Dynamics of Organizational Wisdom

J. Hays
{"title":"Dynamics of Organizational Wisdom","authors":"J. Hays","doi":"10.20460/jgsm.2007118711","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Neglected till recently in management research, expansion of interest in wisdom and its practical application across a wide range of disciplines is observed. Embrace of the ancient wisdom traditions such as Zen Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism, and wider acceptance of spirituality and soul in the workplace exemplify the trend. Facets of wise thought and action are central to burgeoning disciplines such as business ethics, sustainability, transformational leadership, corporate citizenship and social responsibility, and workplace democratization. Built on the principles and practices of organizational learning and knowledge management, but surpassing them in their ability to foster learning, understanding, commitment, and \"doing the right thing,\" organizational wisdom provides an aim worth striving for. This paper identifies and explains important elements of organizational wisdom, and describes their interaction as a dynamic, complex system. Understanding this system illuminates causes of organizational learning problems, permits targeting key sticking points and levers for change, and suggests strategies for more effective learning and the achievement of important performance outcomes. A New Era Unfolds If the last decade of the 20th Century and the early years of the 21st may be termed the era of the learning organization, the period that supercedes it might aptly be termed the era of organizational wisdom; that is, if we can understand and overcome the barriers holding us back. Despite the explosion of research and writing on organizational learning, knowledge management, and related subjects since 1990, there continues to be concern as to how to become a learning organization, exploit intellectual capital, and best value, develop, and get the most out of our human resources. It is not the intent of this paper to exhaustively review or to rehash the organizational learning / learning organization literature, but to provide a working foundation upon which the ideas of organizational wisdom can be developed. A sample of those sources drawn on more heavily includes Argyris (1982; 1991), Argyris and Schon (1978), Garvin (1993), Gorelick, Milton, and April (2004), Griffey (1998), Kirn (1994), Lichtenstein (2000), Reynolds and Ablett (1998), Schein (1993; 1999), Senge (199Oa; 199Ob), Shaw and Perkins (1992), Shelton and Darling (2003), Tucker, Edmondson, and Spear (2002), Ulrich, Von Glinow, and Jick (1993). These sources indicate that we have certainly achieved a profound increase in awareness about the need for change and adaptation, and the mechanism viewed as the best solution, learning organizations; but, paradoxically, we have fallen woefully short of becoming them. The components of organizational learning do not tell the story. It is the way they are arranged, fueled, and operate synergistically that explains how organizations learn (or fail to) and what they need to do to achieve greater levels of wisdom and effectiveness. At the core of the system [model] are a couple of simple elements whose dynamic relationships animate and at least partially explain the organizational learning system and, potentially, wisdom. Effectively contending with context, learning, reflection, and biases, beliefs and assumptions assures organizational learning occurs; it is their interaction that enables organizational learning and converts it to wise thoughts and actions. Without reflection in context, for example, learning is minimized and effectiveness of strategies cannot truly be assessed. Organizational wisdom transcends organizational learning in its commitment to doing the right thing over doing things right. Doing the right thing continually while contending with immediate crises-and sometimes in opposition to business logic-requires courage, commitment to core values that include the greater good, understanding of the big picture, and a willingness to trade short-term profit or ease with longterm viability. …","PeriodicalId":355684,"journal":{"name":"The Business Renaissance Quarterly","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"34","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Business Renaissance Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20460/jgsm.2007118711","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 34

Abstract

Abstract Neglected till recently in management research, expansion of interest in wisdom and its practical application across a wide range of disciplines is observed. Embrace of the ancient wisdom traditions such as Zen Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism, and wider acceptance of spirituality and soul in the workplace exemplify the trend. Facets of wise thought and action are central to burgeoning disciplines such as business ethics, sustainability, transformational leadership, corporate citizenship and social responsibility, and workplace democratization. Built on the principles and practices of organizational learning and knowledge management, but surpassing them in their ability to foster learning, understanding, commitment, and "doing the right thing," organizational wisdom provides an aim worth striving for. This paper identifies and explains important elements of organizational wisdom, and describes their interaction as a dynamic, complex system. Understanding this system illuminates causes of organizational learning problems, permits targeting key sticking points and levers for change, and suggests strategies for more effective learning and the achievement of important performance outcomes. A New Era Unfolds If the last decade of the 20th Century and the early years of the 21st may be termed the era of the learning organization, the period that supercedes it might aptly be termed the era of organizational wisdom; that is, if we can understand and overcome the barriers holding us back. Despite the explosion of research and writing on organizational learning, knowledge management, and related subjects since 1990, there continues to be concern as to how to become a learning organization, exploit intellectual capital, and best value, develop, and get the most out of our human resources. It is not the intent of this paper to exhaustively review or to rehash the organizational learning / learning organization literature, but to provide a working foundation upon which the ideas of organizational wisdom can be developed. A sample of those sources drawn on more heavily includes Argyris (1982; 1991), Argyris and Schon (1978), Garvin (1993), Gorelick, Milton, and April (2004), Griffey (1998), Kirn (1994), Lichtenstein (2000), Reynolds and Ablett (1998), Schein (1993; 1999), Senge (199Oa; 199Ob), Shaw and Perkins (1992), Shelton and Darling (2003), Tucker, Edmondson, and Spear (2002), Ulrich, Von Glinow, and Jick (1993). These sources indicate that we have certainly achieved a profound increase in awareness about the need for change and adaptation, and the mechanism viewed as the best solution, learning organizations; but, paradoxically, we have fallen woefully short of becoming them. The components of organizational learning do not tell the story. It is the way they are arranged, fueled, and operate synergistically that explains how organizations learn (or fail to) and what they need to do to achieve greater levels of wisdom and effectiveness. At the core of the system [model] are a couple of simple elements whose dynamic relationships animate and at least partially explain the organizational learning system and, potentially, wisdom. Effectively contending with context, learning, reflection, and biases, beliefs and assumptions assures organizational learning occurs; it is their interaction that enables organizational learning and converts it to wise thoughts and actions. Without reflection in context, for example, learning is minimized and effectiveness of strategies cannot truly be assessed. Organizational wisdom transcends organizational learning in its commitment to doing the right thing over doing things right. Doing the right thing continually while contending with immediate crises-and sometimes in opposition to business logic-requires courage, commitment to core values that include the greater good, understanding of the big picture, and a willingness to trade short-term profit or ease with longterm viability. …
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
组织智慧动力学
直到最近在管理研究中被忽视,对智慧的兴趣及其在广泛学科中的实际应用得到了扩展。对佛教禅宗、儒教和道教等古老智慧传统的拥抱,以及对精神和灵魂的更广泛接受,都是这一趋势的例证。明智的思想和行动的各个方面是新兴学科的核心,如商业道德、可持续性、变革型领导、企业公民和社会责任,以及工作场所民主化。组织智慧建立在组织学习和知识管理的原则和实践之上,但在培养学习、理解、承诺和“做正确的事情”的能力上超越了它们,提供了一个值得为之奋斗的目标。本文确定并解释了组织智慧的重要元素,并将它们的相互作用描述为一个动态的复杂系统。理解这个系统可以阐明组织学习问题的原因,可以针对关键症结和变革杠杆,并提出更有效学习和实现重要绩效结果的策略。如果说20世纪最后十年和21世纪初可以被称为学习型组织的时代,那么接下来的这段时期可以被恰当地称为组织智慧的时代;也就是说,如果我们能够理解并克服阻碍我们前进的障碍。尽管自1990年以来,关于组织学习、知识管理和相关主题的研究和写作激增,但关于如何成为学习型组织、利用智力资本和最佳价值、开发和充分利用我们的人力资源的关注仍然存在。本文的目的不是详尽地回顾或重述组织学习/学习型组织的文献,而是提供一个工作基础,在此基础上,组织智慧的思想可以得到发展。大量引用的这些资料包括Argyris (1982;1991)、Argyris and Schon(1978)、Garvin(1993)、Gorelick、Milton和April(2004)、Griffey(1998)、Kirn(1994)、Lichtenstein(2000)、Reynolds and Ablett(1998)、Schein (1993);1999),圣吉(199Oa;19991),肖和珀金斯(1992),谢尔顿和达林(2003),塔克、埃德蒙森和斯皮尔(2002),乌尔里希、冯·格里诺和吉克(1993)。这些来源表明,我们对变革和适应的必要性以及被视为最佳解决办法的机制——学习型组织的认识无疑已经大大提高;但是,矛盾的是,我们还远远没有成为他们。组织学习的组成部分并不能说明问题。正是它们被安排、推动和协同运作的方式,解释了组织如何学习(或失败),以及他们需要做些什么来实现更高水平的智慧和效率。系统[模型]的核心是几个简单的元素,它们之间的动态关系赋予了生命,至少部分地解释了组织学习系统和潜在的智慧。有效地应对环境、学习、反思、偏见、信念和假设,确保组织学习的发生;正是它们的相互作用使组织学习成为可能,并将其转化为明智的思想和行动。例如,如果没有对环境的反思,学习就会最小化,策略的有效性也无法真正得到评估。组织智慧超越了组织学习,因为它承诺做正确的事,而不是把事情做对。在与眼前的危机作斗争的同时,持续地做正确的事情——有时与商业逻辑背道而驰——需要勇气,对核心价值的承诺,包括更大的利益,对大局的理解,以及用短期利润或安逸换取长期生存能力的意愿。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Dynamics of Organizational Wisdom Fair Value's Affect on Accounting's Ability to Predict Future Cash Flows
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1