utopian (and) filled with near mystical terminology. Paradise, they would have you
believe, is just round the corner.’ He continues:
Sloman (1999) believes that ‘the concept of the learning organisation should be redefined
or declared redundant’ (p. 31). The language and vocabulary of the learning
organisation need to make sense to the hard-pressed line manager, and for these reasons
alone the concept ‘is in urgent need of review’.
An international study carried out by Chase (1997) for the Journal of Knowledge
Management examined approaches to creating knowledge-based organisations. He
found that while organisations acknowledge ‘the importance of creating, managing and
transferring knowledge, they have so far been unable to translate this need into organisational
strategies. Mayo (1998: 38), cited in Chase’s work, believes that ‘most
organisations are also struggling to use information technology to support implementation’
and a learning organisation. Chase’s survey also pointed out that the biggest
obstacles to creating a knowledge-based organisation were the existing company culture,
lack of ownership of a problem, lack of time, inappropriate organisational
structure, lack of senior management commitment, inappropriate rewards and recognition,
and an emphasis on individuals rather than team work.
Lähteenmäki et al. (1999) have pointed to a number of criticisms that can be levelled
at the concept:
● lack of clarity and multiplicity of definitions;
● lack of explanation of the detailed implementation of LO systems;
● lack of explanation as to how these systems are integrated;
(all these factors point to the need for a holistic model of the learning organisation,
which should convincingly link theory and practice, bringing together ‘pieces of theory’)
● too much stress on learning by individuals and not by the organisation;
● a dearth of research on measurement of the learning process in organisations;
● a need to recognise the historical antecedents of the learning organisation;
● a need to recognise the relationship of the LO with organisational change literature;
● the need for further investigation of the link between HR strategy and change;
● the need for more research on LO in the international context, particularly the transfer
of learning between units within multinational organisations, and the cultural
barriers that may exist in that process.
■ The failure of LOs
Lähteenmäki et al. (1999), in summing up a number of research projects, emphasised
these reasons for failure:
● failure to deal with feelings of uncertainty and insecurity in employees during periods
of intense competition and culture change;
đang được dịch, vui lòng đợi..