Fuller, P A; Dainty, A R J; Thorpe, T and Slater, I (2007) Learning organisations: Can they be shown to exist through the realisation of quantifiable benefits? In: Boyd, D (ed.) Proceedings of 23rd Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2007, Belfast, UK.
Abstract
Learning Organisation concepts and their implementation have been debated for over fifty years. This paper constructs a position on how learning propagates within a knowledge intensive firm based on extant theory. The key purpose of the research is to establish how the effects of organisational learning can be measured in a knowledge intensive business in the support services sector. Learning Organisation research areas reviewed included studies on Learning Organisation strategy and implementation in the Construction/Project based sectors. Related key topic areas were; measurement; realisation of benefits; and valuation of knowledge assets. The aim is to outline a bridge between Organisational Learning and the knowledge practitioners undertaking the learning. The review examines whether the quantifiable measurement of benefits from Learning Organisation implementations can provide 'evidence' that organisations can learn in a meaningful and beneficial way. The paper reveals that this requires enabling learning as part of normal activity. The ongoing research is aimed at taking the learning from this review to develop strategies for implementing a learning organisation culture in the sponsoring organisation and quantifying the outcomes.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | benefits realisation; knowledge assets; learning organisation; organisational learning; strategy |
| Index terms: | practitioner, evidence, implementation, organizational learning, benefits realization, strategy |
| Subjects: | professional development, management, contractual arrangements, value management, practitioner, evaluation and assessment methods |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Information Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here