infed.

org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

1 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

infed is a not-for-profit

The learning organization. Just what constitutes a

learning organization is a matter of some debate.
We explore some of the themes that have emerged
in the literature and the contributions of key
thinkers like Donald Schon and Peter Senge. Is it
anything more than rhetoric? Can it be realized?

site provided by the YMCA

George Williams College.
Give us feedback; write
for us. Join us on Facebook
and Twitter.
log in | register
faqs: about us, copyright,

contents: introduction the learning society and the

printing, privacy, disclaimer

knowledge economy the learning organization systems

theory and the learning organization dialogue and the
learning organization some problems and issues

Hosting by Memset
Dedicated Servers
[CarbonNeutral].

conclusion further reading and references links

associated pages: donald schn and the learning society
peter senge and the learning organization dialogue social
capital

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

2 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

commercial significance of organizational learning and the

notion of the learning organization has been a central
orienting point in this. Writers have sought to identify
templates, or ideal forms, which real organizations could
attempt to emulate (Easterby-Smith and Araujo 1999: 2). In
this sense the learning organization is an ideal, towards
which organizations have to evolve in order to be able to
respond to the various pressures [they face] (Finger and

new : What is education?

Cultivating learning and
possibility? A definition
and discussion

Brand 1999: 136). It is characterized by a recognition that

individual and collective learning are key (op. cit.).

new : Serious and

organised crime toolkit

Two important things result from this. First, while there has

new : The impact of

been a lot of talk about learning organizations it is very

austerity on schools and

difficult to identify real-life examples. This might be because

childrens education and

the vision is too ideal or because it isnt relevant to the

well-being.

requirements and dynamics of organizations. Second, the

focus on creating a template and upon the need to present it
in a form that is commercially attractive to the consultants
and writers has led to a significant under-powering of the
theoretical framework for the learning organization. Here
there is a distinct contrast with the study of organizational
learning.
Although theorists of learning organizations have often
drawn on ideas from organizational learning, there has
been little traffic in the reverse direction. Moreover, since
the central concerns have been somewhat different, the
two literatures have developed along divergent tracks. The
literature on organizational learning has concentrated on
the detached collection and analysis of the processes
involved in individual and collective learning inside
organizations; whereas the learning organizations
literature has an action orientation, and is geared toward
using specific diagnostic and evaluative methodological
tools which can help to identify, promote and evaluate the
quality of learning processes inside organizations.
(Easterby-Smith and Araujo 1999: 2; see also Tsang 1997).

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

3 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

and the process by which organizations eventually reach

th[e] ideal of a learning organization (Finger and Brand
1999: 136).
On this page we examine the path-breaking work of Donald
Schon on firms as learning systems and then go on to explore
Peter Senges deeply influential treatment of the learning
organization (and its focus on systemic thinking and
dialogue). We finish with a brief exploration of the
contribution of social capital to the functioning of
organizations.

The emergence of the idea of the learning organization is

wrapped up with notions such as the learning society.
Perhaps the defining contribution here was made by Donald
Schon. He provided a theoretical framework linking the
experience of living in a situation of an increasing change
with the need for learning.
The loss of the stable state means that our society and all
of its institutions are in continuous processes of
transformation. We cannot expect new stable states that
will endure for our own lifetimes.
We must learn to understand, guide, influence and
manage these transformations. We must make the
capacity for undertaking them integral to ourselves and to
our institutions.
We must, in other words, become adept at learning. We
must become able not only to transform our institutions,
in response to changing situations and requirements; we
must invent and develop institutions which are learning
systems, that is to say, systems capable of bringing about
their own continuing transformation. (Schon 1973: 28)

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

4 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

which companies, social movements and governments were

learning systems and how those systems could be
enhanced. He suggests that the movement toward learning
systems is, of necessity, a groping and inductive process for
which there is no adequate theoretical basis (ibid.: 57). The
business firm, Donald Schon argued, was a striking example
of a learning system. He charted how firms moved from
being organized around products toward integration around
business systems (ibid.: 64). He made the case that many
companies no longer have a stable base in the technologies of
particular products or the systems build around them.
Crucially Donald Schon then went on with Chris Argyris to
develop a number of important concepts with regard to
organizational learning. Of particular importance for
later developments was their interest in feedback and singleand double-loop learning.
Subsequently, we have seen very significant changes in the
nature and organization of production and services.
Companies, organizations and governments have to operate
in a global environment that has altered its character in
significant ways.
Productivity and competitiveness are, by and large, a
function of knowledge generation and information
processing: firms and territories are organized in networks of
production, management and distribution; the core economic
activities are global that is they have the capacity to work as
a unit in real time, or chosen time, on a planetary scale.
(Castells 2001: 52)
A failure to attend to the learning of groups and individuals
in the organization spells disaster in this context. As
Leadbeater (2000: 70) has argued, companies need to invest
not just in new machinery to make production more efficient,
but in the flow of know-how that will sustain their business.

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

5 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

appropriation and exploitation.

It was in this context that Peter Senge (1990) began to

explore The art and practice of the learning organization.
Over 750,000 copies of The Fifth Discipline (1990) were sold
in the decade following its publication and it is probably
this book that has been the most significant factor in
popularising the notion of the learning organization.
However, as Sandra Kerka remarked in 1995 there is not a
consensus on the definition of a learning organization.
Indeed, little has changed since. Garvin (2000: 9) recently
observed that a clear definition of the learning organization
has proved to be elusive.

Learning organizations [are] organizations where

people continually expand their capacity to create
the results they truly desire, where new and
expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where
collective aspiration is set free, and where people are
continually learning to see the whole together.
(Senge 1990: 3)
The Learning Company is a vision of what might be
possible. It is not brought about simply by training
individuals; it can only happen as a result of
learning at the whole organization level. A Learning
Company is an organization that facilitates the
learning of all its members and continuously
transforms itself. (Pedler et. al. 1991: 1)
Learning organizations are characterized by total
employee involvement in a process of collaboratively

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

6 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

towards shared values or principles. (Watkins and

Marsick 1992: 118)

We can see much that is shared in these definitions and

some contrasts. To start with the last first: some writers (such
as Pedler et. al.) appear to approach learning organizations
as something that are initiated and developed by senior
management they involve a top-down, managerial
imposed, vision (Hughes and Tight 1998: 183). This can be
contrasted with more bottom-up or democratic approaches
such as that hinted at by Watkins and Marsick (1992; 1993).
Some writers have looked to the learning company, but most
have proceeded on the assumption that any type of
organization can be a learning organization. A further crucial
distinction has been reproduced from the use of theories
from organizational learning. This is the distinction made
between technical and social variants (Easterby-Smith and
Araujo 1999: 8). The technical variant has looked to
interventions based on measure such as the learning curve
(in which historical data on production costs is plotted
against the cumulative output of a particular product) (op.
cit.). There is a tendency in such approaches to focus on
outcomes rather than the processes of learning. The social
view of the learning organization looks to interaction and
process and it is this orientation that has come to dominate
the popular literature.
According to Sandra Kerka (1995) most conceptualizations of
the learning organizations seem to work on the assumption
that learning is valuable, continuous, and most effective
when shared and that every experience is an opportunity to
learn (Kerka 1995). The following characteristics appear in
some form in the more popular conceptions. Learning
organizations:

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

7 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

Use learning to reach their goals.

Link individual performance with organizational
performance.
Foster inquiry and dialogue, making it safe for people to
share openly and take risks.
Embrace creative tension as a source of energy and
renewal.
Are continuously aware of and interact with their
environment. (Kerka 1995)
As Kerka (1995) goes onto comment, the five disciplines that
Peter Senge goes on to identify (personal mastery, mental
models, shared vision, team learning and systems thinking)
are the keys to achieving this sort of organization. Here,
rather than focus too strongly on the five disciplines (these
can be followed up in our review of Senge and the learning
organization) we want to comment briefly on his use of
systemic thinking and his interest in dialogue (and the
virtues it exhibits). These two elements in many respects
mark out his contribution.

Systemic thinking is the conceptual cornerstone (The Fifth

Discipline) of Peter Senges approach. It is the discipline that
integrates the others, fusing them into a coherent body of
theory and practice (1990: 12). Systems theorys ability to
comprehend and address the whole, and to examine the
interrelationship between the parts provides, for Peter Senge,
both the incentive and the means to integrate the disciplines.
Three things need noting here. First, systems theory looks to
connections and to the whole. In this respect it allows people
to look beyond the immediate context and to appreciate the

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

8 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

extent it holds the possibility of achieving a more holistic

understanding. Second, while the building blocks of systems
theory are relatively simple, they can build into a rather more
sophisticated model than are current in many organizations.
Senge argues that one of the key problems with much that is
written about, and done in the name of management, is that
rather simplistic frameworks are applied to what are complex
systems. When we add these two points together it is possible
to move beyond a focus on the parts, to begin to see the
whole, and to appreciate organization as a dynamic process.
Thus, the argument runs, a better appreciation of systems
will lead to more appropriate action. Third, systemic
thinking, according to Senge, allows us to realize the
significance of feedback mechanisms in organizations. He
concludes:
The systems viewpoint is generally oriented toward the
long-term view. Thats why delays and feedback loops are so
important. In the short term, you can often ignore them;
theyre inconsequential. They only come back to haunt you in
the long term. (Senge1990: 92)
While other writers may lay stress on systems theory, in
Senges hands it sharpens the model and does provide
some integration of the disciplines he identifies.

Peter Senge also places an emphasis on dialogue in

organizations especially with regard to the discipline of
team learning. Dialogue (or conversation) as Gadamer has
argued is is a process of two people understanding each
other. As such it is inherently risky and involves questioning
our beliefs and assumptions.
Thus it is a characteristic of every true conversation that
each opens himself to the other person, truly accepts his

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

9 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

particular individual, but what he says. The thing that has

to be grasped is the objective rightness or otherwise of his
opinion, so that they can agree with each other on a
subject. (Gadamer 1979: 347)
The concern is not to win the argument, but to advance
understanding and human well being. Agreement cannot be
imposed, but rests on common conviction (Habermas 1984:
285-287). As a social relationship it entails certain virtues
and emotions.
It is easy to see why proponents of the learning organization
would place a strong emphasis upon dialogue. As Peter Senge
has argued, for example, team learning entails the capacity of
members of a team to suspend assumptions and enter into a
genuine thinking together (1990: 10). Dialogue is also
necessary to other disciplines e.g. building a shared vision
and developing mental models. However, there are
significant risks in dialogue to the organization. One factor in
the appeal of Senges view of dialogue (which was based upon
the work of David Bohmand associates) was the promise that
it could increase and enrich corporate activity. It could do
this, in part, through the exploration and questioning of
inherent, predetermined purposes and goals (Bohm et. al.
1991). There is a clear parallel here with Argyris and Schns
work on double-loop learning, but interestingly one of
Bohms associates has subsequently suggested that their view
was too optimistic: dialogue is very subversive (Factor
1994).

In our discussion of Senge and the learning organizationwe

point to some particular problems associated with his
conceptualization. These include a failure to fully appreciate
and incorporate the imperatives that animate modern

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

10 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

requires of managers (and whether many in practice they are

up to it); and questions around his treatment of
organizational politics. It is certainly difficult to find real-life
examples of learning organizations (Kerka 1995). There has
also been a lack of critical analysis of the theoretical
framework.
Based on their study of attempts to reform the Swiss Postal
Service, Matthias Finger and Silvia B?rgin Brand (1999)
provide us with a useful listing of more important
shortcomings of the learning organization concept. They
conclude that it is not possible to transform a bureaucratic
organization by learning initiatives alone. They believe that
by referring to the notion of the learning organization it was
possible to make change less threatening and more
acceptable to participants. However, individual and
collective learning which has undoubtedly taken place has
not really been connected to organizational change and
transformation (ibid.: 146). Part of the issue, they suggest, is
to do with the concept of the learning organization itself.
They argue the following points. The concept of the learning
organization:
Focuses mainly on the cultural dimension, and does not
adequately take into account the other dimensions of an
organization. To transform an organization it is necessary
to attend to structures and the organization of work as well
as the culture and processes. Focussing exclusively on
training activities in order to foster learning favours this
purely cultural bias (ibid.: 146).
Favours individual and collective learning processes at all
levels of the organization, but does not connect them
properly to the organizations strategic objectives. Popular
models of organizational learning (such as Dixon 1994)
assume such a link. It is, therefore, imperative, that the
link between individual and collective learning and the

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

11 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

for some form of measurement of organizational learning

so that it is possible to assess the extent to which such
learning contributes or not towards strategic objectives.
Remains rather vague. The exact functions of
organizational learning need to be more clearly defined.
In our view, organizational learning is just a means in order
to achieve strategic objectives. But creating a learning
organization is also a goal, since the ability permanently and
collectively to learn is a necessary precondition for thriving in
the new context. Therefore, the capacity of an organization to
learn, that is, to function like a learning organization, needs
to be made more concrete and institutionalized, so that the
management of such learning can be made more effective.
(ibid.: 147)
Finally, Finger and Brand conclude, that there is a need to
develop a true management system of an organizations
evolving learning capacity (op. cit.). This, they suggest, can
be achieved through defining indicators of learning
(individual and collective) and by connecting them to other
indicators.

It could be argued that the notion of the learning

organization provides managers and others with a picture of
how things could be within an organization. Along the way,
writers like Peter Senge introduce a number of interesting
dimensions that could be personally developmental, and that
could increase organizational effectiveness especially where
the enterprise is firmly rooted in the knowledge economy.
However, as we have seen, there are a number of
shortcomings to the model it is theoretically underpowered
and there is some question as to whether the vision can be

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

12 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

between organizations in a globalized capitalist economy. It

might well be that the concept is being oversold as a
near-universal remedy for a wide variety of organizational
problems (Kuchinke 1995 quoted in Kerka 1995).
There have been various attempts by writers to move
beyond the learning organization. (The cynics among us
might conclude that there is a great deal of money in it for the
writers who can popularise the next big thing in
management and organizational development). Thus, we find
guides and texts on the developing organization (Gilley and
Maybunich 2000), the accelerating organization (Maira and
Scott-Morgan 1996), and the ever-changing organization
(Pieters and Young 1999). Peter Senge, with various
associates, has continued to produce workbooks and
extensions of his analysis to particular fields such as
schooling (1994; 1999; 2000).
In one of the more interesting developments there has been
an attempt to take the already substantial literature on trust
in organizations (Edmondson and Moingeon 1999: 173) and
to link it to developments in thinking around social
capital(especially via the work of political theorists like
Robert Putnam) (see Cohen and Prusak 2001). We could also
link this with discussions within informal education and
lifelong learning concerning the educative power of
organizations and groups (and hence the link to
organizational learning) (see the material on association
elsewhere on these pages). Here the argument is that social
capital makes an organization more than a collection of
individuals. (Social capital can be seen as consisting of the
stock of active connections among people: the trust, mutual
understanding, and shared values and behaviours that bind
the members of human networks and communities and make
cooperative action possible, Cohen and Prusak 2001: 4).
Social capital draws people into groups.

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

13 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

coherent organizational behaviour. This description of

social capital suggests appropriate organizational
investments namely, giving people space and time to
connect, demonstrating trust, effectively communicating
aims and beliefs, and offering equitable opportunities and
rewards that invite genuine participation, not mere
presence. (Cohen and Prusak 2001: 4)
In this formulation we can see many of the themes that run
through the approach to the learning organization that
writers like Watkins and Marsick (1993) take. The significant
thing about the use of the notion of social capital is the extent
to which it then becomes possible to tap into some interesting
research methodologies and some helpful theoretical
frameworks.
Quite where we go from here is a matter for some debate. It
could be that the notion of the learning organization has had
its fifteen minutes of fame. However, there does seem to be
life in the notion yet. It offers an alternative to a more
technicist framework, and holds within it a number of
important possibilities for organizations seeking to sustain
themselves and to grow.

Easterby-Smith, M., Burgoyne, J. and Araujo, L. (eds.) (1999)

Organizational Learning and the Learning Organization,
London: Sage. 247 + viii pages. A collection with a good
overview and some very helpful individual papers. The
opening section provides reviews and critiques, the second, a
series of evaluations of practice.
Schn, D. A. (1973) Beyond the Stable State. Public and
private learning in a changing society, Harmondsworth:
Penguin. 236 pages. A very influential book (following
Schns 1970 Reith Lectures) arguing that change is a

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

14 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

develop social systems that can learn and adapt. Schn

develops many of the themes that were to be such a
significant part of his collaboration with Chris Argyris and his
exploration of reflective practice.
Senge, P. M. (1990) The Fifth Discipline. The art and
practice of the learning organization, London: Random
House. 424 + viii pages. A seminal and highly readable book
in which Senge sets out the five competent technologies that
build and sustain learning organizations. His emphasis on
systems thinking as the fifth, and cornerstone discipline
allows him to develop a more holistic appreciation of
organization (and the lives of people associated with them).

Argyris, C., & Schn, D. (1978) Organisational learning: A

theory of action perspective, Reading, Mass: Addison
Wesley.
Argyris, C. and Schn, D. (1996) Organisational learning II:
Theory, method and practice, Reading, Mass: Addison
Wesley.
Bohm, D., Factor, D. and Garrett, P. (1991) Dialogue a
proposal, the informal education archives.
Bolman, L. G. and Deal, T. E. (1997) Reframing
Organizations. Artistry, choice and leadership 2e, San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 450 pages.
Castells, M. (2001) Information technology and global
capitalism in W. Hutton and A. Giddens (eds.) On the Edge.
Living with global capitalism, London: Vintage.
Cohen, D. and Prusak, L. (2001) In Good Company. How
social capital makes organizations work, Boston: Harvard

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

15 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

Dixon, N. (1994) The Organizational Learning Cycle. How

we can learn collectively, London: McGraw-Hill.
Easterby-Smith, M. and Araujo, L. Current debates and
opportunities in M. Easterby-Smith, L. Araujo and J.
Burgoyne (eds.) Organizational Learning and the Learning
Organization, London: Sage.
Edmondson, A. and Moingeon, B. (1999) Learning, trust and
organizational change in M. Easterby-Smith, L. Araujo and
J. Burgoyne (eds.) Organizational Learning and the
Learning Organization, London: Sage.
Factor, D. (1994) On Facilitation and Purpose,
http://www.muc.de/~heuvel/dialogue
/facilitation_purpose.html
Finger, M. and Brand, S. B. (1999) The concept of the
learning organization applied to the transformation of the
public sector in M. Easterby-Smith, L. Araujo and J.
Burgoyne (eds.) Organizational Learning and the Learning
Organization, London: Sage.
Gadamer, H-G. (1979) Truth and Method, London: Sheed
and Ward.
Garvin, D. A. (2000) Learning in Action. A guide to putting
the learning organization to work, Boston, Mass.: Harvard
Business School Press.
Gilley, J. W. and Maybunich, A. (2000) Beyond the Learning
Organization. Creating a culture of continuous growth and
development through state-of-the-art human resource
practices, Cambridge, Mass.: Perseus Books.
Habermas, J. (1984) The Theory of Communicative Action

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

16 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

Hayes, R. H., Wheelwright, S. and Clark, K. B. (1988)

Dynamic Manufacturing: Creating the learning
organization, New York: Free Press. 429 pages.
Hughes, C. and Tight, M. (1998) The myth of the learning
society in S. Ranson (ed.) Inside the Learning Society,
London: Cassell.
Kerka, S. (1995) The learning organization: myths and
realities Eric Clearinghouse, http://www.cete.org
/acve/docgen.asp?tbl=archive&ID=A028.
Leadbeater, C, (2000) Living on Thin Air, London: Penguin.
Malhotra, Y. (1996) Organizational Learning and Learning
Organizations: An Overview http://www.brint.com/papers
/orglrng.htm
Maira, A. and Scott-Morgan, P. B. (1996) The Accelerating
Organization: Embracing the human face of change,
McGraw-Hill.
Marquandt, M. and Reynolds, A. (1993) The Global Learning
Organization, Irwin Professional Publishing.
Marquardt, M. J. (1996) Building the Learning
Organization, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Van Maurik, J. (2001) Writers on Leadership, London:
Penguin.
Pedler, M., Burgoyne, J. and Boydell, T. (1991, 1996) The
Learning Company. A strategy for sustainable development,
London: McGraw-Hill.
Pieters, G. W. and Young, D. W. (1999) The Ever-Changing

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

17 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

learning and improvement, St Lucie.

Senge, P. et. al. (1994) The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook:
Strategies and Tools for Building a Learning Organization
Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., Roth, G. and
Smith, B. (1999) The Dance of Change: The Challenges of
Sustaining Momentum in Learning Organizations, New
York: Doubleday/Currency).
Senge, P., Cambron-McCabe, N. Lucas, T., Smith, B., Dutton,
J. and Kleiner, A. (2000) Schools That Learn. A Fifth
Discipline Fieldbook for Educators, Parents, and Everyone
Who Cares About Education, New York:
Doubleday/Currency
Sugarman, B. (1996) Learning, Working, Managing, Sharing:
The New Paradigm of the Learning Organization, Lesley
College, http://www.lesley.edu/journals/jppp/2
/sugarman.html
Sugarman, B. (1996) The learning organization and
organizational learning: New Roles for Workers, Managers,
Trainers and Consultants, Lesley College,
http://www.lesley.edu/faculty/sugarman/loandtd.htm
Tsang, E. (1997) Organizational learning and the learning
organization: a dichotomy between descriptive and
prescriptive research, Human Relations, 50(1): 57-70.
Watkins, K. and Marsick, V. (eds.) (1993) Sculpting the
Learning Organization. Lessons in the art and science of
systematic change, San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.
Watkins, K. and Marsick, V. (1992) Building the learning
organization: a new role for human resource developers,
Studies in Continuing Education 14(2): 115-29.

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

18 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

Analyze an organizations learning climate set of tools

concerning cultural aspects of organizational development.
The Business Researchers Interests: Organizational Learning
& Knowledge Management Lots of links.
Index of links to learning organization websites: some ideas
for getting started in learning about learning organizations.
Learning Org A Discussion of Learning Organizations.
Contains current messages and archives of the Learning-org
mailing list.
Learning organization profile checklist produced by ASTD
(American Society For Training and Development)
The Learning Organizations Homepage: articles on the
nature of the learning organization plus articles and links.
The Learning Organization: journal.
The Learning Organization: Transformational Change: article
Organizational fitness Website
Organizational Learning and Learning Organizations: An
Overview Excellent collection of links and papers @
Brint.comAn overview of key concepts related to
Organizational Learning and Learning Organizations
covering questions such as: What is Organizational Learning?
What is a Learning Organization? What is Adaptive Learning
vs. Generative Learning? Whats the Managers Role in the
Learning Organization? Whats the Relationship between
Strategy and Organizational Learning? What is the Role of
Information Systems in the Learning Organization? Does
Information Technology Impose Any Constraints on
Organizational Learning?

14-04-2015 02:17 PM

infed.org | The learning organization: principles, theory and practice

19 of 19

http://infed.org/mobi/the-learning-organization/

inspired homepage
The Society for Organizational Learning
Stanford Learning Organization Web (SLOW): The Stanford
Learning Organization Web (SLOW) is an informal network
of Stanford researchers, staff, and students along with
colleagues and friends from the corporate world interested in
the nature and development of learning organizations.
Acknowledgement: Picture, Marble Madness is by Jo
Christian Oterhals . It was sourced from Flickr and is
reproduced here under a Creative Commons AttributionNonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
licence. http://www.flickr.com/photos/oter/4612019947
To cite this page: Smith, M. K. (2001, 2007) The learning
organization, the encyclopedia of informal education,
http://www.infed.org/biblio/learning-organization.htm.
Mark K. Smith 2001, 207

30

10

learning organization

14-04-2015 02:17 PM