Leading the learning organization: portrait of four

leaders
James R. Johnson
Purdue University, Calumet, Hammond, Indiana, USA
Introduction
The topic of the learning organization has
recently commanded a great deal of
attention. DiBella and Nevis (1998) wrote that
the learning organization is an advanced
state of organizational development. Senge's
(1990a) writing was an important
contribution to the avalanche of literature on
the subject.
Although the literature base pertaining
to learning organizations is expansive,
the vast majority of the writing is
descriptive in nature. Few authors and
researchers have offered suggestions to
senior managers on how to transform
their organization into a learning
organization.
Questions remain as to how senior
managers and chief executive officers (CEOs)
might apply specific leadership actions and
behaviors in order to foster organizational
learning. Argyris (1992, p. 1), commenting on
barriers to organizational learning, stated
that most
. . . researchers did not focus upon producing
actionable knowledge on how to reduce or
lower these barriers. In those cases where
they did, the advice was either disconnected
from the world of practice, or, when examined
carefully, the advice could actually
strengthen the very barriers that were
supposed to be overcome.
Kim (1993, p. 37) provided further evidence of
this ambiguity by writing that
``organizational learning has gained a lot of
attention, but there is little agreement on
what organizational learning means and
even less on how to create a learning
organization''.
The objective of this research was to
capture the ``perceptions and experiences''
(Locke et al., 1993, p. 99) of leaders who have
embraced the concept of the learning
organization.
Literature review
Two bodies of literature are involved here:
one vast, one relatively new. At the
intersection of the two lies very little and is
the subject of this research.
The learning organization
A learning organization must have as a
central tenet the commitment to help people
``embrace change'' (Senge et al., 1994, p. 11).
Learning organizations are designed to
anticipate and react to changing external and
competitive environments in a positive and
proactive manner. They help to institute
internal organizational structures that are
better able to respond to the turbulence of
change (Watkins and Marsick, 1993). They do
not happen automatically but require a deep
commitment to building required skills
throughout the workplace. Watkins and
Marsick (1993,p. 1) indicated that a long-term
commitment must be made at the absolute
pinnacle of the organization. The learning
organization ``will remain a distant vision
until leadership capabilities they demand are
developed'' (Senge, 1990a, p. 22).
But what are these leadership capabilities
and how, specifically, can they be developed?
The concept of leadership is nearly as
ambiguous as that of the learning
organization. Wheatley (1992, p. 12) called
leadership ``an amorphous phenomenon that
has intrigued us since people began studying
organizations'', and Bennis and Nanus (1985,
p. 6) labeled leadership as the ``LaBrea Tar
Pits'' of organizational study.
Watkins and Marsick (1996) stated that
three frameworks are useful for examining
the 22 cases contained in their edited work, In
Action: Creating the Learning Organization.
These three frameworks, from the simplest to
the most complex, are those of:
1 Watkins and Marsick (1993);
2 Pedlar et al. (1991); and
3 Senge (1990a).
The research register for this journal is available at
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregisters
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-7739.htm
[ 241]
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
23/5 [2002] 241249
# MCB UP Limited
[ISSN 0143-7739]
[DOI 10.1108/01437730210435956]
Keywords
Leadership, Learning organizations,
Organizational learning,
Organizational development
Abstract
The phrase ``learning organization''
has existed in the literature for
several decades. Senge popularized
the term in the 1990s; however,
other writers have made significant
contributions to this topic. The
leadership literature, although vast,
lacks specificity. At the
intersection of these two concepts,
the literature lacks a needed link
that describes the specific actions
that a leader can take to achieve
the transformation to a learning
organization. This paper examines
the actions that a leader can take
in order to transform an
organization into a learning
organization and studies four
leaders of widely diverse
organizations. The research
indicated that leaders who were
successful in implementing the
learning organization concept used
it as the solution to a business
problem, while devoting time and
attention to the transformation.
The findings have widespread
implications for practitioners, adult
educators and for future research.
Received: November 2001
Accepted: March 2002
This paper is an adaptation
of an unpublished doctoral
dissertation, partially
fulfilling the requirements
for the Doctor of Education
degree at Northern Illinois
University, DeKalb, IL, USA.
These three frameworks, in addition to two
others, captured the essence of the learning
organization literature and were used in this
study to define the concept of the learning
organization as a state of organizational
existence.
Watkins and Marsick (1993, p. 8) offered the
simplest definition when they defined a
learning organization as one ``that learns
continuously and transforms itself''.
Pedlar et al. (1991, p. 1) defined the learning
company as ``an organization that facilitates
the learning of all of its members and
continuously transforms itself in order to
meet its strategic goals''. Senge's (1990a)
definition is the most complex. He defined
the learning organization as one:
. . . where people continuously expand their
capacity to create the results they truly
desire, where new and expansive patterns of
thinking are nurtured, where collective
aspiration is set free, and where people are
continually learning how to learn together
(Seng, 1990a, p. 7).
Although these definitions capture the
fundamentals of the learning organization,
two others deserve note and add clarity to the
concept. First, Marquardt (1996, p. 80) defined
the learning organization as one ``which
learns powerfully and collectively and is
continuously transforming itself to better
collect, manage, and use knowledge for
corporate success''. This definition provides
robustness to the organizational learning
process, while adding the notion that
knowledge gained can successfully be
managed.
Second, Garvin (1993, p. 80) described the
learning organization as one ``skilled at
creating, acquiring, and transferring
knowledge, and at modifying its behavior to
reflect new knowledge and insights''. Key
insights provided in this definition are
knowledge transfer and behavior
modification.
Widely cited in the literature were such
diverse organizations as Shell Oil, Motorola,
TRW Space and Defense Group (Redding and
Catalanallo, 1994), Arthur Andersen, Caterair
International, Royal Bank of Canada
(Marquardt, 1996), Johnsonville Foods, and
Chaparral Steel (Watkins and Marsick, 1993).
All of these organizations have achieved the
transformation to learning organization
status.
Learning organizations are continually
seeking data from the environment, are fluid
and adaptable, and learn from their previous
experiences. They share knowledge and
contain systems and processes for sharing
knowledge and information.
Leadership
Heilbrun (1994) pointed out that rigorous
study of the leadership phenomenon began
with the work of sociologist Max Weber in
the early part of this century and that the
study of leadership can be divided into three
stages. The earliest stage attempted to
identify traits of leaders. The next stage
focused on the behavior of leaders, and the
third and current stage centers on the
interactions between leaders and those they
lead. Heilbrun (1994) went on to say that the
future of leadership studies might lie in the
understanding that the most significant
aspects of leadership are far beyond the
ability to study them.
Many hundreds or even thousands of
definitions of leadership exist, ranging from
the abstract to the simple. Locke et al. (1991,
p. 2) offered one definition: ``we define
leadership as the process of inducing others
to take action toward a common goal''. Bethel
(1990, p. 6) proposed a more precise definition
of leadership as simply ``influencing others'',
and Loeb (1994, p. 242) stated that ``leaders ask
the what and why questions, not the how
question''.
However, another current definition of
leadership was provided by Senge (1996,
p. 36), who defined leaders as people ``who are
genuinely committed to deep change in
themselves and in their organizations''. The
most useful definition, though, was provided
by Bennis (1984, p. 19), who noted that
``leaders are people who do the right things;
managers are people who do things right''.
This separation of leaders from managers
takes on great importance. Bennis and Nanus
(1985, p. 21) clarified this when they wrote
that the ``problem with many organizations,
and especially the ones that are failing, is
that they tend to be overmanaged and
underled''.
Models of leadership have existed for as
long as the subject has been studied. One
leadership model is worthy of discussion.
Jack Welch, former chairman and CEO of
General Electric (cited in Childress and
Senn, 1995) created a model that utilizes
values results (see Table I). A type I leader,
according to the Welch model (Childress and
Senn, 1995) achieves results when holding
values sacred. This is the ideal leader. A
type II leader is also easily identified. This
leader does not meet the expected results nor
does he/she hold the values as sacred. The
type III leader has the values but does not get
the desired results. Welch (cited in Childress
and Senn, 1995) stated that these leaders were
due a second chance to succeed because of
their values orientation. The type IV leader
achieves the results but does not share in the
[ 242]
James R. Johnson
Leading the learning
organization: portrait of four
leaders
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
23/5 [2002] 241249
values. Welch stated that these leaders will
not make the grade over the long run. For
years, organizations looked the other way as
the type IV continued to achieve results in
unorthodox ways.
Although the discussion of leadership is
important as a foundation to this research,
the focus here is on leadership actions that
transform organizations. Burns (1978)
differentiated between transactional and
transforming leadership. Transforming
leadership, according to Burns, is the type
of leadership that raises both leader and
follower to ``higher levels of motivation and
morality'' (Burns, 1978, p. 20). This idea was
further amplified (Locke et al., 1993) to define
transformational leadership as a type of
leadership that changes organizations rather
than maintaining them in their current
state. Bennis and Nanus (1985, p. 17) defined
transformational leadership as leadership
that transforms ``intention into reality and
sustain(s) it''. Ekvall (1991, p. 22) labeled this
``change-centered'' leadership.
Bennis (1994, p. 143) wrote that leaders are,
by definition, ``innovators''. They must
envision the desired state of an organization
and take required action to enable the
organization to achieve that state. Kotter
(1990), drawing on the work of Lewin,
identified eight stages of leading change: the
first four involve reducing the forces that
lead to the status quo, the middle stages
introduce change, and the last steps
incorporate the changed state into the fiber of
the organization.
The most detailed view of transformational
leadership comes from Tichy and Devanna
(1986). They wrote that transformational
leaders revitalize organizations by
recognizing the need for change, creating the
vision for change, and enlisting the
organization in the change process.
According to these authors, transformational
leaders share seven characteristics. These
leaders:
1 identify themselves as change agents and
take responsibility for change;
2 are courageous and take risks;
3 believe in and trust people;
4 have clear values and are value-driven;
5 are lifelong learners;
6 can deal with complexity, ambiguity, and
uncertainty; and
7 are visionaries and share their vision.
Leadership and the learning organization
At the intersection of the broad concept of
leadership and the ``murky'' (Johnson, 1998,
p. 148) notion of the learning organization,
there is little to provide specific guidance.
Pagonis (1992, p. 118) wrote that this must be
accomplished ``through rigorous and
systematic organizational development''.
Senge (1993) posited that there is no formula
or seminar for creating learning
organizations.
Redding and Catalanello (1994)
recommended that pockets of learning can
form within an organization and may be
shared with the rest of the organization.
Senge (1990b) proposed that leaders need to
be responsible for learning by building
learning organizations, and Bennis (1984)
wrote that leaders must value learning.
Bennis and Nanus (1985) argued that leaders
become expert at learning in the context of
the organization, and Argyris (1991) insisted
that leaders must learn how to learn. Senge
(1990b) and others have stated that leaders
must assume the role of teacher (Denton and
Wisdom, 1991) in learning organizations.
Recently, several more prescriptive views
on this topic have emerged. Senge (1993, p. 14)
proposed that leadership is a ``distributed
phenomena'' in learning organizations rather
than being focused on top management.
Bennis (1994) offered ten factors for dealing
with change and creating learning
organizations. Leaders, according to him:
1 manage the dream;
2 embrace error;
3 encourage reflective backtalk;
4 encourage dissent;
5 possess optimism, faith, and hope;
6 understand the Pygmalion effect;
7 have a certain ``touch'';
8 see the long view;
9 understand stakeholder symmetry; and
10 create strategic partnerships and
alliances.
Marquardt (1996) proposed what is possibly
the most specific series of steps for leaders.
He provided the ``keys to success'' along with
the steps and strategies to achieve that
positive outcome. According to Marquardt
(1996, p. 211), the eight ``keys'' to a successful
Table I
Welch leadership model
Type I leader Achieves results
Holds values sacred
Type II leader Does not achieve results
Does not hold values sacred
Type III leader Does not achieve results
Holds values sacred
Type IV leader Achieves results
Does not hold values sacred
[ 243]
James R. Johnson
Leading the learning
organization: portrait of four
leaders
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
23/5 [2002] 241249
transformation to a learning organization
are:
1 establish a strong sense of urgency;
2 form a coalition;
3 create a vision;
4 communicate the vision;
5 remove obstacles;
6 find short-term wins;
7 consolidate progress and continue
movement; and
8 anchor change to the culture.
These ``keys'' are consistent with the work of
Kotter (2002), who presented a comparable
account when he wrote that leaders must
make eight things happen in organizations
that require significant and effective change.
These eight things are:
1 instill a sense of urgency;
2 pick a good team;
3 create an enterprise vision;
4 communicate;
5 remove obstacles;
6 change fast;
7 keep on changing;
8 make change stick.
Three emergent themes
Three areas emerge from the literature base
that merit further consideration: visioning,
empowerment, and the leader's role in
learning (Johnson, 1998; Senge, 1993). The
ability to create a collective vision of the
future with other members of the
organization (Watkins and Marsick, 1993)
appears to be a crucial action for leaders
of learning organizations. Communicating
the common vision to the organization
(Wheatley, 1992) seems to be of collateral
importance. Marquardt and Reynolds (1994)
referred to the information flow throughout
the worldwide organization. Senge (1990a,
p. 353) called this the ``purpose story'' or the
``overarching explanation of why they do
what they do.'' He described the difference
between the current and the desired state as
building ``creative tension'' (Senge, 1990a,
p. 357), or the force that can move followers
toward the vision by allowing them to share
it as they understand their current reality.
A second theme that emerged from the
literature dealt with empowerment. Marsick
(1994, p. 19) defined empowerment as
``interactive, mutual decision making about
work challenges in which power for work
outcomes is truly shared''. Linda Honold,
formerly director of Member Development at
Johnsonville Foods (Watkins and Marsick,
1993, p. 208), was quoted as saying ``the
learning organization is the result of
empowerment''.
A third theme derived from the literature
involves the leader's role in learning.
Argyris (1993, p. 5) called it the competence of
``leading-learning''. Marquardt and Reynolds
(1994) indicated that the leader must model
continuous learning. Barrow and
McLaughlin (1992) indicated that this new
kind of leadership would, by necessity, tie
learning to strategy. The learning that
results is tied to the strategic objectives of the
organization, and is targeted at performance
improvement (Garvin, 1993), the highest
stage of organizational learning.
Johnson (1998, p. 146) provided a ``Learning
organisation leadership model'' that contains
an ``alignment'' of the three leadership
themes and Woolner's (1995) five-stage model
of the learning organization (see Table II). In
this model, he essentially posits that the
three leadership qualities, when blended in a
specific fashion, allow an organization to
move through the five stages as identified by
Woolner (1995). This blending of qualities,
according to the model, allows the
organization to reach the ultimate goal of the
learning organization.
Research design and methodology
Merriam and Simpson (1995) wrote that the
use of case-study research is appropriate
when a gap exists in the knowledge base.
The design of this research effort was a
qualitative case study, and the unit of
analysis was the individual leader who had
engaged in the process of transforming an
organization into a learning organization.
Data were collected primarily by using 12
semi-structured interviews. Like questions
were asked of each respondent (Merriam,
1988) and at least two other sources were
interviewed within each leader's
organization. Interviews were recorded and
later transcribed verbatim by the researcher.
Interview transcripts were coded and
analyzed by the researcher to determine
themes. In order to minimize the effects of
researcher bias, two trusted peers
continually provided feedback during the
research process.
Guiding this study were six research
questions:
1 What precipitates the decision to
transform the organization into a learning
organization?
2 Why is the learning organization concept
chosen as a desired outcome?
3 What specific actions by leaders enable
them to develop a learning organization?
4 What are the critical milestones in the
transformation process?
[ 244]
James R. Johnson
Leading the learning
organization: portrait of four
leaders
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
23/5 [2002] 241249
5 What barriers hinder the development of
a learning organization?
6 How is progress monitored?
Creswell (1998) referred to research design as
the entire research process, not simply the
methods. Yin (1989) similarly offered that the
research design is a plan of action for getting
from the original set of questions to the
narrative containing the findings and
conclusions. In this study, the research
design begins with the research questions,
includes criteria for sample selection, data
collection and analysis, questions of validity
and reliability, and limitations of the
research, and concludes with the summary
and conclusions from the study.
Stake (1995, p. 2) indicated that the case is
``a specific, a complex, functioning thing''. In
this study, in an attempt to understand this
complex functioning, several selection
criteria were used to select the individuals or
the cases. First, there needed to be a
commitment within the organization to
become a learning organization. Second, the
organization had to be cited in the current
learning organization literature or must
have as a written strategic business objective
the learning organization outcome.
Conclusions
Conclusions drawn from the data are
organized and presented according to
research question. Additional
conclusions are presented at the end of
this section.
Research question 1
Research question 1 asked, ``What
precipitates the decision to transform an
organization into learning organization?''
The data showed that two factors contributed
to the decision to embark on a learning
organization initiative. The first was a
clearly delineated business problem. One
leader provided a vivid example of a business
problem when he said:
And it was shortly thereafter that we needed
to tap our biggest problem at that time, which
was launching new products. And we had
some launches going on at that time that were
very difficult. They just devoured the whole
division. And we said we've got to learn form
these things because we are going to be
launching a lot of new products in the future.
We can't go through this pain. So we put
together a cross-functional team involved
with launching new products. And they
immediately decided that they needed to
expand to incorporate more of the other
departments that are involved in the launch
of a new product.
The second contributing factor reported was
that learning was either implicitly or
explicitly stated in the charter of the
organization.
The commonality discovered was that the
leader must clearly identify the need for
increased learning, then articulate this need
to the organization in a way that makes sense
to them. Identification of this need may take
many forms. Regardless of whether it is
economic survival, or a core function of the
organization, this research showed that a
logical rationale must underlie the inception
of the learning organization. This notion
Table II
A learning organization leadership model
The forming
organization
The developing
organization
The mature
organization
The adapting
organization
The learning
organization
Visioning 5 X
4 X
3 X
2 X
1 X
Empowerment 5 X
4 X
3 X
2 X
1 X
Leading-learning 5 X
4 X
3 X
2 X
1 X
[ 245]
James R. Johnson
Leading the learning
organization: portrait of four
leaders
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
23/5 [2002] 241249
supports many of the tenets found in the
leadership literature but was best presented
by Tichy and Devanna (1986) when they
wrote that leaders must recognize the need
for change. Watkins and Marsick (1993, p. 11)
provided a clear example of this need for
change when they wrote that successful
learning organizations ``realize that the wolf
is at the door''. This created a compelling
sense of urgency for the organization
(Marquardt, 1996).
Research question 2
Research question 2 asked, ``Why is the
learning organization concept chosen as a
desired outcome?'' First, the learning
organization concept was chosen as a
solution to a real or perceived problem. By
increasing the rate of internal learning,
customer solutions could be shared across
the organization.
Second, the leaders chose the learning
organization concept because it fit their
mental models. All four leaders chose this as
an organizational outcome because it fit with
their previous life experience.
Third, none of the leaders studied utilized a
specific model or framework to guide them in
their journey. Such an abstract concept as
the learning organization appeared to be
difficult for the organizations to understand.
Research question 3
Research question 3 asked, ``What specific
actions by leaders will enable them to
develop a learning organization?'' This
question rested at the center of this research
the heart and soul of the project. This
research uncovered few effective leadership
actions. A critical point, though, is that they
paid attention themselves to the learning
organization initiative. This supports the
importance of ``leading-learning,'' proposed
by Johnson (1998) in the learning
organization leadership model and drawn
from Argyris (1991, 1992, 1993). Allied to the
importance of personal attention by the
leader, was the importance of the leaders
insisting that others in the organization pay
attention to the initiative. The idea that
everyone in the organization must pay
attention to learning ran through the data. In
practice, this may mean the inclusion of
organizational learning as a strategic
planning initiative. All four leaders related
the importance of their own attention to both
the learning organization initiative and their
own personal learning. One leader typified
this best when he indicated that he attended
as many of the dialogue meetings as possibly
in order to demonstrate the importance that
he personally placed on the initiative.
Research question 4
Research question 4 asked, ``What are the
critical milestones in the transformation
process?'' As previously indicated, the
research findings showed that one leader was
the only individual studied who utilized
milestones; he set specific financial
milestones at the inception of the initiative.
However, these were not learning-related but
rather were organizational performance-
related. The assumption was that improved
organizational learning enhances
organizational performance.
Research question 5
Research question 5 asked, ``What barriers
hinder the development of a learning
organization?'' Studying these four leaders
revealed two major barriers to the learning
organization initiative. First, the leaders
must perceive a clearly defined need for
increased learning. The learning
organization notion as a solution must fit a
clearly defined existing problem; otherwise it
is simply another fad.
Second, not only must leaders make the
learning organization initiative the solution
to the problem for themselves, they need also
to make this concept fit for others in the
organization. They must perceive not only
the problem, but must also see the learning
organization initiative as the solution.
Research question 6
Research question 6 asked, ``How is progress
monitored?'' These case analyses showed that
progress needs to be measured in clear
financial terms. Clearly defined goals must
be established at the inception of the
initiative, and a reporting system needs to be
in place to track progress. This indicated that
organizational effectiveness was the ultimate
desired outcome for these leaders and it was
the foundation of the learning-organization
concept. This underlying concept was behind
the learning organization initiative.
Summary
By studying four leaders who embarked on
learning organization initiatives, this
research indicated that:
.
Leaders must be in a position of power
within the organization or must gain the
full and complete support from those in
positions of power.
.
The decision to develop a learning
organization should be based on a clearly
defined business need or business
problem.
.
The learning organization notion must be
analyzed and determined to be the
[ 246]
James R. Johnson
Leading the learning
organization: portrait of four
leaders
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
23/5 [2002] 241249
rational solution to this business need or
problem.
.
Although the term itself is not always
used and no specific definition or
framework is utilized, the learning
organization concept needs to be shown as
a solution to a clearly articulated problem.
.
Leaders need to pay attention to this
initiative, ensure that others in the
organization are focused on it, and
institute an appropriate reward system.
This may take place in the strategic
planning process.
.
Milestones are not widely utilized, but
appropriate measurements of both
learning and the resulting organizational
performance need to be in place.
.
The major barrier to success is that the
organization does not perceive the need
for the initiative.
.
Leaders need to set up appropriate
measurements to demonstrate progress.
Implications
Successful implementation of the
learning-organization concept is dependent
upon practitioners who must reside in
positions of organizational influence or
obtain clear support from those in positions
of power. This research indicates that
successful implementation cannot be
achieved without access to positions of power
and influence. Next, a clearly defined
problem or issue must exist, and the learning
organization concept must be envisioned as a
probable solution. It is not a ``quick fix or
panacea'' (Senge et al., 1994, p. xii). Thus,
leaders must devote personal attention to the
initiative, and others in the organization
need to focus attention on it. Resources,
systems, and rewards must be devoted to this
process. And finally, leaders must find an
appropriate method of measuring success.
Just as Porter and McKibbin (1988)
asserted over a decade ago in their study of
organizational needs and business school
curriculums, adult educators need to look at
leadership with fresh eyes and review the
relevancy of the skills required in current
times. New organizational processes and new
leadership paradigms exist in today's rapidly
changing world. Several issues were
uncovered by this research:
.
The process of crafting a learning
organization cannot be initiated or
sustained by those who do not hold a
position of power within an organization.
For example, it is doubtful that human
resource directors can successfully begin
this process. Top leadership must initiate
or at least fully sanction this effort. This
was supported by Watkins and Marsick
(1993, p. xvii) when they asserted , ``You
cannot build a learning organization from
within the training department''. Leaders
must be made aware of the need for
carefully chosen strategic initiatives. The
initiative must be tied to strategy in order
for it to be successful.
.
Leaders need to have the tools for
analyzing problems and making decisions
on solutions. Wright and Noe (1996)
presented one such tool when they
described a rational decision-making
process that includes establishing goals
and objectives, identifying problems,
developing alternatives, choosing among
alternatives, and evaluating outcomes.
.
Once it is deemed appropriate for the
situation, leaders need to be skilled in
communicating the learning organization
concept in a manner that motivates others
in the organization. Kepner and Tregoe
(1997, p. 221) wrote that:
People do not resist practical and useful
ideas that promise to be supportive of
their own best interests. People do resist
obscure theorizing that has no apparent
helpful reference to their lives, threatens
them because of their strangeness, and
must be taken widely on faith.
.
Adult educators operating within
organizations need to focus on helping
people deal with change in general and
must develop the ability to identify
problem situations in their organization.
.
Learning about learning is important;
people need to know more about their
own and the organization's learning
processes.
This research looked closely at four
organizational leaders who had embraced the
learning-organization concept and offered
valuable insight into this phenomenon.
However, more research is needed to expand
the literature base. While explorative
research is not considered generalizable,
insights from this research can be viewed as
``tentative hypotheses'' (Merriam, 1998, p. 41)
that can be used as the basis of future
research initiatives. Additional research
studies of both successful and unsuccessful
learning organization implementations can
provide further insight into this nebulous
arena. Several research questions that
pertain to this topic need to be addressed:
.
What types of data can indicate the need
for increased learning in an organization?
.
In what ways can increased
organizational learning provide the
solution to this delineated problem?
[ 247]
James R. Johnson
Leading the learning
organization: portrait of four
leaders
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
23/5 [2002] 241249
.
How can leaders engage the members of
an organization in this initiative?
.
How can successful organizational
learning be measured?
Findings from these research initiatives
then need to be empirically tested and
confirmed. In some ways, this research
indicates that theorists are working at a level
that is too abstract for practitioner leaders to
comprehend and utilize. A clear model or
framework must be developed that will allow
practitioners and adult educators to more
fully understand the learning organization.
This model needs to answer the dual
questions: ``What exactly is the learning
organization?'' and ``What specifically must
I do as a leader?'' In addition, methods need
to be developed that will allow for the
translation of organizational performance
measures into learning outcomes.
References
Argyris, C. (1991), ``Teaching smart people how to
learn'', Harvard Business Review, Vol. 69 No. 3,
pp. 99-109.
Argyris, C. (1992), On Organizational Learning,
Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge, MA.
Argyris, C. (1993), ``Education for leading-
learning'', Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 21
No. 2, pp. 5-17.
Barrow, M.J. and McLaughlin, H.M. (1992),
``Towards a learning organization'', Industrial
and Commercial Training, Vol. 24 No. 1,
pp. 3-7.
Bennis, W. (1984), ``The four competencies of
leadership'', Training and Development
Journal, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 14-19.
Bennis, W. (1989), Why Leaders Can't Lead,
Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Bennis, W. (1994), On Becoming a Leader,
Addison-Wesley Publishing, Reading, MA.
Bennis, W. and Nanus, B. (1985), ``Organizational
learning: the management of the collective
self'', New Management, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 6-13.
Bethel, S.M. (1990), Making the Difference: Twelve
Qualities That Make You a Leader, P.G.
Putnam and Sons, New York, NY.
Burns, J.M. (1978), Leadership, Harper and Row,
New York, NY.
Childress, J.R. and Senn, L.E. (1995), In the Eye of
the Storm: Reengineering Corporate Culture,
The Leadership Press, Los Angeles, CA.
Creswell, J. (1998), Qualitative Inquiry and
Research Design: Choosing Among the Five
Traditions, Sage Publications, Thousand
Oaks, CA.
Denton, D. and Wisdom, B. (1991), ``The learning
organization involves the entire workforce'',
Quality Progress, Vol. 24 No. 12, pp. 69-72.
DiBella, A. and Nevis, E. (1998), How
Organizations Learn: An Integrated Strategy
for Building Learning Capability, Jossey-
Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Ekvall, G. (1991), ``Change centered leaders:
empirical evidence of a third dimension of
leadership'', Leadership & Organizational
Development Journal, Vol. 12 No. 6. pp. 18-23.
Garvin, D.A. (1993, July-August), ``Building a
learning organization'', Harvard Business
Review, Vol. 71 No. 4, pp. 78-91.
Heilbrun, J. (1994), ``Can leaders be studied?'', The
Wilson Quarterly, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 65-72.
Johnson, J. (1998), ``Embracing change:
a leadership model for the learning
organization'', International Journal of
Training and Development, Vol. 2 No. 2,
pp. 141-50.
Kepner, C.H. and Tregoe, B.B. (1997), The New
Rational Manager, Princeton Research Press,
Princeton, NJ.
Kim, D.H. (1993, Fall), ``The link between
individual and organizational learning'',
Sloan Management Review, Vol. 35 No. 1,
pp. 37-50.
Kotter, J.P. (2002), ``Managing change: The power
of leadership'', Balanced Scorecard Report,
Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston,
MA, pp. 1-4.
Kotter, J.P. (1990), A Force for Change: How
Leadership Differs From Management, The
Free Press, New York, NY.
Locke, E.A., Kirkpatrick, S., Wheeler, J.K.,
Schneider, J., Niles, K., Goldstein, H.,
Welsh, K. and Chah, D. (1991), The Essence of
Leadership: The Four Keys to Leading
Successfully, Lexington Books, New York, NY.
Locke, L.F., Spirdoso, W. and Silverman, S.J.
(1993), Proposals That Work: A Guide for
Planning Dissertations and Grant Proposals,
Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
Loeb, M. (1994), ``Where leaders come from'',
Fortune, Vol. 130 No. 6, pp. 241-2.
Marquardt, M.J. (1996), Building the Learning
Organization: A Systems Approach to
Quantum Improvement and Global Success,
McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Marquardt, M., and Reynolds, A. (1994), The
Global Learning Organization, Irwin, Burr
Ridge, IL.
Marsick, V. (1994), ``Trends in managerial
reinvention: creating a learning map'',
Management Learning, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 11-33.
Merriam, S. (1988), Case Study Research in
Education: A Qualitative Approach, Jossey-
Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Merriam, S. (1998), Qualitative Research and Case
Study Applications in Education, Jossey-Bass,
San Francisco, CA.
Merriam, S. and Simpson, E. (1995), A Guide to
Research for Educators and Trainers of
Adults, Krieger, Malabar, FL.
Pagonis, W.G. (1992), ``The work of leaders'',
Harvard Business Review, Vol. 70 No. 6,
pp. 118-26.
Pedlar, M., Burgoyne, J. and Boydell, T. (1991),
The Learning Company: A Strategy for
Sustainable Development, McGraw-Hill,
London.
[ 248]
James R. Johnson
Leading the learning
organization: portrait of four
leaders
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
23/5 [2002] 241249
Porter, L.W. and McKibbin, L.E. (1988),
Management Education and Development:
Drift or Thrust Into the 21st Century?,
McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Redding, J.C. and Catalanello, R.F. (1994),
Strategic Readiness: The Making of the
Learning Organization, Jossey-Bass, San
Francisco, CA.
Senge, P.M. (1990a), The Fifth Discipline: The Art
and Practice of the Learning Organization,
Currency Doubleday, New York, NY.
Senge, P.M. (1990b), ``The leader's new work:
building learning organizations'', Sloan
Management Review, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 7-23.
Senge, P.M. (1993), ``Transforming the practice of
management'', Human Resource Development
Quarterly, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 5-32.
Senge, P.M. (1996), ``Leading learning
organizations'', Training and Development,
Vol. 50 No. 12, pp. 36-7.
Senge, P.M., Roberts, C., Ross, R.B., Smith, B.J.
and Kleiner, A. (1994), The Fifth Discipline
Field Book: Strategies and Tools for Building a
Learning Organization, Currency Doubleday,
New York, NY.
Stake, R. (1995), The Art of Case Study Research,
Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Tichy, N. and Devanna, M. (1986), The
Transformational Leader, John Wiley & Sons,
New York, NY.
Toffler, A. (1970), Future Shock, Random House,
New York, NY.
Watkins, K.E. and Marsick, V.J. (1993), Sculpting
the Learning Organization: Lessons in the Art
and Practice of a Systemic Change, Jossey-
Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Watkins, K.E. and Marsick, V.J. (1996), ``A
framework for the learning organization'',
in Watkins, K.E. and Marsick, V.J. (Eds), In
Action: Creating the Learning Organization,
American Society for Training and
Development, Alexandria, VA.
Wheatley, M.J. (1992), Leadership and the New
Science: Learning About Organizations From
an Orderly Universe, Berrett-Koehler, San
Francisco, CA.
Woolner, P. (1995), A Developmental Model of the
Learning Organization, Woolner, Lowy and
Associates, Toronto.
Wright, P.M. and Noe, R.A. (1996), Management of
Organizations, Richard Irwin, Chicago, IL.
Yin, R. (1989), Case Study Research: Design and
Methods, Sage Publications, Newbury
Park, CA.
[ 249]
James R. Johnson
Leading the learning
organization: portrait of four
leaders
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
23/5 [2002] 241249