Assess the organization’s culture as it relates to shared knowledge, then specify the significant issue(s) that you discovered with the culture. Determine the disconnect you observed between the culture and organizational learning using three (3) of the five (5) mystifications. Support your response with at least one (1) example of each selected mystification within the organization.
PLEASE USE REFERENCE:
Lipshitz, R., Friedman, V. J., & Popper, M. (2007). Demystifying organizational learning.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
(as one of the 5 references)
Give your opinion on the current Organizational Learning Mechanism(s) (OLMs) that hinder organizational learning. Support your response with one (1) example of a training or learning initiative (e.g., sharing knowledge, training programs, working as a team, experiences, procedures, processes, etc.) and the outcome when it was applied to the organization.
Determine which one (1) of the following OLMs is suitable for replacing the identified OLM(s) that hinder organizational learning as a corrective action to facilitate the transition from individual to organizational learning: Off-line/Internal, On-line/Internal, Off-line/External or On-line/External. Justify your selection.
Evaluate the norms of the organization’s learning culture to determine the source(s) that currently prevent productive learning by applying two (2) of the following norms: inquiry, issue orientation, transparency, integrity or accountability. Provide at least one (1) example of each of the selected norms’ manifestation within the organization in your evaluation.
PS I am a Real Estate Consultant for a large well-known brokerage, we recently underwent a large change-over to a new website and branding. This emails I have attached clearly show the major issues in ‘communication’ with organizational learning and relate well to how the organization does not cater to translating to everyday action. They love trying to initiate projects and plans, but get everyone ‘all dressed up’ with nowhere to go. The executive level of commitment wane’s quickly and often. The follow-through is horrible and as you will see in the email, confusing at best. Employees and Independent contractors become skeptical at best to change and reluctant to trust. I hope this helps some.
Below is NOT the correct way to answer the question: contact us for the correct way to go about it
The current culture of my organization requires the gathering translation and procedural incorporation of new data, which prompts a gathering activity and experimentation through danger taking. While authoritative learning offers for all intents and purposes unending advantages, there are very nearly an equivalent number of difficulties. The accompanying data clarifies five of the most discriminating difficulties hindering authoritative learning.
Visionaries and skeptics: Regardless of the developing ubiquity of hierarchical learning and the multiplication of writing on the subject, the idea stays tricky for specialists and chiefs alike. There is persisting vulnerability about the importance and routine of authoritative learning mirrors its alleged confusion. It ascribes perplexity to various elements, constantly expanding reasonable assorted qualities, a split in the field in the middle of visionaries and doubters (Lipshitz, Friedman, & Popper, 2007).
In my opinion, this practice have several complication that hinder organization learning. The implication that hinder sharing of knowledge include;
Challenges with Goals: Despite the fact that a huge lion’s share of administration may have an unmistakable enthusiasm for the development and dispersal of authoritative information, measuring the achievement of it with measurements and growing clear objectives is still a test. Without objectives and measurements, it is for all intents and purposes difficult to quantify the advancement, apportion suitable learning assets, and impact the general conduct of those inside of the association.
Challenges with Incentives: To cultivate hierarchical realizing, every individual in the association must be inspired to achieve and offer learning effectively. With a specific end goal to make a society and environment like this present, it’s important to have a motivator framework set up a great deal more convincing than an objective. Without the compelling measures set up to persuade the workers and elucidate motivating forces for groups, people, and for the association all in all, the scattering of data will be impeded. Rather, the association should successfully comprehend what it takes to change an objective into a need, which rises above whatever other contending requests (Cross, 2000).
Challenges with the Amount of Information: Another issue with hierarchical learning is the immeasurable volumes of data that must be successfully dispersed or adapted in brief times of time. While most representatives can be taught sure data through corporate preparing projects, everything with respect to a rich organization society can’t be put into a presentation.
All the more critically, the learning relating to the attention to the accessible data, where to discover the data, and the capability of acquired inspiration leaves with those leaving representatives. Organizations that are frequently effective over the long haul have a low turnover rate contrasted with organizations with a high turnover rate (Gilley, 2003).
This practice can be replaced by on-line/ internal organizational learning mechanism. Under this practice, significance of making a situation where numerous individuals can finish an extensive variety of errands inside of an organization should be considered. Murat Kristal, an educator at the Schulich Executive Education Center states “unless you have broadly educating and mulit-tasking, you can’t make a deft association.” Acquiring individuals who have various types of encounters as opposed to gaining practical experience in one perspective or industry can empower an association’s pioneer to ricochet thoughts around and get understanding based upon genuine encounters (King, 2009). This will permit organizations to wind up more nimble, which assumes a noteworthy part in an organization’s future.
Inquiry and issue orientation norms suggest a readiness to acquire costs keeping in mind the end goal to accomplish profitable learning. Expecting that hierarchical learning includes handling non-minor, badly characterized issues in intricate and element circumstances comprehension obliges request, that is, resolute, constant examination regardless of challenges. Request, obviously, is likewise needed from the physicist who may without any help take care of an issue in cutting edge quantum mechanics. In social settings it requires the coordinated effort of others and straightforwardness, without which enter from others will fundamentally be constrained or imperfect. Straightforwardness is dangerous inferable from the potential introduction of one’s disappointments and issues. The following tension instigates cautious schedules, which can square request or subvert its honesty.
These norms helps individuals continue with request in spite of the danger that it includes. Inquiry suggest that a man lean towards the loss of face and different expenses brought about by open introduction to the loss of a chance to learn and move forward. Issue introduction keeps the activating of protective conduct by messages that are seen as ill-bred or hostile (Gilley, 2003).
Subsidizing for worker preparing and improvement is a worry: Sufficient subsidizing keeps on being a worry. While the need to utilize assets to give representative preparing and improvement builds, the assets to do as such may not be accessible. Actually, subsidizing for preparing and advancement may be one of the first things to be wiped out in times of money related instability.
Less professional stability: Representatives have less employer stability than they used to. Individuals always hear that they can hope to have a wide range of businesses and even diverse professions amid their work life. Given this message and its existence, workers are searching for executives who will give them chances to create transferable abilities.
Restricted open doors for progression: Organization in the part have a level authoritative structure. This implies that there is no place for advancement. Representatives and associations need to grasp the thought that moving “up” is not by any means the only approach to be fulfilled by one’s work. An option is to make challenges for representatives in their present position or a comparable position (Smith, 1999).
Lipshitz, R., Friedman, V. J., & Popper, M. (2007). Demystifying organizational. learningCross, R. (2000). Strategic learning in a knowledge economy individual, collective, and organizational learning process. Boston, MA: Butterworth Heinemann.
Gilley, A. (2003). Critical issues in HRD: A new agenda for the twenty-first century: New perspectives in organizational learning, performance, and change. Reading, Mass.: Perseus.
King, W. (2009). Knowledge management and organizational learning. Dordrecht: Springer.
Smith, M. (1999). Organizational learning and the learning organization developments in theory and practice. London: Sage Publications