Siinviidatu võiks huvi pakkuda paljudele nii organisatsioonide valdkonnast huvitatutele kui ka neile, kel (enda arvates) organisatsioonidega suurt pistmist ei ole. Teine põhjus on erialane-empiiriline. Minuni jõudvad praktikad avalikest organisatsioonidest on küll väga harva sellised, mis õpimotivatsiooni toetavad. “Kastist välja” retoorikat jõustatakse järjest detailsemate reeglite ja ettekirjutustega; ametnikkond sageli ei selgita oma otsuseid põhifunktsioonide täitjatele, neid lihtsalt informeeritakse, kuidas asjad on ja olema peaksid.

Tekst on vabalevis, sestap pikka kommentaari ei vaja.

Kontekstist:

Indeed, management is often, and increasingly, argued to be overly focused on short-term performance (e.g. Laverty, 1996; Marginson and McAulay, 2008), whereas learning benefits performance primarily in the longer term—that is, when prior experience is applied to future events (Huber, 1991; Levinthal and March, 1993).

Mis raamistavad käitumist?

The behavioral sciences have long distinguished among three major categories of factors that determine behavior and, by extension, performance: opportunity, ability, and motivation (see Blumberg and Pringle, 1982).

Valitsetusest organisatsioonis ja artikli fookus:

In an initial effort to assess the extent to which motivational conditions affect organizational learning in complex strategic settings, we focus on the incentivizing role of corporate governance mechanisms—both in terms of rewards and penalties. Corporate governance—that is, the set of organizational mechanisms that serves to align the interests of management with those of the owners of the firmhas been studied in great detail (see Daily et al., 2003).

Kesksed motivatsioonifaktorid:

we distinguish among three fundamentally different types of motivational factors, which we label “carrots,” “sticks,” and “stones,” and which map onto three sets of corporate governance mechanisms. “Carrots” reward management for working in the best interest of the firm’s owners (i.e. executive compensation). “Sticks” monitor management internally and penalize it for not working in the owners’ best interest (i.e. the board of directors). Finally, “stones” monitor management externally and penalize it for not working in the owners’ best interest (i.e. institutional investors and the market for corporate control).

Motivatsioonifaktorite eetos:

Hence, although all three of the above-mentioned categories constitute motivational mechanisms, they operate in different ways: “carrots” offer reward-based motivation, whereas “sticks” and “stones” provide penalty-based motivation (e.g. Steel and König, 2006).

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

In line with the tripartite framework from the behavioral sciences (see Blumberg and Pringle, 1982), this implies that besides the opportunity to learn (provided by experience) and the ability to learn (enhanced by deliberate learning efforts), the motivation to learn constitutes a crucial third determinant of the efficacy of organizational learning—and one that, to our knowledge, has remained all but unexplored in our literature.

Schijven, M., Kolev, K. D., & Haleblian, J. (John). (2021). The governance of learning: Carrots, sticks, and stones in acquisition capability development. Strategic Organization. https://doi.org/10.1177/14761270211027841