Editing Organizational learning (section)

== Processes ==
Three key processes that drive organizational learning are knowledge creation, knowledge retention, and knowledge transfer.

=== Knowledge creation ===
Knowledge creation specifically concerns [[Experience]] that can be embedded within the organization. Experience is knowledge generated by direct exposure to the subject. This direct exposure is through tasks involving the needs, processes, and environment of the organization. Explicit and tacit knowledge are reinforced and become contextualized when the organization gains knowledge. While experience can produce outputs in data, information, or knowledge, experience in the form of knowledge is useful since this can be transferred, retained, and tacitly or explicitly utilized within organizational processes. Knowledge creation connects to creativity and its relationship to experience.<ref name="Argote 20113">{{cite journal|last1 = Argote|first1 = L.|title = Organizational learning research: Past, present and future|journal = Management Learning|volume = 42|issue = 4|year = 2011|pages = 439–446|issn = 1350-5076|doi = 10.1177/1350507611408217|s2cid = 145490839}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Taylor | first1 = A | last2 = Greve | first2 = HR | year = 2006 | title = Superman or the fantastic four? Knowledge combination and experience in innovative teams | journal = Academy of Management Journal | volume = 49 | issue = 4| pages = 723–740 | doi=10.5465/amj.2006.22083029| s2cid = 144849651 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Audia | first1 = PG | last2 = Goncalo | first2 = JA | year = 2007 | title = Past success and creativity over time: A study of inventors in the hard disk drive industry | doi = 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0593 | journal = Management Science | volume = 52 | issue = 1| pages = 1–15 | url = http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1026&context=articles | hdl = 1813/75941 | s2cid = 1192620 | hdl-access = free }}</ref> Compared to knowledge transfer and knowledge retention, knowledge creation has not received much research attention.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Antonacopoulou | first1 = EP | year = 2009 | title = Impact and scholarship: Unlearning and practicing to co-create actionable knowledge | journal = Management Learning | volume = 40 | issue = 4| pages = 421–430 | doi=10.1177/1350507609336708| s2cid = 144772923 }}</ref>

''Dimensions of experience'' are aspects of experience that impact the form and function of knowledge creation.<ref>Argote L and Ophir R (2002) Intraorganizational learning. In: Baum JAC (ed.) Companion to Organizations. Oxford: Blackwell, 181–207.</ref><ref>Schulz M (2002) Organizational learning. In: Baum JAC (ed.) The Blackwell Companion to Organizations. Oxford: Blackwell Business, 415–441.</ref><ref>Ingram P (2002) Interorganizational learning. In: Baum JAC (ed.) The Blackwell Companion to Organizations. Oxford: Blackwell Business, 181–207.</ref><ref>Argote, L., B. McEvily, R. Reagans. 2003. Managing knowledge in organizations: An integrative framework and review emerging themes.. Management Sci. 49(4) 571–582.</ref><ref>Argote, L., G. Todorova. 2007. Organizational learning: Review and future directions. G. P. Hodgkinson, J. K. Ford, eds. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology.Wiley, New York, 193–234.</ref>
* The ''organizational dimension'' refers to the directness or indirectness of experience acquired in addition to the configurations of individuals, units, and networks.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Levitt | first1 = B | last2 = March | first2 = JG | year = 1988 | title = Organizational learning | journal = Annual Review of Sociology | volume = 14 | pages = 319–340 | doi=10.1146/annurev.soc.14.1.319| doi-access =  }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Kim | first1 = P. H. | year = 1997 | title = When what you know can hurt you: A study of experiential effects on group discussion and performance | journal = Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes| volume = 69 | issue = 2| pages = 165–177 | doi=10.1006/obhd.1997.2680}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Taylor | first1 = A. | last2 = Greve | first2 = H.R. | year = 2006 | title = Superman or the fantastic four? Knowledge combination and experience in innovative teams | journal = Academy of Management Journal | volume = 49 | issue = 4| pages = 723–40 | doi=10.5465/amj.2006.22083029| s2cid = 144849651 }}</ref> 
* The ''spatial dimension'' refers to the geographic concentration or dispersion of the experience.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Cramton | first1 = C. D. | year = 2001 | title = The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration | journal = Organ Sci| volume = 12 | issue = 3| pages = 346–371 | doi=10.1287/orsc.12.3.346.10098}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Gibson | first1 = CB | last2 = Gibbs | first2 = JL | year = 2006 | title = Unpacking the concept of virtuality: The effects of geographic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on team innovation | journal = Administrative Science Quarterly | volume = 51 | issue = 3| pages = 451–495 | doi=10.2189/asqu.51.3.451| s2cid = 10856839 }}</ref><ref>Argote L, Denomme C and Fuchs E. Organizational learning across boundaries: The effect of geo- graphic distribution on organizational learning and knowledge transfer. Easterby-Smith M and Lyles M (eds) Handbook on Organizational Learning and Knowledge Management. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.</ref> 
* The ''temporal dimension'' refers to frequency and pace at which the experience is acquired or its temporal relation to a task.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Herriott | first1 = S. R. | last2 = Levinthal | first2 = D. | last3 = March | first3 = J.G. | year = 1985 | title = Learning from experience in organizations | journal = American Economic Review | volume = 75 | pages = 298–302 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Levinthal | first1 = D. A. | last2 = March | first2 = J. G. | year = 1981 | title = A model of adaptive organizational search | journal = Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization | volume = 2 | issue = 4| pages = 307–333 | doi=10.1016/0167-2681(81)90012-3}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Pisano | first1 = GP | year = 1994 | title = Knowledge, integration, and the locus of learning: An empirical analysis of process development | journal = Strategic Management Journal | volume = 15 | issue = S1| pages = 85–100 | doi=10.1002/smj.4250150907}}</ref>
* The ''content dimension'' refers to the subject task or unit, outcome,<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Sitkin | first1 = S.B. | year = 1992 | title = Learning through failure: The strategy of small losses. Res. Organ | journal = Behaviour | volume = 14 | pages = 231–266 }}</ref><ref>Sitkin SB (1996) Learning through failure: The strategy of small losses. In: Cohen MD and Sproull LS (eds)
Organizational Learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 541–578.</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Denrell | first1 = J. | last2 = March | first2 = J. | year = 2001 | title = Adaptation as information restriction: The hot stove effect | journal = Organ Sci| volume = 12 | issue = 5| pages = 523–538 | doi=10.1287/orsc.12.5.523.10092}}</ref><ref>Kim, June-Young, Jay Kim, and Anne S. Miner. Can new firms learn from their own experience? The impact of success and recovery experience." ''Organizational Science''</ref> novelty,<ref>Lampel, J., J. Shamsie & Z. Shapira. In press. Special Issue on Learning from Rare Events. ''Organ. Sci.''</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = March | first1 = J. G. | last2 = Sproull | first2 = L.S. | last3 = Tamuz | first3 = M. | year = 1991 | title = Learning from samples of one or fewer | journal = Organ Sci | volume = 2 | issue = 1| pages = 1–14 | doi=10.1287/orsc.2.1.1 | pmid = <!--none--> | pmc = <!--none--> }}; Reprinted: {{cite journal | pmc = 1758026 | pmid=14645764 | doi=10.1136/qhc.12.6.465 | volume=12 | title=Learning from samples of one or fewer. 1991 | year=2003 | journal=Qual Saf Health Care | pages=465-71; discussion 471-2  | last1 = March | first1 = JG | last2 = Sproull | first2 = LS | last3 = Tamuz | first3 = M| issue=6 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Katila | first1 = R. | last2 = Ahuja | first2 = G. | year = 2002 | title = Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction | journal = Academy of Management Journal | volume = 45 | issue = 6| pages = 1183–1194 | doi=10.2307/3069433| jstor = 3069433 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.335.1453 }}</ref> heterogeneity,<ref name="Sullivan BN 20022">{{cite journal | last1 = Haunschild | first1 = PR | last2 = Sullivan | first2 = BN | year = 2002 | title = Learning from complexity: Effects of prior accidents and incidents on airlines' learning | journal = Administrative Science Quarterly | volume = 47 | issue = 4| pages = 609–643 | doi=10.2307/3094911| jstor = 3094911 | hdl = 2152/29294 | s2cid = 143856368 | hdl-access = free }}</ref> and ambiguity.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Bohn | first1 = RE | year = 1995 | title = Noise and learning in semiconductor manufacturing | journal = Management Science | volume = 41 | issue = 1| pages = 31–42 | doi=10.1287/mnsc.41.1.31}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Repenning | first1 = N. P. | last2 = Sterman | first2 = J.D. | year = 2002 | title = Capability traps and self-confirming attribution errors in the dynamics of process improvement | journal = Administrative Science Quarterly | volume = 47 | issue = 2| pages = 265–295 | doi=10.2307/3094806| jstor = 3094806 | s2cid = 11414519 }}</ref>
* The ''artificiality dimension'' refers to the directness of the experience and the degree to which the experience is fabricated, adapted, or transcribed.

=== Knowledge transfer ===
[[Knowledge transfer]] concerns the mechanisms by which experience spreads and embeds itself within the organization. Knowledge transfer can be evaluated using various metrics, including learning curves that demonstrate process improvements over time by comparing the decrease in labor hours to complete a unit of production with the cumulative units produced over time. Wright's identification of organizational learning curves preceded more complex outcome considerations<ref name="Argote Book5" /> that now inform measures of knowledge transfer. While knowledge may transfer tacitly and explicitly as direct experience, organizations can introduce processes and knowledge management systems that facilitate this transfer. Researchers investigate the context of various factors and mechanisms affecting knowledge transfer to determine their beneficial and detrimental effects.

Factors of knowledge transfer include the dimensions of the knowledge described in the prior section, as well as the contexts in which it occurs and mechanisms through which it can occur:
* ''Relational context'' concerns whether knowledge is interconnected.<ref name="Darr ED 19952">{{cite journal | last1 = Darr | first1 = ED | last2 = Argote | first2 = L | last3 = Epple | first3 = D | year = 1995 | title = The acquisition, transfer and depreciation of knowledge in service organizations: Productivity in franchises | journal = Management Science | volume = 41 | issue = 11| pages = 1750–1762 | doi=10.1287/mnsc.41.11.1750}}</ref> 
* ''Cognitive context'' concerns mental abilities and processes regarding knowledge.<ref>Szulanski, G. (1996).  Exploring external stickiness:  Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm.  Strategic Management Journal, 17.</ref>
* ''Motivational context'' of personal preferences and social influences affect direct or indirect knowledge transfer behaviors.<ref>(Osterloh & Frey, 2000; Quigley, Tesluk, Locke & Bartol, 2007)</ref> 
* ''Emotional context'' impacts mental state and sense of security, which affect knowledge transfer.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Elkjaer | first1 = B | year = 2004 | title = Organizational learning: The 'third way' | journal = Management Learning | volume = 35 | issue = 4| pages = 419–434 | doi=10.1177/1350507604048271| s2cid = 143927836 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Levin | first1 = DZ | last2 = Kurtzberg | first2 = T | last3 = Phillips | first3 = KW | last4 = Lount | first4 = RB | last5 = Jnr | year = 2010 | title = The role of affect in knowledge transfer | journal = Group Dynamics | volume = 14 | issue = 2| pages = 123–142 | doi=10.1037/a0017317}}</ref>
* ''Social networks'' determine the flows through which knowledge can transfer and the node-based conditional limitations on transfer.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Hansen | first1 = M | year = 1999 | title = The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organizational subunits | journal = Administrative Science Quarterly | volume = 44 | issue = 1| pages = 82–112 | doi=10.2307/2667032| jstor = 2667032 | s2cid = 19016767 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Reagans | first1 = R | last2 = McEvily | first2 = B | year = 2003 | title = Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range | journal = Administrative Science Quarterly | volume = 48 | issue = 2| pages = 240–267 | doi=10.2307/3556658| jstor = 3556658 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.458.1753 | s2cid = 14702711 }}</ref>
* ''Personnel movement'' between units and organizations impacts available knowledge and geographical, chronological, and social limitations on knowledge transfer.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Almedia | first1 = P | last2 = Kogut | first2 = B | year = 1999 | title = Localization of knowledge and the mobility of engineers in regional networks | doi = 10.1287/mnsc.45.7.905 | journal = Organization Science | volume = 45 | issue = 7| pages = 905–917 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.568.8647 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Kane | first1 = AA | last2 = Argote | first2 = L | last3 = Levine | first3 = JM | year = 2005 | title = Knowledge transfer between groups via personal rotation: Effects of social identity and knowledge quality | journal = Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes | volume = 96 | issue = 1| pages = 56–71 | doi=10.1016/j.obhdp.2004.09.002}}</ref> 
* ''Routines'' impact knowledge transfer as they contain embedded knowledge and teach it through experience repeating the routine.<ref name="Argote Book5" /><ref name="Argote L 19902">{{cite journal | last1 = Argote | first1 = L | last2 = Beckman | first2 = SL | last3 = Epple | first3 = D | year = 1990 | title = The persistence and transfer of learning in industrial settings | journal = Management Science | volume = 36 | issue = 2| pages = 140–154 | doi=10.1287/mnsc.36.2.140| citeseerx = 10.1.1.357.3312 }}</ref> 
* ''Templates'' affect knowledge transfer as they affect the framing, priming, volume, and content parameters for formal exchanges of knowledge.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Jensen | first1 = RJ | last2 = Szulanski | first2 = G | year = 2007 | title = Template use and the effectiveness of knowledge transfer | url = https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/facpub/226| journal = Management Science | volume = 53 | issue = 11| pages = 1716–1730 | doi=10.1287/mnsc.1070.0740| s2cid = 17975371 }}</ref> 
* ''Alliances'' impact knowledge transfer between formal and informal groups.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Gulati | first1 = R | year = 1999 | title = Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation | journal = Strategic Management Journal | volume = 20 | issue = 5| pages = 397–420 | doi=10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199905)20:5<397::aid-smj35>3.3.co;2-b}}</ref>

=== Knowledge retention ===
{{Main|Knowledge retention}}
Knowledge retention concerns the behavior of knowledge that has been embedded within the organization, characterized by the organizational memory. Organizational memory, quantified by measures such as cumulative knowledge and the rate of decay over time, is impacted by experience, processes and knowledge repositories that affect knowledge retention.<ref name="Darr ED 19952" /><ref name="Argote L 19902" /><ref name=benkard>{{cite journal | last1 = Benkard | first1 = CL | year = 2000 | title = Learning and forgetting: The dynamics of aircraft production | url = http://www.nber.org/papers/w7127.pdf| journal = American Economic Review | volume = 90 | issue = 4| pages = 1034–1054 | doi = 10.1257/aer.90.4.1034 | s2cid = 153611067 }}</ref> Knowledge repositories are of key significance as they are intentional remedies to increase retention. Repositories can include the organization's rules and routines,<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Kieser | first1 = A | last2 = Koch | first2 = U | year = 2008 | title = Bounded rationality and organizational learning based on rule changes | journal = Management Learning | volume = 39 | issue = 3| pages = 329–347 | doi=10.1177/1350507608090880| s2cid = 145356701 }}</ref> altered by the processes of routine development<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Cohen | first1 = MD | last2 = Bacdayan | first2 = P | year = 1994 | title = Organizational routines are stored as procedural memory: Evidence from a laboratory study | journal = Organization Science | volume = 5 | issue = 4| pages = 554–568 | doi=10.1287/orsc.5.4.554}}</ref> and routine modification.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Feldman | first1 = MS | last2 = Pentland | first2 = BT | year = 2003 | title = Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change | url = http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/6rb6f923| journal = Administrative Science Quarterly | volume = 48 | issue = 1| pages = 94–118 | doi=10.2307/3556620| jstor = 3556620 | s2cid = 28673881 }}</ref> [[Transactive memory]] systems<ref>Wegner DM (1986) Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In: Mullen B and
Goethals GR (eds) Theories of Group Behavior. New York: Springer, 185–205.</ref> are additional methods by which knowledge holders within the organization can be identified and utilized, subject to their development<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Hollingshead | first1 = A | year = 2001 | title = Cognitive interdependence and convergent expectations in transitive memory | journal = Journal of Personality and Social Psychology | volume = 81 | issue = 6| pages = 1080–1089 | doi=10.1037/0022-3514.81.6.1080 | pmid=11761309}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Lewis | first1 = K | year = 2004 | title = Knowledge and performance in knowledge worker teams: A longitudinal study of transactive memory stems | journal = Management Science | volume = 50 | issue = 11| pages = 1519–1533 | doi=10.1287/mnsc.1040.0257}}</ref> and performance.<ref name="Argote Book5" /><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Liang | first1 = DW | last2 = Moreland | first2 = R | last3 = Argote | first3 = L | year = 1995 | title = Group versus individual training and group performance: The mediating role of transactive memory system | journal = Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin | volume = 21 | issue = 4| pages = 384–393 | doi=10.1177/0146167295214009| s2cid = 145473164 }}</ref> Organizations that retain the bulk of their knowledge in individuals are vulnerable to lose that information with high turn over rates. In a study of organizational learning in the automotive and fast food industries, Argote found that high turn over rates lead to lower productivity and decreased organizational memory.<ref name=":03" />