Search results

This paper is based on several years of ethnographic and desk-based research studying the Hare Krishna movement. The work is the first in a series exploring how segments of specific faith communities embrace dietary veganism and how this relates to the concept of transformational learning/change in the context of sustainability transitions. The focus is on how these communities embrace a plant-based diet representing different rationales and attitudes of learning in the process of organisational change.

I investigated Krishna practices extensively by visiting and volunteering in several of its farm communities in Europe. I used the mixed method of qualitative observations, participation, in-depth interviews and email interviews during a period of ten weeks spent in the communities altogether. I had not been in contact with Hare Krishna believers before the fieldwork.

Krishna veganism is analysed in the context of sustainability transitions by drawing on the concept of transformative (third-order) learning/change. Findings reveal an unexpected tendency to veganism despite the movement's worldview and radical commitment to dairy consumption. By calling into question their own collective dietary paradigm, the Hare Krishna community provides an exemplary case of third-order learning and change in an organisational context.

The paper invites scholars to include third-order learning into sustainability transitions frameworks while aiming to address the shortcomings of theorising levels of learning. The connection between Krishna veganism, third-order learning and sustainability transitions has not been put forward before.

Three levels of learning developed by Gregory Bateson in the tradition of second-order cybernetics have in-part been translated in terms of double-loop and triple-loop learning (TLL), particularly in the tradition of systems thinking. Learning III and TLL have gained less popularity since they deal with less tangible issues regarding virtues of wisdom and justice, respectively. The purpose of this paper is to provide a learning device – the systems thinking in practice (STiP) heuristic – which helps to retrieve the cybernetic concern for wisdom in association with an often forgotten systems concern for real-world power relations.

Using “conversation” as a metaphor the heuristic is introduced based on three orders of conversation. Drawing on ideas of systemic triangulation, another heuristic device – the systemic triangulator – is used to surface issues of power in the three orders of conversation. Some manifestations in using the STiP heuristic for supporting postgraduate systems learning are demonstrated.

Some key complementarities between conventionally opaque cybernetic issues of wisdom and systems issues of power are revealed, and used proactively to explore more effective coaching of STiP.

Cybernetics and systems thinking may benefit from being grounded more in understanding, engaging with, and transforming social realities. The heuristics provide practical experiential and meaningful learning through conversation, and more social premium for the study of cybernetics and systems thinking.

The heuristics – STiP, and the systemic triangulator – provides an innovative cyber-systemic space for learning and action.

Organizational learning capabilities are embedded in organizational communication systems and processes related to knowledge creation and articulation. The emergence of new organizational forms (such as horizontal organizations) in rapidly‐changing environments and hyper‐competitive markets underscores the need to better understand these foundational sources of learning. In fact, the reason horizontal organizations may find success is that their structure is intended to promote communications systems and processes which enhance a knowledge‐response sequence similar to a stimulus‐response sequence associated with learning. These systems permit managers to quickly gather information, respond with agility in making decisions, and continue to make ongoing adjustments. Firms which understand the need to build their communications capabilities may be characterized as meta‐learning organizations. Resource‐based theory suggests that communications systems and processes are thus sources of competitive advantage. Future empirical research on organizational learning may progress by evaluating specific measures of communication process as proxies for learning processes.

The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive understanding of the roots of family firms' competitive advantages by defining and testing the familiness learning mechanisms that emerge from the interaction between family and firm. Because family members are economically, emotionally and socially attached to the firm, family firms are expected to be able to develop unique and difficult to imitate learning mechanisms related to family firm value creation.

This study operationalizes and tests the concept of the familiness learning mechanism using a sample of nonlisted Spanish family firms. The sample is analyzed using the structural equation modeling method.

Results show that family firms' ability to accumulate internal and external knowledge, integrate social knowledge, as well as create and retain socioemotional knowledge forms the concept of the familiness learning mechanism, and the authors show what implications it might have for family firm value creation.

By using the dynamic capabilities approach, this article highlights the importance of the knowledge and learning derived from family involvement in the firm. The creation of learning mechanisms occurs because of the close relationships between family members and their simultaneous participation in the family and in the company systems, which creates a unique context wherein knowledge and learning emerge in an idiosyncratic manner.

The paper seeks to provide a theoretical contribution to the current phase of the knowledge creation theory of knowledge management (KM) by addressing the need for a paradigm shift and having more ontological and epistemological discussions.

The proposed “becoming to know” framework builds on the KM literature review and on the study of learning, knowing and becoming concepts from several perspectives. Both conceptual and empirical research papers contribute to the framework.

The paper presents the challenges of KM; it identifies five phases of the knowledge creation theory development through 1995‐2008; it summarizes the main criticism against the theory; and it proposes the “becoming epistemology” concept and the “becoming to know” framework. The main elements of this framework are: engaging, exploring, experiencing, emerging, enabling and evolving.

Study of the KM literature reveals several other challenges that are not addressed here and could provide opportunities for researchers. The paper calls for more discussions regarding the paradigm shift and for more attention to the participative research paradigm, as well as action and case study research in KM.

Drawing on the participative paradigm, epistemology of practice, extended epistemology, transformative teleology, becoming ontology and on concepts of learning, knowing, and becoming, the proposed framework illustrates the dynamic, iterative, interactive interplay and evolution of ontological and epistemological knowledge creation spirals that is the essence of the knowledge creation theory.

To develop a theoretical model for strategic change that links learning in an organization to the strategic process.

The model was developed from a review of literature covering a range of areas including: management, strategic planning, psychology of learning and organizational learning. The process of forming and implementing strategy in an organization was looked at critically and then the links between learning and strategy were explored, particularly in relation to innovation and radical strategic change.

The degree of correspondence found across various strands of the literature implies a general principle: that the development of strategy is closely linked with learning. The paper proposes that, if appropriately designed, purposeful strategic activity will help to develop an organizational learning culture. As the strategic planning process is widely accepted across all sectors of the economy, it has the potential; to provide an effective means of directing resources in order to achieve desirable learning within an organization towards its long‐term viability.

The paper develops a theoretical model of strategy formation, called “The maturity model for strategy formation”, which describes a developmental continuum for strategy based on the application of appropriate strategic approaches which are linked to suitable learning approaches and a consideration of the roles of management and staff in the change process.

To improve our understanding of the impact of organizational learning and knowledge on competitive advantage, we propose a framework that includes the constructs of data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. Each of these constructs is then associated with a different type of learning. We further argue that wisdom is an important, albeit missing, construct in the knowledge‐based theory of the firm. A key to organizational wisdom is judgement and decision making, which requires an understanding of the complexity of a situation, but also requires the ability to make sense and simplify so that action can be taken. Three important drivers for the development of organizational wisdom are experience, a passion to learn, and spirituality. Processes for acquiring organizational wisdom such as transformational leadership, organizational culture and knowledge transfer are also discussed.

This article aims to define and explore the nature of wisdom, managerial wisdom, organisational wisdom and wisdom management.

The paper draws on some of the diverse writings on wisdom, and explores the relevance of wisdom in the context of knowledge management.

Wisdom has received little attention in the information management and systems, knowledge management and management literature. This is surprising since in this knowledge‐based economy the link between data, information and knowledge is seen as pivotal by practitioners, consultants and academics.

The article explores the nature of organisational wisdom and identifies a number of areas for further theory‐making and empirical investigation.

Organisations must build resilience to be able to deal with disruptions or non-routine events in their supply chains. While learning is implicit in definitions of supply chain resilience (SCRes), there is little understanding of how exactly organisations can adapt their routines to build resilience. The purpose of this study is to address this gap.

This paper is an in-depth qualitative case study based on 28 interviews across five companies, exploring learning to build SCRes.

This study uncovers six learning mechanisms and their antecedents that foster SCRes. The learning mechanisms identified suggest that through knowledge creation within an organisation and knowledge transfer across the supply chain and broader network of stakeholders, operating routines are built and/or adapted both intentionally and unintentionally during three stages of a supply chain disruption: preparation, response and recovery.

This study shows how the impact of a supply chain disruption may be reduced by intentional and unintentional learning in all three disruption phases. By being aware of the antecedents of unintentional learning, organisations can more consciously adapt routines. Furthermore, findings highlight the potential value of additional attention to knowledge transfer, particularly in relation to collaborative and vicarious learning across the supply chain and broader network of stakeholders not only in preparation for, but also in response to and recovery from disruptions.

This study contributes novel insights about how learning leads both directly and indirectly to the evolution of operating routines that help an organisation and its supply chains to deal with disruptions. Results detail six specific learning mechanisms for knowledge creation and knowledge transfer and their antecedents for building SCRes. In doing so, this study provides new fine-grained theoretical insights about how SCRes can be improved through all three phases of a disruption. Propositions are developed for theory development.