Õpivõime on iga organisatsiooni arengu ja ellujäämise üks võtmekriteeriumitest. Tõsi, avalikes ja eraorganisatsioonides võivad tagajärjed – nii heas kui halvas – ilmneda ajateljel erinevates punktides ning väljenduda üsna erinevalt. Siinviidatu võiks kandideerida paljude kursuste seminaritekstideks ja olla viljakaks lugemisvaraks kõikidele organisatsioonidega puutumuses olijatele.

Kontekstiks:

While Levitt and March’s observations were made long ago, the assumption that organizational learning (OL) enhances the performance of the organization and its members (Schilling and Kluge, 2009) has remained largely unquestioned.

Üksikisik on õppimise lähtepunkt:

To help resolve the OL-performance and individual dilemmas, we look to the role of the individual in the various levels of OL, since the foundation of OL is the individual learner (Crossan et al., 1999; Kim, 1993; March, 1991). In particular, we examine the type of judgment needed by individuals to not only discern effective from ineffective learning, but also know when challenging the status quo is needed.

Uurimisküsimus:

How does character influence OL processes and their effectiveness?

Õppimise kasu praktikale?

Under the strain of differing viewpoints about learning and performance, two perspectives have emerged: OL with a descriptive focus recognizes that learning does not necessarily lead to performance benefits, and the learning organization (LO) with its prescriptive and practice focus, which assumes learning leads to better performance.

See tsitaat (Tsang (1997: 73)) võiks erilist huvi pakkuda parimate praktikate pooldajatele:

There is a clear distinction between the descriptive and prescriptive approaches. In the former judgment and evaluation are suspended while in the latter not only are they undertaken but the “best practices” are put forward to the reader.

Iseloom siinse teksti tähenduses:

In sum, character can be contrasted from other types of individual differences because the character dimensions (1) offer a comprehensive and nuanced view of the individual; (2) are behavior-based so that development, or learning, is possible in each dimension; and (3) link to the focal construct of judgment, which affords individuals with the agency to choose how to respond to stimuli.

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

We contribute to OL research in three important ways. First, introducing character into OL deepens OL theory by focusing on the exercise of character-based judgment and how it influences OL processes, thus addressing the dilemmas surrounding performance outcomes of OL and the role individuals play in them. “Practical wisdom” or “character-based judgment” has rarely been discussed in OL, even though they are key to understanding agency in decision making (Nguyen and Crossan, 2021). Weak character may lead to the context determining one’s actions, while the ability to choose an action is catalyzed by one’s strength of character.

Crossan, M. M., Nguyen, B., Sturm, R. E., Vera, D., Ruiz Pardo, A., & Maurer, C. C. (2022). Organizational learning through character-based judgment. Management Learning. https://doi.org/10.1177/13505076221100918