DYNAMICS OF ORGANIZATIONAL WISDOM

Abstract

Abstract Neglected till recently in management research, expansion of interest in wisdom and its practical application across a wide range of disciplines is observed. Embrace of the ancient wisdom traditions such as Zen Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism, and wider acceptance of spirituality and soul in the workplace exemplify the trend. Facets of wise thought and action are central to burgeoning disciplines such as business ethics, sustainability, transformational leadership, corporate citizenship and social responsibility, and workplace democratization. Built on the principles and practices of organizational learning and knowledge management, but surpassing them in their ability to foster learning, understanding, commitment, and the right thing, organizational wisdom provides an aim worth striving for. This paper identifies and explains important elements of organizational wisdom, and describes their interaction as a dynamic, complex system. Understanding this system illuminates causes of organizational learning problems, permits targeting key sticking points and levers for change, and suggests strategies for more effective learning and the achievement of important performance outcomes. A New Era Unfolds If the last decade of the 20th Century and the early years of the 21st may be termed the era of the learning organization, the period that supercedes it might aptly be termed the era of organizational wisdom; that is, if we can understand and overcome the barriers holding us back. Despite the explosion of research and writing on organizational learning, knowledge management, and related subjects since 1990, there continues to be concern as to how to become a learning organization, exploit intellectual capital, and best value, develop, and get the most out of our human resources. It is not the intent of this paper to exhaustively review or to rehash the organizational learning / learning organization literature, but to provide a working foundation upon which the ideas of organizational wisdom can be developed. A sample of those sources drawn on more heavily includes Argyris (1982; 1991), Argyris and Schon (1978), Garvin (1993), Gorelick, Milton, and April (2004), Griffey (1998), Kirn (1994), Lichtenstein (2000), Reynolds and Ablett (1998), Schein (1993; 1999), Senge (199Oa; 199Ob), Shaw and Perkins (1992), Shelton and Darling (2003), Tucker, Edmondson, and Spear (2002), Ulrich, Von Glinow, and Jick (1993). These sources indicate that we have certainly achieved a profound increase in awareness about the need for change and adaptation, and the mechanism viewed as the best solution, learning organizations; but, paradoxically, we have fallen woefully short of becoming them. The components of organizational learning do not tell the story. It is the way they are arranged, fueled, and operate synergistically that explains how organizations learn (or fail to) and what they need to do to achieve greater levels of wisdom and effectiveness. At the core of the system [model] are a couple of simple elements whose dynamic relationships animate and at least partially explain the organizational learning system and, potentially, wisdom. Effectively contending with context, learning, reflection, and biases, beliefs and assumptions assures organizational learning occurs; it is their interaction that enables organizational learning and converts it to wise thoughts and actions. Without reflection in context, for example, learning is minimized and effectiveness of strategies cannot truly be assessed. Organizational wisdom transcends organizational learning in its commitment to doing the right thing over doing things right. Doing the right thing continually while contending with immediate crises-and sometimes in opposition to business logic-requires courage, commitment to core values that include the greater good, understanding of the big picture, and a willingness to trade short-term profit or ease with longterm viability. …