PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 1, 1991Organization Science8,060 citations

Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures

View Full Paper
GHGeorge W. Huber

Key Points

  • The aim is to evaluate the existing literatures on organizational learning processes and identify gaps in knowledge and integration.
  • Critically examines four constructs: knowledge acquisition, information distribution, information interpretation, and organizational memory.
  • Describes and critiques the related literatures for each of the four constructs.
  • Identifies subprocesses of knowledge acquisition and explores their current state of research.
  • Knowledge acquisition is complex with five subprocesses recognized but lacks integration across research groups.
  • Information distribution is established, yet crucial dynamics of how units exchange information remain unexplored.
  • Organizational memory needs systematic investigation to enhance learning and decision-making capabilities.

Abstract

This paper differs from previous examinations of organizational learning in that it is broader in scope and more evaluative of the literatures. Four constructs related to organizational learning (knowledge acquisition, information distribution, information interpretation, and organizational memory) are articulated, and the literatures related to each are described and critiqued. The literature on knowledge acquisition is voluminous and multi-faceted, and so the knowledge acquisition construct is portrayed here as consisting of five subconstructs or subprocesses: (1) drawing on knowledge available at the organization's birth, (2) learning from experience, (3) learning by observing other organizations, (4) grafting on to itself components that possess knowledge needed but not possessed by the organization, and (5) noticing or searching for information about the organization's environment and performance. Examination of the related literatures indicates that much has been learned about learning from experience, but also that there is a lack of cumulative work and a lack of integration of work from different research groups. Similarly, much has been learned about organizational search, but there is a lack of conceptual work, and there is a lack of both cumulative work and syntheses with which to create a more mature literature. Congenital learning, vicarious learning, and grafting are information acquisition subprocesses about which relatively little has been learned. The literature concerning information distribution is rich and mature, but an aspect of information distribution that is central to an organization's benefitting from its learning, namely how units that possess information and units that need this information can find each other quickly and with a high likelihood, is unexplored. Information interpretation, as an organizational process, rather than an individual process, requires empirical work for further advancement. Organizational memory is much in need of systematic investigation, particularly by those whose special concerns are improving organizational learning and decision making.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

George W. Huber (1991) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d7c720e57cdc1cc9ae2c6chttps://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.88
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change.1983 · 21,727 citations
  2. 2The Organizational Life Cycle1981 · 669 citations
  3. 3Organizational Learning: Observations Toward a Theory1965 · 486 citations
  4. 4Communication, Meaning, and Organized Action1986 · 360 citations
  5. 5The business intelligence system : a new tool for competitive advantage1988 · 106 citations