User talk:Linda Lightbourne

Knowledge has a shelf life! It is not enough to say that you have a Bachelor's degree. The knowledge you gained twenty years ago has lost its shelf life. People who are functioning well have done so on their own, outside of the degree, and gone on to build their knowledge base through experience and soft skills or emotional intelligence. Those who have tried to counteract this problem have created training sessions that have been a waste of money because of the single-loop learning that has taken place. Consequently, billions of dollars have been lost in ineffective training programs.

Organizational Learning: processes
Knowledge has a shelf life! It is not enough to say that you have a Bachelor's degree. The knowledge you gained twenty years ago has lost its shelf life. People who are functioning well have done so on their own, outside of the degree, and gone on to build their knowledge base through experience and soft skills or emotional intelligence. Those who have tried to counteract this problem have created training sessions that have been a waste of money because of the single-loop learning that has taken place. Consequently, billions of dollars have been lost in ineffective training programs.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/User_talk:Linda_Lightbourne"

Knowledge Management Processes
In his article entitled Research and the Creation of Training Intelligence, Irving H. Buchen asserts that “Research is like innovation. Both optimize. In particular, research drives business to be not just knowledge based but also knowledge creating, not just research users but research providers. It compels the next step, the road not taken, the inquiry not pursued. Increasingly, before savvy professionals embark on any new venture, they ask four related questions: 1)	What do we know? 2) What does the research show? 3) Who in our industry is doing what? And 4) Does the problem and the solution have a future? (Buchen, 2006, p. 1). In the last decade or so, these industry-wide questions are being asked of researchers and consultants. If the specific industry is not getting the answers to any part of these four questions, then they are resorting to doing their own R&D instead of depending on universities and consultants to do their R&D. Knowledge Management: Leadership Learning is good for business. Jack Welch, in one of his letters to customers, shareholders and employees said: “The most significant change in GE has been its transformation into Learning Company”. In his white paper, Joe Dougherty, the President of Thomson NETg said: Corporate learning matters to the Board for two fundamental reasons: 1) The Board’s responsibility is to protect the health and grow the value of the corporation. Directors must also take a long term view of corporate performance and assets, paying constant attention to the organization’s ability to learn and change. 2) Making the cultural change to embrace learning requires genuine leadership. Business leaders must take the time to make it happen. But senior executives are often under severe short-term performance pressures. They may not have the time or resources to devote to a perceived “soft” issue like learning. The Board has to promote it as a priority – and lead on the issue. (Dougherty, 2005, p. 3). Knowledge Management: Processes There are many critical processes that an organization has to go through in order to determine their profitability where corporate learning is concerned. One of these processes is the development of an organizational portfolio. Sue Todd, President of Corporate University Exchange explains that “Portfolio management is a process that will quickly make its way into the hands of L & D organizations that want to make good strategic decisions with the organizations investments in corporate learning. Those who are seeking the optimum path to achieving alignment between learning and business performance will begin to make portfolio management a key and critical process in developing the actual enterprise learning strategy.” (Linnehan & Todd, 2005, p. 8) There are three critical questions that each crisis or issue should address: 1) What is the significance of the event? Will this require monumental change or will the organization have to just be aware of the issue?  2) What is its impact? Who does it affect? Will consequences be felt internally at the top of the organization, middle, bottom or all three? 3) What action is required? Does it require immediate action? Does the issue warrant building a case for change? Does the issue just require that we develop awareness of the topic? These questions are monumental in making sure that we keep first things first.  Failing to address these questions can have leadership spinning their wheels, putting out the latest fire or catering to the squeakiest wheel.

Knowledge Management: Change
Knowledge Management: Change In their article, "Four essential ingredients for transforming culture", D’Aprix and Tyler lay out a situation in an automotive industry where Asian part-makers have over taken their American counterparts in offering a competitive product at a superior price. The company is saddled with exorbitant health care and pension costs that have made this company non-competitive against other global car manufacturers. In an attempt to change the culture, the first thing they came up with was a “Winning Together” campaign initiative that issued wallet cards to each employee, showing the new company values. Because of the lack of trust and low morale within the company, the campaign was not successful. It came across to the workers as just one more thing to do. D’Aprix and Tyler suggest four things that will make a difference in transforming the culture in the face of a crisis. Instead of just implementing changes, explain to the workforce why change is necessary. “The driving force of culture change is the market place.”(D'Aprix & Tyler, 2006, p. 23). Sometimes, senior management resist communicating openly because of the underlying belief that employees are not capable of fully understanding the external market realities or that an honest disclosure of the full case for change would cause undue panic, the loss of key talent, or loss in productivity. Typically, such organizations are suffering from all these symptoms already. Senior management has not acknowledged the symptoms. So disclosing the full reality of the situation may be the key to transforming the culture.

Knowledge Management: Leadership
Learning is good for business. Jack Welch, in one of his letters to customers, shareholders and employees said: “The most significant change in GE has been its transformation into Learning Company”. In his white paper, Joe Dougherty, the President of Thomson NETg said: Corporate learning matters to the Board for two fundamental reasons: 1) The Board’s responsibility is to protect the health and grow the value of the corporation. Directors must also take a long term view of corporate performance and assets, paying constant attention to the organization’s ability to learn and change. 2) Making the cultural change to embrace learning requires genuine leadership. Business leaders must take the time to make it happen. But senior executives are often under severe short-term performance pressures. They may not have the time or resources to devote to a perceived “soft” issue like learning. The Board has to promote it as a priority – and lead on the issue. (Dougherty, 2005, p. 3).

Knowledge Management: Challenges
Knowledge Management: Challenges One of the challenges of knowledge management is the brain drain that comes from people retiring or moving on to other organizations and taking all their knowledge with them. It is imperative that knowledge sharing become part of the culture. Specific and codified v. diffuse and implicit knowledge is worth mentioning here because countries where the good of the community is placed above the good of the individual, more community knowledge sharing takes place and so expectations and new knowledge is readily made available from generation to generation, from employee to employee, from employer to employee, and from one department to the next. If the good of the individual is placed above the good of the community, then the one who has knowledge has a choice of either codifying it by writing it in a procedures manual or using it as a weapon of force, threat or superiority.

Organizational Learning: processes:Contributions by Discipline
There are many similarities between organizational learning and the discipline of fine arts. As it relates to music as it is in business, you begin with the end in mind. You have a vision of a full orchestra playing the finished work. There is a need to write the mission statement and procedures manual in different ways, because different instruments have different key signatures and have limitations on how high they can go or how low they can go. When a trumpet and a clarinet sound a Bb, that sound is equivalent to a C on the violin or an F on the Trombone. Just as it is necessary to use the manuscript to make these adjustments to the different instruments, so it is necessary to use the vision and procedures statements to write the role of different key players in a business. The lower sounding instruments have to have parts written for them based on the mission statement, vision statement, the function of the whole but appropriate to their personality, ability and purpose. The higher sounding instruments need to have parts written for them, based on their purpose, personality and abilities also, but they are radically different from the purpose, personality and abilities of the lower sounding instruments. The function of the conductor and the section leaders is to ensure that their part of the whole is executed correctly and that the instruments in their section are working well inside of the ability of the instruments of their particular section. This is a function of leadership. No tuba is happy playing the role of a flute! The parts written have to be embedded in the activities of the instrument and therefore make the activities purpose driven. The purpose is embedded in the original manuscript. The leadership has to teach the players, not how to play their instruments, that is a function outside of the orchestra rehearsal setting, but to use their instruments to buy into the vision; to teach different functions of the whole; to keep the big picture in mind at all times, to work in teams, to compliment each other and share information with each other, to be aware of the functions of different “departments” and work in tandem with each team. We have all heard an orchestra warming up. Each player is playing the right part, according to the manuscript, the mission and procedures manual, but if they are all doing the right thing on their own, in silos, whether it is an individual silo, or departmental silo, the manuscript is still not being played in a way that benefits all the participants or the hearers, the management, the customers or the stockholders. Like many businesses, all the players are but part of the whole and many are operating in silos. They are doing a lot of right things and executing difficult things well, but they are not being done in a way that benefits the big picture or the vision of the company. The end result is the same chaos that you hear when you hear an orchestra warming up and practicing before a performance. It takes a knowledgeable leadership team and dedicated players to make the chaos of an orchestra warming up to turn the manuscript into a living, breathing document, where all of the activities of the individual instruments are in line and in time with the articulated and demonstrated vision of the leadership. If all the parts made up the whole and the organization followed its mandate in tandem what we would have is beautiful music and a level five learning organization!

Organizational Learning: processes:Contributions by Discipline
Organizational Learning: Contributions by Discipline There are many similarities between organizational learning and the discipline of fine arts. As it relates to music as it is in business, you begin with the end in mind. You have a vision of a full orchestra playing the finished work. There is a need to write the mission statement and procedures manual in different ways, because different instruments have different key signatures and have limitations on how high they can go or how low they can go. When a trumpet and a clarinet sound a Bb, that sound is equivalent to a C on the violin or an F on the Trombone. Just as it is necessary to use the manuscript to make these adjustments to the different instruments, so it is necessary to use the vision and procedures statements to write the role of different key players in a business. The lower sounding instruments have to have parts written for them based on the mission statement, vision statement, the function of the whole but appropriate to their personality, ability and purpose. The higher sounding instruments need to have parts written for them, based on their purpose, personality and abilities also, but they are radically different from the purpose, personality and abilities of the lower sounding instruments. The function of the conductor and the section leaders is to ensure that their part of the whole is executed correctly and that the instruments in their section are working well inside of the ability of the instruments of their particular section. This is a function of leadership. No tuba is happy playing the role of a flute! The parts written have to be embedded in the activities of the instrument and therefore make the activities purpose driven. The purpose is embedded in the original manuscript. The leadership has to teach the players, not how to play their instruments, that is a function outside of the orchestra rehearsal setting, but to use their instruments to buy into the vision; to teach different functions of the whole; to keep the big picture in mind at all times, to work in teams, to compliment each other and share information with each other, to be aware of the functions of different “departments” and work in tandem with each team. We have all heard an orchestra warming up. Each player is playing the right part, according to the manuscript, the mission and procedures manual, but if they are all doing the right thing on their own, in silos, whether it is an individual silo, or departmental silo, the manuscript is still not being played in a way that benefits all the participants or the hearers, the management, the customers or the stockholders. Like many businesses, all the players are but part of the whole and many are operating in silos. They are doing a lot of right things and executing difficult things well, but they are not being done in a way that benefits the big picture or the vision of the company. The end result is the same chaos that you hear when you hear an orchestra warming up and practicing before a performance. It takes a knowledgeable leadership team and dedicated players to make the chaos of an orchestra warming up to turn the manuscript into a living, breathing document, where all of the activities of the individual instruments are in line and in time with the articulated and demonstrated vision of the leadership. If all the parts made up the whole and the organization followed its mandate in tandem what we would have is beautiful music and a level five learning organization!

Organizational Learning:Agents
(Lim & Chan, 2004, p. 106) assert that “as organizational learning is increasingly recognized to be an important paradigm for contemporary organizations’ survival and success, a better understanding of the theories and frameworks is critical.” In their article “Development and Application of an Organizational Learning Matrix”, they refer to Argyris’s major types of learning; however I’m using Lim and Chan’s version, because they clink it to a matrix. Single loop learning, which is the same as non-strategic learning, does very little to change behavior. It may help in reacting to a problem, but it does not go far enough to solve the problem. If  a company just wants to maintain its existing processes, single loop learning might, in some circumstances, be sufficient. For example, a business whose environment is characterized by low volatility can get away with single-loop learning. Typically this kind of organization is not equipped to handle a crisis. They engage in shock learning and respond with knee-jerk reactions to deal with a situation that would threaten their ability to be competitive. It is the belief of the author of this article, that if an organization that is operating a highly volatile business environment is “stuck” in single-loop learning, they are destined to failure. Double loop learning is required for complex and non-programmable issues. (Lim & Chan, 2004, p. 101). The term double-looping is also referred to as high-level learning, generative learning or strategic learning. This kind of learning occurs when the organization is willing to question long-held assumptions and behaviors. This kind of learning is transformational in that assumptions, and ways of thinking and doing things, even if they stay the same, have been challenged and validated. Double-loop learning provides opportunity for organizations to improve. However, sustainable competitive advantage requires deutero-learning. In the book, Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge, the authors offer a definition of deutero-learning by saying that deutero-learning is an even higher level of reflexivity that is said to occur when the learning process itself is examined anew. (Berthoin Antal, Dierkes, Child, & Nonaka, 2001, p. 924).

Behavioralist Theories
The General Assumptions of Behaviorist Theories are as follows: 1) Principles of learning apply equally to different behaviors and to different species of animals. 2) Learning processes can be studied most objectively when the focus of the study is on stimuli and responses. 3) Internal cognitive processes are largely excluded from scientific study 4) Learning involves a behavior change. 5) Learning is largely the result of environmental events. Students should be active respondents; people are most likely to learn when they actually have a chance to behave.  Also, student learning must be evaluated; only measurable behavior changes can confirm that learning has taken place. Many theorists emphasize the importance of rewards or reinforcements for learning. A good example of measuring behavior is seen in all of the sports arenas.  In the last two decades, the Corporate University has been using the measurable behavior as an indicator of learning in the workplace.  It is paying off handsomely for the individual and for the corporations who use this means of measuring learning.

Remarkably, people can learn from the moment of birth. Learning can and should be a lifelong process. Learning shouldn't be defined by what happened early in life, only at school. We constantly make sense of our experiences and consistently search for meaning. In essence, we continue to learn. Though humans like the familiar and are often uncomfortable with change, the brain searches for and will respond to novelty. "Ah-ha!" you may think. "That's why I hated freshman English. No novelty!" Rote learning frustrates us because the brain resists meaningless stimuli. When we invoke the brain's natural capacity to integrate information, however, we can assimilate boundless amounts. This may explain why sometimes a tough class, one you never thought you would get through, was one of your all-time favorites. Western society once believed adults didn't learn. Even today, if you ask a group why adults cannot learn, it may surprise you how many begin answering the question without challenging the premise. Unfortunately, many adults deny themselves what should be one of the most enriching parts of life because they assume they can't learn. We can learn from everything the mind perceives (at any age). Our brains build and strengthen neural pathways no matter where we are, no matter what the subject or the context. In today's business environment, finding better ways to learn will propel organizations forward. Strong minds fuel strong organizations. We must capitalize on our natural styles and then build systems to satisfy needs. Only through an individual learning process can we re-create our environments and ourselves.

Adult Learning Theories
Remarkably, people can learn from the moment of birth. Learning can and should be a lifelong process. Learning shouldn't be defined by what happened early in life, only at school. We constantly make sense of our experiences and consistently search for meaning. In essence, we continue to learn. Though humans like the familiar and are often uncomfortable with change, the brain searches for and will respond to novelty. "Ah-ha!" you may think. "That's why I hated freshman English. No novelty!" Rote learning frustrates us because the brain resists meaningless stimuli. When we invoke the brain's natural capacity to integrate information, however, we can assimilate boundless amounts. This may explain why sometimes a tough class, one you never thought you would get through, was one of your all-time favorites. Western society once believed adults didn't learn. Even today, if you ask a group why adults cannot learn, it may surprise you how many begin answering the question without challenging the premise. Unfortunately, many adults deny themselves what should be one of the most enriching parts of life because they assume they can't learn. We can learn from everything the mind perceives (at any age). Our brains build and strengthen neural pathways no matter where we are, no matter what the subject or the context. In today's business environment, finding better ways to learn will propel organizations forward. Strong minds fuel strong organizations. We must capitalize on our natural styles and then build systems to satisfy needs. Only through an individual learning process can we re-create our environments and ourselves.

Organizational Learning:Triggers
In order for an organization to make a change there is more often than not, a trigger that sets the learning in motion. Unfortunately, single loop learning can get in the way of progress in such a situation. Different kinds of organizational learning have to drive the decisions made in such times. A trigger is an event that demands an immediate change from what is business as usual. It usually is a crisis that creates need for a change in thought pattern and behavior. It could be as serious as a law suit that is threatening to bring the company under, or something as different as State regulations changing, creating a need for licensing of workers every two years instead of once at the beginning of practice, as is the case with architects in the State of Indiana. The crisis usually calls for a culture change or a knowledge base change. Some organizations meet resistance from workers when they try to implement changes. The resistance comes most strongly when workers are not given reasons for the changes or when their input is not valued, or when leadership fails to articulate the reasons for the change because it thinks that workers are not capable of understanding the present crisis event or events. Triggers properly handled can strengthen an organization. On the contrary, triggers handled poorly can become another nail in the organization’s coffin.

Organizational Learning: Interorganizational
How knowledge is managed is different in every organization, and indeed in every department within every organization. In CISCO, an organization that I spent some time studying, they came to the same conclusion as Rosenberg in writings that people are much more likely to adopt knowledge management when they believe that both they and the organization will benefit. (Rosenberg, 2004, p. 241) In the case of Universal versus Particular knowledge, CISCO changed their culture from one where people showed up for work and went home at the end of the day, to one where knowledge sharing was valued and made safe from C-level management. Specific and codified v. diffuse and implicit knowledge. In countries where the good of the community is placed above the good of the individual, more community knowledge sharing takes place and so expectations and new knowledge is readily made available from generation to generation. If the good of the individual is placed above the good of the community, then the one who has knowledge has a choice of either codifying it by writing it in a procedures manual or using it as a weapon of force or superiority. Top-down v. bottom up-knowledge. CISCO found that it was futile for top management to be so far removed from the front line and middle management needed to be involved in deciding what kind of training would benefit the organization as well as the bottom line, as well as the individual acquiring the new knowledge. (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 2004, p. 13-16) Inside-out to outside in knowledge. In order to be balanced, it is necessary to educate not only your employees, but your suppliers as well as your customers. CISCO discovered that and it turned their failing business into a knowledge-rich one, enjoying the confidence from their suppliers, customers and employees in just five years.

Organizational Learning: Practice
“A learning organization is an organization skilled at creating, acquiring, and transferring knowledge, and at modifying its behavior to reflect new knowledge and insights. (Garvin, 1993, p. 80). Organizations are effective at creating and acquiring new knowledge but they are less successful in applying that knowledge to their activities. Learning organizations are skilled at five main activities: systematic problem solving – Deming calls this the “Plan, Do, Check, Act” cycle; experimentation with new approaches; learning from their own experience and past history; learning from the experiences and best practices of others, and transferring knowledge quickly and efficiently  throughout the organization (Garvin, 1993, p. 81). Mark Allen defines a corporate university as an educational organization that is part of another organization whose primary purpose is something other than education. (Allen, 1999, p. 12). While “training focuses on skills that are necessary for specific tasks, “development” refers to education designed to modify “core parts of the executive and his/her behavior” (Allen, 1999, p. 13).

Organizational Learning: Changes
The andragogical model of instruction, described by Knowles, is the best-known learner-centered or learner-directed model of instruction. (Merriam & Caffarella, 1999, p. 37)  In addition to diagnosing learning needs, formulating objectives, designing a pattern of learning needs, formulating objectives, designing a pattern of learning experiences, and evaluating results, which a lot of other models actually do, what sets this model apart is that the learner is viewed as a mutual partner, or when learning in natural settings, as the primary designer of the learning activities. In the teacher-directed model, learners lack commitment and confidence (according to the teacher). In the learner-directed model, are capable of providing their own direction and support and they are willing and able to take responsibility for all instructional functions (Merriam & Caffarella, 1999, p. 38).

Post Modern Theories
The role of research in postmodern thought is not that of ‘discovering the truth’ but of challenging the conventional wisdom, routines, static meanings, and axioms of ‘normal’ science, thereby exposing knowledge to non-dogmatic forms of thought (Berthoin Antal, Dierkes, Child, & Nonaka, 2001, p. 44). According to postmodern traditions, the relationship between knowledge and power, the central importance of language and discourse, and fragmented identity are crucial. (Midgley, 2004, p. 52) states the premises of post-modernism. 1) Post modernism cannot accept the possibility of objective knowledge. It refuses the language of ‘truth’ on the grounds that all statements are relative to the contexts in which they are spoken. 2) Post-modernism assumes tat ‘realities are socially constructed, and language plays a key role in this. 3) Post-modernism says that language is purely self-referential, and does not reflect a real world. Validity claims are made and challenged. 4) Some authors seek to overcome dualism by stressing the socio-linguistic construction of both mind and matter. 5) The concept of rationality has important limitations. 6) As all reality is socially constructed, terms like “objective”, “normative” and subjective” lose their meaning. 7) Science is a limited discourse. Its development should be noted, but it should not be taken too seriously. 8) Science, ethics and art can be appreciated as separate discourses, but they all contribute to producing a great variety of stories. 9) Power is not ‘owned’ by any single person or group. It is constituted by knowledge that is communicated through discourse, and it is this knowledge that frames our experiences.  10) Post modern theories welcome contradictions and do not seek to resolve them. Where none are seen to exist, they are sought in the belief that greater variety will undermine certainties about what is ‘true’ or legitimate’.

Reference Midgley, G. (2004). Five stetches of postmodernism:implications for systems thinking and operational research. Journal of Organizational Transformation and Social Change, 1(1), 47-62.