ORGANIZATIONAL LEARNING: DIMENSIONS FOR A THEORY

TLDR

Organizational learning has attracted growing attention, yet its development has stalled due to inconsistent terminology, varying definitions, and a lack of explicit assumptions. The review seeks to surface the implicit and explicit assumptions of OL researchers and delineate three key dimensions—unit of analysis, cognitive/behavioral emphasis, and the learning‑performance relationship—that differentiate perspectives. An inductive approach is used to identify these dimensions by analyzing the literature on organizational learning.

Abstract

Organizational learning (OL) is receiving increasing attention from researchers and practitioners alike. In fact, some have suggested that the only sustainable competitive advantage is a firm's ability to learn faster than its competitors. In spite of OL's promise, the field has been slow to evolve. The primary impediments to the development of OL theory are that inconsistent terminology is used for comparable concepts and that different definitions are used to describe the phenomenon. Furthermore, many theorists have neglected to make explicit their underlying assumptions about the phenomenon. Employing an inductive approach, this review surfaces the implicit and explicit assumptions of OL researchers, identifying three key dimensions that differentiate perspectives: (1) unit of analysis—individual, group, organizational, and inter organizational; (2) cognitive/behavioral emphasis; and (3) the learning‐performance relationship.