This review describes how the field of organizational learning can be understood from a social learning perspective and what social learning theories add to an understanding of organizational learning that cannot be included in an individual learning theoretical approach. In the review, we set out by characterizing the main elements of an individual approach followed by an in-depth review of organizational learning literature viewed from a social learning perspective. Finally, we refined the social learning perspective by including a pragmatist inspired understanding of organizational learning. The pragmatist approach to organizational learning echoes the philosophy from social learning theory without losing the individual capacity to inquire and enact new organizational experiences in the organizational learning processes. We have structured the answers to the governing questions of the review in four elements: the learning content; the learning process; the relation between the individual and the organization; and the organizational concepts.
Applying a social learning theory in organizational learning takes the focus of learning away from the individual mind and ‘places’ it in the organizational context as a setting for organizational learning. This means that the organizational actions directed to develop organizational learning cannot be solely focused on changing individuals’ ways of thinking but should be focused on the organizational context, its patterns of participation and interaction. Social learning theory also moves the focus away from knowledge as the learning input to that of developing and socializing organizational members in order to turn them into skilled practitioners. Knowledge or knowing as the often preferred verb within social learning theory then becomes a way of enacting artifacts, routines, experiences, rules, etc. competently in the organization instead of something that resides inside the human mind ready to be used whenever needed.
A point of departure in social learning theory for organizational learning means that learning is viewed as an ongoing activity, which cannot be controlled, only the environments, the organization, can be made to facilitate organizational learning to a larger or lesser degree (Thompson, 2005). Some critique of social learning theory is that it focuses too much on the organizational context, and, thus, cannot for example encompass the mobile, knowledgeable, and potentially influential individuals. This may be the transformational leader or the ordinary professional who imports new ideas and who perhaps gets changed by outside encounters. The answer to this criticism is that the focus on context does not omit the individual as the two are viewed as mutually constituted and continuously changing with the participants ‘moving’ in and out of the specific context at hand. Thus, one cannot just change the organizational context without including the concrete and present participants in this context. The essence of applying a social learning theory is that it is not possible to work with ideal-typical individuals who learn by way of changing their ways of thinking. Organizations consist of real people each with their own experiences, history, and hopes for the future. This makes up the organizational context together with the specific work practice, the artifacts, the organizational rules and regulations. And it is from this starting point that learning and organizational learning begins to occur.
The contribution to social learning theory from pragmatism is to stress the coexistence between epistemology and ontology in learning. This is done by focusing on the development of human experience as both encompassing processes of knowledge acquisition and being and becoming part of the world. And it is to stress the interconnectedness of the development of individuals and organizations. The most beneficial contribution from pragmatism for organizational learning is, however, the notion of inquiry, which provides a method in which thinking is regarded as a tool, a way to define problems, and reflection is included as a way of sharing learning outcome.
Given the already mentioned wide-spread contemporary interest in viewing learning as participation in social processes, we have been interested in adding an organizational dimension by a social arenas/worlds understanding with its emphasis on tensions and ruptures as pathways for potential organizational learning experiences through inquiry.
Looking forward and into the future of the field of organizational learning in light of a social learning theoretical perspective, we believe that a pragmatist understanding will be beneficial in a globalized economy in which knowledge is no longer a scarce resource but the ability to find and select the right knowledge at the right time is. This means that learning not only demands cognitive skills or the power to access and participate in relevant practices, but both. The most important skill will, however, be an ability to make judgments, personal and collectively, and in that way be able to stand out as something separate and unique, as a person or an enterprise. The immense emphasis on branding products and enterprises that we currently witness especially in the economic sector of intangibles will afford more than ever anticipatory skills and knowledge to always be one step ahead and to be able to account for the initiatives taken. The emphasis will be on innovation and the ability to learn innovatively, for which pragmatism with its notions of inquiry and experience in the past, present, and future will be a good theoretical instrument in this pursuit. Also, the globalized economy is bringing enterprises together with an abundance of different cultures, races, ethnicities, etc. which will put an emphasis on learning as not only cognition or socialization skills but both, that is, an ability to learn to not only think or be but to be and think in a differentiation of workplaces where knowledge and judgmental power are distributed and demand continuous ability to learn and socialize.
References
Amin, A. and Roberts, J. (2008) Knowing in action: Beyond communities of practice. Research Policy, 37(2): 353–369.
Argyris, C. and Schön, D. A. (1996) Organizational Learning II. Theory, Method, and Practice. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
Babuji, H. and Crossan, M. (2004) From questions to answers: Reviewing organizational learning research. Management Learning, 35(4): 397–417.
Beckhy, B. A. (2003) Sharing meaning across occupational communities: The transformation of understanding on a production floor. Organization Science, 14(3): 312–330.
Berger, P. L. and Luckmann, T. (1966 [1991]) The Social Construction of Reality. A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Bernstein, R. J. (1960) John Dewey. On Experience, Nature and Freedom. Representative Selections. New York: The Liberal Arts Press.
Blackler, F. (1993) Knowledge and the theory of organizations: Organizations as activity systems and the reframing of management. Journal of Management Studies, 30(6): 863–884.
Blackler, F. and McDonald, S. (2000) Power, mastery and organizational learning. Journal of Management Studies, 37(6): 833–851.
Brandi, U. (2010) Bringing back inquiry – Organizational learning the Deweyan way. In S. Jordan and H. Mitterhoffer (eds.) Beyond Knowledge Management – Sociomaterial and Sociocultural Perspectives within Management Research. Innsbruck: Innsbruck University Press: 95–121.
Bredo, E. (1997) The social construction of learning. In G. P. Phye (ed.) Handbook of Academic Learning. Construction of Knowledge. San Diego: Academic Press: 3–43.
Brown, J. S. and Duguid, P. (1991) Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization 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.
Casey, C. (2002) Critical Analysis of Organizations. Theory, Practice, Revitalization. London: Sage Publications.
Clarke, A. E. (1991) Social worlds/arenas theory as organizational theory. In D. R. Maines (ed.) Social Organization and Social Process. Essays in the Honor of Anselm Strauss. New York: Aldine de Gruyter: 119–158.
Clegg, S. R., Kornberger, M. and Rhodes, C. (2005) Learning/becoming/organizing. Organization, 12(2): 147–167.
Contu, A. and Willmott, H. (2003) Re-embedding situatedness: The importance of power relations in learning theory. Organization Science, 14(3): 283–296.
Cook, S. D. N. and Brown, J. S. (1999) Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organization Science, 10(4): 381–400.
Cook, S. D. N. and Yanow, D. (1993) Culture and organizational learning. Journal of Management Inquiry, 2(4): 373–390.
Coopey, J. and Burgoyne, J. (2000) Politics and organizational learning. Journal of Management Studies, 37(6): 869–885.
Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Dewey, J. (1916 [1980]) Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. In J. A. Boydston (ed.), Middle Works 9. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.
Dewey, J. (1917 [1980]) The need for a recovery of philosophy. In J. A. Boydston (ed.), Middle Works Vol. 10). Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press: 3–48.
Dewey, J. (1929 [1984]) The quest for certainty: A study of the relation of knowledge and action. Gifford Lectures. In J. A. Boydston (ed.), Later Works 4. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.
Dewey, J. (1933 [1986]) How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. In J. A. Boydston (ed.), Later Works 8. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press: 105–352.
Dewey, J. (1938 [1986]) Logic: The theory of inquiry. In J. A. Boydston (ed.), Later Works 12. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.
Dewey, J. (1941 [1988]) Propositions, warranted assertibility, and truth. In J. A. Boydston (ed.), Later Works 14. Edwardsville and Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press: 168–188.
Dewey, J. and Bentley, A. F. (1949 [1991]) Knowing and the known. In J. A. Boydston (ed.), Later Works 16. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press: 1–294.
DiBella, A. J., Nevis, E. C., and Gould, J. M. (1996) Understanding organizational learning capability. Journal of Management Studies, 33(3): 361–379.
Dodgson, M. (1993) Organizational Learning: A review of some literatures. Organization Studies, 14(3): 375–394.
Easterby-Smith, M. (1997) Disciplines of organizational learning: Contributions and critiques. Human Relations, 50(9): 1085–1113.
Easterby-Smith, M., Snell, R., and Gherardi, S. (1998) Organizational learning: Diverging communities of practice? Management Learning, 29(3): 259–272.
Elkjaer, B. (2000) The continuity of action and thinking in learning: Re-visiting John Dewey. Outlines. Critical Social Studies, 2: 85–101.
Elkjaer, B. (2004) Organizational learning: The ‘Third Way.’ Management Learning, 35(4): 419–434.
Elkjaer, B. and Huysman, M. (2008). Social Worlds Theory and the Power of Tension. In D. Barry & H. Hansen (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of New Approaches in Management and Organisation. London: SAGE: 170–177.
Engeström, Y. (2001) Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1): 133–156.
Fenwick, T. (2008) Understanding relations of individual-collective learning in work: A review of research. Management Learning, 39(3): 227–243.
Fiol, M. C. and Lyles, M. A. (1985) Organizational learning. Academy of Management Review, 10(4): 803–813.
Fox, S. (2000) Communities of practice, Foucault and actor-network theory. Journal of Management Studies, 37(6): 853–867.
Gherardi, S. (1999) Learning as problem-driven or learning in the face of mystery. Organization Studies, 20(1): 101–124.
Gherardi, S. (2000) Practice-based theorizing on learning and knowing in organizations. Organization, 7(2): 211–223.
Gherardi, S. (2006) Organizational Knowledge: The Texture of Workplace Learning. Malden, Oxford, Carlton: Blackwell Publishing.
Gherardi, S. (2009) Knowing and learning in practice-based studies: an introduction. The Learning Organization, 16(5): 352–359.
Gherardi, S., Nicolini, D., and Odella, F. (1998) Toward a social understanding of how people learn in organizations. The notion of situated curriculum. Management Learning, 29(3): 273–297.
Giorgi, A. (1975) An application of phenomenological method in psychology. In A. Giorgi, C. T. Fischer and E. L. Murray (eds.), Duquesne Studies in Phenomenological Psychology, II. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University: 82–103.
Handley, K., Sturdy, A., Fincham, R., and Clark, T. (2006) Within and beyond communities of practice: Making sense of learning through participation, identity and practice. The Journal of Management Studies, 43(3): 641–653.
Hong, J. F. L. and Fiona, K. H. O. (2009) Conflicting identities and power between communities of practice: The case of IT outsourcing. Management Learning, 40(3): 311–326.
Huber, G. P. (1991) Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organization Science, 2(1): 88–115.
Jacobs, C. and Coghlan, D. (2005) Sound from silence: On listening in organizational learning. Human Relations, 58(1): 115–138.
Larochelle, M., Bednarz, N., and Garrison, J. (eds.). (1998) Constructivism and Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lave, J. (1988) Cognition in Practice. Mind, Mathematics and Culture in Everyday Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lave, J. (1993 [1996]) The practice of learning. In S. Chaiklin and J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding Practice. Perspectives on Activity and Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 3–32.
Lave, J. (1997) Learning, apprenticeship, social practice. Nordisk Pedagogik, 17(3): 140–151.
Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning. Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leavitt, H. J. (1965) Applied organizational change in industry: Structural, technological and humanistic approaches. In J. G. March (ed.), Handbook of Organizations. Chicago: Rand McNally: 1144–1170.
Levitt, B. and March, J. G. (1988) Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14: 319–340.
Macpherson, A. and Clark, B. (2009) Islands of practice: conflict and a lack of ‘Community’ in situated learning. Management Learning, 40(5): 551–568.
March, J. and Simon, H. A. (1958) Organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
McDermott, J. J. (1973 [1981]) The Philosophy of John Dewey. Two Volumes in One: 1. The Structure of Experience; 2. The Lived Experience. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
McDermott, R. P. (1993) The acquisition of a child by a learning disability. In S. Chaiklin and J. Lave (eds.), Understanding Practice. Perspectives on Activity and Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 269–305.
Miettinen, R. (2000) The concept of experiential learning and John Dewey’s theory of reflective thought and action. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 19(1): 54–72.
Miner, A. S. and Mezias, S. J. (1996) Ugly duckling no more: Pasts and futures of organizational learning research. Organization Science, 7(1): 88–99.
Mumford, A. (1991) Individual and organizational learning—the pursuit of change. Industrial and Commercial Training, 23(6): 24–31.
Nicolini, D., Gherardi, S., and Yanow, D. (2003) Introduction: toward a practice-based view of knowing and learning in organizations. In D. Nicolini, S. Gherardi and D. Yanow (Eds.), Knowing in Organizations. A Practice-Based Approach. Armonk, New York: M.E. Sharpe: 3–31.
Nicolini, D. and Meznar, M. B. (1995) The social construction of organizational learning: Conceptual and practical issues in the field. Human Relations, 48(7): 727–746.
Orlikowski, W. J. (2002) Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization Science, 13(3): 249–273.
Orlikowski, W. J. (2007) Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies, 28(3): 1435–1449.
Packer, M. J. and Goicoechea, J. (2000) Sociocultural and constructivist theories of learning: Ontology, not just epistemology. Educational Psychologist, 35(4): 227–241.
Patterson, J. A. (2009) Organizational learning and leadership: On metaphor, meaning making, liminality and intercultural communication. International Journal of Learning and Change, 3(4): 382–393.
Pedler, M. and Aspinwall, K. (1998) A Concise Guide to the Learning Organization. London: Lemos and Crane.
Popkewitz, T. S. (1998) Dewey, Vygotsky, and the social administration of the individual: Constructivist pegagogy as systems of ideas in historical spaces. American Educational Research Journal, 35(4): 535–570.
Putnam, H. (1995) Pragmatism: An Open Question. Oxford: Blackwell.
Rashman, L., Withers, E., and Hartley, J. (2009) Organizational learning and knowledge in public service organizations: A systematic review of the literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 11(4): 463–494.
Raz, A. E. and Fadlon, J. (2006) Managerial culture, workplace culture and situated curricula in organizational learning. Organization Studies, 27(2): 165–182.
Richter, I. (1998) Individual and organizational learning at the executive level. Towards a research agenda. Management Learning, 29(3): 299–316.
Senge, P. M. (1990) The Fifth Discipline. The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday Currency.
Senge, P. M., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., Roth, G., and Smith, B. (1999) The Dance of Change. The Challenges of Sustaining Momentum in Learning Organizations. A Fifth Discipline Resource. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
Shrivastava, P. (1983) A typology of organizational learning systems. Journal of Management Studies, 20(1): 7–28.
Sleeper, R. W. (1986) The Necessity of Pragmatism. John Dewey’s Conception of Philosophy. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Strauss, A. L. (1978) A social world perspective. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, 1: 119–128.
Strauss, A. L. (1982) Interorganizational negotiations. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 11(3): 350–367.
Strauss, A. L. (1993) Continual Permutations of Action. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Thompson, M. (2005) Structural and epistemic parameter in communities of practice. Organization Science, 16(2): 151–164.
Weick, K. E. and Roberts, K. H. (1996 [1993]) Collective mind in organizations. Heedful interrelating on flight decks. In M. D. Cohen and L. S. Sproull (Eds.), Organizational Learning. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: SAGE Publications: 330–358.
Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of Practice. Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, E. (2000) Communities of Practice: The key to knowledge strategy. In E. Lesser (ed.), Knowledge and Communities. London: Butterworth Heinemann: 3–20.
Yanow, D. (2000) Seeing organizational learning: A cultural view. Organization, 7(2): 247–268.
1 The main texts are in alphabetical order: Brown and Duguid, 1991; Cook and Brown, 1999; Cook and Yanow, 1993; Easterby-Smith, Snell, and Gherardi, 1998; Gherardi, 1999, 2000; Gherardi, Nicolini, and Odella, 1998; Hong and Fiona, 2009; Jacobs and Coghlan, 2005; Macpherson and Clark, 2009; Nicolini, Gherardi, and Yanow, 2003; Nicolini and Meznar, 1995; Patterson, 2009; Raz and Fadlon, 2006; Richter, 1998; Yanow, 2000. Others have been included and are mentioned in the text.