Abstract
This chapter looks at the way that knowledge is created, managed, and transferred, and its importance for generating responsible behavior. It looks at different types of learning and explains why some of them support a coherent approach and others don’t. It outlines the characteristics of learning organizations and highlights the limitations of current attitudes that block learning including short-term thinking, heuristic response processes, and cultural resistance to criticism. It finishes by considering complexity levels in the management of broad and diverse responsibilities, and the need for a more coherent approach to learning to manage such complexity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
They also argue, quite convincingly, that innovation is key to a more sustainable future.
- 2.
A problem with this is that it often assumes that problems and their solutions are very closely related, when in fact they may require substantial changes in behavior.
- 3.
Ironically, the more effective an organization is in single-loop learning, the more difficult it may be to produce double-loop learning, as organizational incentives are set up to reward and promote perceived problem-solvers (Dooley 1997).
- 4.
All three share similar characteristics and the differences between them are not clearly defined. Deutero learning was first proposed by Argyris and Schon (1978), and triple-loop by Swieringa et al. (1992), although Argyris and Schon are often cited as having come up with the concept. Unlearning (Tsang and Zahra 2008) is more recent. Based on Tosey et al. (2012), we will consider deutero as more focused on reflection on learning, unlearning as eliminating blockages to learning, and triple-loop as dealing with underlying fundamentals of why something is the way it is. It can be seen as taking a step beyond double loop learning to question base principles.
- 5.
An earlier identification process as to the location of such knowledge assets came to a broadly similar conclusion, emphasizing employees, positions, operating procedures, and the physical workplace (Walsh and Ungson 1991).
- 6.
It is also to do with the nature of the position and current business teaching methods. Practically, every well-known management book looks at the roles and responsibilities of top-, middle-, and front-line managers, and the types of skills they require. They uniformly concur that conceptual skills are more necessary amongst top managers, and technical skills are most important at the lower levels. This surely helps to create a mind-set that some people are meant to do, while others are meant to think and learn.
- 7.
Nowadays, Novozymes identifies consumers and climate change as issues of high materiality, required detailed disclosures (Novozymes Annual Report 2017, n.d.).
- 8.
This may vary significantly from the way in which critical internal voices are dealt with, as mentioned in the previous section, due to the difference in the type of relationships.
- 9.
Following Inge et al. (2002), redundancy is defined as a network property indicating the degree of overlap between contacts. These contents, if connected to each other, will tend to possess the same information and, therefore, may be redundant.
- 10.
Antal and Sobczak (2004) argue that organizations are discovering how to undertake different kinds of learning, with different types of knowledge, in pursuit of strategic responsibility. At the same time, they admit that the scope of this learning is limited, and the numbers involved are few. In fact, some commentators have suggested that it is the introduction of responsible policies and practices that should be the driver of organizational learning, rather than the other way around, thereby generating an ongoing change process genuinely responsible organization (von Weltzien Hoivik 2011).
- 11.
For example, taking responsibility for costs, which have until now been externalized in an extremely irresponsible way, would increase complexity would require a massive increase in understanding and knowledge.
- 12.
It is not just knowledge that is not being reaped through closer collaboration, for example with environmental groups, but that as yet-undiscovered knowledge is being destroyed as biodiversity is narrowed down. According to the World Wildlife Fund, current extinction rates are between 1000 and 10,000 times the natural extinction rate, which is the expected rate were humans not to exist (World Wildlife Fund, n.d.).
- 13.
An advantage of viewing the organization as a facilitator of knowledge creation is that it helps to break down the artificial barrier between internal and external stakeholders, reducing the argument that internal stakeholders, be they employees or financiers, have, a priori, most call on value generated.
- 14.
Organic textiles must contain a minimum 95% of fibers coming from organic agriculture, and a maximum of 5% from synthetic or artificial fibers (Ecocert, n.d.).
- 15.
Less than 3% of the world’s cropland is cotton-based, but it uses 10% of all agricultural chemicals and 25% of insecticides (EcoWatch, n.d.).
- 16.
Between 1995 and 1996, Patagonia reduced its cotton product range from 91 styles to 66, which costs for the those products rose over by over 30% (Casadesus-Masanell et al. 2009).
- 17.
After an initial foray, Levi’s largely pulled out of the organic market.
References
Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 107–136.
Andrews, K. M., & Delahaye, B. L. (2000). Influences on knowledge processes in organizational learning: The psychosocial filter. Journal of Management Studies, 37(6), 797–810.
Antal, A. B., Dierkes, M., MacMillan, K., & Marz, L. (2002). Corporate social reporting revisited. Journal of General Management, 28(2), 22–42.
Antal, A. B., & Sobczak, A. (2004). Beyond CSR: Organisational learning for global responsibility. Journal of General Management, 30(2), 77–98.
Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 150–169.
Argyris, C. (1977). Double loop learning in organizations. Harvard Business Review, 55(5), 115–125.
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action approach. Reading, MA: Addision Wesley.
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. A. (1996). Organisational learning II. Boston, MA: Addison Wesley.
Ashby, W. R. (1991). Requisite variety and its implications for the control of complex systems. In Facets of systems science (pp. 405–417). New York, NY: Springer.
Ashmos, D. P., Duchon, D., & McDaniel, R. R., Jr. (2000). Organizational responses to complexity: The effect on organizational performance. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 13(6), 577–595.
Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. The Academy of Management Review ARCHIVE, 32(3), 946–967.
Collison, C., & Parcell, G. (2005). Ten steps to build a “knowledge asset”. Knowledge Management Review, 3, 24–27.
Davenport, T. H., & Klahr, P. (1998). Managing customer support knowledge. California Management Review, 40(3), 195–208.
Denrell, J. (2003). Vicarious learning, undersampling of failure, and the myths of management. Organization Science, 14(3), 227–243.
Dooley, K. J. (1997). A complex adaptive systems model of organization change. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 1(1), 69–97.
Drucker, P. (2017). The age of discontinuity: Guidelines to our changing society. New York, NY: Routledge.
Echeverri-Carroll, E. L. (1999). Knowledge flows in innovation networks: A comparative analysis of Japanese and US high-technology firms. Journal of Knowledge Management, 3(4), 296–303.
Gephart, M. A., Marsick, V. J., Van Buren, M. E., Spiro, M. S., & Senge, P. (1996). Learning organizations come alive. Training & Development, 50(12), 34–46.
Glisby, M., & Holden, N. (2003). Contextual constraints in knowledge management theory: The cultural embeddedness of Nonaka’s knowledge-creating company. Knowledge and Process Management, 10(1), 29–36.
Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A., & Segars, A. H. (2001). Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 185–214.
Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 109–122.
Hackbarth, G. (1998). The impact of organizational memory on IT systems. AMCIS 1998 Proceedings, 197.
Hardy, C., Phillips, N., & Lawrence, T. B. (2003). Resources, knowledge and influence: The organizational effects of interorganizational collaboration. Journal of Management Studies, 40(2), 321–347.
Hosmer, L. T. (1994). Strategic planning as if ethics mattered. Strategic Management Journal, 15(S2), 17–34.
Inge Jenssen, J., & Greve, A. (2002). Does the degree of redundancy in social networks influence the success of business start-ups? International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 8(5), 254–267.
Isaacs, W., & Senge, P. (1992). Overcoming limits to learning in computer-based learning environments. European Journal of Operational Research, 59(1), 183–196.
Lozano, R. (2014). Creativity and organizational learning as means to foster sustainability. Sustainable Development, 22(3), 205–216.
Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
McEvily, B., & Zaheer, A. (1999). Bridging ties: A source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20(12), 1133–1156.
Mosca, F., & Civera, C. (2017). The evolution of CSR: An integrated approach. Symphonya. Emerging Issues in Management, 1, 16–35.
Müller, M., & Siebenhüner, B. (2007). Policy instruments for sustainability-oriented organizational learning. Business Strategy and the Environment, 16(3), 232–245.
Nidumolu, R., Prahalad, C. K., & Rangaswami, M. R. (2009). Why sustainability is now the key driver of innovation. Harvard Business Review, 87(9), 57–64.
Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37.
Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Konno, N. (2000). SECI, Ba and leadership: A unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long Range Planning, 33(1), 5–34.
Novozymes Annual Report, 2017. (n.d.). Retrieved October 17, 2018, from https://report2017.novozymes.com/sustainability/commitment.
O’dell, C., & Grayson, C. J. (1998). If only we knew what we know: Identification and transfer of internal best practices. California Management Review, 40(3), 154–174.
Pedersen, E. R. (2006). Making corporate social responsibility (CSR) operable: How companies translate stakeholder dialogue into practice. Business and Society Review, 111(2), 137–163.
Rerup, C. (2006). Success, failure and the gray zone: How organizations learn or don’t from ambiguous experience. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2006, pp. BB1–BB6). New York: Academy of Management.
Savino, D. M. (2009). The role of technology as an enabler in job redesign. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 4(3), 14–23.
Seidl, D., & Becker, K. H. (2010). Organizations as distinction generating and processing systems: Niklas Luhmann’s contribution to organization studies. Directions in Organization Studies (pp. 205–228). SAGE Library in Business and Management.
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Random House.
Senge, P. M., Smith, B., Kruschwitz, N., Laur, J., & Schley, S. (2008). The necessary revolution: How individuals and organizations are working together to create a sustainable world. New York, NY: Crown Business.
Spender, J.-C., & Grant, R. M. (1996). Knowledge and the firm: Overview. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 5–9.
Starbuck, W. H. (1992). Learning by knowledge-intensive firms. Journal of Management Studies, 29(6), 713–740.
Swieringa, J., Wierdsma, A., & Swieringa, J. (1992). Becoming a learning organization: Beyond the learning curve. Wokingham: Addison-Wesley.
Terzieva, M. (2014). Project knowledge management: How organizations learn from experience. Procedia Technology, 16, 1086–1095.
Toffier, A. (1990). Power shift (p. 5). New York: Bantam.
Tosey, P., Visser, M., & Saunders, M. N. K. (2012). The origins and conceptualizations of ‘triple-loop’ learning: A critical review. Management Learning, 43(3), 291–307.
Tsang, E. W. K., & Zahra, S. A. (2008). Organizational unlearning. Human Relations, 61(10), 1435–1462.
von Weltzien Hoivik, H. (2011). Embedding CSR as a learning and knowledge creating process: The case for SMEs in Norway. Journal of Management Development, 30(10), 1067–1084.
Walsh, J. P., & Ungson, G. R. (1991). Organizational memory. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 57–91.
World Wildlife Fund. (n.d.). How many species are we losing? | WWF. Retrieved February 13, 2019, from http://wwf.panda.org/our_work/biodiversity/biodiversity/.
Yang, B., Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J. (2004). The construct of the learning organization: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 15(1), 31–55.
References for Case Study
Beske, P., & Seuring, S. (2014). Putting sustainability into supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 19(3), 322–331.
Casadesus-Masanell, R., Crooke, M., Reinhardt, F., & Vasishth, V. (2009). Households’ willingness to pay for “green” goods: Evidence from Patagonia’s introduction of organic cotton sportswear. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 18(1), 203–233.
Chandler, M. (2011). Patagonia’s secret is in its supply chain | Stanford Graduate School of Business. Retrieved February 20, 2019, from https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/yvon-chouinard-patagonias-secret-its-supply-chain.
Ecocert. (n.d.). Global Organic Textile Standard. Retrieved February 20, 2019, from http://www.ecocert.com/en/global-organic-textile-standard-gots/index.html.
EcoWatch. (n.d.). Fast fashion. Retrieved February 20, 2019, from https://www.ecowatch.com/fast-fashion-is-the-second-dirtiest-industry-in-the-world-next-to-big--1882083445.html.
Pagell, M., & Wu, Z. (2009). Building a more complete theory of sustainable supply chain management using case studies of 10 exemplars. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 45(2), 37–56.
Petrie, K. (2016). Patagonia Inc.’s sustainable supply chain initiatives and their contribution to company brand (Doctoral Dissertation). Baylor University, Waco.
Pongtratic, M. (2007). Greening the supply chain: A case analysis of Patagonia. IR/PS CSR, Case, 7–22. San Diego: University of California.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hilliard, I. (2019). The Tipping Points of Organizations: Why They Are Not Fed Correctly. In: Coherency Management. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13523-2_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13523-2_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-13522-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-13523-2
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)