Search results

Considering personality as changeable through a bottom-up process of altering states, habits and traits, constitutes a shift in the predominant paradigm within personality psychology. The purpose of this paper is to reconsider Bateson’s theory of learning and organizational triple-loop learning in light of this recent empirical evidence.

This paper uses a multi-disciplinary conceptual approach. Based on an integrative analysis of literature from recent work in personality psychology, four dimensions (process, content, time and context) are identified that allow linking personality change and triple-loop learning.

Identifying a bottom-up process of changing states, habits and traits as being central to change personality, allows for reconsidering Bateson’s theory of learning as a theory of personality development (Learning II) and personality change (Learning III). Functionally equivalent, organizational triple-loop learning is conceptualized as a change in an organization’s identity over time that may be facilitated through a change in responding to events and a change in the organization’s routines.

Interventions that change how organizations respond to events and that change the routines within an organization may be suitable to facilitate triple-loop learning in terms of changing organizational identity over time.

This paper contributes to the discussion on Bateson’s theory of learning and organizational triple-loop learning. As interest in personality change grows in organization studies, this paper aims to transfer these findings to organizational learning.

Introduces diversity management as managing the increased diversity of issues that confront humankind in contemporary organizational and societal affairs. Defines triple loop learning as being about the increase in the fullness and deepness of learning about the diversity of issues and dilemmas faced. Presents the contours of diversity management and triple loop learning. Sees the latter as the dénouement of single loop learning and of double loop learning. Provides a “quickmap” of the contours of diversity management and triple loop learning.

The organizational learning literature distinguishes different levels of learning (zero learning and single, double and triple loop learning) in order to understand the complexity and dynamics of changes in policies, objectives, mental maps, and structures and strategies for learning. This article explores the case of an emerging new organizational design, the circular organization, in order to understand the role of triple loop learning. The circular model was developed on the basis of ideas about the relationship between organizational structure and behavior taken from theories of dynamic systems. Circular design precepts appear to provide a structural facilitation of single and double loop learning. In this respect, the circular design tends to act as a facilitating infrastructure for triple loop learning, that is, exploring the structural opportunities and key competences people need to participate in making well‐informed choices about policies, objectives and other issues.

This paper aims to build on notions of a higher level of organizational learning to suggest another dimension: interorganizational learning that emerges in a cross‐sector partnership.

A case study was conducted with the DC Central Kitchen (DCCK) partnership with for‐profit and governmental entities. Research methods included interviews with the founder, CEO, and manager responsible for the relationship with partners; direct observation during volunteer work at DCCK; and review of archival data and physical artifacts.

At the organizational level, DCCK was a learning organization because the principal variables – culture, strategy, shared vision, and knowledge management – were focused on learning. At the interorganizational level, the network was like a constellation of organizations. DCCK had many dyadic relationships with its partners, but the partners were not always interconnected with one another. Triple‐loop learning occurred in DCCK but was not yet developed among partners. DCCK benefited the community both tangibly, as seen in its education projects, and culturally, by giving a more central role to the nonprofit organization in the economic system.

The paper illustrates the value of interorganizational learning across two or more sectors of organizations.

The purpose of this paper is to propose performance measures for supply chain knowledge management (SCKM) performance.

This is a conceptual study. State of performance measurement has been analyzed on the basis of a comprehensive review of literature in field of SCKM. Based on principles of double and triple loop learning, performance measures have been identified for measuring the success of KM practices in SCs.

Principles of double and triple loop learning have been utilized to suggest KPI’s for SCKM performance, i.e. supply chain identity and knowledge supply chain stratum. The relevance and justification of these KPI’s is also discussed.

This study is limited to conceptualized measures for SCKM only. Further research is required to test the benefits of these performance measures based on industry applications.

These proposed KPI’s will facilitate the development of the new processes through re-engineering, i.e. problem identification and then rectification. Further, these KPI’s will provide some essential insights as to how supply chains can develop their performance evaluation systems to become more effective and learning oriented.

This study aims to not only identify the gaps present in the SCKM performance measurement literature but also aims to fill the knowledge gap by suggesting suitable performance metrics.

The purpose of the paper is to introduce a systemic approach to organizational learning “triple loop learning” (TLL) that addresses processes of power. Three equally important foci in our TLL are processes of design, processes of debate and processes of power. The focus on power aims to shift “power over” (power as domination) to “power to” enact empowering designs, “power to” co-develop responsible decision-making and “power to” transform our relations with each other and with life on Earth.

The organizational learning literature is reviewed in the context of power dynamics and its shortcomings are highlighted. The authors introduce their understanding of TLL, and how it engages with power dynamics in organizations.

Peter Senge’s conceptualization of systems thinking is unable to recognize processes of power in organizations and offers limited support to transformative learning. Conceptualizations of TLL aim to enhance learning in organizations but none satisfactorily address the processes of power. The learning organization literature as a whole does not satisfactorily address processes of power or reflect our way of envisaging “looping between loops of learning” in TLL to better design, better debate and better develop relationality in the social fabric of organizations.

The authors introduce an original approach to TLL that directly addresses the processes of power in organizations. It offers researchers, learning facilitators and practitioners of the learning organization a way to engage with the processes of power without neglecting other important organizational and environmental issues.

Previous research has highlighted the need to examine the appropriateness of existing information systems methods in the context of electronic business environments. This paper argues for a re‐examination of the suitability of current planning practices in light of the complexity of developing electronic business systems. In particular, the paper illustrates that planning and developing business‐to‐business electronic trading systems (ETS) is fraught with difficulties associated with the priorities and power of individual actors in participant organisations. The authors discuss triple loop learning (TLL), an approach that deals with diverse requirements and power issues, and argue that it may assist in overcoming some of the problems identified. The study aims to analyse the theoretical usefulness of the concepts of triple loop learning in the context of planning inter‐organisational ETS. Using the data gathered from case studies of three inter‐organisational networks, the authors argue that approaches associated with TLL can offer insight into managing inter‐organisational systems complexities, and can thereby enhance planning methods for ETS.

The purpose of this paper is to present personal experiences of using storytelling as a “sensemaking” tool, to argue for the benefits of this method as a process of better understanding the gendered academy and the role storytelling can play in effecting change.

Drawing on personal experiences of storytelling within workplaces, the paper explores how stories between colleagues can lead to positive change through the co‐construction of new worlds of meaning which are spontaneously revised through interaction.

The paper demonstrates how storytelling between individuals experiencing inequality makes visible the gendered practices in academic workplaces and can lead to a change in those experiences of the workplace. Also, such stories can be a means for prompting change through negotiation. Theoretically, a triple‐loop learning environment within an organization could provide the agora required for stories about inequality to be heard continually and change to come about through negotiation.

The paper uses a method that serves as a heuristic device and as such cannot be generalized for all organizational settings. The findings offer a new but partial solution for negotiating gender inequity in academia by suggesting that there must be more storytelling in openly public spaces between colleagues to challenge and negotiate the gendered organizational cultures of academia.

The application of the method of triple‐loop learning in academic organizational settings can assist in challenging and changing gender inequity through the consistent use of narratives.

The paper is unique in that it argues for the value of a self‐reflexive narrative form of method which favours stories being shared in public spaces – the agora – as a way of addressing gender inequity within complex, male dominated professions such as academia.

Studies have shown that higher education institutions (HEIs) need to achieve deep organizational learning to develop and implement long-term strategies for responding to the climate crisis. This study aims to analyze the sustainability efforts of HEIs, in particular those who use the sustainability tracking, assessment and rating system (STARS), to ascertain what type of organizational learning is being achieved.

This paper does this by analyzing perceptions of learning amongst this group of HEIs. More specifically, it analyzes survey data regarding perceptions of types and system levels of organizational learning achieved by 116 HEIs in the USA that currently use or have used STARS in the past. The approach also aims to develop a macro view of the relationships between practicing campus sustainability, using sustainability reporting tools and learning as an organization.

An examination of the practice of campus sustainability and its relationship to organizational learning reveals that the use of sustainability reporting promotes broad learning, but deep learning at the level of the organization is seldom achieved.

Given the success of using sustainability reporting tools to diffuse knowledge and foster broad learning, this paper argues that such tools should incorporate more metrics relative to soft organizational characteristics of HEIs to shift organizational cultures and foster deeper organizational learning.

This work constitutes one of the few studies analyzing empirical data on campus sustainability, sustainability reporting and organizational learning for a large number of HEIs.

This paper distils practical perspectives from experienced consultants on an integrative framework on organisational learning and performance. The foundation of this framework is governed by behavioural and cognitive learning theories. Convergent interviewing was the methodology used to verify the practicality of the framework and provide insight for further development. Data derived from four organisational development consultants confirmed the framework’s feasibility, but suggested additional issues to examine organisational learning further. The conclusion drawn is that there are distinct stages of learning but the relationship between them is robust and dynamic. Further, the notion of “triple‐loop learning” is often misconstrued in practical contexts due to its level of abstraction. Effective leadership is regarded as the leitmotif in driving strategic organisational learning initiatives. However, leaders must consider the time factor involved, as such initiatives can only take effect after a period of time rather than immediately.