The paper "An Actor Approach to Strategic Learning - Enron Corporation" is a good example of a management case study. Enron Corp unexpected sudden collapses were the first in a progression of key corporate bookkeeping scandals that has meddled with the trust in the corporate administration and money markets as well. The company was formed in 1985 through a Merger between Houston Natural Gas and Intermonth (Thomas, 2002). This made it the first across country gas pipeline network. The center of the business moved from the managed transportation gas to that of unregulated vitality exchanging markets.
The principal followed, in this case, was that of the fact that more money was being made through the purchase and sale of monetary contracts associated with the estimation of vitality resources than in genuine responsibility for resources. Enron filed bankruptcy in December 2001, however, was viewed as a standout amongst the most imaginative, quickly developing and best managed inside the US. All the stakeholders lost billions of money following the swift collapse of the company (Garavan, 2007). This makes clear that Enron was in serious financial shape as 2000, carrying heavy burdens of money-losing business and debts, but manipulated its financial and accounting statements to cover up for these issues. Analyses and explanations The company leaders hold top position by the time of company collapse were Lay and Skilling.
These leaders engaged in mainly in the concept of self-promotion. This can be seen by the way they assigned nomenclatures for themselves and another topmost employee. The company under the management employed young people and maintained work regimes that stretched up to 180 hours per week.
Employees were made to believe that they were part of the world changers but wager fired at the notion of the managers (Iles, Preece, & Chuai, 2010). From an actor approach to strategic learning or Learning network theory, Lay seemed to be a transformational leader who could promote a learning culture based on transformation and progression among the employees at the start of his career. This can be seen from his supportive approach and advocate for a free market, as well as, deregulation of the energy market. However, he later used this approach that he had developed among the employees and those he led at Enron to develop a culture that only passed the wrong message to the employees. The culture that was created by the management at Enron failed to recognize workers as focal performing actors who compose learning on the premise of their thoughts and interest as opposed to lessening their cooperation to being forced to bear an instructional course.
The administration various methods for sorting out work-related learning through the expression various arranging procedures utilized by workers and different characters keeping in mind the end goal to learn negatively.
The kind of lessons directed to the employees made inalienable strains amongst learning and work, between worker improvement and work execution and no interest, is directed to the learning concept making it simply a function for work. As a result, not time was available to reduce the risk of making a learning tip top individuals were not modifying work to their capabilities or adapting their capabilities to work innovations