The Learning Organization

The new "Learning" Organization

The purpose of learning in organizations has evolved over time and we need to understand the character of the changing organizations to effectively understand what kind of learning is required in organizations today. Learning is linked to organization structure, design and of course the specific nature of a business and its development.

Traditional organizations use organization hierarchy to mark out learning and career development paths. Changing organizations evolve new learning opportunities and collapse traditional learning systems in the process. Traditional organizations link learning to (vertical) career progression. A promotion was equated to a learning opportunity, however modern business organization has reformatted organization learning to more horizontal and exposure oriented learning. Today's business organizations have de-linked learning from career progression altogether.

Many employees today are expected to expand and develop learning without accompanying promotion. Organization learning has become a condition for continued employment rather than a condition of promotion. This frustrates many employees who feel they need to be rewarded with a promotion following training, the acquisition of new skills (certificates) or business competencies. Today's confusing state of learning affairs can be traced to the reorganization of two important aspects organization development; structure and (business) systems. 

Organization structure

As the bureaucratic high hierarchy dinosaur organization collapsed it has left may employees holding on to impossible hope. The bureaucratic organization used professionals to process work vertically up the hierarchy. So a draughts man was hired at one level and then a junior Architect and then a senior Architect would complete and certify the job. Work developed vertically required increasing levels of competence up the organization ladder. To climb the organization ladder, which in some cases could be as long as between twenty or thirty rungs, one had to develop professional competencies and gain "experience" and "learn" their way to the top.

An accounts clerk could progress through the ranks of the organization gaining experience to become chief accountant. This type of organization has since collapsed and is no more. Company hierarchies are seldom more than three or four rungs. Career ladders have been drastically cut down. This is frustrating to an increasing number of employees who hit the glass ceiling early in their careers. No amount of professional learning can propel them upwards anymore. In traditional organizations, work was mainly artistic and required "professionals to make decisions put the final touches. Today, cars are designed on computer systems which can be operated by persons without engineering qualification. Accounts are produced not by professionals but by accounting packages and data entry clerks. Professionals (true artists) in organizations may be going the way of the dinosaur. This brings me to the second point. Today's organizations are scientific and built around systems not (hierarchical) structures.

If you are still with me you will appreciate that the collapse of the Old (manual) organization structures wiped out a vast number of jobs and opportunities for learning that have been taken over by processes and information controls that restrict decision making. Reporting lines in today's organizations can be called a "coordinated maze" rather than clearly identifiable organization lines. Learning in today's organizations is more of "exposure to" than "experience in".  What professionals took years to draw, science, particularly information technology has made routine. To carry out a scientific routine you don't need to be a scientist. It does not matter that you have a diploma, business degree or a PhD. If you can master the steps of the cashiering process, you need no further qualification to work efficiently. You don't have to understand the process. The system does the work. That is why employment requirements in scientific organizations have changed from professional to entry level aptitude tests. Banks will just as easily employ scientists as they will economists and arts graduates, if they pass the banks aptitude test. Professionalism is only required at the very top levels of entrepreneurship

Scientific organizations with advanced business systems are not as worried as old organizations with vertical hierarchies when staff leave. When professionals left traditional organizations they left with a huge amount of institutional memory. There was a great deal of panic that accompanied finding someone suitable to ensure the continuity of the department. Work would literally stop. Today, when a manager leaves an organization with effective business systems, someone else will be operating the system within the hour. The system retains the institutional memory the manager would have walked away with. All that is needed is another operator. Their will not be as much as a blip on the organizations ECG screen.

My argument obviously raises multiple questions about learning, education and professional development in organizations. We do not have enough space to open up that discussion in this article. What this article helps HR practitioners and employees seeking career advancement realize is that the goal posts of learning in the new organization have been moved. HR practitioners and employees should quickly align themselves to the new realities if they want to keep a job and stay ahead.

Evolution of learning

Learning in organizations has evolved from professional capacity to process competence. The learning path is built around exposure to business processes and functional competence. This is acutely felt in public organizations that have been privatized as they are forced to learn functional competence as a business organization strategy. Organizations that wish to promote learning today cannot offer as much career progression as many employees desire, but they must open up to exposing their people to learning opportunities through rotation and reassignment in totally new business disciplines within the organization. These are the career paths that will identify employees that understand the business and are suited for greater responsibility against developed and demonstrated process competencies.

Allan Bukusi, August 2008