Relevance of Organisational Learning to Human Resource Management - Example

A discussion on the relevance of Organisational Learning to Human resource Management Introduction The organisational learning is not among the most favourite ideas for many of the theorists and most of the practitioners of management requiring urgent attention. In many countries, theories of learning do not figure strongly in professional education programs for teachers. Theorists, as a whole, have been divided on the relevance of organisational learning as a field of management and practitioners are found to be more or less too occupied with the routine chorus of their jobs. On implementation part, there are problems for managers seeking to stimulate learning. The primary notion of being a manager is ‘leadership’ and ‘leaders’ need to pose themselves as the ultimate fountain sources of knowledge and decisions. They can ill-afford to be seen making mistakes and being uncertain at times. Thus, the concept of ‘learning’ clashes with their primary posture. Secondly, the process of learning, by creating a culture that supports the flow of knowledge and the questioning of traditional ways of seeing and doing things, requires a bit of ‘re-structuring’ for most of the organisations. Most of the organisational structures are found serving as barriers to knowledge sharing. Recognizing and actively seeking out the knowledge held by people in the organisation across the hierarchy, department or status is again a big task, with potential to spill over to reviews. Naturally, for a learning conducive environment, people need not be penalized for making mistakes. It can lead to avoidance of risk and even concealing the errors, instead of using it as an opportunity for the organisation to learn from. Similarly, the prevailing incentive systems are primarily individualistic and focus on one unit or individual at the expense of other. This is again incompatible to inculcate people to share their knowledge with others. Further, a high degree of tolerance for non-conformists is also required for a culture that is open to learning. This might not suit to the regimen of ‘discipline’. On the other hand the theorists too are divided on this count. In the mid-nineties it was said that the field of organisational learning was an ‘ugly duckling in the pond of organisation theory’ 1and that there were ‘more reviews of organisational learning than there is substance to review’2. Similarly, it was said that ‘everyone is talking about [it] but few are living it.’3 And, that we ‘know a lot about learning-organisation theory, but far less about how to apply it.’4 However, in the last decade and onwards, a lot many empirical studies of Organisational learning have been produced. Various conditions and outcomes of learning, its relations with other aspects and dimensions of management are being studied. One stream of the studies has found learning instrumental in enhancing the performance, innovativeness and survival of organisations. Some researches pointed at the cultural, structural, strategic and environmental facilitators for learning.5 However, learning, being an organic phenomenon, involving willing individuals and appropriate atmosphere and essentially a creative and interactive process, is still struggling to find a regular place in the regimented management practices. Even the recent empirical researches show learning to be an elusive phenomenon, which may not occur when it is expected6. Further, the occurrence of learning was found to be more transient than permanent7. Why Organisational Learning is relevant? Still, certain factors have been pushing the concept of Organisational Learning for induction into the theory and practice. The realities of business becoming more complex, dynamic, and globally competitive have pushed the study of Organisational Learning. More understanding, knowledge, preparation, and agreement have become imperative in the new all dynamic business environment than the expertise and experience of the ‘sole boss’ could provide. The commercial significance of organisational learning is also recognised by many consultants and organisations. Organisational learning is reckoned essential for sustainable socioeconomic system and a sustainable natural environment. Further fuel to organisational learning is provided by globalisation. It is deemed as a critical imperative for global strategic effectiveness. The induction and enforcement of the following concepts unmistakably point to the need of organisational learning. Best Practice Transfer (BPT) Transformational leadership Skilful change management Seductive vision/mission statements Participative management Transparency Open communication Malleable organisational culture Flattening of organisational ‘architecture’ Downsizing Authentic delegation of authority Empowerment of stakeholders Total quality management (TQM). Theories of organisational learning Despite of the fact that organisational learning mixes up with so many dimensions of management, it is still treated as ‘The Fifth Discipline’ i.e. beyond the Strategy, Human Resource Management, and Operations Management. In fact, the publication of Senge's book The Fifth Discipline in 1990 followed by another in 19948, is considered as the first serious attempt to promote the concept of the learning organisation as a way to restructure organisations to meet the challenges of the coming century. We are already into the new century and seem to be still exploring this discipline. Senge described the five disciplines as the means of building learning organisations, i.e. organisations where people continually expand their capacity (by learning) to create the results they truly desire, where (within the organisation) the new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, and collective yearning is liberated, where people persistently learn how to learn together. According to Senge, the five disciplines are Systems thinking Personal mastery Mental models Shared vision & team learning. Systems thinking framework is based on the dynamics of the system. This highly conceptual looks at systems in terms of particular types of cycles (archetypes); and it includes explicit system modelling of complex issues. In essence the discipline of systems thinking looks for a shift of mind. Starting by simple learning to recognize types of "structures" that keep on recurring, it eventually forms a rich language for describing a vast array of interrelationships and patterns of change. Ultimately, it moves on to see the deeper patterns lying behind the recurring events. Systems Archetypes are those basic cycles that systems go through. The Fifth Discipline lists the following archetypes - Balancing Process with Delay Limits to Growth Shifting the Burden Shifting the Burden to the Intervener Eroding Goals Escalation Success to the Successful Tragedy of the Commons Fixes that Fail Growth and Underinvestment Systems thinking uses archetypes for modelling those cycles that systems go through. This helps in locating the point in the cycle where effort is most effective. Similarly, the cycle proves useful in changing the structure of the system as well. Personal Mastery Personal mastery is in the field of organisational learning is as simple as it can be in the field of, say sports. It is the discipline of persistently enhancing personal vision, concentrating the energies, developing serenity, and seeing the reality in an objective manner. According to Senge, continually developing personal mastery involves some kind of ‘meditation.’ He advocates regular meditative practice as he finds it extremely helpful in working more productively with the subconscious mind. Many mega organisations might not have formally adopted organisational learning, but their management gurus have started Yoga and meditation as part of organisational routine. In fact, the concept of organisational learning occurred to Senge himself during Yoga only in the fall of 1987. Mental Models ‘Mental models’ are those presumed assumptions which influence our understanding of the world and our methods on action. This is again a meditation type of ‘soul searching’; involving learning to locate our internal pictures of the world, identify them and to scrutinise them rigorously. It also includes the ability of the people to balance their own thinking effectively. Shared Vision Shared vision is the ‘macro’ or sum of the micro visions of the future. It fosters genuine commitment and involvement rather than mere compliance. Team Learning Again, the corporations and organisations, which might not have cognised organisational learning as a instrument of management, have adopted the concept of team learning by ‘dialogue’ among the staffers. This helps in building the capacity of members of a team to do away with the private assumptions and enter into a genuine ‘thinking together.’ It involves mastering the practices of dialogue and discussion, instead of the monologue. 9 Senge gives maximum importance to the systems thinking. Criticism to Senge starts with that there is no organisation can learn it is individual who learns. But a learning organisation promotes a culture of learning and a community of learners, simultaneously ensuring that individual learning enhances and boosts the organisation. But, the individual learning need be shared and used by the organisation.10 It is truism to state that organisational learning is a process. However, the different process models of organisational learning have not been systematically compared, nor the process characteristics of organisational learning have not been systematically studied. It has left the literature on the subject in a fragmented state. Further the ever-increasing conceptual diversity, humanisation of the organisational learning and the representation of a human being as a physical thing have made a mystery of the concept. Organisational learning and the Human Resource Management There is a lack of empirical studies that explore the relationship between human resource management and organisational learning, despite of the fact that a number of researchers have discussed the role of human resource management in learning organisations. The development aspect of the Human resource management comprises those procedures and processes which provide learning activities to enhance the skills, knowledge and capabilities of people, teams and the organisation. The objective is to alter the actions in a manner to achieve the desired outcomes. Education is always an investment and each investment is a cost. Thus, obviously, this approach of development of human resources presumes that the employees are worth investing in, and there will be benefits for the individuals involved, the organisation, the economy and society as a whole. The provision of learning activities in whatever form is based on this presumption only. The returns on investment, as in the Human capital theory, are the people’s performance and the results achieved. These results are assessed in terms of costs and benefits.11 The outcomes of the organisational learning contribute to a firm’s resource based capability and thus it is in accordance with one of the fundamental objectives of human resource management that the investment need be made in the people, in order to generate the required intellectual capital. If we replace the words ‘training cost’ with ‘investment’, it signals a longer-term view with respect to the outcomes of Human Resource Development. This ‘Investment’ has a power shifting effect on the progression of other policies and programmes of Human resource Management. Particularly those related to recruiting, retaining and rewarding employees. The rewards and reviews start recognising the ‘productivity’ as a quality independent of ‘production’. Such practices finally create qualitative difference between organisations. This, of course, is a recent phenomenon, but finally the holistic view of learning at individual and organisational levels as a crucial source of competitive advantage has started taking precedence over the traditional narrow conception of training and development. The ‘high-road’ HRM strategy and Organizational Learning The ‘high road’ HRM strategy revolves around the concept of that a high performance working with high level skills and high discretion in performance of work. It implies that the working role of employees requires learning and change. Secondly, the line managers and other organs of management are involved in the development of the staff to that a degree that learning and working becomes virtually the same task. The leadership is understood to be a key variable in setting link between strategy, culture and the commitment of employees. In the Design School model of strategic work, senior managers are required to sense important environmental trends and signals in HRD terms.   The strategic HRD, barring the orthodox view of it, provide for a more reciprocal and proactive impact on the organisational strategy. From the social point of view, the maximum incidence of the concept of Organisational learning can be felt in Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs), since they employ a good number of people. Particularly in Manufacturing sector the market is highly competitive as well. Here, the organisational learning becomes a core capability and a key element of a strategy of an effective organisation. They learn to survive with the enhanced customer expectations, a higher degree of globalisation, pressure to drive down the labour costs and cut-throat competition. For SMEs take the organisational learning is several ways. It is for innovation, it is a core competence and a key element of a strategy. The sources of external learning for SMEs include customers, suppliers, scientific community, other industries, competitors, partnerships and consultants. The demand side linkages of the SMEs inculcate the firm to increase the innovation speed, while the supply side linkages of learning lead to better operational efficiency. Other industries enhance the process technologies of the firm. However, some researches have found the learning from competitors as counter-productive in development of product technologies and basic research.12 The most interesting part is that smaller firms are more apt in learning from suppliers and the scientific community than larger firms. On the other hand the larger firms learn more from partnerships and consultants. A low commitment to HRD is found in UK. As many employers either underestimate the skills gaps or do not recognise them at all. Many of them don’t consider future needs. Training is often concentrated among managers and senior staff (a remnant of the old school attitude), whereas unskilled workers receive very little, resulting in lowering of the skill quotient for the organisation and a lower than potential HDI for the society. In fact it is deemed as a factor responsible for relatively poor economic performance of the UK.13 However, for the firms also, the HRD is easier said than done. To begin with, the entire management outlook is required to be thoroughly altered. It is essential that the actions of managers at all levels are towards favouring learning and turning a repugnance to risk-taking into opportunity-spotting attitude. It also requires a systematic training model. To implement a training model, consideration of budgets, attitudes, abilities and culture or climate are the essential prerequisites. Then the training activity has to be relevant and to reflect the real world. Theorists have given four distinct systemic levels of learning: Zero learning- when problems arise, yet members fail to take corrective action. Single loop learning- making simple adoptions and taking corrective actions Double loop learning- involves reframing, i.e. to see things in totally new ways. Triple loop learning - members developing new processes or methodologies for arriving at re-framings.14 Triple loop learning (developed into the circular organisation) exhibits itself in the form of ‘collective mindfulness’. Members discover the modes of learning from their collective experiences. They produce new structures and strategies for learning. The development of the circular organisational system is important from the entire management point of view and in particular the HRM. There were theories about the organisational structure affecting organisational behaviour. The ‘circular organisational system’ rounded off all those edges of the organisational structure, which come in the way of developing new processes. It is also known as the sociocratic model. The three fundamental of the primary circular design are: 1) Consent based decision making which is defined as ``no argued objection''. 2) Double linking. Lower strata of workers are represented into the higher echelons by electing a representative. This poses a huge challenge for Manpower management. 3) Election of persons is done by consent after open and free discussion. This design is almost plutonic from implementation point of view, but with sector bias. Hospitals, IT, Software and other knowledge based industries are forced to go ‘circular’ for better professional performance. Here the Human Resource development policy has to be translated into the structures, systems and processes of the firm, in order to create a learning climate. It is inclusive of subjectively perceived physical and psychosocial variables that effect the employee’s realization of his/her learning potential. An organisation’s ‘learning environment’ can be considered as expansive or restrictive.  From the HRM point of view, it faces several tough challenges while seeking to stimulate organisational learning. First, it is required to have the courage and the humility to be seen as learner itself. With so many cards- review to recruitment – in its hands, the HRM The pressure is high for leaders to demonstrate knowing rather than learning. Similarly, in order to create a culture supportive of the flow of knowledge and the questioning of traditional ways of doing things and perceptual experiences. It also falls in the duties of the HRM to ensure that the organisational structures are supporting the flow of knowledge instead of serving as barriers to knowledge sharing. This amounts to move towards the circular organisation, whether they accept it or not. Rewards, one of the most potent weapons in the hands of HRM, must also be in tune with knowledge sharing and learning processes. Non-conformists or aggressive trade unionists are a bane of any HRM, but to have a culture open to learning will have to have a higher tolerance for them. Most important part is that the HRM must ensure creation of space for people to think differently from one another and to feel safe in challenging the status quo. This need be precariously balanced with the internal discipline. No matter haw a company defines its sense of discipline, practically; each discipline requires employees to ‘follow the boss.’ The HRM will have to ascertain a balance between articulating a generally shared sense of purpose and direction without imposing it and at the same time remaining open to questioning with different approaches. That is besides the hectic and budget sensitive schedules of training within the work hours, without any serious damage to output. It is widely recognised that learning is not done only within the boundaries of an organisation. The learning takes place between organisations as well and that is also equally very important. Since the final assessment of the performance is done by the stakeholders, the thus a kind of learning for the diverse stakeholders also becomes imperative. None of it can be a one-sided process of persuasion or manipulation. Conclusion The organisational learning is not among the most favourite ideas for many of the theorists and most of the practitioners of management requiring urgent attention. In many countries, theories of learning do not figure strongly in professional education programs for teachers. Most of the organisational structures are found serving as barriers to knowledge sharing. Recognizing and actively seeking out the knowledge held by people in the organisation across the hierarchy, department or status is again a big task, with potential to spill over to reviews. In the last decade and onwards, a lot many empirical studies of Organisational learning have been produced. Various conditions and outcomes of learning, its relations with other aspects and dimensions of management are being studied. Certain factors have been pushing the concept of Organisational Learning for induction into the theory and practice. The realities of business becoming more complex, dynamic, and globally competitive have pushed the study of Organisational Learning. More understanding, knowledge, preparation, and agreement have become imperative in the new all dynamic business environment than the expertise and experience of the ‘sole boss’ could provide. Despite of the fact that organisational learning mixes up with so many dimensions of management, it is still treated as ‘The Fifth Discipline’ i.e. beyond the Strategy, Human Resource Management, and Operations Management. In fact, the publication of Senge's book The Fifth Discipline in 1990 followed by another in 1994, is considered as the first serious attempt to promote the concept of the learning organisation as a way to restructure organisations to meet the challenges of the coming century. From the HRM point of view, it faces several tough challenges while seeking to stimulate organisational learning.. References: 1. Miner AS and Mezias SJ (1996). Ugly duckling no more: pasts and futures of organizational learning research. Organization Science 7(1): 88-99. 2. Watkins, K. E., and Marsick, V. J. Sculpting the Learning Organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993. 3. Calvert, G.; Mobley, S.; and Marshall, L. "Grasping the Learning Organization." Training 48, no. 6 (June 1994): 38-43. (ERIC No. EJ 484 475 4. Bapuji H & Crossan M (2004). From questions to answers: reviewing organizational learning research. Management Learning 35(4): 397-417. 5. Huzzard T and Östergren K (2002). When norms collide: learning under organizational hypocrisy. British Journal of Management 13: S47-S59 6. Senge, P. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organisation. New York: Doubleday, 1990 & The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook 1994 7. William N. Isaacs , Taking Flight: Dialogue, Collective Thinking, and Organizational Learning, Organizational Dynamics. Autumn 1993 8. West, P. "The Learning Organization: Losing the Luggage in Transit?" Journal of European Industrial Training18, no. 11 (1994): 30-38. (ERIC No. EJ 497 198) 9. John Bratton and Jeffrey Gold, Human Resource Management: Theory and practice, 10. Paul E. Bierly, Daly, Paula S., Sources of external organisational learning in small manufacturing firms, International Journal of Technology Management, Volume 38, 11. John Bratton and Jeffrey Gold, Human Resource Management: Theory and practice, 2003, Palgrave Macmillan 12. Argyris and SchoÈn, 1974; Flood and Romm, 1996; Snell and Man-Kuen Chak, 1998 Read More