presented as a strong tool for homogenizing experiences….it
can be used to create unity in vision, purpose and direction and help overcome
impediments to group behaviour with conformity of members being the ultimate aim.
They goe on to say that Senge does not see teams as "potentially problematic" or
"unnecessary" because "issues of diversity and power are not included in his analysis." I
think it is important to remember that although team alignment of vision and mission of
the organization are important we cannot disregard that diversity within a team
environment will increase creativity and innovation. If we try and bring "conformity to
the members" of the team there will be problems. Teamwork will be problematic, the
dynamics of society are such that this is inevitable. It is important to harness the creative
tension within a team context and use it to the organization's advantage.The third issue is connected to the first two. It deals with leadership within a learning
organization. If we view a learning organization without taking into consideration the
first two issues, i.e. we view a learning organization as one in which there is no politics or
group diversity then as Fulop and linstead (1999, pg 40) put it, it is very difficult to
examine (the learning organization) in the context of managing diversity," which is "a
key issue for managers." Our attention is not drawn to "the differences in the workplace
based on gender, ethnicity or race." If a manager is trying to develop a learning culture
within an organization then they need to be aware of the political and social culture in
which they are operating. Much of the literature that addresses the learning organization
does not deal with this.

The fourth issue is one of organizational imperatives. Simply put "within a capitalist
organization, where the bottom line is profit, a fundamental concern with the learning and
development of employees and associates is simply too idealistic." (Smith, 2001.) Many
companies may focus on the long term growth and sustainability of the company as
opposed to the Human Resources issues.

The fifth issue is to do with the willingness of staff to undertake change or to implement
the features necessary for the organization to learn. Smith (2001) points out that many of
the practical steps taken for an organization to learn involve "developing quite
complicated mental models, and being able to apply and adapt these to different
situations." Smith also points out that "the process of exploring one's performance,
personality and fundamental aims in life, as much of the literature proposes, is a daunting
task." Will the employees be willing to undertake such steps. "Employees are not simply
asked to do (their) jobs. (They) are also requested to join in something so much bigger."
Fiona Wilson (2004) suggests that younger employees will be more willing to adopt these
changes than the older employees.

Taking all these factors into consideration it is obvious to see that most of the difficulties
in becoming a learning organization occur when managers and employees attempt to
achieve this status without viewing the organization within its natural context.Bibliography

Argyric, C., 1982, Reasoning, Learning and Action, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco

Argyris, C and Schön, D., 1974, Theory in Practice, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

Argyris, C and Schön, D. (eds), 1978 Organizational Learning, Addison-Wesley,
Reading, Ma.

Buchanan, D. and Huczynski, A. (2004), Organizational Behaviour: An Introductory
th
Text, Prentice Hall/Financial Times, 5 edition

Fulop, L. and Linstead, S. (1999), Management and Organization: A Critical Text.
Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke.

Huysman, M., 1999, 'Balancing biases: A critical review of the literature on
organizational learning', in Mark Easterby-Smith, John Burgoyne and Luis Araujo (eds),
Organizational Learning and the Learning Organization, Sage Publications, London

Luthans, F., 2005, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA.


Pedler, M., Burgoyne, J. and Boydell, T., 1997, The Learining Company: A Strategy for
Sustainable Development, McGraw-Hill, London (second edition).

Senge, P., 1990, The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning
Organization, Doubleday, New York.

Smith, M. K. (2001) 'Peter Senge and the learning organization', the encyclopedia of
informal education, www.infed.org/thinkers/senge.htm Accessed 19/11/05

Wilson, F. (2004), Organizational Behaviour: A Critical Introduction, Oxford University
Press