Although still under-researched and characterized by a fragmented understanding, unlearning and forgetting have recently received increased scholarly attention. The…
Although still under-researched and characterized by a fragmented understanding, unlearning and forgetting have recently received increased scholarly attention. The purpose of this systematic literature review is to survey and evaluate key works in the field of organizational unlearning and forgetting. Through analyzing and synthesizing common themes, this paper aims to highlight research gaps and avenues for future research.
This paper follows a systematic approach of identifying, analyzing and synthesizing pertinent literature in the field of organizational unlearning and forgetting. In total, 63 works were thoroughly reviewed.
This paper highlights different levels and scopes, as well as antecedents and consequences of organizational unlearning and forgetting. Even though unlearning and forgetting has gained increased attention, researchers still need to provide robust conceptual and empirical evidence to advance the field.
By structuring the analysis and synthesis around various constructs, theories, typologies and related themes, this paper outlines several research gaps and proposes avenues for further research. Additionally, this systematic literature review resulted in the development of a framework based on the intentionality and depth of knowledge loss, which allows future researchers to position their research and differentiate themselves from other literature in the field.
The purpose of this paper is to empirically investigate the antecedents, levers of control and outcomes of organizational unlearning and forgetting in new product…
The purpose of this paper is to empirically investigate the antecedents, levers of control and outcomes of organizational unlearning and forgetting in new product development (NPD) teams.
This paper employs a holistic multiple-case study design. This paper gathered data from 30 individual semi-structured interviews in 10 different NPD teams as well as additional data to triangulate the findings.
The authors propose a model of unlearning and forgetting elements occurring in NPD teams. The two most prominent factors that hamper innovation are the inability to unlearn and involuntary forgetting. Failure to manage these antecedents results in the loss of crucial resources, missing innovations or intra-team tensions. Managing knowledge loss by promoting unlearning and reducing forgetting leads to enhanced creativity and flexibility, a higher chance of exceeding innovation goals, increased conversion efficiency and augmentation of existing knowledge.
This paper contributes empirical evidence to the field of unlearning and forgetting. The model illustrates the NPD process from the perspective of organizational unlearning and forgetting. The authors examined the NPD process from an unlearning and forgetting perspective and proposed new categories of antecedents, consequences and managing unlearning and forgetting. This generates a more profound theoretical understanding of underlying knowledge loss processes in NPD teams.
Companies should promote unlearning and specify spatial and temporal freedom. In doing so, team members can identify outdated and obsolete knowledge. Being attentive to unlearning and forgetting processes allows teams to achieve increased creativity and flexibility.
This paper provides empirical evidence to generate a more profound understanding of the underlying mechanisms of knowledge loss in NPD teams. First, the authors propose a holistic model of antecedents, levers of control and consequences of both unlearning and forgetting. Second, the authors suggest that organizations can use these levers of control to successfully manage unlearning and forgetting in NPD teams.
A quarter of a century has passed since Stonehill and Nathanson (1968) surveyed multinational companies to determine their foreign capital budgeting practices. Since then…
A quarter of a century has passed since Stonehill and Nathanson (1968) surveyed multinational companies to determine their foreign capital budgeting practices. Since then, research has not only refined its theoretical base on this subject but also expanded the knowledge of actual practices by multinational companies. This article summarizes the findings of major multinational capital budgeting studies for the last 25 years to ascertain whether companies followed theoretically prescribed approaches. Then, it suggests further research to advance the knowledge on this subject.
Learning, unlearning and relearning (LUR) has been preached as a panacea to organizations. Whereas, research on learning and unlearning has grown exponentially, relearning…
Learning, unlearning and relearning (LUR) has been preached as a panacea to organizations. Whereas, research on learning and unlearning has grown exponentially, relearning is still considered as an obscure concept. This paper aims to provide a new insight on organizational relearning and highlight its linkages with organizational unlearning.
This study is based upon a systematic literature review of organizational unlearning and organizational relearning. Papers expounding upon relearning were carefully analyzed vis-à-vis organizational unlearning.
Organizational unlearning and organizational relearning assume a vital place in developing a learning organization. However, linking the two processes in a sequence tends to arouse certain conceptual difficulties. First, it is not necessary that relearning follows this prescribed ordering sequence. It is a process that can happen without prior unlearning. Second, based on the process model and multiple definitions of unlearning, the very purpose of organizational unlearning is to acquire new knowledge (relearning in literature). Therefore, in this sense, relearning seems to become a redundant concept and a neologism. As a result, this hampers the proper contextualization of relearning.
This paper attempts to expound upon the debate of organizational relearning and its interplay with organizational unlearning. As the concept of lifelong learning and building learning organizations assumes the center stage in contemporary organizations, it is suggested that unless the conceptual issues of related to LUR are not adequately addressed, academicians will naturally find it difficult to prescribe proper course of action to practitioners.