Using a typology encompassing psychological learning theories across four quadrants, we have compared and contrasted various strands in the literature in an effort to detect synergies as well as points of difference. Doing so has enabled us to explore how psychological learning theories have been used in the development of (some) theories connected with organizational learning. To the left side of the model, theories which are essentially individualistic in orientation are reviewed. We have examined behavioral learning theory as well as simple cognitive models, in combination with theories that explore how the individual interacts with his or her environment to learn, change, and grow. To the right side of the model, we have explored theories such as distributed cognitions and learning-in-practice that highlight the shared sense of being that arises from working closely with others and the inseparability of learners from the social system to which they belong. Across the horizontal axis, we have reviewed (connected) themes asserting, firstly, the amenability of learning to control and direction, and, secondly, the natural evolution of learning, which occurs as people engage with their environments.
There are differences within each set of quadrants, taking into account the broad parameters described above. For example, looking to the left of the vertical axis, in the first quadrant, the individual is essentially passive, at the behest of his or her environment. Through appropriate reinforcement, desired behaviors are produced, which are, in turn, encouraged and rewarded by external parties in order to become a habitual state. In the fourth quadrant, by contrast, individuals are portrayed as active learners. Learning and progression may not necessarily be conscious, but rather a necessary part of the human condition.
Turning to perspectives outlined in the top and bottom parts of the typology, the point of contention is to do with control in learning, where we have asked questions about whether scholars perceive there to be an external reality against which learning can be held to account. For the first quadrant, the perspective seems to be that knowledge and expertise is concentrated in the hands of specific parties (for example, senior managers or learning and development specialists) who have responsibility for assisting and enabling the learning of those for whom they are responsible. In the second quadrant this line of reasoning is perhaps more subtly portrayed. Rather than people responding directly to their environments, it is suggested that there is a filtering process whereby a judgment is made about how effective or ineffective an action has been in the quest to achieve mastery (cf. Bandura, 1982). The social system influences mastery to the extent that there are role models portraying ideal behavior and providing guidance and support. The reciprocal nature of learning and the role of shared cognitions bring to mind several well known theories of organizational learning, such as the ‘4-i’ framework (Crossan et al., 1999) and the SECI model posited by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995).
Regarding constructivist perspectives, the typology suggests that there is a focus in the bottom two quadrants on how relationships influence learning within a work setting. Learning is social and is grounded in the concrete situations in which people participate with others. Social construction perspectives complement information processing and behavioral perspectives by focusing on organizational learning as involving socially mediated processes of interpretation and sense making. Weick (1995) conceives of the organization as a sense-making system that engages in recurring cycles of enactment, selection, and retention. These processes are the means by which the organization evolves as it makes sense of itself and its environment. The community of practice literature relies on the enactment of sense making, asserting that learning arises from communities sharing a common language, values, and practices. Newcomers to such communities learn through participation (Lave and Wenger, 1991).
Recent work has taken a knowledge co-creation and/or network learning perspective, which follows on from work reviewed in this quadrant. Because knowledge is socially constructed, rather than managed or directed by an external party, organizational boundaries are more fluid and less constricting than is implicitly suggested by theorists whose work is portrayed in the first two quadrants. The logic seems to be in line with Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998) in that social networks lead to the creation, transmission, and retention of intellectual capital. Social constructivist perspectives suggest that such networks are not necessarily contained within any one specific context. By contrast, people are likely to gravitate towards those with similar professional interests, even where expertise is located outside. Turning to the applied learning school of thought (quadrant four), there are several theoretical perspectives largely drawn from individual learning literatures. Experiential learning theory, for example, draws attention to the stages involved in the learning experience; there is, however, a connection with social constructivist theory especially for interventions where learning tasks are anchored to naturally occurring work activity, such as projects (DeFillippi, 2001).
In conclusion, the emphasis across the four quadrants seems to have been on cognitive modeling based on theorizing at the individual level, developed for applicability at the level of the organization, or alternatively in exploring how learning arises informally, in a collective setting. The importance of building productive relationships and learning culture has been widely considered by organizational learning scholars, especially within work located in quadrants two, three, and four. We have suggested that there may be scope for developing these areas in future research by taking into account not just the cognitive aspects involved but also emotional dynamics.
References
Antonacopoulou, E. (2001) The paradoxical nature of the relationship between training and learning. Journal of Management Studies, (38)3: 327–350.
Argyris, C. (1990) Overcoming Organisational Defenses: Facilitating Organisational Learning. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Argyris, C. and Schön, D. (1978) Organisational Learning: a Theory of Action Perspective. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
Armstrong, A. and Foley, P. (2003) Foundations for a learning organization: organization learning mechanisms. The Learning Organization, 10(2): 74–82.
Arthur, J. and Aimant-Smith, L. (2001) Gainsharing and organizational learning: An analysis of employee suggestions over time. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 737–754.
Ayas, K. and Zeniuk, N. (2001) Project-based Learning: Building Communities of Reflective Practitioners. Management Learning, 32(1): 61–76.
Bailey, K. (1994) Typologies and taxonomies: An introduction to classification techniques. Sage University Paper No. 102. London: Sage Publications.
Bandura, A. (1982) Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37: 122–147.
Bandura, A. (1997) Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.
Bass, B. and Vaughan, J. (1967) Training in industry: the management of learning. London: Tavistock Publications.
Blanchard, P. and Thacker, J. (2010) Effective training: Systems, strategies and practice, 4th edition. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Brown, J.S. and Duguid, P. (1991) Organisational learning and communities of practice: towards a unified view of working, learning and innovating. Organisation Science, 2(1): 40–57.
Brown, J.S. and Duguid, P. (2001) Knowledge and organization: a social-practice perspective. Organization Science, 12(2): 198–213.
Christianson, M., Farkas, M., Sutcliffe, K., and Weick, K. (2009) Learning through rare events: significant interruptions at the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Museum. Organization Science, 20: 846–860.
Coghlan, D. (2001) Insider Action Research Projects: Implications for Practicing Managers. Management Learning, 32(1): 49–60.
Cook, S and Brown, J.S. (1999) Bridging epistemologies: the generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organization Science, 10(4), 381–400.
Crossan, M., Lane, H., and White, R. (1999) An organizational learning framework: from intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review, 24(3): 522–537.
DeFillippi, R. (2001) Project-based learning, reflective practices and learning outcomes. Management Learning, 32(1): 5–10.
DeFillippi, R. and Milter, R. (2009) Problem-based and Project-based Learning Approaches: Applying Knowledge to Authentic Situations. In S. J. Armstrong and C. Fukami (eds.), Handbook of Management Learning, Education and Development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press: 344–363.
DeFillippi, R. and Ornstein, S. (2003) Psychological Perspectives Underlying Theories of Organizational Learning. In M. Easterby-Smith and M. Lyles (eds.), Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing: 19–37.
Dewey, J. (1938) Experience and education. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Edmondson, A. (2002) The Local and Variegated Nature of Learning in Organizations: A Group-Level Perspective. Organization Science, 13: 128–146.
Fineman, S. (2003) Emotions and learning. In M. Easterby-Smith and M. Lyles (eds.), Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge. Blackwell Publishing, pp. 19–37.
Garvin, D., Edmondson, A., and Gino, F. (2008) Is yours a learning organization? Harvard Business Review, 86(3): 109–118.
Gherardi, S., Nicolini, D., and Odella, F. (1998) Toward a social understanding of how people learn in organizations. Management Learning, 29(3): 273–297.
Harrison, R. (2009) Learning and development. London: CIPD.
Huber, G. (1991) Organisational learning: the contributing processes and the literature. Organisation Science, 2(1): 88–115.
Huysman, M. (2000) An organizational learning approach to the learning organization. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 9(2): 133–145.
Kang, S., Morris, S., and Snell, S. (2007) Relational archetypes, organizational learning and value creation: Extending the human resource architecture. Academy of Management Review, 36: 236–256.
Keegan, A. and Turner J.R. (2001) Quantity versus Quality in Project-based Learning Practices. Management Learning, 32(1): 77–98.
Kelly, G. (1955) The psychology of personal constructs, Vols. 1 and 2. New York: Norton.
Kim, D.H. (1993) The link between individual and organisational learning. Sloan Management Review, 35(1): 37–50.
Kim, L. (1998) Crisis construction and organizational learning: Capability building in catching-up at Hyundai Motor. Organization Science, 9: 507–541.
Knight, L. and Pye, A. (2005) Network learning: An empirically derived model of learning by groups of organizations. Human Relations, 58: 369–392.
Kolb, D.A. (1984) Experiential Learning; Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Leonard-Barton, D. (1998) Wellsprings of Knowledge: Building and Sustaining the Sources of Innovation. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Lewin, K. (1946) Action Research and Minority Problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4): 34–46.
Mankin, D. (2009) Human Resource Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mead, G. (1938) The philosophy of the act. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Miozzo, M., Lehrer, M., DeFillippi, R., Grimshaw, D. and Ordanini, A. (2010) Economies of scope through multi-unit skill systems: the organisation of large design firms. British Journal of Management: no. doi: 10.1111/j.1467–8551.2010.00699.x.
Nahapiet, J. and Ghoshal, S. (1998) Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage. The Academy of Management Review, 23(2): 242–266.
Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995) The Knowledge Creating Company. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pea, R. (1999) Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In G. Salomon (ed.), Distributed cognitions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 47–87.
Pedler, M., Burgoyne J. and Boydell P. (1996) The Learning Company: a Strategy for Sustainable Development. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill.
Piaget, J. (1950) The psychology of intelligence. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Raelin, J.A. (2001) Public Reflection as the Basis of Learning. Management Learning, 32(1): 11–30.
Rashman, L, Withers, E. and Hartley, J. (2009)Academic Journal Organizational learning and knowledge in public service organizations: A systematic review of the literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 11(4): 463–494.
Ron, N., Lipshitz, R., and Popper, M. (2006) How organizations learn: post flight reviews in a F-16 fighter squadron. Organization Studies: 27(8): 1069–1089.
Salomon, G. (1999) Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Senge, P. (1990) The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Double Day.
Senge, P. (2006) The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: DoubleDay.
Shipton, H. (2006) Cohesion or confusion? Towards a typology for organizational learning research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 8: 233–252.
Shipton, H. and Sillince, J. (under review). More than a cognitive experience: Emotion and meaning re-construal in organizational learning.
Shipton, H., Zhou, Q., and Mooi, E. (under review). The paradoxical nature of learning organizations.
Sicilia, M. and Lytras, M. (2005) The semantic learning organization. The Learning Organization, 12 (5): 402–410.
Simon, H. (1991) Bounded rationality and organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1): 175–187.
Skinner, B.F. (1953) Science and Human Behaviour. London: Macmillan.
Smith, P.A.C. (2001) Action learning and reflective practice in project environments that are related to leadership development. Management Learning, 32(1): 31–48.
Thomas, J., Sussman, S., and Henderson, J. (2001) Understanding strategic learning: Linking organizational learning, knowledge management and sense-making. Organization Science, 12: 331–345.
Vince, R. and Saleem, T. (2004) The impact of caution and blame on organizational learning. Management Learning, 35(2): 133–154, 1350–5076.
Weick, K.E. (1995) Sensemaking in organizations. London: Sage.
Wenger, E. (2000) Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7: 225–246.
Zollo, M. and Winter, S.G. (2002) Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13(3): 339–351.