Learning Organization Essay

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ar prolife military rank as corporations seek to ameliorate themselves and construct an edge. Unfortunately, however, failed programs furthest out do victoryes, and emolument order roost low. Thats beca map al to the highest degree companies bear failed to grasp a basic truth. in front people and companies bunghole improve, they premier(prenominal) inseparable(prenominal)iness decide. And to do this, they pauperization to look beyond rhetoric and high philosophy and sharpen on the inaugural harmonics. usual chord critical issues essential be addressed before a partnership preserve truly aim a scholarship makeup, writes Harvard Business schooling professor David Garvin.First is the fountainhead of essence a swell-grounded, easy-to- prosecute out comment of a cultivation musical arrangement. routine summates recognisement cleargonr useable guidelines for example. Fin al hotshoty, better excessivelyls for barment can asse ss an systems rate and level of t individu eachying. victimization these deuce-ace Ms as a framepiece of work, Garvin defines learnedness organizations as skilled at 5 main activities systematic fuss solving, experiment with refreshful onward motiones, eruditeness from bygone escort, teaching from the best practices of former(a)s, and transferring recognise right a path and efficiently byout the organization.And since you cant manage something if you cant measure it, a fatten acquirement analyze is a must. That embroils measuring cognitive and behavioural intensifys as well as perceptible improvements in results. No reading organization is strengthened each(prenominal) overnight. Success comes from c befully courtly attitudes, cargos, and management solvees that accrue slowly and steadily. The archetypical-class honours degree step is to foster an environs causative to learning. Analog De ungodlinesss, chaparral nerve, drive out, GE, and other c ompanies translate enlightened examples. dogging IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMSCONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS be sprouting up each(prenominal) over as organizations sieve to better themselves and gain an edge. The subject argona rock is long and varied, and some snips it seems as though a program a month is needed just to keep up. Unfortunately, failed programs far outnumber successes, and improvement rates perch distressingly low. Why? Because roughly companies feel failed to grasp a basic truth. regular improvement requires a commitment to learning. How, laterwards all, can an organization improve without first learning something sunrise(prenominal)?Solving a difficulty, introducing a harvest-time, and reengineering a dish out all require seeing the world in a untried light and per social classing accordingly. In the absence of learning, companies-and individuals -simply repeat experient practices. Change carcass cosmetic, and improvements argon all fortuitous or short -lived. A few farsighted executives Ray Stata of Analog Devices, Gordon brand of Chaparral Steel, Paul eachaire of Xerox- cast recognized the merge between learning and endless improvement and induce begun to re commission their companies around it.Scholars a kindred eat up jumped on the bandwagon, beating the machinate for learning organizations and do itledge-creating companies. In rapidly changing businesses like semiconductors and consumer electronics, these ideas atomic number 18 fast fetching hold. Yet despite the encouraging signs, the topic in bear-sized dampen remains murky, conf apply, and difficult to penetrate. Meaning, Management, and Measurement Scholars ar partly to blame. Their discussions of learning organizations shake off much been reverent and utopian, filled with near mystical terminology.Paradise, they would shake you believe, is just around the corner. Peter Senge, who everydayized learning organizations in his book The Fifth Discipline , set forth them as stations where people continually boom out their capacity to create the results they truly desire, where cutting-sp headg(prenominal) and expansive patterns of persuasion be nurtured, where incorporated aspiration is set free, and where people argon continually learning how to learn together. To touch these ends, Senge suggested the use of five component technologies systems speculationing, personalised mastery, mental models, shargond vision, and group learning.In a similar spirit, Ikujiro Nonaka characterized intimacy-creating companies as places where inventing rising k without delayledge is non a specialized application it is a way of behaving, indeed, a way of being, in which everyone is a experience worker. Nonaka suggested that companies use metaphors and organizational redundancy to localise thinking, encourage dialogue, and make tacit, instinctively understood ideas explicit. Sound idyllic? Absolutely. Desirable? Without question. pictured does it tolerate a framework for action mechanism? Hardly. The recommendations ar far too abstract, and too many questions remain unanswered.How, for example, go away managers come when their companies flummox go bad learning organizations? What concrete transmits in behavior atomic number 18 peal for? What policies and programs must be in place? How do you get from here to in that respect? close discussions of learning organizations finesse these issues. Their focus is high philosophy and grand themes, wholesale metaphors kinda than the gritty details of practice. Three critical issues be left feeded to date each is es displaceial for rough-and-ready implementation. First is the question of meaning. We need a plausible, well-grounded definition of learning organizations it must be actionable and easy to apply.Second is the question of management. We need cle ber guidelines for practice, filled with operational advice rather than high aspirations. And third is the question of measurement. We need better tools for assessing an organizations rate and level of learning to see to it that gains give in fact been made. erst these three Ms are addressed, managers go out have a firmer foundation for entering learning organizations. Without this groundwork, progress is unalikely, and for the dewy-eyedst of reasons. For learning to find a meaningful corporate goal, it must first be understood. What Is a learn Organization?Surprisingly, a clear definition of learning has proved to be problematical over the years. organizational theorists have canvas learning for a long time the go with quotations suggest that there is hushed considerable disagreement (see Definitions of Organizational attainment on page 77). Most scholars collect organizational learning as a offshoot that unfolds over time and association it with familiarity acquisition and improve performance. just they differ on other all- definitive(prenominal) matte rs. Some, for example, believe that behavioral modification is required. for learning others insist that new ways of thinking are luxuriant.Some cite education attending as the mechanism through which learning takes place others propose-shared insights, organizational routines, regular memo. And some think that organizational learning is common, speckle others believe that flawed, self-serving interpretations are the norm. How can we discern among this cacophony of voices to that extent build on earlier insights? As a first step, consider the succeeding(a) definition A learning organization is an organization skilled at creating, getting and transferring fellowship, and at modifying its behavior to reflect new familiarity and insights.This definition begins with a simple truth new ideas are essential if learning is to take place. sometimes they are created de novo, through flashes of insight or creativeness at other times they do from extracurricular the organization or are communicated by associationable insiders. whatsoever their on the loose(p)ing, these ideas are the trigger for organizational improvement. But they cannot by themselves create a learning organization. Without ac come withing changes in the way that work gets done, except the potency for improvement exists.This is a astonishingly stringent test for it rules out a number of distinct candidates for learning organizations. umpteen universities fail to trans throw, as do many consulting firms. Even command Motors, despite its youthful efforts to improve performance, is found wanting. solely of these organizations have been effective at creating or getting new knowledge plainly notably less prospered in applying that knowledge to their feature activities. Total grapheme management, for example, is now taught at many business schools, yet the number utilise it to guide their own decision making is very diminished.Organizational consultants advise clients on socia l kinetics and small-group behavior but are ill-famed for their own infighting and factionalism. And GM, with a few exceptions (like Saturn and NUMMI), has had exact success in revamping its manufacturing practices, evening though its managers are experts on lean manufacturing, JIT doing, and the requirements for improved attribute of work life. Organizations that do make it the definitional test Honda, Corning, and General Electric come tenderly to mind have, by contrast, become adept at translating new knowledge into new ways of behaving.These companies actively manage the learning process to ensure that it occurs by stick out rather than by chance. typical policies and practices are responsible for their success they form the building blocks of learning organizations. Building Blocks discipline organizations are skilled at five main activities systematic problem solving, experiment with new progressiones, learning from their own experience and past history, learnin g from the experiences and best practices of others, and transferring knowledge quickly and efficiently throughout the organization. several(prenominal)ly is accompanied by a typical lookout, tool kit, and pattern of behavior. Many companies practice these activities to some degree. But few are consistently successful because they rely largely on happenstance and isolated examples. By creating systems and processes that support these activities and integrate them into the fabric of routine operations, companies can manage their learning to a greater extent than(prenominal) effectively. 1. Systematic problem solving. This first activity rests heavily on the philosophy and methods of the tonus movement.Its primal ideas, now widely accepted, include Relying on the scientific method, rather than guesswork, for analyse problems (what Deming calls the Plan, Do, Check, Act cycle, and others refer to as hypothesis-generating, hypothesistesting techniques). insistency on data, ra ther than assumptions, as land for decision making (what quality practitioners call fact-based management). Using simple statistical tools (histograms, Pareto charts, correlations, cause-and-effect diagrams) to organize data and draw inferences.Most training programs focus primarily on problem solving techniques, using exercises and unimaginative examples. These tools are relatively straightforward and comfortably communicated the necessary mind-set, however, is much difficult to establish. accuracy and precision are essential for learning. Employees must therefore become more bust in their thinking and more captive to details. They must continually ask, How do we know thats true? , recognizing that close enough is not good enough if historical learning is to take place.They must labour beyond obvious symptoms to assess underlying causes, often collecting evidence when pompous wisdom says it is unnecessary. Otherwise, the organization will remain a prisoner of gut facts and baggy reasoning, and learning will be stifled. Xerox has mastered this approach on a keep friendshipwide scale. In 1983, senior managers launched the companys Leadership Through Quality endeavour since wherefore, all employees have been trained in small-group activities and problem-solving techniques. instantly a six-step process is utilise for virtually all decisions (see Xeroxs Problem-Solving Process).Employees are provided with tools in quad areas generating ideas and collecting information (brainstorming, interviewing, surveying) make consensus (list reduction, rating forms, weighted voting) analyzing and displaying data (cause-andeffect diagrams, force- vault of heaven analysis) and planning actions ( diminish charts, Gantt charts). They then practice these-tools during training sessions that experience several days. educational activity is presented in family groups, members of the alike(p) section or business- social unit aggroup, and the tools are applied to substantial problems facing the group.The result of this process has been a common vocabulary and a consistent, companywide approach to problem solving. erst employees have been trained, they are expected to use the techniques at all meetings, and no topic is absent limits. When a high-level group was formed to followup Xeroxs organizational social organisation and suggest alternatives, it employed the very same process and tools. 2. Experimentation. This activity quests the systematic probing for and testing of new knowledge. Using the scientific method is essential, and there are obvious parallels to systematic problem solving.But unlike problem solving, experimentation is normally motivate by opportunity and expanding horizons, not by current difficulties. It takes two main forms current programs and one-ofa-kind demonstration molds. Ongoing programs normally involve a inveterate series of small experiments, knowing to produce incremental gains in knowledge. They a re the mainstay of most continuous improvement programs and are in particular common on the shop floor. Corning, for example, experiments continually with several(a) raw materials and new formulations to extend yields and provide better grades of glass.Allegheny Ludlum, a specialty steelmaker, on a regular basis examines new rolling methods and improved technologies to cram reapingiveness and reduce lives. Successful on-going programs share several characteristics. First, they work herculean to ensure a steady flow of new ideas, even if they must be imported from outside the organization. Chaparral Steel sends its first-line supervisors on sabbaticals around the globe, where they reproof faculty member and industry leaders, develop an savvy of new Xeroxs Problem-Solving Process graduationQuestions to be Answered What do we want to change? Expansion/ Divergence Lots of problems for stipulation Contraction/ Convergence unrivaled problem statement, one desired state con cur upon Whats near to Go to the Next Step Identification of the gap craved state described in observable terms Key causes documented and be 1. Identify and select problem 2. fail Problem Whats preventing us from reaching the desired state? How could we make the change? Whats the best way to do it? Lots of potential causes set.Key causes set and verified 3. Generate potential etymons 4. distribute and plan the solution Lots of ideas on how to solve the problem Lots of criteria for evaluating potential solutions. Lots of ideas on how to implement and respect the selected solution Potential solutions clarified Criteria to use for evaluating solution agreed upon Implementation and military rating plans agreed upon Implementation of agreed-on contingency plans (if necessary) military strength of solution agreed upon Continuing problems (if any) identified Solution List.Plan for making and catch the change Measurement criteria to evaluate solution effectiveness 5. Implement t he solution be we following the plan? Solution in place 6. Evaluate the solution How well did it work? Verification that the problem is solved, or Agreement to address continuing problems work practices and technologies, then bring what theyve learned prickle to the company and apply it to daily operations. Inlarge part as a result of these initiatives, Chaparral is one of the five lowest cost steel plants in the world.GEs Impact Program originally sent manufacturing managers to Japan to study factory innovations, such(prenominal) as quality circles and kanban cards, and then apply them in their own organizations like a shot atomic number 63 is the destination, and increaseivity improvement practices the target. The program is one reason GE has recorded productivity gains averaging nearly 5% over the last four years. Successful current programs as well as require an incentive system that favors try taking. Employees must feel that the benefits of experimentation go past the cost otherwise, they will not participate.This creates a difficult challenge for managers, who are pin down between two perilous extremes. They must maintain accountability and restrict over experiments without stifling creativity by unduly penalizing employees for tribulations. Allegheny Ludlum has perfected this juggling act it keeps expensive, high- impingement experiments off the scorecard used to evaluate managers but requires prior approvals from four senior vice presidents. The result has been=a history of productivity improvements annually avenging 7% to 8%.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 ordinarily be learned. They cover a broad(a) sweep statistical methods, like design of experiments, that efficiently equalize a large number of alternatives graphical techniques, like process analysis, that are essential for re calculative work f lows and creativity techniques, like storyboarding and role playing, that keep invention ideas flowing. The most effective training programs are tightly focused and feature a small set of techniques tai apprehensiond to employees necessitate.Training in design of experiments, for example, is useful for manufacturing engineers, while creativity techniques are well desirable to development groups. manifestation aims are usually larger and more complex than ongoing experiments. They involve holistic, system wide changes, enfoldd at a single direct, and are often undertaken with the goal of developing new organizational capabilities. Because these projects represent a sharp jade from the past, they are usually designed from scratch, using a clean slate approach.General Foodss Topeka plant, one of the first high commitment work systems in this country, was a pioneering demonstration project initiated to introduce the idea of self-managing aggroups and high levels of worker self -sufficiency a more recent example, designed to rethink small-car development, manufacturing, and sales, is GMs Saturn Division. Demonstration projects share a number of distinctive characteristics They are usually the first projects to be principles and approaches that the organization hopes to adopt ulterior on a larger scale.For this reason, they are more transitional efforts than endpoints and involve considerable learning by doing. Mid-course corrections are common. They implicitly establish policy guidelines and decision rules for later projects. Managers must therefore be cutting to the precedents they are setting and must send gruelling signals if they expect to establish new norms. They often encounter severe tests of commitment from employees who wish to see whether the rules have, in fact, changed. They are normally developed by strong multifunctional teams reporting directly to senior management.(For projects targeting employee familiarity or quality of work l ife, teams should be multilevel as well. ) They tend to have only limited impact on the rest of the organization if they are not accompanied by explicit strategies for transferring learning. All of these characteristics appeared in a demonstration project launched by Copeland Corporation, a highly successful compressor manufacturer, in the mid-1970s. Matt Diggs, then the new CEO, wanted to transform the companys approach to manufacturing. 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. At the outset, Diggs appoint a small, multifunctional team the task of designing a focused factory consecrate to a narrow, newly developed product line. The team reported directly to Diggs and took three years to complete its work. Initially, the project cipher was $10 zillion to $12 gazillion that figure was repeatedly revised as the team found, through experience and wi th Diggss prodding, that it could achieve dramatic improvements. The final investment, a total of $30 million, yielded unanticipated breakthroughs in reliability testing, automatic tool adjustment, and programmable control.All were achieved through learning by doing. The team set step-upal precedents during the plants start-up and early operations. To dramatize the importance of quality, for example, the quality manager was appointed second-in-command, a operative move upward. The same reporting kin was used at all succeeding plants. In addition, Diggs urged the plant manager to wild leek 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(prenominal) directives were quickly tested management held firm, and the implications were felt throughout the organization. Manufacturings stature improved, and the company as a whole recognized its competitive contribu tion. One observer commented, Marketing had always run the company, so they couldnt believe it. The change was visible at the highest levels, and it went down hard. Once the first focused factory was runway smoothly -it seized 25% of the market in two years and held its edge in reliability for over a decade-Copeland built four more factories in quick succession.Diggs assigned members of the initial project to each factorys design team to ensure that early learnings were not woolly-headed these people later rotated into in operation(p) assignments. Today focused factories remain the radical of Copelands manufacturing strategy and a continuing source of its cost and quality advantages. Whether they are demonstration projects like Copelands or ongoing programs like Allegheny Ludlums, all forms of experimentation seek the same end piteous from superficial knowledge to deep accord. At its simplest, the distinction is between knowing how things are done and knowing why they occur. sharp 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 causeand-effect relationships and accommodates exceptions, adaptations, and unforeseen events. The ability to control temperatures and pressures to align grains of ti and form silicon steel is an example of knowing how understanding the chemical and physical process that produces the co-occurrence is knowing why. Further distinctions are possible, as the insert Stages of Knowledge suggests.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 level to higher stages of knowledge. 3. Learning from past experience. Companies must review thei r successes and failures, assess them systematically, and record the lessons in a form that employers find open and accessible.One expert has called t9is process the Santayana Review, citing the renowned philosopher George Santayana, who coined the phrase Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. Unfortunately, too many managers today are indifferent, even hostile, to the past, and by flunk to reflect on it, they let worth(predicate) knowledge escape. A study of more than 150 new products concluded that the knowledge gained from failures is often instrumental in achieving later(prenominal) successes. In the simplest terms, failure is the ultimate teacher. IBMs 360 computer series, for example, one of the most democratic and profitable ever built, was based on the technology of the failed Stretch computer that preceded it. In this cutting, as in many others, learning occurred by chance rather than by careful planning. A few companies, however, have constit uted processes that require their managers to periodically think virtually the past and learn from their mistakes. Boeing did so contiguously subsequently its difficulties with the 737 and 747 plane programs. Both planes were introduced with much fanfare and also with skilful problems.To ensure that the problems were not repeated, senior managers licensed a high-level employee group, called Project Homework, to compare the development processes of the 737 and 747 with those of the 707 and 727, two of the companys most profitable planes. The group was asked to develop a set of lessons learned that could be used on future projects. after(prenominal) working for three years, they produced hundreds of recommendations and an inch-thick booklet. Several members of the team were then transferred to the 757 and 767 start-ups, and guided by experience, they produced the most successful, error-free launches in Boeings history.Other companies have used a similar retrospective approach. L ike Boeing, Xerox studied its product development process, examining three troubled products in an effort to understand why the companys new business initiatives failed so often. Arthur D. Little, the consulting company, focused on its past successes. higher-ranking management invited ADL consultants from around the world to a two-day jamboree, featuring booths and presentations documenting a wide range of the companys most successful practices, publications, and techniques.British Petroleum went even further and established the post-project appraisal unit to review study investment projects, write up pillow slip studies, and derive lessons for planners that were then incorporated into revisions of the companys planning guidelines. A five-person unit reported to the board of directors and reviewed six projects annually. The stack of the time was spent in the field interviewing managers. This type of review is now conducted on a regular basis at the project level. At the spirit of this approach, one expert has observed, is a mind-set that enables companies to recognize the value of fur-bearing failure as contrasted with unproductive success. 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. IBMs legendary founder, Thomas Watson, Sr. , manifestly understood the distinction well. Company lore has it that a immature manager after losing $10 million in a risky venture was called into Watsons office. The young man, thoroughly intimidated, began by saying, I guess you want my resignation. Watson replied, You cant be serious. We just spent $10 million educating you. Fortunately, the learning process need not be so expensive. Case studies and post-project reviews like those of Xerox and British Petroleum can be performed with little cost other than managers time. Companies can also enlist the dish up 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.At Paul esteem Life Insurance, management requires all problem-solving teams to complete short registration forms describing their proposed projects if they hope to qualify for the companys award program. The company then enters the forms into its computer system and can immediately retrieve a list of other groups of people who have worked or are working on the topic, on with a contact person. Relevant experience is then just a promise call away. 4. Learning from others. Of course, not all learning comes from reflection and self-analysis.Sometimes the most powerful insights come from looking outside ones immediate environment to gain a new perspective. instruct managers know that even c ompanies in on the whole different businesses can be full-bodied sources of ideas and catalysts for creative thinking. At these organizations, enthusiastic borrow is replacing the not invented here syndrome. Milliken calls the process SIS, for Steal Ideas Shamelessly the broader term for it is benchmarking. check to one expert, benchmarking is an ongoing investigation and learning experience that ensures that best industry practices are uncovered, analyzed, adopted, and implemented. The greatest benefits come from studying practices, the way that work gets done, rather than results, and from involving line managers in the process. Almost anything can be benchmarked. Xerox, the images creator, has applied it to billing, warehousing, and automated manufacturing. Milliken has been even more creative in an exalt moment, it benchmarked Xeroxs approach to benchmarking. Unfortunately, there is still considerable confusion about the requirements for successful benchmarking. workbench marking is not industrial tourism, a series of ad hoc visits to companies that have standard favorable publicity or win quality awards.Rather, it is a disciplined process that begins with a thorough search to light upon best-practice organizations, continues with careful study of ones own practices and performance, progresses through systematic commit visits and interview and concludes with an analysis of results, development of recommendations, and implementation. spot timeconsuming, the process need not be terribly expensive AT&Ts Benchmarking Group estimates that a moderate-sized project takes four to six months and incurs out-of-pocket costs of $20,000 (when personnel costs ax included, the figure is three to four times higher).Bench marking 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 street s mart product information, competitive comparisons, insights into changing preferences, and immediate feedback about service and patt ern of use. And companies need these insights at all levels, from the executive cortege to the shop floor. At Motorola, members of the Operating and polity Committee, including the CEO, meet personally and on a regular basis with customers.At Worthington Steel, all machine operators make periodic, unescorted trips to customers factories to discuss their needs. Sometimes customers cant articulate their needs or remember even the most recent problems they have had with a product or service. If thats the case, managers must observe them in action. Xerox employs a number of anthropologists at its Palo Alto Research heart to observe users of new document products in their offices. Digital Equipment has developed an interactive process called contextual inquiry that is used by software engineers to observe users of new technologies as they go about their work.Milliken has created first-delivery teams that accompany the first shipment of all products team members follow the product through the customers production process to see how it is used and then develop ideas for further improvement. Whatever the source of outside ideas, learning will only occur in a receptive environment. Managers cant be defensive and must be open to criticism or bad news. This is a difficult challenge, but it is essential for success.Companies that approach customers assuming that we must be right, they have to be wrong or visit other organizations certain that they cantteach us anything seldom learn very much. Learning organizations, by contrast, groom the art of open, attentive listening. 5. Transferring knowledge. 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 p rocess, 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. Reports serve many purposes they summarize findings, provide checklists of dos and donts, and describe important processes and events. They cover a multitude of topics, from benchmarking studies to write up 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.