Introduction
In line with survival motive in the era of globalization, various organizations are examining their management systems to attain competitive capacity. This is essential towards remaining relevant in their area of operations.
Since its inception at the beginning of 1990, Learning Organization (LO) has received overwhelming attention as managers realize that they need to build an organization that can remain relevant in the ever changing business environment.
Garvin, Edmondson, and Gino (2008) argue that it is vital that companies should become learning organizations due the tougher competition, and shifting customer preferences. The authors argue that in learning organizations, employees continually acquire, create and transfer knowledge.
Consequently, employees will help their organizations acclimatize to the volatile business environment faster than their competitors. The learning organization is applicable to business organization in general and to service sector such as academic, hospital organization, and hotels (Senge, 1994, p. 48).
Thus, this reflective treatise attempts to explicitly review aspects of learning in Microsoft Company with the view of identifying learning models applied by the company. Besides, the paper relates Garvin’s diagnostic tools to those in use at Microsoft and HP.
Moreover, the treatise identifies the concepts of organization learning, continuous knowledge acquisition, system thinking, knowledge sharing, team learning, personal mystery, and mental models in organizational learning. In conclusion, the paper reflects on success of the applied institution learning module existing in Microsoft Company.
According to Garvin, Edmondson, and Gino, experience is the basis from which learning organizations justify progress in terms of productivity and self motivation. Garvin, in article published in the Harvard Business Review, illustrates a learning association as “an organization skilled at creating, acquiring, and transferring knowledge and modifying its behavior to reflect new knowledge insight and insights” (Garvin, 1993, p.1).
Learning organization
A learning organization do engage in active process of learning through promotion of learning, facilitation, and rewarding collective learning since it does not rely on ad hoc process with the hope that learning will occur through chance.
Garvin, Edmondson, and Gino in an article, “Is Yours a Learning Organization?” published in Harvard Business Review (March 2008), replicates on organization edifice wedges as “supportive learning environment, concrete learning processes, and practices leadership that reinforces learning” (Garvin, Edmondson, and Gino, 2008, p.14).
Garvin et al., (2008) argue that by using the diagnostic tools, managers can assess areas of the organization that require urgent improvement. Thus, this help in moving the company closer to an ideal learning organization from the usual. The managers play a significant role in setting up the learning environment for their employees.
As result, creating an effective learning environment will allow employees to draw upon resources, thus making sense out of things and construct consequential solution to business challenges (Fielden 2001).
As mentioned earlier, in the changing business environment of the twenty-first century, only sustainable competitive advantage and will permit businesses to learn faster than its rivals. Firms that implement learning organization training programs have shown improvements in their productivity by an average of about 17 per cent.
Same as in HP, Microsoft Regional Sales Corporation organizational learning is highly valued. The organizational learning here covers individual employees, business manager, business group, and sector-specific needs as they apply to company’s values, mission, and business main concerns.
Garvin (1993) suggests that a learning organization should posses the capacity for problem solving, learning from past experience, experimentation, learning from best practices of other successful organizations, and swift and efficient transfer of knowledge.
On the other hand, Senge (1990) argues that an organization can develop its learning organization attribute through system thinking, shared vision, mental modeling, personal mastery, and team learning. Our organization applies Senge’s five basic disciplines or component technologies of learning, that is, systems thinking, personal mastery, building of shared vision, mental models, and team building.
The learning processes at Microsoft Regional Sales Corporation are basically based on Senge’s principles of organization learning-‘disciplines’ while those at Hewlett Packard are inclined towards Garvin’s model.
These values have been embedded in the company’s tradition and practiced by our employees over the years. For example, at Microsoft Regional Sales Corporation, it is responsible for the developing and driving growth strategies between management and employees.
Systems thinking
According to Senge (1990), systems thinking theory is the cornerstone of the learning organization model. Coherently, this system factors in discipline as a concept of theory and body. Senge argues that managers tend to focus on sectors rather than the whole.
The key perception in this line of thought is that recognition of organization systems facilitates informed and appropriate decision science by management unit and other employees. At Microsoft, the organization is viewed in this perspective enabling the training of about 92,000 employees via the four employee education organizations.
The four parts of management that facilitate learning organization at Microsoft are the engineering department responsible for product development, sales and customer care department, leadership and management that is responsible for professional development of employees, and the marketing department.
Personal mastery
Senge (1990) argues that individual learning do not warranty organizational learning. However, organization learning cannot function independently without individual learning. He further notes that organization can also learn from people who learn.
Therefore, through personal mastery is the discipline that allows people to acquire knowledge patiently in a continuous manner, while allowing such individuals to see reality objectively. For example, at Microsoft, there is an enterprise of a large governance team called the Learning Council that is responsible for streamlining learning organization within the company’s four learning organizations.
The council’s main responsibility is to make certain that there are links in learning and development initiatives undertaken by the organization in pursuit of its business priorities.
In addition, the other key area that the learning council is involved in is provision of strategic planning methodologies and directions for a range of learning communities at the Corporation. Moreover, the learning council ensures that systems, processes, and learning infrastructure are available to enable organizational learning to take place.
Continuous knowledge acquisition
Porth et al. (1999) asserts that continuous knowledge acquisition is crucial for adapting to and surviving in the competitive business environment. Thus, it becomes an important feature of learning organization. Continuous knowledge can be through activities such as research and development, market research, and competitor analysis.
Team Learning
Microsoft Regional Sale Cooperation is involved in team learning through formal and informal activities via its various departments (Senge 1990) just as the HP Company. For example, the engineering excellence is one of the central learning organs tasked with ensuring that learning takes place across all the organizations’ engineering departments.
In addition, it ensures the delivery of guidance, curriculum, and expert advice to all junior engineers. Similarly, ensuring continuity in the acquisition of knowledge is the Sales and Marketing group that are involved in carrying out frequent market research for new products to ensure availability of market.
The group has helped the organization to continue to grow through growth in the market share. Some commentators argue that team learning can also be achieved through direct experience and learning from other individuals’ experience what is referred to as benchmarking.
Knowledge sharing
Fielden (2001) argues that knowledge is only useful when it is made freely available. Consequently, sharing information with employees is significant for organization learning process. Knowledge sharing is the distribution of knowledge or what has been previously leant (Dixon, 1999).
He further notes that knowledge sharing begins with making information available to everybody in the organization. Knowledge sharing can be expanded through shared vision, communication, knowledge, values, and information by developing the cultural norms of sincerity, open-mindedness, trust, and honesty (Porth et al. 1999).
Knowledge sharing is a key success of knowledge management strategy. In addition, to achieve knowledge sharing between employees, leadership commitment is a channel to speed up and reinforce knowledge sharing (Nymark, 1999).
After knowledge acquisition, there is need to store the information in organizational repository system so that other members can easily access and use it in their work as practiced in HP training department. In Microsoft, the corporate learning and development department is tasked with ensuring that knowledge is developed and managed in an open environment where it is accessible to all.
Shared vision
A company that has objectives to attain the status of a learning organization should employ people that are commonly referred to as high caliber workers.
The distinguishing feature of such workers is that they have high levels of education and posses the capacity to acquire new knowledge rapidly and constantly while adjusting to new conditions within a common vision (Senge 1990).
Secondly, they have the capability to work under no supervision and are able to set their own goals and objectives, while observing the attainment and results of these goals.
Mental model
A learning organization comprises of workers who have excellent interpersonal skills. They have the capacity to solve problems through creative evaluation of different possible outcomes, and by using their own ideas to find solutions to the rising problems (Barrow and Loughlin, 1992, p. 5).
Microsoft knows that strong performance is a prerequisite for future career development and thus employ people with global mindsets, customer focus, result oriented, and deep business understanding (Hewlett-Packard 2010).
Same as in HP, the acquired talents are put into rigorous development program which relies on feedback from development center sessions to evaluate the learning process. However, the evaluation process at Microsoft relies on feedback from managers thus might not be flawless owing to personal attitudes that the managers have towards their employees at the corporation.
The above interactive prospects facilitate elimination of unnecessary bureaucracy and hierarchical levels and go a long way in reducing overhead costs, while efficiently increasing productivity. A study done in the Dutch proved that there is higher productivity in companies that have flat and organizational structure which promotes integration among employees as is exhibited in Microsoft and HP companies (Nymark, 1999).
As a result, acquisition of knowledge is encouraged and proper management encouraged that functions on inclusivity of interactive process.
Nymark (1999) asserts that it is impossible to force workers to be spontaneous, the same way it is impossible to force people to act more autonomous, to be imaginative, or to take more responsibility. Therefore, the organization managers have no direct leeway to force workers to act spontaneously, or take initiatives.
In conclusion, Microsoft is a learning organization just like HP. Though they share more or less the same learning models, there are several quantifiable dissimilarities in balancing one model to another. Microsoft is more aligned to Senge’s organizational learning features which include personal mastery, shared vision, mental model, team learning, and systems thinking.
On the other hand, HP tends to apply more of Garvin’s model. To improve the organization, the management unit should endeavor to institute inclusive organization that motivate employees to internalize essential learning attributes which makes learning in the organization interesting and relevant.
In addition, this model should be inclusive and easy to follow in order to ensure that the system is non discriminative. Relevancy is critical in designing this alternative due to the fact that knowledge and learning environment is not constant.
Factually, relevancy is vital in ensuring that the goal or target of continouse knowledge sharing is achieved within the shortest time possible. It is important to establish a flexible module that can be modified to fit into the need of parties involved.
Finally, paradigms must be constantly evaluated, reevaluated, analyzed, and clarified to ensure that they are as precise as possible. Learning in an organization is vital in goal attainment. Generally, learning process is continuous and relies on structured systems that control information dispensation.
List of References
Barrow, M & Loughlin, M 1992, “Towards a learning organization,” Industrial and Commercial Training, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 3-7.
Dixon, N M 1999, “The Changing Face of Knowledge,” The Learning Organization, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 212-216.
Fielden, T 2001, “A Knowledge Management State of Mind. Info World, 23: 47.
Garvin, D 1993, “Building a Learning organization,” Harvard Business Review, vol. 2 no 4, pp. 78-91.
Garvin, D A, Edmondson, A C and Gino, F 2008, “Is yours learning organization,” Harvard Business Review, vol. 86 no. 3, pp. 109-116.
Hewlett-Packard 2010, Organization learning: Hewlett Packard (HP), viewed on https://www.slideshare.net/maronoman/hp-challenges-organizational-learning
Nymark, S R 1999, “A study of flexibility and renewal in Danish companies,” Human Resource Development International, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 59-66.
Porth, S et al. 1999, “Spiritual Themes of the ‘Learning Organization,’” Journal of Organization Change Management, vol. 12 no. 3, pp. 211-220.
Senge, Peter M et al, 1994, The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook: Strategies and Tools for Building a Learning Organization, Currency Doubleday: New York.
Senge, Peter M., 1990, The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, Currency Doubleday: New York.