Facilitating unlearning during implementation of new technology

Purpose – One of the critical issues for change management, particularly in relation to the implementation of new technologies, is the existence of prior knowledge and established mental models which may hinder change efforts. Understanding unlearning and how it might assist during organizational change is a way to address this resistance. The purpose of this paper is to present research designed to identify specific factors that facilitate unlearning. Design/methodology/approach – Drawing together issues identified as potential influencers of unlearning, a survey questionnaire was developed and administered in an Australian corporation undergoing large-scale change due to the implementation of an enterprise information system. The results were analyzed to identify specific factors that impact on unlearning. Findings – Findings from this paper identify factors that hinder or help the unlearning process during times of change including understanding the need for change, the level of organizational support and training, assessment of the change, positive experience and informal support, the organization's history of change, individual's prior outlooks, and individuals' feelings and expectations. Research limitations/implications – The use of only one organization does not allow for comparisons between organizations of different sizes, cultures or industries and therefore extension of this research is recommended. Practical implications – For practitioners, this paper provides specific elements at both the level of individuals and the organization that need to be considered for optimal unlearning during times of change. Originality/value – Previous literature on unlearning has been predominantly conceptual and theoretical. These empirical findings serve to further an earlier model based on qualitative research into potential influencers of unlearning.

Unlearning leadership in the conceptual age

"We live in times in which unlearning has become as important as learning. Dan Pink has called these times the Conceptual Age,i to distinguish them from the Knowledge/Information Age in which many of us were born and educated. Before the current Conceptual Age, the core business of learning was the routine accessing of information to solve routine problems, so there was real value in retaining and reusing the templates taught to us at schools and universities. What is different about the Conceptual Age is that it is characterised by new cultural forms and modes of consumption that require us to unlearn our Knowledge/Information Age habits to live well in our less predictable social world. The ‘correct’ way to write, for example, is no longer ‘correct’ if communicating by hypertext rather than by essay or letter. And who would bother with an essay or a letter or indeed a pen these days? Whether or not we agree that the Conceptual Age, amounts to the first real generation gap since rock and roll, as Ken Robinson claims,ii it certainly makes unique demands of educators, just as it makes unique demands of the systems, strategies and sustainability of organisations. Foremost among these demands, according to innovation analyst Charlie Leadbeater,iii is to unlearn the idea that we are becoming a more knowledgeable society with each new generation. If knowing means being intimately familiar with the knowledge embedded in the technologies we use in our daily lives, then, Leadbeater says, we have never been more ignorant.iv He reminds us that our great grandparents had an intimate knowledge of the technologies around them, and had no problem with getting the butter churn to work or preventing the lamp from smoking. Few of us would know what to do if our mobile phones stopped functioning, just as few of us know what is ‘underneath’ or ‘behind’ the keys of our laptops. Nor, indeed, do many of us want to know. But this means that we are all very quickly reduced to the quill and the lamp if we lose our power sources or if our machines cease to function. This makes us much more vulnerable – as well as much more ignorant in relative terms – than our predecessors."