Search results

The purpose of Part II of this two-part paper is to uncover important differences in the nature of the three unlearning subprocesses, which call for different leadership interventions to motivate people to move through them.

The paper draws on research in behavioral medicine and psychology to demonstrate that initial destabilizing of old patterns and the subsequent behavioral processes of discarding the old and experimenting with the new are qualitatively different.

Leadership interventions must fit the unique requirements of each unlearning subprocess. Discarding old routines requires continued focus on the costs of not doing so, as well as a progressive refocus on positive possibilities and engaging people in activities to explore them. When aspects of the old routine resurface, the costs of relapse must again become salient, leading to further discarding-from-use, followed by further positive experimentation. Finally, maintaining long-term release of an embedded routine requires recognition of the emerging new patterns and a shift from future-oriented visioning of possibilities to current satisfaction with the new.

All empirical studies of organizational unlearning imply some form of destabilization of old learning as an antecedent to unlearning, and many of them discuss subsequent behavioral and cognitive displacement. However, they have not clearly distinguished between these subprocesses to fine-tune how to motivate people to move through them. This paper addresses that gap.

The purpose of this two-part paper is to develop a process model of unlearning established organizational routines. The model traces the interactions among three unlearning sub-processes: ostensive aspects of initial destabilization of an established routine; performative aspects of ongoing discarding-from-use of old behaviors and experimenting with new ones; and ostensive aspects of eventual release of prior understandings and development of new ones.

The paper draws on evidence from psychology and cognitive science to explain the mechanisms underlying organizational processes of unlearning embedded routines.

The proposed model contributes to enriching current understanding of unlearning organizational routines without contradicting it. Consistent with prior understanding, destabilizing an old routine may lead to discarding it, and further discarding-from-use is likely required for continued destabilization of embedded routines. Again, consistent with prior understanding, experimenting with new behaviors may be a desired outcome of unlearning an old routine, and ongoing experimentation is likely required to sustain unlearning embedded routines.

The organizational unlearning literature provides many examples of organizational members relinquishing old routines to then make new learning possible and also provides little insight into the processes by which this occurs. The paper addresses this gap by modeling the mutually reinforcing nature of three unlearning sub-processes.