Is yours a learning organization

TOOL KIT Is Yours a Learning Organization? Using this assessment tool, companies can pinpoint areas where they need to foster knowledge sharing, idea development, learning from mistakes, and holistic thinking. by David A. Garvin, Amy C. Edmondson, and Francesca Gino L EADERS MAY THINK that getting their organizations to learn is only a matter of articulating a clear vision, giving employees the right incentives, and providing lots of training. This assumption is not merely flawed – it’s risky in the face of intensifying competition, advances in technology, and shifts in customer preferences. Organizations need to learn more than ever as they confront these mounting forces. Each company must become a learning organization. The concept is not a new one. It flourished in the 1990s, stimulated by Peter M. Senge’s The Fifth Discipline and countless other publications, workshops, and websites. The result was a compelling vision of an organization made up of employees skilled at creating, acquiring, and transferring knowledge. These people could help their firms cultivate tolerance, foster Daniel Chang open discussion, and think holistically and systemically. Such learning organizations would be able to adapt to the unpredict- able more quickly than their competitors could. hbr.org | March 2008 | Harvard Business Review 109

TOOL KIT | Is Yours a Learning Organization? Unpredictability is very much still comparing themselves accurately with supportive learning environment, con- with us. However, the ideal of the others. crete learning processes and practices, learning organization has not yet been In this article, we address these de- and leadership behavior that provides realized. Three factors have impeded ficiencies by presenting a comprehen- reinforcement. We refer to these as the progress. First, many of the early dis- sive, concrete survey instrument for building blocks of the learning organiza- cussions about learning organizations assessing learning within an organization. Each block and its discrete subcom- were paeans to a better world rather tion. Built from the ground up, our tool ponents, though vital to the whole, are than concrete prescriptions. They over- measures the learning that occurs in a independent and can be measured sep- emphasized the forest and paid little department, office, project, or division – arately. This degree of granular analysis attention to the trees. As a result, the an organizational unit of any size that has not been previously available. associated recommendations proved difficult to implement – managers could not identify the sequence of steps Supportive learning environments allow time for a pause necessary for moving forward. Second, the concept was aimed at CEOs and se- in the action and encourage thoughtful review of the nior executives rather than at manag- organization’s processes. ers of smaller departments and units where critical organizational work is done. Those managers had no way of has meaningful shared or overlapping Our tool is structured around the assessing how their teams’ learning work activities. Our instrument enables three building blocks and allows com- was contributing to the organization your company to compare itself against panies to measure their learning pro- as a whole. Third, standards and tools benchmark scores gathered from other ficiencies in great detail. As you shall for assessment were lacking. Without firms; to make assessments across areas see, organizations do not perform these, companies could declare vic- within the organization (how, for, exam- consistently across the three blocks, tory prematurely or claim progress ple, do different groups learn relative nor across the various subcategories without delving into the particulars or to one another?); and to look deeply and subcomponents. That fact sug- within individual units. In each case, gests that different mechanisms are at Article at a Glance the power is in the comparisons, not in work in each building-block area and the absolute scores. You may find that that improving performance in each A learning organization is a place where an area your organization thought was is likely to require distinct supporting employees excel at creating, acquiring, a strength is actually less robust than at activities. Companies, and units within and transferring knowledge. There are other organizations. In effect, the tool them, will need to address their partic- three building blocks of such institu- gives you a broader, more grounded ular strengths and weaknesses to equip tions: (1) a supportive learning environ- view of how well your company learns themselves for long-term learning. Be- ment, (2) concrete learning processes and how adeptly it refines its strategies cause all three building blocks are ge- and practices, and (3) leadership behavior that reinforces learning. and processes. Each organization, and neric enough for managers and firms of each unit within it, needs that breadth all types to assess, our tool permits orga- The online tool presented here can of perspective to accurately measure its nizations and units to slice and dice the help you assess the depth of learning learning against that of its peers. data in ways that are uniquely useful to in your organization and its individual them. They can develop profiles of their units. The power of the instrument Building Blocks of the Learning distinctive approaches to learning and lies in the comparisons it allows Organization then compare themselves with a bench- users to make – within and among an Organizational research over the past mark group of respondents. To reveal institution’s functional areas, between two decades has revealed three broad the value of all these comparisons, let’s organizations, and against established benchmarks. factors that are essential for organi- look in depth at each of the building zational learning and adaptability: a blocks of a learning organization. Exploring how well your company learns relative to others reveals both David A. Garvin (dgarvin@hbs.edu) is the C. Roland Christensen Professor of Business the multidimensionality of the organiza- Administration and the chair of the Teaching and Learning Center, and Amy C. Edmondson tional learning process and the specific (aedmondson@hbs.edu) is the Novartis Professor of Leadership and Management and the areas where your company needs to chair of the doctoral programs, at Harvard Business School in Boston. Francesca Gino improve. (fgino@andrew.cmu.edu) is a visiting assistant professor of organizational behavior and theory at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh. 110 Harvard Business Review | March 2008 | hbr.org

BUILDING BLOCK 1: A supportive to talk about and change behaviors, ment. Learning processes involve the learning environment. An environ- policies, and systems that put patients generation, collection, interpretation, ment that supports learning has four at risk. Over time, these learning activi- and dissemination of information. They distinguishing characteristics. ties yielded measurable reductions in include experimentation to develop Psychological safety. To learn, em- preventable deaths and illnesses at the and test new products and services; ployees cannot fear being belittled or institution. intelligence gathering to keep track marginalized when they disagree with BUILDING BLOCK 2: Concrete learn- of competitive, customer, and techno- peers or authority figures, ask naive ing processes and practices. A learn- logical trends; disciplined analysis and questions, own up to mistakes, or pre- ing organization is not cultivated effort- interpretation to identify and solve sent a minority viewpoint. Instead, they lessly. It arises from a series of concrete problems; and education and training must be comfortable expressing their steps and widely distributed activities, to develop both new and established thoughts about the work at hand. not unlike the workings of business employees. Appreciation of differences. Learning processes such as logistics, billing, or- For maximum impact, knowledge occurs when people become aware of der fulfillment, and product develop- must be shared in systematic and opposing ideas. Recognizing the value of competing functional outlooks and alternative worldviews increases en- ergy and motivation, sparks fresh thinking, and prevents lethargy and drift. Openness to new ideas. Learning is not simply about correcting mistakes and solving problems. It is also about crafting novel approaches. Employees should be encouraged to take risks and explore the untested and unknown. Time for reflection. All too many managers are judged by the sheer number of hours they work and the tasks they accomplish. When people are too busy or overstressed by deadlines and sched- uling pressures, however, their ability to think analytically and creatively is compromised. They become less able to diagnose problems and learn from their experiences. Supportive learning environments allow time for a pause in the action and encourage thoughtful review of the organization’s processes. To change a culture of blame and silence about errors at Children’s Hos- pitals and Clinics of Minnesota, COO Julie Morath instituted a new policy of “blameless reporting” that encouraged replacing threatening terms such as “errors” and “investigations” with less emo- tionally laden terms such as “accidents” and “analysis.” For Morath, the culture of hospitals must be, as she told us, “one of everyone working together to understand safety, identify risks, and report them with out fear of blame.” The result was that people started to col- laborate throughout the organization hbr.org | March 2008 | Harvard Business Review 111

TOOL KIT | Is Yours a Learning Organization? clearly defined ways. Sharing can take experts to gain their perspectives on did it happen? What do we do next place among individuals, groups, or the company’s activities or challenges. time? (Which activities do we sustain, whole organizations. Knowledge can Together, these concrete processes en- and which do we improve?) In the army, move laterally or vertically within a sure that essential information moves lessons move quickly up and down firm. The knowledge-sharing process quickly and efficiently into the hands the chain of command, and laterally can, for instance, be internally focused, and heads of those who need it. through sanctioned websites. Then the with an eye toward taking corrective Perhaps the best known example results are codified by the Center for action. Right after a project is com- of this approach is the U.S. Army’s Army Lessons Learned, or CALL. Such pleted, the process might call for post- After Action Review (AAR) process, dissemination and codification of learn- audits or reviews that are then shared now widely used by many companies, ing is vital for any organization. with others engaged in similar tasks. which involves a systematic debriefing BUILDING BLOCK 3: Leadership Alternatively, knowledge sharing can after every mission, project, or critical that reinforces learning. Organiza- be externally oriented – for instance, it activity. This process is framed by four tional learning is strongly influenced might include regularly scheduled fo- simple questions: What did we set out by the behavior of leaders. When lead- rums with customers or subject-matter to do? What actually happened? Why ers actively question and listen to em- Assess the Depth of Learning BUILDING BLOCK 1 Supportive Learning Environment in Your Organization Psychological Safety This diagnostic survey, which you take online, is designed to In this unit, it is easy to speak up about what is on your mind. help you determine how well your company functions as a If you make a mistake in this unit, it is often held against you.* learning organization. The complete interactive version, avail- People in this unit are usually comfortable talking about problems and able at los.hbs.edu, includes all the self-assessment state- disagreements. ments to the right; they are divided into three sections, each People in this unit are eager to share information about what does and representing one building block of the learning organization. In doesn’t work. the first two blocks, your task is to rate, on a seven-point scale, Keeping your cards close to your vest is the best way to get ahead in this unit.* how accurately each statement describes the organizational Appreciation of Differences unit in which you work. In the third block, your task is to rate Differences in opinion are welcome in this unit. how often the managers (or manager) to whom you report Unless an opinion is consistent with what most people in this unit believe, exemplify the behavior described. it won’t be valued.* Dynamic scoring online synthesizes your ratings (some are This unit tends to handle differences of opinion privately or off-line, reverse-scored because they reflect undesirable behaviors) rather than addressing them directly with the group.* and yields an estimated score for each building block and In this unit, people are open to alternative ways of getting work done. subcomponent. Synthesized scores are then converted to a zero-to-100 scale for ease of comparison with other people in Openness to New Ideas In this unit, people value new ideas. your unit and other units in your organization. In addition, you Unless an idea has been around for a long time, no one in this unit wants can compare your scores with benchmark data that appear in to hear it.* the table on page 114. In this unit, people are interested in better ways of doing things. HBR In this unit, people often resist untried approaches.* .ORG Visit learning.tools.hbr.org for a short Time for Reflection version of this survey and for recommended lists of People in this unit are overly stressed.* learning resources that are tailored to your results. Despite the workload, people in this unit find time to review how the work For the complete interactive tool, including scor- is going. ing, go to los.hbs.edu. In this unit, schedule pressure gets in the way of doing a good job.* In this unit, people are too busy to invest time in improvement.* There is simply no time for reflection in this unit.* 112 Harvard Business Review | March 2008 | hbr.org

ployees – and thereby prompt dialogue ees and managers. He pushed hard for are they standing on?” His questions and debate – people in the institution active reasoning and forced managers were not designed to yield particular feel encouraged to learn. If leaders sig- to think creatively and in unexpected answers, but rather to generate truly nal the importance of spending time ways. A subordinate observed that he open-minded discussion. on problem identification, knowledge often “came at things from a different The three building blocks of organi- transfer, and ref lective post-audits, angle” to ensure that conventional ap- zational learning reinforce one another these activities are likely to flourish. proaches were not accepted without and, to some degree, overlap. Just as When people in power demonstrate first being scrutinized. “I am far less leadership behaviors help create and through their own behavior a willing- interested in people having the right sustain supportive learning environ- ness to entertain alternative points of answer than in their thinking about ments, such environments make it view, employees feel emboldened to of- issues the right way,” Golub told us. easier for managers and employees to fer new ideas and options. “What criteria do they use? Why do execute concrete learning processes Harvey Golub, former chief ex- they think the way they do? What al- and practices smoothly and efficiently. ecutive of American Express, was re- ternatives have they considered? What Continuing the virtuous circle, con- nowned for his ability to teach employ- premises do they have? What rocks crete processes provide opportunities BUILDING BLOCK 2 Education and Training Concrete Learning Processes and Practices Newly hired employees in this unit receive adequate training. Experienced employees in this unit receive Experimentation • periodic training and training updates This unit experiments frequently with new ways of working. • training when switching to a new position This unit experiments frequently with new product or service offerings. • training when new initiatives are launched This unit has a formal process for conducting and evaluating experiments or new ideas. In this unit, training is valued. This unit frequently employs prototypes or simulations when trying out new ideas. In this unit, time is made available for education and training activities. Information Collection This unit systematically collects information on Information Transfer • competitors • economic and social trends This unit has forums for meeting with and learning from • customers • technological trends • experts from other departments, teams, or divisions This unit frequently compares its performance with that of • experts from outside the organization • competitors • best-in-class organizations • customers and clients • suppliers Analysis This unit regularly shares information with networks of experts This unit engages in productive conflict and debate during discussions. within the organization. This unit seeks out dissenting views during discussions. This unit regularly shares information with networks of experts This unit never revisits well-established perspectives during discussions.* outside the organization. This unit frequently identifies and discusses underlying assumptions that might This unit quickly and accurately communicates new knowledge affect key decisions. to key decision makers. This unit never pays attention to different views during discussions.* This unit regularly conducts post-audits and after-action reviews. BUILDING BLOCK 3 My managers listen attentively. Leadership That Reinforces Learning My managers encourage multiple points of view. My managers provide time, resources, and venues for identifying My managers invite input from others in discussions. problems and organizational challenges. My managers acknowledge their own limitations with respect to knowledge, My managers provide time, resources, and venues for reflecting information, or expertise. and improving on past performance. My managers ask probing questions. My managers criticize views different from their own.* * Reverse-scored items hbr.org | March 2008 | Harvard Business Review 113

TOOL KIT | Is Yours a Learning Organization? for leaders to behave in ways that foster learning and to cultivate that behavior in others. Benchmark Scores for the Learning Uses for the Organizational Organization Survey Learning Tool Our online diagnostic tool is designed Our baseline data were derived from surveys of large groups of senior execu- to help you answer two questions about tives in a variety of industries who completed an eight-week general manage- the organizational unit that you lead ment program at Harvard Business School. We first conducted the survey or in which you work: “To what extent in the spring of 2006 with 100 executives in order to evaluate the statistical is your unit functioning as a learning properties of the survey and assess the underlying constructs. That autumn organization?” and “What are the rela- we surveyed another 125 senior executives to use as our benchmark data. tionships among the factors that affect After you’ve taken the complete survey at los.hbs.edu, compare the learning in your unit?” People who com- average scores for people in your group with the benchmark scores in plete the survey rate how accurately a the following chart. If your group’s scores fall at or below the median in a series of brief, descriptive sentences particular building block or subcomponent – especially if they are in the bot- in each of the three building blocks of tom quartile – consider initiating an improvement effort in that area. One learning describe their organization possibility is to assemble a team to brainstorm specific, concrete strategies and its learning culture. For the list of for enhancing the area of weakness. In any building block or subcomponent statements in the complete survey, in- where your group’s scores fall above the median – especially if they are in the formation about where to find it online, top quartile – consider partnering with other units in your organization that and details about how it works, see the may benefit from specific, concrete strategies that you can articulate and exhibit “Assess the Depth of Learning in model for them in the area of weakness. Your Organization.” There are two primary ways to use Scaled Scores the survey. First, an individual can take Building Blocks and Their Bottom Second Third Top it to get a quick sense of her work unit Subcomponents quartile quartile Median quartile quartile or project team. Second, several mem- bers of a unit can each complete the Supportive Learning Environment survey and average their scores. Either way, the next step is to compare indi- • Psychological safety 31–66 67–75 76 77–86 87–100 vidual or group self-evaluations with • Appreciation of differences 14–56 57–63 64 65–79 80–100 overall benchmark scores from our • Openness to new ideas 38–80 81–89 90 91–95 96–100 baseline group of organizations. The • Time for reflection 14–35 36–49 50 51–64 65–100 benchmark data are stratified into Learning environment composite 31–61 62–70 71 72–79 80–90 quartiles – that is, the bottom 25%, the next 25%, and so on – for each attribute, Concrete Learning Processes and Practices arrayed around a median (see the exhibit “Benchmark Scores for the Learn- • Experimentation 18–53 54–70 71 72–82 83–100 ing Organization Survey”). Once you • Information collection 23–70 71–79 80 81–89 90–100 have obtained your own scores online, • Analysis 19–56 57–70 71 72–86 87–100 you can identify the quartile in which • Education and training 26–68 69–79 80 81–89 90–100 your scores fall and reflect on how they • Information transfer 34–60 61–70 71 72–84 85–100 match your prior expectations about where you stand. Learning processes composite 31–62 63–73 74 75–82 83–97 Having compared individual or unit scores with the benchmarks, it’s pos- Leadership That Reinforces Learning sible to identify areas of excellence and Composite for this block 33–66 67–75 76 77–82 83–100 opportunities for improvement. If employees in multiple units wish to take Note: The scaled scores for learning environment and learning processes were computed by multiply- the survey, you can also make the com- ing each raw score on the seven-point scale by 100 and dividing it by seven. For learning leadership, parisons unit-by-unit or companywide. which was based on a five-point scale, the divisor was fi ve. Even if just two people from different 114 Harvard Business Review | March 2008 | hbr.org

parts of a firm compare scores, they can number of markets and that only re- eas where their firm needed special pinpoint cultural differences, common- cently had established units in other attention. alities, and things to learn from one geographic areas. Eutilize’s scores in Given that the survey-based scores another. They may also discover that the bottom quartile on openness to derive from perceptions, the best use of their unit – or even the company – lags new ideas, experimentation, conflict the data at Eutilize was, as it would be behind in many areas. By pooling indi- and debate, and information transfer at any company, to initiate conversation vidual and unit scores, organizations as were evidence that changing the com- and self-reflection, not to be the sole ba- a whole can begin to address specific pany’s established culture would be a sis for decision making. Discussions had problems. long haul. to be conducted with a healthy balance Eutilize’s managers also discovered of what scholars call “advocacy and Holding Up the Mirror at Eutilize the degree to which their mental mod- inquiry.” The communication allowed Consider how managers from a major els about their own ways of working people the latitude to assert their per- European public utility, which we will were inaccurate. For example, they sonal observations and preferred sug- call Eutilize, used the survey to assess learned that many people in their firm gestions for action, but it also ensured their company’s readiness for and prog- believed that “analysis” was an area of that everyone took the time to carefully ress in becoming a learning organiza- strength for Eutilize, but they inter- consider viewpoints that were not their tion. In the summer of 2006, 19 mid- preted analysis to be merely number own. In addition, managers learned the level managers took the survey. Before learning their scores, participants were asked to estimate where they thought When leaders demonstrate a willingness to entertain Eutilize would stand in relation to the alternative points of view, employees feel emboldened benchmark results from other firms. to offer new ideas. Virtually all the participants pre- dicted average or better scores, in keeping with the company’s espoused goal crunching. The survey results helped importance of using concrete examples of using knowledge and best-practice them to understand the term analysis to illustrate interpretations, to refer to transfers as a source of competitive ad- more broadly – to think about the de- specific practices or processes, and to vantage. But the results did not validate gree to which people test assumptions, clarify observations. Finally, the partici- those predictions. To their great surprise, engage in productive debate, and seek pants from Eutilize identified specific Eutilize’s managers rated themselves out dissenting views. Each of those ar- actions to be taken. Had they not done below the median baseline scores in eas was actually a weakness in the firm. so, the discussions could have dete- almost all categories. For example, out This revelation led Eutilize’s managers riorated into unproductive complaint of a possible scaled score of 100, they to understand that without a more open sessions. had 68 on leadership, compared with environment buttressed by the right the median benchmark score of 76. processes and leadership, the company Moving Forward: Four Principles Similarly, they scored 58 on concrete would have difficulty implementing a Our experiences developing, testing, learning processes (versus the median new strategy it had just adopted. and using this survey have provided benchmark of 74) and 62 on support- Eutilize’s experience illustrates us with several additional insights for ive learning environment (versus the how our organizational learning tool managers who seek to cultivate learn- median of 71). These results revealed prompts reflective discussion among ing organizations. to the Eutilize managers that integrat- managers about their leadership and Leadership alone is insufficient. By ing systematic learning practices into organizational practices. Without con- modeling desired behaviors – open- their organization would take concrete data, such reflection can become minded questioning, thoughtful listen- siderable work. However, the poorest- abstract and susceptible to idiosyn- ing, consideration of multiple options, scoring measures, such as experimenta- cratic assessments and often emotional and acceptance of opposing points of tion and time for reflection, were com- disagreements about the current state view – leaders are indeed likely to fos- mon to both Eutilize and the baseline of affairs. With the survey data in hand, ter greater learning. However, learning- organizations. So Eutilize was not un- managers had a starting point for dis- oriented leadership behaviors alone usual in where it needed to improve, cussion, and participants were able to are not enough. The cultural and pro - just in how much. point to specific behaviors, practices, cess dimensions of learning appear to The portrait that emerged was not or events that might explain both high require more explicit, targeted inter- unexpected for a public utility that had and low scores. The results also helped ventions. We studied dozens of organi- long enjoyed monopolies in a small Eutilize’s managers to identify the ar- zations in depth when developing our hbr.org | March 2008 | Harvard Business Review 115

TOOL KIT | Is Yours a Learning Organization? survey questions and then used the prove learning are concentrated in a should think broadly about the avail- instrument with four firms that had di- single area – more time for reflection, able options. Our survey opens up the verse sizes, locations, and missions. All perhaps, or greater use of post-audits menu of possibilities. four had higher scores in learning lead- and after-action reviews. Our analysis ••• ership than in concrete learning pro- suggests, however, that each of the The goal of our organizational learning cesses or supportive learning environ- building blocks of a learning organi- tool is to promote dialogue, not critique. ment. Performance often varies from zation (environment, processes, and All the organizations we studied found category to category. This suggests that leadership behaviors) is itself multi- that reviewing their survey scores was installing formal learning processes dimensional and that those elements a chance to look into a mirror. The and cultivating a supportive learning most productive discussions were those climate requires steps beyond simply where managers wrestled with the im- modifying leadership behavior. Managers need to be plications of their scores, especially the Organizations are not monolithic. comparative dimensions (differences by especially sensitive to local Managers must be sensitive to differ- level, subunit, and so forth), instead of ences among departmental processes cultures of learning, which simply assessing performance harshly and behaviors as they strive to build can vary widely across units. or favorably. These managers sought learning organizations. Groups may to understand their organizations’ vary in their focus or learning maturity. strengths and weaknesses and to paint Managers need to be especially sensi- respond to different forces. You can an honest picture of their cultures and tive to local cultures of learning, which enhance learning in an organization leadership. Not surprisingly, we believe can vary widely across units. For ex- in various ways, depending on which that the learning organization survey is ample, an early study of medical errors subcomponent you emphasize – for ex- best used not merely as a report card or documented significant differences in ample, when it comes to improving the bottom-line score but rather as a diag- rates of reported mistakes among nurs- learning environment, one company nostic instrument – in other words, as ing units at the same hospital, reflect- might want to focus on psychological a tool to foster learning. ing variations in norms and behaviors safety and another on time for reflec- established by unit managers. In most tion. Managers need to be thoughtful Reprint R0803H settings, a one-size-fits-all strategy for when selecting the levers of change and To order, see page 135. building a learning organization is un- likely to be successful. Comparative performance is the critical scorecard. Simply because an organization scores itself highly in a certain area of learning behavior or processes does not make that area a source of competitive advantage. Sur- prisingly, most of the organizations we surveyed identified the very same do- mains as their areas of strength. “Open- ness to new ideas” and “education and training” almost universally scored higher than other attributes or categories, probably because of their obvious links to organizational improvement and personal development. A high score therefore conveys limited information about performance. The most important scores on critical learning attributes are relative – how your organization compares with competitors or Patrick Hardin benchmark data. Learning is multidimensional. All too often, companies’ efforts to im- “OK, if we could just work through this without the whistling.” 116 Harvard Business Review | March 2008 | hbr.org

Is yours a learning organization

by Muhamad Suphian Bin Hamid on Jun 11, 2010

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Statistics

Is yours a learning organization — Document Transcript