Learning organization is a concept of collective learning that results from individual or team learning. The concept can be seen as a win-win situation based on the argument that individuals can develop as the organization grows. A learning organization may choose to empower workers by giving greater decision making power, how to complete their tasks and work in self managed teams (Spencer and Kelly, 2013) In this essay, various debates and case studies on organizational learning and learning organization will be identified and it will be discussed if the concept is in fact based on firm foundations.

According to Spencer and Kelly, 2013 workplace learning needs to begin with the substantive issues of equity, power, authority, control and ownership. Large corporations create hierarchies of control and power and are driven by the profit motive. These control, power and profit relations create the social relations within work and society. When looking at income equity, from September 2010 to September 2011 the average earnings of Canadians rose by 1.1% while the top 100 CEOs income rose by 27% (CCPA, 2012). Additionally, HRM policies create a “sense of shared ownership” and control of the enterprise but the “sense of ownership” is not the same thing as workers actually owning and controlling and could be regarded as a form of propaganda. The idea is to increase productivity and commitment which would lift labour performance higher- “committed employees would “go the extra mile” in pursuit of organizational goals (Spencer and Kelly, 2013).

Workers are naturally encouraged to learn about what is useful for the employer, and some of their learning may contribute to a “culture o f silence”, that is, to an acceptance of the way things are (Spencer and Kelly, 2013). Organizational culture is determined and molded by management and employees are expected “to be on the same page,” to accept the mission statement of the organization, and to “buy into” the organizational goals. Peter Senge, 1990 emphasizes that the role of the “leader” (i.e. manager) is “to help people restructure their views of reality”.

There is an underlying tension between work and learning and a broader concept of what lifelong learning could be. Research suggests that rhetoric proclaiming the virtues of workplace restructuring (towards cell production, self managed teams, learning organizations) seldom matches workplace reality (Bratton, 1999). A research conducted by Fred Schied and collegues (1997a, 1997) found many examples of contradictory outcomes resulting from the application of workplace learning and management reorganization strategies. They also found confirmation of Forrester’s fear of how the brave new world in relation to “work and learning” can become part of the new forms of oppression and control in the workplace. They explain how some competent knowledgeable long-time workers found themselves downgraded and left with lower pay. They also demonstrated how “empowered” workers who challenge organizational policies are often quickly silenced.

In those few cases where genuine moves towards a learning organization have taken place, workers report greater job satisfaction and more flexible work patterns and having more say over how work is conducted. Bratton (1992) reports that this is often tied to the nature of work i.e. gains for workers in high-skilled work with batch production favouring a core workforce, but few gains for less skilled workforce in mass production factories. Mike Welton (2005) commented “harnessed to the money-code the business organization is actually learning disabled. It is intensely pressurized to learn along a single trajectory: to enhance shareholder profits and interests”.

Changes at work are often used to suggest the move from Taylorism to teams and employee empowerment while many researches argue that Taylorist measurement and control at work remains or has been expanded as well as the knowledge required at work has changed from simple know-how to “work process knowledge”- understanding of the production process beyond a particular worker’s own job. It has been argued that the purpose of “work process knowledge” is to turn workers away from understandings of ownership, authority, and control and towards accepting managerial objectives and employer ownership of value added in the production process (Spencer and Kelly, 2013).

Bratton (1992) suggested that the learning organization claim of empowerment for workers in contradicted by close electronic surveillance of operating activities resulting in “computer-controlled autonomy.” And that employers are caught between two contradictory imperatives: regulating workers’ activity too tightly undermines workers learning and creative potential, whereas empowering workers undermines employer and management control.

The importance of labour productivity in growth, competitiveness and trade is closely allied to the workplace learning agenda in the HRM literature. Productivity linked workplace learning is important due to human capital theory. According to human capital theory, workers can increase their own human capital via training and workplace learning which should lead to workplace productivity rise but as mentioned before most Canadian companies under-invest in education and training which is a reflection of the nature of most work and capital investment in Canada.

The problems with the “learning organization” model are highlighted when it comes to marginalized workers and contingent work. According to Spencer and Kelly (2013), immigrant women are clearly a special category of precarious workers but essentially all contingent labour has to deal with similar adjustments and undergo similar learning in order to survive. The kind of learnings that the women endure includes learning to deal with “unstable, poorly paid jobs” and an ideological or identity shift where women learn to “construct themselves as precarious workers”. Even though racist immigration rules and regulations formally ended in 1967 but racialized employment practices continue to exist. Temporary foreign worker program involving Pilipino, Mexican and Central American workers is an example.

The learning opportunities for contingent/precarious workers in work that can lead to promotion and “good” jobs are extremely limited. Companies spend most training dollars on “core” workers, particularly those in managerial and professional grades: those who have most education/training get more. (Spencer and Kelly, 2013)

In conclusion, after reviewing the above research it is safe to say that the concept of learning is not based on firm foundations. In most organizations the “learning organization” concept is created to get the workers to buy into the organizational goals leading to higher productivity and profits for the employer.

References:

Bratton, J. (1992). Japanization at work. London: Macmillan.

Bratton, J. (1999). Gaps in the workplace learning paradigm: Labour flexibility and job design, Researching work and learning: A first international conference, 486-92. Leeds: School of Continuing Education, Leeds University.

Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. (2012). The clash for cash: CEOs v the average Joe. Retrived from: www.policyalternatives.ca/ceo

Canadian Council on Learning (2009). Securing Prosperity through Canada’s Human Infrastructure: The State of Adult Learning and Workplace Learning in Canada. Ottawa, Canada. 107 pages

Canadian Council on Learning (2007). Report on learning in Canada: Strategies for Success. Ottawa, Canada.

Council of Ministers of Education Canada. (2007). Recongnition of non-formal and informal learning: Report on Provincial/Territorial Activities and Pan-Canadian Overview.

Forrester, K. (1999). Work-related learning and the struggle for subjectivity, in researching work and learning: A first international conference (pp. 187-97). Leeds: School of Continuing Education, Leeds University.

Friesen, J. (2006). Six years in Manitoba buys free education: Tutition deal offered to university students in attempt to kept graduates in province. The Globe and Mail

Public Policy Forum (2001). Learning and Skills development: Issues, Best practices and Suggestion for Action. Ottawa, Canada.
Rajasekaran, V. (2008). Skills and Learning in Canada: A review of key issues that could affect Canada’s future economic prosperity and social development. Ottawa, Canada.

Schied, F., Carter, V., Preston, J., and Howell , S. (1997a). Knowledge as “quality non-conformance”: A critical case study of ISO 9000 and adult education in the workplace. 38th annual adult education research conference (pp, 214-19). Stillwater, Oklahoma: Oklahoma State University.

Schied, F., Carter, V., Preston, J., and Howell , S. (1997b). The HRD factory: An historical inquiry into the production of control in the workplace. Crossing boarders breaking boundaries. Research in the education of adults: An international conference (pp. 404-08). London: Birkbeck College, University of London.

Spencer, B., Kelly, J. (2013). Work and learning: An introduction. Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing.

Statistics Canada (2007). Study: Canada’s Immigrant labour market.

Welton, M. (2005). Designing the just learning society: A critical inquiry. Leicester, UK: NIACE