No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Components of a Successful Training Model for Statistical Reporting in the Pharmaceutical Industry
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
We have found that many people talk about learning organizations without realizing the underlying assumptions that are required to develop a learning organiza-tion. Once we facilitated a group training and did a blitz survey about how many people believed they work in a learning organization. All but two out of 18 people believed they worked for a learning orga-nization. They associated the concept of learning organization with the learning opportunities their organizations offered to employees. By the end of the training, in which we explored the concept of learning organizations, we asked the same ques-tion again and only two out of 16 said they worked for a learning organization. Why? They realized that there is much more to the concept of organizational learning than the amount of training people can take.TwoTypesofLearningTo explore this concept, we will begin with the word "learning." There are two types of learning—informative and transforma-tive (Kegan, 2000). Simplistically speak-ing, informative learning allows people to learn more about the things that fit their mental models, while transformative learning is the process of changing mental models. To be consistent, we will use the term mental model across the article to describe a set of beliefs that generates people's assumptions and values and informs their motivations. The terms mental model and belief system will be used interchangeably. A simplistic metaphor for the two kinds of learning may help. Imagine you made a swimming hole in the backyard: you dug a hole, added water, and had a place to swim. You could embellish it by adding a diving board perhaps, or a rope swing, but in essence, it is a swimming hole. In this metaphor, the additions and changes are informative learning — taking in only the new information which fits with one's preconceived mental model of a swimming hole. But what if you saw that some people grew fish in their ponds, and the idea comes that you could expand the swimming hole to make it a fish farm too. You could reject this idea right away; you could understand that different people have different needs but you choose not to have fish; or you could become a fish farm fan. Converting your swimming hole into a fish farm/swimming hole is transformative learning, at least in this simplistic meta-phor. Your mental model changed.Transformative learning happens in stages, which we will illustrate with an example of intercultural interaction, because individuals from different cultures have absolutely different mental models of life. In the first stage, rejection, the person rejects, (or ignores, denies, dismisses—pick a word) any new information that does not fit in the current mental model. Often, during this stage, the carrier of the other mental model is viewed as being, at best ridiculous, or wrong, or at worst evil. The readers perhaps can relate to their own experience when they faced a culture that was extremely different from their own, and thus can recreate the plethora of 5What?assumptions (often inaccurate), feelings, and emotions that came with this.In the second stage, understanding, the person gets used to the idea that there are other ideas, assumptions, or values, which have the right to exist, and this is fine, as long as the person does not have to use or accept them. The readers perhaps have often heard a phrase, "we agree to disagree." This reflects that the parties understand that the other has a different opinion but are adamant about their own positions and reluctant to even try some-thing different. Using the intercultural example, this would be a situation when one has to live in a different culture for a short time, perhaps during travel. The person very much sticks to her own mental model, eats only foods she is used to, does only things she is used to, and does not venture off the beaten track. The person may find the other mental model amusing, but does not have to fight it, and does not certainly accept it for herself.In the third stage, using, the person tries out new behaviors from a different mental model, either by choice, or because this is the only way to adapt to a new envi-ronment. In our intercultural example, that would be a person who has to live in a dif-ferent culture for a longer time and finds some customs of this new culture accept-able. The person tries different foods, experiences new activities and new ways of thinking as part of being in the new culture but does not feel that this is something to embrace permanently.The fourth stage, integration, is char-acterized by a creation of a mental model that incorporates the best elements of the old and new mental models and rejects elements that do not work. In our example, the person becomes bi-cultural. The per-son's mental model becomes an amalgam of beliefs and assumptions that work in a new environment. Some new ideas are accepted, and some old ideas are rejected. In Figure1, the cylinder represents one's mental model and the arrows depict ideas that are taken in. The darker arrow is information that fits the mental model, and the faded line represents ideas for a differ-ent mental model. The difference between the last two stages is the relationship
This paper presents a model of team learning and tests it in a multimethod field study. It introduces the construct of team psychological safety—a shared belief held by members of a team that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking—and models the effects of team psychological safety and team efficacy together on learning and performance in organizational work teams. Results of a study of 51 work teams in a manufacturing company, measuring antecedent, process, and outcome variables, show that team psychological safety is associated with learning behavior, but team efficacy is not, when controlling for team psychological safety. As predicted, learning behavior mediates between team psychological safety and team performance. The results support an integrative perspective in which both team structures, such as context support and team leader coaching, and shared beliefs shape team outcomes.
This paper considers the role of team learning in organizational learning. I propose that a group-level perspective provides new insight into how organizational learning is impeded, hindering effective change in response to external pressures. In contrast to previous theoretical perspectives, I suggest that organizational learning is local, interpersonal, and variegated. I present data from an exploratory study of learning processes in 12 organizational teams engaged in activities ranging from strategic planning to hands-on manufacturing of products. These qualitative data are used to investigate two components of the collective learning process--reflection to gain insight and action to produce change--and to explore how teams allow an organization to engage in both radical and incremental learning, as needed in a changing and competitive environment. I find that team members' perceptions of power and interpersonal risk affect the quality of team reflection, which has implications for their team's and their organization's ability to change.
Authentic Leadership in Contemporary Slovenian Business Environment: Explanatory Case Study of HERMES SoftLab
The paper explores the authentic leadership in learning organization in Slovenian business environment. The purpose of the paper is to present relationship between authentic leadership and learning organization. Main research thesis is focused on characteristics of authentic leadership in company HERMES SoftLab. The main thesis of this paper is that authentic leadership in learning organization enables the growth of leaders in organizational surroundings through a constant dedication to authenticity and organizational learning that will be explored through the qualitative research method of case study research approach. Key research finding is that authentic leaders can be identified in company HERMES SoftLab and that there is a mutual influence between learning organization and authentic leadership. Therefore, the main research finding is that the learning organization leverages the authentic leadership, which in turn leverages the learning organization.
This study advances prior theoretical research by linking transformational and transactional behaviors of strategic leaders to two critical outputs of organizational learning: exploratory and exploitative innovation. Findings indicate that transformational leadership behaviors contribute significantly to adopting generative thinking and pursuing exploratory innovation. Transactional leadership behaviors, on the other hand, facilitate improving and extending existing knowledge and are associated with exploitative innovation. In addition, we argue that environmental dynamism needs to be taken into account to fully understand the effectiveness of strategic leaders. Our study provides new insights that misfits rather than fits between leadership behaviors and innovative outcomes matter in dynamic environments. Hence, we contribute to the debate on the role of strategic leaders in managing exploration and exploitation, not only by examining how specific leadership behaviors impact innovative outcomes, but also by revealing how the impact of leadership is contingent upon dynamic environmental conditions.
An organization with a strong learning culture faces the unpredictable deftly. However, a concrete method for understanding precisely how an institution learns and for identifying specific steps to help it learn better has remained elusive. A new survey instrument from professors Garvin and Edmondson of Harvard Business School and assistant professor Gino of Carnegie Mellon University allows you to ground your efforts in becoming a learning organization. The tool's conceptual foundation is what the authors call the three building blocks of a learning organization. The first, a supportive learning environment, comprises psychological safety, appreciation of differences, openness to new ideas, and time for reflection. The second, concrete learning processes and practices, includes experimentation, information collection and analysis, and education and training. These two complementary elements are fortified by the final building block: leadership that reinforces learning. The survey instrument enables a granular examination of all these particulars, scores each of them, and provides a framework for detailed, comparative analysis. You can make comparisons within and among your institution's functional areas, between your organization and others, and against benchmarks that the authors have derived from their surveys of hundreds of executives in many industries. After discussing how to use their tool, the authors share the insights they acquired as they developed it. Above all, they emphasize the importance of dialogue and diagnosis as you nurture your company and its processes with the aim of becoming a learning organization. The authors' goal--and the purpose of their tool--is to help you paint an honest picture of your firm's learning culture and of the leaders who set its tone.
A learning organization is an organization skilled at creating, acquiring, and transferring knowledge, and at modifying its behavior to reflect new knowledge and insights. This paper discusses the essentials of building a learning organization. It also suggests that beyond high philosophy and grand themes, building a learning organization requires the gritty details of practice.
The problem and the solution. Some organizations seek to become learning organizations. Yet, implementation is elusive and is not often based on research about what constitutes a learning culture. Over the past 16 years, a model of a learning organization was developed that draws on both the literature and organizational case studies. However, organizations wanted a way to diagnose their current status and guide change, and scholars wanted better measures of learning to compare organizations and to explore links between organizational learning and the performance of the firm. The solution was to develop and validate an instrument that addresses these needs.
We review theoretical and empirical work relevant to the nexus of leadership with organizational learning. We build on the classic distinction between exploration and exploitation and the 4I framework of organizational learning [Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E. (1999). An organizational learning framework: From intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review, 24, 522–537.] to present previous research and offer research directions linking leadership constructs and processes of organizational learning at different levels of analysis. For each of these links, we discuss the mediating effect of organizational context and suggest future research directions. This review is integrated using a model and propositions that depict the role of leaders with regard to new and existing learning.
from questions to answers: Reviewing 2. organizational learning research
- H Bapuji
- M Crossan
Bapuji H, Crossan M (2004) from questions to answers: Reviewing
2.
organizational learning research. Management Learning 35: 397-417.
Development of a Clinical SAS Uni-7. versity Training Program in Eastern Europe
- E Pirbhai
- S Glushakov
Pirbhai E, Glushakov S (2015) Development of a Clinical SAS Uni-7.
versity Training Program in Eastern Europe. Part of Proceedings from
Pharma-SUG, Orlando FL.
) the construct of the learning 9. organization: Dimensions, measurement, and validation
- B Yang
- K E Watkins
- V J Marsick
Yang B, Watkins KE, Marsick VJ (2004) the construct of the learning
9.
organization: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Human Resource Development Quarterly 15: 31-55.
Need Global Talent? Grow Your Own
- H L Sirkin
Sirkin HL (2008) Need Global Talent? Grow Your Own. Business week
12.
Online 15.
Organizational learn-13. ing: Debates past, present and future
- M Easterby-Smith
- M Crossan
- D Nicolini
Easterby-Smith M, Crossan M, Nicolini D (2000) Organizational learn-13.
ing: Debates past, present and future. Journal of Management Studies
37: 783-796.
Organizational learning: From expe-17. rience to knowledge
- L Argote
- E Miron-Spektor
Argote L, Miron-Spektor E (2011) Organizational learning: From expe-17.
rience to knowledge. Organization Science 22: 1123-1137.
Leading learning organizations. Training and Devel-19
- P M Senge
Senge PM (1996) Leading learning organizations. Training and Devel-19.
opment 50: 36-37.
Transformative learning in practice: in-20. sight from community work place and higher education
- J D Mezirow
- E Taylor
Mezirow JD, Taylor E (2009) Transformative learning in practice: in-20.
sight from community work place and higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Research on Adult Learners: Supporting the 21. Needs of a Student Population that Is No Longer Nontraditional
- J M Ross-Gordon
Ross-Gordon JM (2011) Research on Adult Learners: Supporting the
21.
Needs of a Student Population that Is No Longer Nontraditional. Peer
Review 13.
2002) an investigation of personal learning 25. in mentoring relationships: Content, antecedents, and consequences
- M J Lankau
- T A Scandura
Lankau MJ, Scandura TA (2002) an investigation of personal learning
25.
in mentoring relationships: Content, antecedents, and consequences.
Academy of Management Journal 45: 779-790.
the power of asking pivotal ques-26. tions
- Pjh Shoemaker
- S Krupp
Shoemaker PJH, Krupp S (2015) the power of asking pivotal ques-26.
tions. MIT Sloan Management Review, 56: 39-47.