Development of a multi-level learning framework

Purpose This paper aims to examine multiple learning cycles across a UK housebuilder organization following changes made to their quality management routine at the organizational level, through to subsequent understanding and enactment at the level of the individuals involved. Design/methodology/approach This study uses a qualitative case study methodology based on an analysis of six-weeks of participant observation, semi-structured ethnographic interviews and documentation within three of the organization’s regional offices. Through an abductive process, it draws on gathered data and extant literature to develop a multi-level learning model. Findings Four levels of learning cycles are observed within the model: individual, team (within which inter-organizational relationships nest), region and organization. Three inter-related factors are identified as influencing feed-forward and feedback across the levels: time, communication and trust. The impact of these levels and factors on the process of learning is conceptualized through the metaphor of coupling and decoupling and discussed using examples from housing development projects. Originality/value While previous models of organizational learning highlight important multi-level interaction effects, they do not explore how the different levels of learning synchronize over time for learning to move between them. This paper addresses this gap by shedding important light on how layers of learning synchronize and why and when this can occur within multi-level organizations.

[1]  Hans Berends,et al.  Explaining Discontinuity in Organizational Learning: A Process Analysis , 2010 .

[2]  Dermot Breslin,et al.  Interpreting futures through the multi-level co-evolution of organizational practices , 2011 .

[3]  O. Boiral,et al.  ISO 9001 and ISO 14001: Towards a Research Agenda on Management System Standards , 2013 .

[4]  M. Polanyi.  The Logic of Tacit Inference , 1966, Philosophy.

[5]  Kevin G. Corley,et al.  Identity Ambiguity and Change in the Wake of a Corporate Spin-off , 2004 .

[6]  J. Creswell.  Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches, 2nd ed. , 2007 .

[7]  G. Huber.  Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures , 1991 .

[8]  Chapter 2 Organization Learning : A Theoretical Framework , 2022 .

[9]  I. Nonaka.  A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation , 1994 .

[10]  M. Feldman,et al.  Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change , 2003 .

[11]  Jennifer A. Howard-Grenville.  The Persistence of Flexible Organizational Routines: The Role of Agency and Organizational Context , 2005, Organ. Sci..

[12]  J. V. Maanen,et al.  The Fact of Fiction in Organizational Ethnography. , 1979 .

[13]  O. Jones,et al.  Inter-organizational learning and strategic renewal in SMEs: extending the 4I Framework , 2006 .

[14]  J. Brix.  Exploring Knowledge Creation Processes as a Source of Organizational Learning: A Longitudinal Case Study of a Public Innovation Project , 2017 .

[15]  Sandy Q. Qu,et al.  The qualitative research interview , 2011 .

[16]  Dermot Breslin,et al.  Rule breaking in social care: hierarchy, contentiousness and informal rules , 2016 .

[17]  D. Hofmann,et al.  The Structure and Function of Collective Constructs: Implications for Multilevel Research and Theory Development , 1999 .

[18]  Kevin G. Corley,et al.  Seeking Qualitative Rigor in Inductive Research , 2013 .

[19]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research : techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory , 1998 .

[20]  L. Argote.  Organization Learning: A Theoretical Framework , 2013 .

[21]  Karen Locke.  Grounded Theory in Management Research , 2000 .

[22]  M. Easterby-Smith,et al.  Organizational learning: debates past, present and future , 2000 .

[23]  A. Kieser,et al.  Bounded Rationality and Organizational Learning Based on Rule Changes , 2008 .

[24]  Andrea Casey,et al.  Enhancing Individual and Organizational Learning , 2005 .

[25]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organizational and Social Research , 2007 .

[26]  Elena P. Antonacopoulou,et al.  The Relationship between Individual and Organizational Learning: New Evidence from Managerial Learning Practices , 2006 .

[27]  Alvin Hwang,et al.  Learning, dynamic capabilities and operating routines: A consumer package goods company , 2008 .

[28]  Johan P. Olsen,et al.  THE UNCERTAINTY OF THE PAST: ORGANIZATIONAL LEARNING UNDER AMBIGUITY* , 1975 .

[29]  Bente Elkjaer,et al.  Organizational Learning , 2004 .

[30]  Linda Argote,et al.  Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge , 2011, Organ. Sci..

[31]  J. Brown,et al.  Knowledge and Organization: A Social-Practice Perspective , 2001 .

[32]  Allan Macpherson,et al.  From Rule Breaking to Organizational Learning: Decoupling and Recoupling Local Actions and Rules , 2018 .

[33]  N. Dixon.  The Organizational Learning Cycle: How We Can Learn Collectively , 1994 .

[34]  K. Eisenhardt.  Building theories from case study research , 1989, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[35]  Mary Crossan,et al.  ORGANIZATIONAL LEARNING: DIMENSIONS FOR A THEORY , 1995 .

[36]  E. Antonacopoulou,et al.  Time and Organizational Learning: A Review and Agenda for Future Research , 2014 .

[37]  Fabiola H. Gerpott,et al.  A Phase Model of Intergenerational Learning in Organizations , 2017 .

[38]  Roderick E. White,et al.  An Organizational Learning Framework : From Intuition to Institution Author ( s ) : , 2007 .

[39]  D. G. MacKay,et al.  Metaphor and Thought , 1980 .

[40]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  Theory Building From Cases: Opportunities And Challenges , 2007 .

[41]  J. H. Davis,et al.  An Integrative Model Of Organizational Trust , 1995 .

[42]  I. Nonaka,et al.  How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation , 1995 .

[43]  Mary E. Zellmer-Bruhn,et al.  THE EFFECT OF TEMPORAL ENTRAINMENT ON THE ABILITY OF TEAMS TO CHANGE THEIR ROUTINES , 2004 .

[44]  Nancy M. Dixon,et al.  The Organizational Learning Cycle , 1999 .

[45]  Martha S. Feldman,et al.  Organizational Routines as a Unit of Analysis , 2005 .

[46]  J. H. Davis,et al.  An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust: Past, Present, and Future , 2007 .

[47]  Daniel H. Kim.  The Link between individual and organizational learning , 1997 .

[48]  W. Gibb Dyer,et al.  Better Stories, Not Better Constructs, To Generate Better Theory: A Rejoinder to Eisenhardt , 1991 .

[49]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .