Two Schools of Thought on Organizational Learning

Discuss about the Learning Organization for Journal of Production Research.

Leadership is both a research area and a practical skill combining the ability of the individual to lead to guide organization or other individuals on the path of sustained success ensuring business sustainability. Leadership is not just restricted to organizational or societal level, it even extends to one’s own personal life. A leader is thus responsible for ensuring the success of his organization, society, community and also his followers (Yang, Sechi & Homberg, 2018). John Maxwell has aptly defined a leader by stating that Leader is the one who knows the way, goes the way and shows the way to other individuals. The essay here will focus on exploring the three ways of knowing, going and showing using the theories of organizational learning and reflect on one’s own leadership journey.

There is plethora of literature on organizational learning, primarily because it was extremely pivotal to understand how organizational learning occurs and what can be done to overcome the challenges and obstacles in the way of organizational learning (Alavi et.al, 2014). There exists two schools of thoughts on organizational learning; each has its own focus area. Cognitive school of organizational learning focuses on “thinking” aspect of organizational learning while behavioural learning focuses on the act of “doing”. Cognitive school of learning states that an individual learns from mental models, schemas which help one understand events and situation and helps to respond to the environment((Theodorakopoulos and Figueira, 2012)

 On the other hand, the behavioural school of learning assets that an individual learns by gaining insight and understanding from experience thorough experimentation. It can be clearly said that organizational learning has two schools of learning, where in one focuses on “thinking” and other on “Doing” (Jung and Takeuchi, 2010).I personally believe more in behaviour school of organizational learning, because I believe in learning from the experiences and situation, which forms the rationale of my “doing” part of leadership.

There are three unique theories of organizational learning viz. experimental learning derived from cognitive school, adaptive and generative learning theory which is also derived from cognitive learning and assimilation theory which is derived from behavioural school of learning (Molderex and Ceulemans, 2018). The theories will form the preamble of the art of knowing, going and showing in leadership. Kolb in the year 1984 propounded the experimental learning theory which is closely based on psychology, philosophy and physiology; the organizational learning theory significantly influenced leadership and contributed towards organizational development. The preamble of the theory is based on the learning process which begins through grasping of information and transforming experiences (Cotae, Musabende and Valladares, 2016). The theory has four components which influence leadership, which are as follows: concrete experience and abstract conceptualization which covers the grasping component, whereas reflective observation and active experimentation which takes care of transforming experience component (Kim, 2016). Both the component is the pillars which influence leadership. The learning process here is a cyclic process where the leader or the learner goes through the sequence of experiencing, reflecting, thinking and acting in a repeated sequence which contributes towards his learning experience. It can be thus said that a leader can enter the learning cycle at any stage but he has to sequentially follow all the steps to be an influential leader. I personally have been focussing on this experiential learning theory by following all the stages in my organization. Working at Amazon I have been enrolled into a leadership development program, wherein I have been learning numerous things on leadership by the virtue of teaching and by experiences which I have been seeing in the program.

Three Theories of Organizational Learning

In accordance to adaptive and generative learning theory, Senge stated that adaptive learning is create on the foundation of existing wisdom and knowledge and modifying the same with new thinking to fulfil personal or organizational objective(Chiva, Grandio and Alegre, 2010). I use generative learning in my day to day activity in organization and in my personal life by the virtue of existing learning and being flexible enough to learn the new ways of learning and thinking to give an impetus to my leadership and my personality. Generative learning on the other hand is a different kind of learning which is needed to bring out radical new ideas for change or to create any kind of disruption in the organization or one’s personal life(Sessa et al., 2011). I have a personal experience to share on the concept of generative learning, I understood very early in my business career that if I have to compete in the dynamic industry I need to acquire a couple of skills which are highly differentiated and valued in the business ecosystem. I was one of the first few ones who completed the Google certification program of Digital learning; I got the opportunity to work in Amazon due to this unique skill 7 years back. This was generative learning which was needed to make my life move forward by bringing change.

Assimilation theory is an extension of behavioural learning approach unlike the other two which focuses on thinking rather than doing (Leipold et al., 2014). The assimilation learning theory describes learning as observable, rational and quantifiable due to its coherent approach of taking action. The theory is further broken down into three stages which decodes the way a person acts; acquisition of knowledge, sharing of knowledge and towards the end utilizing the knowledge to achieve the desired result for oneself and the organization (Xie and Greenman, 2011)

Leadership can thus said to be an amalgamation of all the three organizational learning theories, which helps the leader to best adapt to the situation by developing a coherent learning and understanding of the behavioural and cognitive dimensions of leadership (Argote, 2012). Steve jobs is a great example of leadership who does things by knowing , going forward with them and in an impeccable way show it to a large number of audience and even the organization. Steve Jobs after spotting Steve Wozniak making a machine in a box knew that it is the harbinger of progress and innovation. He knew right from there that if the product can be developed into a full- fledged product which has great utility for consumer, it will automatically become a massive hit. Thus, he “knew” the potential of the PC market and how it can be developed. He went forward with the idea of Steve Wozniak and started working on to make it a great product by adding certain modifications into the product. He was sure that he can easily go forward with the idea. In the last, it was present and showing to the world and organization that Apple is capable of creating breath taking consumer product which has high utility for the consumer audience. Thus Steve Jobs ably applied the logic of “knowing”, “going” and “showing” in his leadership style. He was one of the most criticized and influential leader of his times and still is recognized as one of the most creative and innovative leader of his times.

Reflecting on Personal Leadership Journey

I have been adopting the adaptive and generative organizational learning theory in my business and personal conduct. I believe in learning through experimentation and gaining insight from the examples, I then apply my own logic to conduct myself at business or in my personal life. For example, at Amazon working as a digital marketing team lead, I first enrolled myself in learning advanced digital marketing; this was done to focus on my “knowing” of things. Knowing digital marketing in much depth would help me in going forward with my leadership approach in developing and winning confidence of my team members and tell them how to go forward in their business approach. I was so focussed on going forward with my learning and sharing my wisdom and knowledge to be the best digital marketing team at Amazon. The result I achieved after “knowing” and “going forward” was great to show to the management that I can be a good team leader. The art of “knowing”, “going” and “showing” was thus demonstrated in my organizational journey. Leadership is extremely tricky, to some people it comes naturally and some people have to adapt themselves to the virtues of being a great leader, however, the right style of leadership is the knowing the way, going the way and then showing the way to the organization and its employees.

Organizational learning theories are broadly divided into two school of thought; one being the cognitive school of learning which focuses on thinking aspect of learning while the other focuses on behavioural school of learning which focuses on the doing aspect of learning(Bernstein, 2012). These two theories shape an individual in carrying out his leadership style at business organization. Similarly, the experiential organization learning, adaptive and generative learning and assimilation learning theories are the extension of cognitive and behaviour school of learning. To, conclude it can be say that leadership is encompassing the practical skill learned in the organization to lead the organization to the zenith of success. There is no leadership style which can be said as the ultimate style, it depends hugely on how an individual responds and reacts to the organizational learning theories and encompasses it to lead the organization. It is rightly said that a true leader is the one who knows the way, goes the way and shows the way.

References

Alavi, S., Abd. Wahab, D., Muhamad, N. and Arbab Shirani, B. (2014) Organic structure and organisational learning as the main antecedents of workforce agility. International Journal of Production Research, 52(21), pp.6273-6295.

Argote, L. (2012) Organizational learning: Creating, retaining and transferring knowledge. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.

Bernstein, E.S. (2012) The transparency paradox: A role for privacy in organizational learning and operational control. Administrative Science Quarterly, 57(2), pp.181-216.

Chiva, R., Grandío, A. and Alegre, J. (2010) Adaptive and generative learning: Implications from complexity theories. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(2), pp.114-129.

Cotae, F.F., Musabende, J. and Valladares, I.H. (2016) Experiential Learning: Looking At Glo-Bus for Teaching International Business Courses. Allied Academies International Internet Conference, p. 171.

Jung, Y. and Takeuchi, N. (2010) Performance implications for the relationships among top management leadership, organizational culture, and appraisal practice: testing two theory-based models of organizational learning theory in Japan. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 21(11), pp.1931-1950.

Kim, S. (2016) Cognitive hierarchy thinking based behavioral game model for IoT power control algorithm. Computer Networks, 110, pp.79-90.

Leipold, B., Bermeitinger, C., Greve, W., Meyer, B., Arnold, M. and Pielniok, M. (2014) Short-term induction of assimilation and accommodation. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(12), pp.2392-2408.

Molderez, I. and Ceulemans, K. (2018) The power of art to foster systems thinking, one of the key competencies of education for sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 186, pp.758-770.

Sessa, V.I., London, M., Pingor, C., Gullu, B. and Patel, J. (2011) Adaptive, generative, and transformative learning in project teams. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 17(3/4), pp.146-167.

Theodorakopoulos, N. and Figueira, C. (2012) What Can Situated Learning Theory Tell Us About Leading to Develop Organizational Learning Capabilities for Entrepreneurial Performance? Lessons from a Knowledge?Intensive Small Firm. Thunderbird International Business Review, 54(6), pp.859-873.

Xie, Y. and Greenman, E. (2011) The social context of assimilation: Testing implications of segmented assimilation theory. Social science research, 40(3), pp.965-984.

Yang, Y., Secchi, D. and Homberg, F. (2018) Are organisational defensive routines harmful to the relationship between personality and organisational learning?. Journal of Business Research, 85, pp.155-164.