The concept of “learning organization” can be applied to many modern companies interested in strategic growth and development. The case of Avnet vividly portrays that the company should use all its resources in order to develop learning environment and ensure adequate knowledge and skills of its employees. In general, the learning outcomes include the development of the procedures to get there and the route taken, and concepts associated with the journey and destination. However, this learning process is underpinned by how individuals value the journey and destination. If an employee does not actively engage in the learning process, their learning outcomes might be quite weak.
Following Nanxy Dixon (1994): ‘”The essence of organizational learning is the organization’s ability to use the amazing mental capacity of all its members to create the kind of processes that will improve its own” (Insights on The Learning Organization 2005). The circumstances of the learning and the learner’s interpretation of that experience result in an individual’s categorization of the learning of new knowledge. Throughout the journey, the engagement in goal-directed activity (problem-solving) extends and transforms the individual’s existing knowledge (Choo, 2008).
The main properties which make Avnet a “learning organization” are unique systems and mechanisms used to create learning networks, knowledge transfers, continuous on-work training and learning, unique culture and motivation of employees. At Avnet, knowledge exists which is important to learn but may not be learnt alone. A particular instance is conceptual knowledge, which can be difficult to access because it is remote or hidden.
There is important but hidden links among knowledge. Organisational factors include the quality of guidance (i. e. its accessibility and availability) and access to a sequenced pathway of workplace activities. Individual factors include the willingness of experts to guide and of learners to engage in guided learning. Organizational factors are direct responsibilities of the enterprise, and some of the individual concerns can be eased by actions within the enterprise. That is, what happens within the work practice will likely have a direct impact on the quality of learning at work (Summerfield 2005).
Taking into account Skurme readings, it is possible to say that Avnet follows all main points and procedures typical for a learning organization. Avnet develops learning arrangements, provide opportunities, and support and ease the access for participation in developing vocational practice. However, the direction, strength and persistence of individuals’ participation are key determinants. Both as learning guides and as learners, individuals determine the outcomes of how they engage in learning.
As has been shown, committed learning guides and learners make up for a poor workplace learning environment, and rich learning environments can be rendered poor by reluctant learners (Summerfield 2005). The ideal is for the workplace to afford a rich learning experience through quality guided learning, and for workers to participate with effort and persistence in these experiences. This ideal provides a goal for the organization and management of workplace learning. It seems that the roles for enterprises in realizing this goal are fourfold (Krebs, 2007).
The interdependence which exists between learning and work is founded, on the one hand, in what the workplace provides to assist that learning and, on the other, in how the individual engages and uses these contributions. Then—as individuals ultimately determine what they learn as a consequence of their engagement in work—they outline the basis for individuals’ construction of knowledge. Particular kinds of workplace tasks are likely to result in particular kinds of learning because of the kinds of problem-solving they present (Summerfield 2005).
The major factors standing in the way of moving towards the learning organization are inability to cope with rapid changes, lack of flexibility and inadequate service quality (Summerfield 2005). Despite the concerns expressed above, some forms of conceptual knowledge are developed through guided everyday activities in the workplace. It is erroneous to suggest that procedures are privileged in workplaces and concepts in the schoolroom.
However, given the importance of understanding to vocational expertise, and the importance of developing richly associated conceptual knowledge, it is appropriate to place a particular emphasis on its coherent development in workplace settings (Krebs, 2007). Guided learning by more experienced coworkers will probably be required to generate understanding within the constraints of the workplace activities. For the development of understanding, the structuring of experiences, close guidance and/or instructional interventions may serve to access and develop knowledge that is opaque and hidden from the novices.
In particular, the selected use of strategies that aim to develop conceptual knowledge in the workplace is warranted. Workplace artefacts, the workplace itself, experienced others and peers can all assist in bridging the gap between what the individual knows and what may otherwise remain unknowable. In the case of the tax returns, we might use the previous year’s return as an artefact and tool to guide the filling out of this year’s return (Teece, 2001).
The main resources which allow the organization to become more learning involve innovations and training (Teece, 2001). The degree of preparation and support required will differ across workplaces, depending on the readiness of those involved, the work practices and the values within the workplace, its size and the homogeneity of its functions. Guided learning is also dependent on an environment conducive to securing interactions among workers and opportunities to learn. Therefore it may be necessary to improve interactions between learners and guides, particularly when workers are isolated physically or geographically (Summerfield 2005).
The attention to social networks can enhance learning by engaging employees in different activities and education programs. The key goal of enhanced participation will necessitate finding ways to encourage workers who are reluctant to participate, and to moderate their access to situations where they have opportunities to learn and practice. However, expectations need to be realistic (Krebs, 2007). Not all workers will be able to move through the pathway to expert practice at a pace of their choosing. This movement will depend on opportunities for engagement and practice in these tasks and enterprise needs. This movement needs to be paced appropriately, as it takes time to develop work-related knowledge, even more for expertise (Wiig, 1995).
Work practices provide and structure activities and guidance in ways that influence the learning of the knowledge required for performance at work. These experiences are not informal or unstructured, as is often contended; instead, they are structured by the requirements of work practice rather than the practice of educational institutions. The types of activities individuals engage in and the guidance they access are central to learning the knowledge required for work.
Workplace experiences are often of a kind that is unlikely to be replicated in educational institutions or through substitute means. The knowledge constructed in workplaces is likely to be different from that constructed in the classroom, rather than being inherently inferior (Insights on The Learning Organization 2008). This is because the activities individuals engage in, and the kinds of guidance and support that contribute to learning, are different. Each of these settings has goals and activities that are the product of their institutional practices. In particular, workplace learning experiences are likely to be authentic in terms of the goal-directed activity of the workplace.
To reiterate, the contributions of the workplace to learning are rich, complex and probably difficult to avoid (Summerfield 2005). They are certainly neither incidental nor ad hoc. They are central to the workplace itself. The key concern is for these contributions to be directed towards developing transferable vocational knowledge that is purposeful for the individual and the enterprise in which they are employed (Choo, 2008).
The theories and facts discussed above show that the understanding of the “organization as a brain” is more beneficial for modern companies because it allows to join human resources and organizational structures in order to obtain the best possible outsides. So individuals learn as part of everyday work activity. The requirements for understanding non-routine practices may be more difficult.
While totally novel tasks will remain unknown until encountered, it might be useful to make accessible the scope of the kinds of activities that may be encountered (Wiig, 1995). Consequently, an enterprise moving along this pathway of change will primarily be concerned with broadening the skillfulness of its existing workforce and attempting to secure transfer to new situations. A variation of this scenario is enterprises that are changing their productive or service processes through the use of emerging technology.
The need could be to develop new understandings, to overcome concerns about new technologies and to assist in the learning of knowledge of a symbolic kind that might well be difficult to learn or has been physically and conceptually remote from workers. Work task factors influence the appropriateness and use of guided learning strategies and their sequencing. Equally, the degree to which observable procedures such as physical tool use are required may determine the use of modeling and coaching. So the kinds of knowledge to be learnt and the goals for learning will determine the approach to guided learning adopted in the workplace (Wiig, 1995). Therefore, it is necessary to consider a fit between the selected approaches to guided learning and the requirements of the knowledge of work to be learnt.
In sum, factors associated with the organization of work, the culture or environment in the workplace and familiarity with skill development processes play a significant role in how workplace learning is likely to proceed. The organization of work will determine how interactions occur in the workplace and how guided learning, as well as communication and interactions with other workers, can best proceed. Procedures such as modeling and coaching are unlikely to be uniform, with adaptations required when, for instance, guides and learners are on different shifts, or separated by distance and without direct communication.
If teamwork is a key component of work practice, the goals and processes of learning will need to include focusing on the ability to work in a team situation and the use of collective approaches to learning. Concerns for both the guides and workers will arise if the goals for proceeding with work-based learning are not widely understood.
References
Choo, C.W. (2008). The Knowing Organization: How Organizations Use Information To Construct Meaning, Create Knowledge, and Make Decisions. Web.
Insights on The Learning Organization. (2008). Skyrme Web Page. Web.
Krebs, V. (2007) Knowledge Networks: Mapping and Measuring Knowledge Creation. (2007). Web.
Summerfield. B. Avnet: Learning at All Levels. Chief Learning Officer. Nov. (2005). Web.
Teece, David J. (2001) Managing Intellectual Capital: Organizational, Strategic and Policy Dimensions. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wiig, Karl M. (1995). Knowledge Management Methods: Practical Approaches to Managing Knowledge. Arlington, Tex.: Schema.