Organizational learning and emotion:constructing collective meaning in support of strategic themes

Missing in the organizational learning literature is an integrative framework that reflects the emotional as well as the cognitive dynamics involved. Here, we take a step in this direction by focusing in depth over time (five years) on a selected organization which manufactures electronic equipment for the office industry. Drawing on personal construct theory, we define organizational learning as the collective re-construal of meaning in the direction of strategically significant themes. We suggest that emotions arise as members reflect on progress or lack of progress in achieving organizational learning. Our evidence suggests that invalidation - where organizational learning fails to correspond with expectations - gives rise to anxiety and frustration, while validation - where organizational learning is aligned with or exceeds expectations - evokes comfort or excitement. Our work aims to capture the key emotions involved as organizational learning proceeds. © The Author(s) 2012.

Organisational learning - a critical systems thinking discipline

Original Paper European Journal of Information Systems (2001) 10, 135–146; doi:10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000394 Organisational learning—a critical systems thinking discipline P Panagiotidis1,3 and J S Edwards2,4 1Deloitte and Touche, Athens, Greece 2Aston Business School, Aston University, Aston Triangle, Birmingham, B4 7ET, UK Correspondence: Dr J S Edwards, Aston Business School, Aston University, Aston Triangle, Birmingham, B4 7ET, UK. E-mail: j.s.edwards@aston.ac.uk 3Petros Panagiotidis is Manager responsible for the Process and Systems Integrity Services of Deloitte and Touche in Athens, Greece. He has a BSc in Business Administration and an MSc in Management Information Systems from Western International University, Phoenix, Arizona, USA; an MSc in Business Systems Analysis and Design from City University, London, UK; and a PhD degree from Aston University, Birmingham, UK. His doctorate was in Business Systems Analysis and Design. His principal interests now are in the ERP/DSS field, where he serves as project leader and project risk managment leader in the implementation of SAP and JD Edwards/Cognos in various major clients in the telecommunications and manufacturing sectors. In addition, he is responsible for the development and application of knowledge management systems and activity-based costing systems. 4John S Edwards is Senior Lecturer in Operational Research and Systems at Aston Business School, Birmingham, UK. He holds MA and PhD degrees (in mathematics and operational research respectively) from Cambridge University. His principal research interests are in knowledge management and decision support, especially methods and processes for system development. He has written more than 30 research papers on these topics, and two books, Building Knowledge-based Systems and Decision Making with Computers, both published by Pitman. Current research work includes the effect of scale of operations on knowledge management, interfacing expert systems with simulation models, process modelling in law and legal services, and a study of the use of artifical intelligence techniques in management accounting. Top of pageAbstract This paper deals with the application of critical systems thinking in the domain of organisational learning and knowledge management. Its viewpoint is that deep organisational learning only takes place when the business systems' stakeholders reflect on their actions and thus inquire about their purpose(s) in relation to the business system and the other stakeholders they perceive to exist. This is done by reflecting both on the sources of motivation and/or deception that are contained in their purpose, and also on the sources of collective motivation and/or deception that are contained in the business system's purpose. The development of an organisational information system that captures, manages and institutionalises meaningful information—a knowledge management system—cannot be separated from organisational learning practices, since it should be the result of these very practices. Although Senge's five disciplines provide a useful starting-point in looking at organisational learning, we argue for a critical systems approach, instead of an uncritical Systems Dynamics one that concentrates only on the organisational learning practices. We proceed to outline a methodology called Business Systems Purpose Analysis (BSPA) that offers a participatory structure for team and organisational learning, upon which the stakeholders can take legitimate action that is based on the force of the better argument. In addition, the organisational learning process in BSPA leads to the development of an intrinsically motivated information organisational system that allows for the institutionalisation of the learning process itself in the form of an organisational knowledge management system. This could be a specific application, or something as wide-ranging as an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) implementation. Examples of the use of BSPA in two ERP implementations are presented.

Building belief in organizational learning: the role of organizational learning efficacy

There appears to be a missing dimension in OL literature to embrace the collective experience of emotion, both within groups and communities and also across the organization as a whole. The concept of OL efficacy- as a stimulus offering energy and direction for learning - remains unexplored. This research involved engaging with a company we have called ‘Electroco’ in depth to create a rich and nuanced representation of OL and members’ perceptions of OL over an extended time-frame (five years). We drew upon grounded theory research methodology (Locke, 2001), to elicit feedback from the organization, which was then used to inform future research plans and/ or refine emerging ideas. The concept of OL efficacy gradually emerged as a factor to be considered when exploring the relationship between individual learning and OL. . Bearing in mind Bandura’s (1982) conceptualization of self-efficacy (linked with mastery, modelling, verbal persuasion and emotional arousal), we developed a coding strategy encompassing these four factors as conceptualized at the organizational level. We added a fifth factor: ‘control of OL.’ We focused on feelings across the organization and the extent of consensus or otherwise around these five attributes. The construct has potential significance for how people are managed in many ways. Not only is OL efficacy is difficult for competitors to copy (arising as it does from the collective experience of working within a specific context); the self-efficacy concept suggests that success can be engineered with ‘small wins’ to reinforce mastery perceptions. Leaders can signal the importance of interaction with the external context, and encourage reflection on the strategies adopted by competitors or benchmark organizations (modelling). The theory also underlines the key role managers may play in persuading others about their organization’s propensity to learn (by focusing on success stories, for example). Research is set to continue within other sectors, including the high-performance financial service sector as well as the health-care technology sector.