Editing Organizational learning (section)

== Barriers and enablers to organizational learning ==

=== Corporate amnesia ===
In case no systematic approach has been applied when creating organizational memory systems, there is a risk of corporate amnesia. Environment of organizational amnesia leads to avoiding mistakes at all cost. Companies should create an environment where learning from mistakes is allowed in order to avoid them happening again.<ref name=DALKIR-K-2011>Dalkir, K. (2011) 'Knowledge Management in Theory and Practice', in Knowledge Management in Theory and Practice. 267.</ref>{{rp| 366, 372, 390}} Corporate amnesia is said to be a double-edged sword – it helps to move on by forgetting the wrongdoing, but at the same time it creates a danger of repeating the same error all over again.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Spicer |first=André |date=2015-10-09 |title=VW and the toxic problem of corporate amnesia |url=http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/oct/09/vw-bp-corporate-scandals-emissions-tests-oil-spill-horsemeat-rana-plaza |access-date=2022-12-06 |website=the Guardian |language=en}}</ref>

=== Developing organizational memory ===
Organizations need to have an organizational memory, a documentation of their milestone events. That documentation needs to be accessible for all involved to have the ability to learn as an organization.<ref name=DALKIR-K-2011/>{{rp| 365}} Because organizations have a routine of forgetting what they have done in the past and why, organizational memory systems should be created to make the knowledge explicit so that the transparency, coordination and communication in the organizations increase and it becomes possible to learn from past mistakes.<ref name=DALKIR-K-2011/>{{rp| 372–373}} OL grows through processes but the essential material is individual's memory, culture and experience. Individual learning is the first level in OL. Transfer process to OL is synthesized by "what people learn (know-what) and how they understand and apply this learning (know-how).<ref>{{cite book | doi = 10.1016/b978-0-7506-9850-4.50006-3 | chapter=The Link between Individual and Organizational Learning | year=1998 | title=The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital | pages=41–62| last1=Kim | first1=D. | isbn=9780750698504 }}</ref> While learning is the know-how, memory could be perceived as a storage area. Memory plays an active role in a learning process. In a transfer mechanism, mental models are an excellent way to share knowledge and to make it independent from individuals.

Organizational memory is an agglomerate of individual's memory, composed by data, information and knowledge. For those three levels of learning, five retention facilities are available:<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Walsh | first1 = James P. |author1-link= James P. Walsh | last2 = Ungson | first2 = Gerardo Rivera | year = 1991 | title = Organizational Memory | journal = The Academy of Management Review | volume = 16 | issue = 1| pages = 57–91 | doi = 10.2307/258607 | jstor = 258607 }}</ref>

* Individuals, with their own memory capacity and experience  
* Culture, perceived and thought experience transmitted to the members of the organization. Language is a cultural information transmitted repeatedly 
* Transformation, the logic and repeated continuation of actions transforming an input into an output  
* Structure, link between an individual and its role in the organization 
* External archives, information retailed by sources outside the organization about its past.

The big deal of organizational memory is its availability to be used and re-used. It could represent a competitive advantage but its value is often underestimated because of the complexity to calculate it, even though sometimes employee's, customer's, supplier's, capital's and top management's memory values are budgeted.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Wijnhoven | first1 = F | year = 1999 | title = Development Scenarios for Organizational Memory Information Systems | journal = Journal of Management Information Systems | volume = 16 | issue = 1| pages = 121–146 | doi = 10.1080/07421222.1999.11518236 }}</ref>

Organization's memory needs technological solutions on its side. Technology is often associated with information or communication technology (IT) which relates to different software solutions that support the organization's memory and ease the transfer of knowledge 
.<ref name=ABDULAZIZ-A-2004>{{cite journal | last1 = Abdulaziz Al-Tameem | first1 = A | year = 2004 | title = An inhibiting context hampering role of information technology as an enabler in organizational learning | journal = The Journal of Computer Information Systems | volume = 44 | issue = 4| pages = 34–40 }}</ref> Technology can be a barrier if it is not accepted or there is not enough understanding of new technologies. Technology can open for example new ways of communicating, but it is different to find a shared acceptance for its utilization.<ref name=ARDICHVILI-A-2008>{{cite journal | last1 = Ardichvili | first1 = Alexandre | year = 2008 | title = Learning and Knowledge Sharing in Virtual Communities of Practice: Motivators, Barriers, and Enablers | journal = [[Advances in Developing Human Resources]] | volume = 10 | issue = 4| pages = 541–554 | doi = 10.1177/1523422308319536 | s2cid = 143487366 }}</ref>{{rp| 550}}

IT is an enabler for codifying and distributing data and information as well as both tacit and explicit knowledge.<ref name=ABDULAZIZ-A-2004/> A. Abdulaziz Al-Tameem also states that the interaction between humans and IT enhances OL. Different repositories are used within organization to store corporate knowledge as an extension for the memory. Maintaining organizational memory is enabler for efficient and effective processes and routines but most of all for profitable business.<ref name=ABDULAZIZ-A-2004/> Traditionally, IT was regarded solely as a tool to support human learning. In contrast, with the advent of machine learning in organizations, IT based on machine learning algorithms is now viewed as a further type of organizational learner that learns side-by-side along human learners and can offer its own contributions to organizational learning. To this end, today's organizations form complex systems of interrelated human and machine learning that requires coordination and rises a wide range of new managerial issues.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Sturm|first1=Timo|last2=Gerlach|first2=Jin P.|last3=Pumplun|first3=Luisa|last4=Mesbah|first4=Neda|last5=Peters|first5=Felix|last6=Tauchert|first6=Christoph|last7=Nan|first7=Ning|last8=Buxmann|first8=Peter|title=Coordinating Human and Machine Learning for Effective Organizational Learning|url=https://misq.org/coordinating-human-and-machine-learning-for-effective-organizational-learning.html|journal=MIS Quarterly|volume=45|issue=3|pages=1581–1602|doi=10.25300/MISQ/2021/16543|s2cid=238222756 }}</ref>

=== The role of organizational culture ===
Culture is considered as the holding strength between members of an organization. Culture brings a representation of past learning and an instrument to communicate it through the organization.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Schein | first1 = E. H. | year = 1984 | title = Coming to a New Awareness of Organizational Culture | journal = Sloan Management Review | volume = 25 | issue = 2| page = 3 }}</ref>

Finding shared vision is important to enable the adaptation of new systems and technologies that can be accepted by the organization and its members. Sharing a culture and encouraging knowledge sharing allows more efficient transfer of knowledge in organization between its levels.<ref name=ARDICHVILI-A-2008/>{{rp| 547}} Sharing information between different cultures can be limited due to varying norms and it can end up in one or both sides hoarding knowledge <ref name=ARDICHVILI-A-2008/>{{rp| 543}}

Willingness to inquire can also be related to differences between culture groups or culture of multicultural organizations in general. Status, modesty, fear of embarrassment, etc. contribute to the interaction we decide or do not decide to initiate.<ref name=ARDICHVILI-A-2008/>{{rp| 546}} It has been studied that organizational culture is one of the most important enablers in knowledge sharing. When the information is not shared due to hoarding based on cultural differences it becomes a major barrier in business.<ref name=ARDICHVILI-A-2008/>{{rp| 547}}

Different influential factors regarding characteristics of an organizational culture (especially in knowledge-centered cultures) affect the processes of knowledge management.<ref name="Intezari et al., 2017">{{cite journal |last1=Intezari |first1=Ali |last2=Taskin |first2=Nazim |last3=Pauleen |first3=David J. |title=Looking beyond knowledge sharing: an integrative approach to knowledge management culture |journal=Journal of Knowledge Management |date=2017 |volume=21 |issue=2 |pages=492–515 |doi=10.1108/JKM-06-2016-0216 |issn=1367-3270}}</ref> these can include:

* Social interactions
* Openness in communication
* Trust
* Perception of knowledge
* Top management's support and involvement
* Freedom vs. control
* Compensation system (organizational rewards)

=== Virtual environments ===

Organizations are evolving, which is sometimes causing interpretation of experiences more complex. Team members that are geographically apart,<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Argote | first1 = Linda | year = 2011 | title = Organizational learning research: Past, present and future | journal = Management Learning | volume = 42 | issue = 4| pages = 439–446 | doi = 10.1177/1350507611408217 | s2cid = 145490839 }}</ref>{{rp| 266}} may only have an option to learn virtually through electronic devices instead of face-to-face.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Gibson | first1 = Cristina B. | last2 = Gibbs | first2 = Jennifer L. | year = 2016 | 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> Communities of practice in virtual environments can create tacit knowledge shared between the different factors such as individual members, rules accepted and technologies used. Technology in this case affects the identity and learning patterns of the community.<ref name=ARDICHVILI-A-2008/>{{rp|549}} Building routines in a virtual team and the use of sophisticated technology such as video meetings, creates trust and psychological safety that enables learning.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Dixon | first1 = Nancy | year = 2017 | title = Learning together and working apart: routines for organizational learning in virtual teams | journal = The Learning Organization | volume = 24 | issue = 3| pages = 138–149 | doi = 10.1108/tlo-12-2016-0101 }}</ref>{{rp| 148}}

=== Barriers in organizational learning from 4I framework ===

Developed by Crossan, Lane and White (1999) the 4I framework of organizational learning consists of four social processes; intuiting, interpreting, integrating and institutionalizing. It is proposed by Crossan et al. (1999)<ref name="CROSSAN-M-1999" /> that organizational learning is a dynamic and iterative process between exploration and exploitation (March 1991)<ref>{{Cite journal|last=March|first=J. G.|date=1991|title=Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning|journal=Organization Science|volume=2|pages=71–87|doi=10.1287/orsc.2.1.71}}</ref> with feed forward flowing from individual level to organizational level and feedback from organizational to individual. A pivotal characteristic of the framework is the relationship and interplay between action and cognition that it assumes and portrays. It is a framework that was developed to specifically address the phenomenon of strategic renewal.<ref name=CROSSAN-M-1999>{{cite journal | last1 = Crossan | first1 = Mary M. | last2 = Lane | first2 = Henry W. | last3 = White | first3 = Roderick E. | year = 1999 | title = "An Organizational Learning Framework: From Intuition to Institution". The | journal = Academy of Management Review | volume = 24 | issue = 3| pages = 522–537 | doi = 10.2307/259140 | jstor = 259140 }}</ref>

J. Schilling and A. Kluge (2009) have contributed to the M. Crossan, H. Lane and R. White (1999) 4I framework of organizational learning by identifying the barriers to the learning process. There is a wide variety of barriers in every level of each learning process identified as actional-personal, structural-organizational and societal-environmental.<ref name="Schilling, Jan 2370">{{cite journal | last1 = Schilling | first1 = Jan | last2 = Kluge | first2 = Annette | year = 2009 | title = Barriers to organizational learning: An integration of theory and research | journal = International Journal of Management Reviews | volume = 11 | issue = 3| pages = 337–360 | doi = 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2008.00242.x | s2cid = 143715152 }}</ref>

Actional-personal barriers include such as individual attitudes, thinking, and behavior. Structural-organizational barriers are based in organizational technology, strategy, culture and formality of regulations. In addition to the 4I model, environment is also considered as relevant at all individual, group and organization levels and that is why societal-environmental barriers are also considered. Intuition process barriers are related to individual's lack of motivation or such as what is the freedom in the organization to 'think out of the box'. Societal-environmental barriers of intuition process relate e.g. to the unclear success criteria of the branch of the organization or to cultural misunderstandings. Interpretation process barrier can be e.g. lack of status or a conflict in a relationship between innovator and the group. Integration process barriers that take place at the organizational level can be such as the willingness to maintain positive self-image or the fear of punishment. If the idea is against beliefs commonly held in the industry, the whole sector might reject the idea. A major barrier is, if there is no top management's support for the innovative idea. A barrier to institutionalization process is when something previously learned has been forgotten – an innovation or lesson has not been put to practice so that it would become embedded into the structure, procedures and strategy. Some teams or employees may not have enough skills or knowledge to absorb the innovation or there is not enough trust towards the innovation. Management may also have a lack of skills to implement the innovation.<ref name="Schilling, Jan 2370"/>

=== Other challenges ===
Several challenges may be identified during the organizational learning process. Milway and Saxton (2011) suggest three challenges related to goals, incentives and processes.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Milway|first1=Katie Smith|last2=Saxton|first2=Amy|title=The Challenge of Organizational Learning|journal=Stanford Social Innovation Review|volume=9|issue=3|pages=44–50}}</ref>

Generational issues and employee turnover are also challenges that organizations might have to consider.<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last1=Sprinkle|first1=Therese A.|last2=Urick|first2=Michael J.|date=2018|title=Three generational issues in organizational learning: Knowledge management, perspectives on training and "low-stakes" development|journal=The Learning Organization|volume=25|issue=2|pages=102–112|doi=10.1108/TLO-02-2017-0021}}</ref>