The topic is the 'learning organization'. In this issue, let's look at how learning actually works. If you are aware of how it happens, you can harness it to your purposes. The requirements for learning are three, simple and imperative. Regardless of the situation, if any of these three conditions are not present then no learning will occur. The three conditions are;

• Inquisitiveness – the courage to ask questions
• Openness – the courage to suspend one's assumptions, and
• Initiative – the courage to take appropriate, versus expected action.

The challenge is to overcome the comfort and stability that is a characteristic of routine and precedents. The culture of our organization serves to keep us 'on track', to avoid extremes, to mitigate the impact of sudden changes. Culture promotes comfort, stability, and a number of other things that aren't so beneficial. Tom Gove of IBM uses the analogy of a sailing ship being hit by a sudden wind change – the momentum of the boat is like the culture of the organization. You must change the direction of the boat to accommodate the new wind condition. The momentum works against you though, to the point that the boat could capsize if care is not taken.

In the organization, culture is a complexity of unspoken assumptions, habits, routines, consistencies and predictabilities – all of which are highly valued. This complexity will resist any change in direction that is attempted, no matter that the market demands it. Those who advocate change are rarely 'heroes', even when the status quo is known to be a problem. What price learning?

Learning is not threatening, but it is uncomfortable. It's seeing what others see, but thinking what no one has thought. It is innovation, freshness, insight, impetus, and excitement. It is also the key to survival and success for almost any organization in a dynamic circumstance and/or condition.

The stages of learning are three – acquisition, assessment and implementation of new information. The acquiring of information is becoming both easier and more difficult, in that there's so much of it available these days, but its harder to differentiate the 'signals' from the 'noise'. To assist in separating the useful from the not-so-useful, the typical manager uses working hypotheses or 'models' to determine 'fit'. The real danger here is that the model may be wrong and, even more dangerous, the search for information may stop once the model requirements have been served.

The experienced manager rarely has difficulty in assessing information, for perspectives, positions, meaning have already been formulated by past practice – how does the new information conform to what is currently known? This may be the sole test of accuracy and relevance. As Peter Drucker pointed out, every organization has its own 'theory of business', a series of collective assumptions which are rarely challenged but which can be made obsolete by changing market conditions. Such assumptions are not always valid even though they are useful. The 'art' of management has been described as 'making meaningful generalizations out of inadequate facts' (Dean Stanley Teele – HBS).

The third and vital step is applying information. We need to work with it, to take action, to make changes. We learn best by 'doing', and 'experience is the best teacher'. For successful organizational change we need a critical mass of new involvement. Here, we should recall that action is based not on intellect, but on emotion. Also letting go of old ways is essential to make room for the new. Time is of the essence – managers have to make time available for 'rehearsals'.

All this suggests that we need to stand the process on its head. By this I mean that whereas in traditional methods we invest much time in acquiring information, being careful and detailed, striving for 'complete' information, we should spend much less time. We can do this by sharing the load among many persons working to a common template, each responsible for a small part of the collection process. Share the load.

Next, tradition says that the experienced manager should rely heavily on past experience to make 'intuitive' assessments of new information. This must change to a more extended assessment process, again shared by many – all with different yet compatible perspectives. It takes more time initially, but it saves time in re-work later. It makes sense to share the load.

Lastly, we have always preferred small, controlled 'test market' approaches to fresh actions. How often do we have to repeat a mistake to recognize the need for a different approach? Since we have to attain a 'critical mass' for effective change, why not diversify the test market - a limited and/or a phased change process across a broad front. In short, share the load!

We learn best through collaboration with others. This was our experience as children, and it's still true. Learning occurs at the interface between individuals with mutual interests, so let's stop resisting it. This way, we will all benefit.

See the Andros Website / Staying in Touch Archives for The Learning Organization - Values