The learning organization

Abstract

PurposeTwenty years ago, Senge's, 1990 pioneering article, ”The learning organization,” published in MIT's Sloan Management Review, received center‐stage attention. The concept received much support and was followed with articles by prominent writers and educators, Margaret Wheatley amongst them. Only ten years later, however, another prominent writer and educator, David Garvin, remarked, “Learning organizations have been embraced in theory but are still surprisingly rare.” The purpose of this paper is to argue and present support for a perspective that learning organizations have existed for over 100 years. Linking this concept to the past versus arguing that learning organizations are new will better pave the way for learning organizations to achieve a status of being more than simply “embraced in theory.”Design/methodology/approachThree objectives were presented. The first developed an historical link, with the goal of showing that learning organizations have had a rich history and did not simply appear in 1990. The approach to the second was based on drawing implications from literature about the learning process. The very heart of competitiveness depends on how firm members experience the learning process. The process is a function of the use of tools (T) within a learning climate (C) and their interaction (T x C). The approach to the third objective was to conceptualize learning climate dimensions, old compared to new learning organizations.FindingsFirst, the idea that learning is always a competitiveness issue has not been consistently advanced in the literature, if hardly at all. Second, the internal learning climates within firms are what is at the heart of other cultures' successes. Much time has been spent studying the tools used in these firms, for instance quality circles, but little time with the climate learning dimension. The climate dimension has been the reason for their success.Originality/valueThe paper presents a tools/climate learning dimensions matrix (a 2x2 matrix) and develops the understanding that all learning stems from two learning dimensions, tools, and the learning dimension, climate, within which the tools are employed. Within this discussion, the authors present the idea of the competitive advantage of cultures; this advantage appearing in a firm as a consequence of the “climate learning dimension” of various cultures. The concluding section of the paper presents five climate dimensions; those of yesterday compared with those of today. These well known management perspectives (e.g. single loop learning/double loop learning, independence/interdependence) are linked to the learning process with a special focus on the climate dimension of the process. It is there that the degree of the firm's competitiveness is enhanced.