Search results

In this response to Day and Tate (this volume) and Markham, Groesbeck, and Swan (this volume), we clarify the concept of continuous learning from a living system's perspective and address the evolution of adaptive, generative, and transformative learning. Further, we assert that a system's drive for homeostasis is actually a fluid, continuous learning process that may vary in the rate and direction of change. Environmental triggers, readiness for learning, and feedback provide leverage points for change and learning within and across individual, group, and organizational systems. Future research is needed to identify and study the effects of these leverage points on systems’ adaptive, generative, and transformative learning.

This chapter defines a learning culture and discusses the relationship between knowledge and learning. The authors explain why learning is essential to bringing knowledge to life and incentivizing knowledge flows and use. The chapter addresses the interplay between knowledge and learning cultures. A key point in the chapter is the value of mistakes as learning opportunities. The authors explain how mistakes are viewed in the industrial economy and how this perspective impedes critical organizational learning. Specifically, we define mistakes, explain the double cognitive bias of mistakes, explain the tendency and impact of hiding mistakes, the side effects of double mistake bias, learn to learn from mistakes, and take on the challenge of reconciling mistake acceptance and avoidance. Finally, the chapter addresses the importance of cultivating a learning climate to realize your learning culture.

Here is a new conceptual framework for organizational learning (OL) that applies to both planned reform and emergent change. It integrates strategic and operational, micro and macro perspectives. It has three parts: (a) a revised definition and typology of OL, (b) seven reform stories that define stages and tasks, (c) a management and assessment guide demarcating four areas of OL: (i) action learning within core operations; (ii) sharing learning and innovations across the organization; (iii) mission/s-beyond ambidexterity; (iv) integration-managing mission conflicts and other paradoxes, which ensure endogenous change. Dynamic capability is therefore intrinsic to this view of OL that is illustrated from two cases: NYPD and public school reforms.

This study investigates how university libraries in Nigeria are staffed and presents staff development opportunities and learning activities that sustain staff.

A survey research design was adopted. Purposive sampling technique was used to select 46 universities and 400 respondents consisting of 46 heads of libraries and 354 professionals from federal, state, and private universities. Content of the instrument was based on literature comprising six questions. The 327 (92.4%) usable responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics and presented in simple frequency tables.

The study showed that library workforce in Nigerian universities included different categories of professionals and para-professionals having diversified job opportunities and duties. Most libraries had staff development budget and respondents received various forms of assistance to foster learning. Although all nontransferable skills recorded high mean, respondents accorded less importance to nonlibrary personal skills that can be used to leverage the expectations of recruitment, retention, and sustainability.

The study was limited to practicing professionals but has staffing implications for all libraries across Nigeria.

Many professionals may lack the appropriate multi-skills that would enhance exploring new approaches and breaking out of traditional ways of operation in the different library and outside library settings.

The study contributes to knowledge about sustaining library staff in relation to adopting the recommended skills on a broad scale, and assessing how their acquisition can change the perception of professionals to its immense contributions to sustaining them in the workforce.

In this chapter, the authors explain the value of the KLC approach to building cultural capacity in knowledge-driven organizations. This chapter also explains the importance of coherent multilevel interactions to expose and experience a company culture. The authors reinforce that culture is learned simultaneously, consciously and unconsciously, through all company’s related experiences. The effects of leadership, hierarchy, and maturity on cultural capacity are discussed at the individual, team, and organizational levels. Finally, the chapter provides a step-by-step methodology and sample questions for taking stock of an organization’s cultural capacity.

A model of stereotypical beliefs that older workers have difficulty learning and developing and are not motivated to learn is presented. Three categories of antecedents of the stereotypical beliefs are addressed: (1) experience with stereotype-consistent behaviors and promulgation of the stereotype by others; (2) perceived learning and development inhibitors internal to the older worker; and (3) perceived learning and development inhibitors external to the older worker. Potential consequences of the stereotypical beliefs for older workers and employing organizations are also explored. Individuating information and knowledge of within-older-group differences are posited to attenuate the influence of group-based stereotypes. Processes and tactics within organizations that should increase this information and knowledge are presented. The proposed model provides a framework to help guide future research on this topic and also some suggestions for managing a work place where these beliefs may exist.

Drawing on the experience of the Observatories, a set of interconnected research centers in Italy, this chapter explains why academics are in one of the best positions to orchestrate interorganizational initiatives of change and development, and highlights two prerequisites that appear necessary to render salient this orchestrator role of academics: (i) the extensive use of multiple approaches of collaborative research and (ii) the creation and maintenance of a platform allowing the management and diffusion of the network-based learning mechanisms underlying each change and development effort. The contributions extend existing knowledge on organization development and collaborative research.