Search results

Students of organizations are beginning to recognize the importance of continuous learning in organizations, but to date the concept is not well understood, particularly in terms of how the learning of individuals is related to the learning that takes place in groups, which is related to the learning that occurs in organizations (and all other combinations). To further our understanding, we offer the idea of continuous learning in organizations from a living system's perspective. We view individuals, groups, and organizations as living systems nested in a hierarchy. We propose that living systems can learn in three ways: they can adapt, they can generate, and they can transform. Learning triggers from the environment spark learning, and this relationship is moderated by the system's readiness to learn. Readiness to learn is a function of the permeability of the system's boundaries, the system's stage of development, and the system's meta-systems perspective. Additional research questions are presented to explore learning flow between levels and to determine how the match between one system's pressure for change and another system's readiness to learn affects the emergence of adaptive, generative, and transformative learning. In addition, research questions are offered as a means to test these ideas and build grounded theory. Finally, using this model, the chapter presents three case studies and suggests diagnostic questions to analyze and facilitate continuous learning from a multi-level perspective.

This uses a framework of systemic change to understand the contextual factors including stakeholder, social, political, cultural and economic, which contribute to the social and environmental narratives of a conservation organisation that has and continues to undergo transformation.

The social and environmental disclosure annual report narratives for a 27-year period were coded to a framework of systemic change.

The end of apartheid in 1994 meant that South African society required transformation. This transformation impacts and drives the social and environmental accounting disclosures made by SANParks. The social and environmental disclosures coded against a framework of systemic change, fluctuated over the period of the study as the format of the annual reports changed. The systems view was the most frequently disclosed category. The political ecology subcategory which details the power relationships showed the most disclosures. However, 25 years after the end of apartheid, the transformation process remains incomplete. Although the evidence in the paper does not support Joseph and Reigelut (2010) contention that the framework of systemic change is an iterative process, it nevertheless provides a useful vehicle for analysing the rich annual report narratives of an organisation that has undergone and continues to undergo transformation.

This paper makes two primary contributions. First, to the limited developing country social and environmental accounting literature. Second, the development, refinement and application of a framework of systemic change to social and environmental disclosures.

In business environments characterized by intense competition, globalization, rapid technological diffusion, accelerated product life cycles, and evolving industry boundaries, the ability of firms to adapt effectively to their changing environments is a strategic imperative (Hitt, Keats, & DeMarie, 1998; Nadler & Tushman, 1999). The exhibition of strategic adaptability – the ability of a firm to alter its alignment with the environment through reactive and proactive behaviors (Evans, 1991) – is a function of the goodness-of-fit that exists between the capabilities of a firm and the demands imposed by its relevant industry context (Burgelman & Grove, 1996). When firm capabilities are well aligned with industry success factors, those capabilities constitute strategic assets for the firm, or resources that lead to the achievement of competitive success in that context (Amit & Schoemaker, 1993). The possession of strategic assets thus contributes to a state of adaptation, defined by Chakravarthy (1982) as a state in which an organization exhibits the capacity to survive the conditions of its changing environment. Because of the constantly shifting nature of the environment, a state of adaptation is not a permanent settling point for the organization, but rather a moving target for the organization as it attempts to remain “mapped on” to the exigencies of the environment.

This article seeks to discuss a balanced and effective holistic knowledge management (KM) framework, which consists of four key domains postulated and validated in the late 1990s and 2000 as The George Washington University (GWU) four‐pillar KM framework: leadership, organization, technology, and learning.

The two conceptual organizational models of an “adaptive enterprise” and “agile enterprise” are briefly described, their utility challenged and a request launched for empirical findings documenting the organizational implementations and linkages to leadership, technology and learning with attendant performance results.

The twenty‐first century has surfaced the need for more flexible and responsive knowledge‐based organizational entities capable of rapidly adjusting to the increasing rate of change and demands in both products and services.

Provides an insight into the George Washington University four‐pillar KM framework.

Examines the concept of adaptation as it relates to the start‐up and survival of small businesses over time. Adaptation is approached as the making of appropriate adjustments to the business and its strategic focus, as the venture evolves from an initial idea to a successful business. It is proposed that adaptation has three relevant components: the firm’s capacity to adapt, how much it actually adapts, and the strategies it relies upon to adapt. A conceptual model and hypotheses are proposed, relating the entrepreneur, the organizational context and the external environment to these three components of adaptation, and relating the components of adaptation to performance. Results from a cross‐sectional survey of small business founder/owners suggest that characteristics of the entrepreneur and levels of environmental change are especially important determinants of the three components of adaptation, and that levels of and strategies for adapting are related to organizational performance. A number of implications are drawn from the findings and suggestions are made for ongoing research.

Argues that strategy formulation across sectors is different. Often the use of normative approaches to strategic management that have sprung from research and experience within the private sector do not pay sufficient cognizance to the subtle differences that drive non‐profit and human‐service‐oriented public sector organizations. Analyses the interplay of variables such as environment, values and leadership to ascertain their significance in strategy formulation. Includes four case organizations from these two sectors in order to develop theoretical insights. Uses Ellen Chaffee’s models of linear, adaptive and interpretive strategy to analyse these variables across the sectors. Unlike other theories of strategy, Chaffee’s models are hierarchical and accommodate distinctive characteristics that motivate human service organizations. Identifies patterns of proactivity in strategy formulation, and concludes that transformational leadership enjoys a necessary relationship with value consensus, and together these form a sufficient condition to describe two case organizations from different sectors as interpretive in their strategy formulation.

This chapter presents a theory for developing an adaptive high commitment, high performance system of organizing, managing, and leading. It is a synthesis of my 50 years of action and field research presented in my books and articles. It operationalized and makes actionable the ideas of Lewin and systems theorists. Its features are three organizational outcomes that must be achieved simultaneously, features of the system that must be targeted for change, six silent barriers to change, a governance system for continuous learning, change in large complex systems, and elements of a system that needed to immunize it against ultimate destruction.

Accounting for quality and improved organizational performance has recently received attention in management control research. However, the extent to which process innovation changes have been integrated into management control research is limited. This paper contributes to that integration by drawing from institutional adaptive theory of organizational change and process innovation strategies. The paper utilizes a 2 by 2 contingency table that uses two factors: environmental conditions and organizational change/learning strategies, to build a process innovation framework. A combination of these two factors yields four process innovation strategies: mechanistic, organic, organizational development (OD) and organizational transformation (OT).

The four process innovation typologies are applied to characterize innovations in accounting such as activity based costing (ABC). ABC has been discussed as a multi-phased innovation process that provides an environment where both the initiation and the implementation of accounting change can occur. Technical innovation can be successfully initiated as organic innovation that unfolds in a decentralized organization and requires radical change and double loop learning. Implementation occurs best as a mechanistic innovation in a hierarchical organization and involving incremental change and single loop learning. The paper concludes that if ABC is integrated into an OD or OT intervention strategy, the technical and administrative innovation aspects of ABC can be utilized to manage the organization’s operating activities.

The purpose of this article is to build a new frame of reference for exploring the value of hierarchy as a learning platform as organizations move away from bureaucracies and toward complex adaptive behavior.

Observations of the behaviors of horses and the hierarchical structure within which they function are introduced to explore the value of hierarchy as a learning platform. The concepts of bureaucracy and hierarchy are juxtaposed based on a literature review. Moving to individual learning, functioning space is introduced and then extrapolated across to organizations. Finally, these interwoven ideas are used to pose questions.

The paper posits that recognition of the distinction between hierarchy and bureaucracy places us in a framework to reap the benefits of hierarchy in our thinking, talking and acting as our organizations move toward complex adaptive behavior.

This paper discusses important distinctions between hierarchy and bureaucracy in support of a learning framework. It also introduces the relationship of thinking, talking and acting to our functioning space.

Production schedules, if not met as per timelines may result in heavy losses to a company in terms of its standing and the overall profit. Production scheduling is generally planned by not taking preventive maintenance schedules into consideration. Most of the plants allocate discrete hours/time for preventive maintenance activities. These hours allocated for preventive maintenance will be in addition to the hours which would be lost during breakdown maintenance. These lost hours may be reduced if production scheduling and preventive maintenance activities are integrated. This advocates that we need to devise a methodology which can take care of lost hours.

Adaptive and noncyclic maintenance strategy describes the modification of existing maintenance practices, policies and procedures to meet new dynamic tasks/opportunities. It demands a high degree of flexibility and mental agility from maintenance staff members. The maintenance team has to be on a lookout for an opportunity message received from the central server and has to act promptly. The moment an opportunity arises, a message is forwarded to a central maintenance server (opportunity is captured). The central server then assigns individuals/team, based on their expertise and the maintenance task due on that machine/equipment. This action is completely automated and implemented without delay.

The total man-hours saved by executing adaptive and noncyclic preventive maintenance methodology comes to 705 h during 15 days on 30 machines installed in three different sections. There was a contribution of 71 innovative ideas from the repair teams. Out of these 71 innovative ideas, 16 were found suitable for execution. A quantum jump in the morale and motivation of the maintenance team was noticed from the feedback forms. Mutual understanding and respect for each other among employees has been enhanced. The optimization of resources and infrastructure including tools, gauges, testing equipment, etc. could truly be attained.

The developed adaptive and noncyclic preventive maintenance model assists in capturing lost hours and make the system proactive and lean. The suggested model optimizes the preventive and predictive maintenance activities and results in substantial saving of efforts, manpower, resources and allocated budget.

The adaptive and noncyclic preventive maintenance model discussed in the article is a novel approach for the optimization of resources. The technique assists in capturing lost hours and utilization of these hours for preventive maintenance tasks. The model will also encourage creative and innovative ideas from employees and take the organization toward Continual Maintenance Optimization.