Is it Finally Time to Drive Toward a Learning Culture?

As Schein notes in our text with references to the Drucker Foundation, 1999; Global Business Network, 2002; Schwartz, 2003; and Michael, 1985, 1991; “we basically do not know what the world of tomorrow will really be like, except that it will be different, more complex, more fast fast-paced, and more culturally diverse.”  (Schein, pg 365) A quote that rings so true with much of what I have observed not only within my own organization, but through observations of our world and society as a whole as well.  And yet despite, can we truly say that our organizations and those around us are embracing the benefits that a learning culture could/can bring to changes like these?  Noting the dates in the quote above, considering the publishing date of our Schein text (2010) and reflecting on others discussed in class throughout the semester; it seems surprising that the drive for a learning culture has not been adopted by more sooner.   As I stated in class yesterday, leaders of today and tomorrow must be forward-thinking,  with a grasp of not only what may be best for the organization in the now, but also what may be best to continue to stay viable in the future.

“Culture is a stabilizer, a conservative force, and a way of making things meaningful and predictable.” (Schein, pg 365)   Leaders with this understanding coupled with an ability to know the best and most suitable direction to lead their employees, I believe, can create and drive a culture that supports longevity and what we’ve learned this semester can be the makeup of a learning organization.  So I can’t help but wonder as we come to the close of the semester and our studies on this topic, where are organizations of our society headed?  Will org. cultures change as the world around us continues at its current pace?  Or will the idea of learning as an organization continue to be the tortoise in the race?

Culture and Size, is There a Relationship?

I do not dispute that there is learning within my organization or that there may very well be processes or systems in place that encourage knowledge transfer and/or organizational learning more than I may realize.  What I do wonder however is if  healthcare facilities and business were once better at knowledge sharing because of their size or the value that organizations placed on relationships in the past.  This is not to imply that relationships are no longer important, but the emphasis is perhaps just…different.  Consider first that many years prior to now companies (hospitals included) were smaller, more intimate, family run, etc.; promoting perhaps an organic environment for relationships among all employees.  Further still employees often socialized outside of work, took lunch breaks together, worked together…. we were perhaps a less individualistic culture as a society?  And, if true, I ponder if this may have helped to encourage or naturally result in sharing of knowledge; because we needed each other and it was expected that we did.   But thinking now of current societal expectations, current cultures of some organizations, our current focus on the importance of relationships, I cannot help but wonder if we are recognizing disparities or possibilities because of what has been and our understanding now.

To consider a more current example, think back to our Dixon readings early on in class.  Many of her positive examples included smaller facilities that were purposefully kept on the smaller scale.  But in many cases now, you will find overarching organizations and the words “globalization” in just about every field you see.  So…is there a relationship between culture and size?  And if so does that culture grow diverse and more inclusive with this growth, or does it instead loose focus and foundation?  We are often astounded at how far back the studies go regarding the significance of culture in any and all organizations, but I can’t help but wonder-when did we discover the need to start paying attention?

Considering Vella; the Influence Educational Awareness May Have on a Culture

While some of this post is a copy from the post for my other class, I wanted to change the tone only slightly and share the content/thoughts with my Organizational Learning associates as well.  As I read the text for my Design and Delivery class, How Do They Know They Know by Jane Vella, Paula Berardinelli and Jim Burrow, I couldn’t help but pause on a statement found on page 32, “additional improvements can be made by paying attention to the daily work environment of the learners and the personal characteristics and motivation of the leaders.”

I considered this quote from the perspective of my chosen topic for the project in the class.  The topic is an offering that I have already created and conducted several times in my workplace. It’s a popular topic and one that many continue to request, but I can’t always guarantee that the empowerment or motivation that I sense as they leave the classroom continues once they return to an environment that has not had the enlightenment or feeling of inspiration to change as they have. Without any real way to evaluate whether that motivation continues or whether the learning opportunity has really created a change in behavior, it leaves me to assume that the session has made a difference.

But instead of assuming, I’d like to really know. I’d like to create an opportunity to discover just how much of an impact the session really made and, if any, obstacles they may have encountered when they went back to ‘the real world’. I’d like to really consider the impact that their daily work environment has or may have had on their learning. While the topic that I facilitate is not necessarily life changing, nor is it rocket science; I’d like to think that creating awareness in a few people about how they can establish and maintain better relationships in the workplace can impact more than just that person. I’d like to think that it can begin to also build a better culture, create a better environment to work in and, ultimately, create a better organization for employees and the patients that we serve. For a smile can certainly brighten someones day, a caring heart can create the feeling of warmth that is so desperately needed in our darkest hour, and a helping hand can be the strength that we need on our toughest day. From a higher level, these things can also create the culture that empowers us to do well in our workplace, motivates us to go the extra mile and inspires us to be the team player that contributes to the team’s (departmental and organizational) overall success.

So while I paused to consider whether or not what I have decided on is reminiscent of what Vella described in the referenced quote, I’d like to also ask my classmates from Organizational Learning if they agree that such a creation of awareness has the potential to impact something as tremendous as an entire organizational culture?  Considering what we’ve discussed thus far and tapping into our recent readings from Schein, can education truly impact or influence culture?  Can organizational learning really begin with the awareness of a few if it creates a movement of many?

Sometimes You Must Take a Step Back to Take a Step Forward

As I read our text, How Do They Know They Know, I couldn’t help but pause on a statement on page 32, “additional improvements can be made by paying attention to the daily work environment of the learners and the personal characteristics and motivation of the leaders.” As many may know, I have chosen the topic for my course work this semester based on an offering that has already been created and conducted several times. It’s a popular topic and one that many continue to request, but I can’t always guarantee that the empowerment or motivation that I sense as they leave the classroom continues once they return to an environment that has not had the enlightenment or feeling of inspiration to change as they have. Without any real way to evaluate whether that motivation continues or whether the learning opportunity has really created a change in behavior, it leaves me to assume that the session has made a difference.

But instead of assuming, I’d like to really know. I’d like to create an opportunity to discover just how much of an impact the session really made and, if any, obstacles they may have encountered when they went back to ‘the real world’. I’d like to really consider the impact that their daily work environment has or may have had on their learning. While the topic that I facilitate is not necessarily life changing, nor is it rocket science; I’d like to think that creating awareness in a few people about how they can establish and maintain better relationships in the workplace can impact more than just that person. I’d like to think that it can begin to also build a better culture, create a better environment to work in and, ultimately, create a better organization for employees and the patients that we serve. For a smile can certainly brighten someones day, a caring heart can create the feeling of warmth that is so desperately needed in our darkest hour, and a helping hand can be the strength that we need on our toughest day. From a higher level, these things can also create the culture that empowers us to do well in our workplace, motivates us to go the extra mile and inspires us to be the team player that contributes to the team’s (departmental and organizational) overall success.

So often we fail to realize just how much our actions can impact others, and I’d like to not only help to create awareness of that fact, but to also inspire employees to change those actions. So have I been doing as Vella described and really looking at our environment for the possibility of change to my own program? I’d like to think that without that step back, I would not have had the inclination that there may be a need for this step forward.

Which Comes First? Individual Learning or Organizational Learning as a Whole?

While I realize that perhaps part of the premise of this class is to explore the possibility of whether an organization’s learning begins with the individual, especially an individual perhaps in a position of power, or does it in fact occur at times as an entire organization comes upon a new realization? One could argue the point either way, for when an error occurs is it just the one person that learns from the mistake or instead, the entire organization learns a new way not to do things? Especially when there is something in place that allows for the sharing of that new knowledge? And yet, must the knowledge be embraced by someone in a position of relevance before someone will truly listen to this new way of thinking? But better still, what causes someone to be in a position of what one would consider relevance? Is it because they are charged with making decisions? Or is it simply because they have gained the respect of those that are listening? But with this point perhaps I digress…

As we read the article recently, Culture & Organizational Learning by Cook and Yanow, we were introduced to the idea that Bolman (1976) believed organizational learning to be “learning experiences for key decision makers”. (pg. 375) And I have to agree, for in order for the change in the organization that many look for as a sign of organizational learning to even take place, do we not need those in upper management (or in a position of decision making, change making, power) to support and/or assist in incorporating these new ideas? I have always been a tremendous proponent of ‘from the top down’ in order to achieve the change that an organization seeks. So in this case I do wonder, does organizational learning begin with the individual and then become an organization that learns together?

And, as the article seems to point out in a variety of ways, how are most key decision makers influenced to make a change in the first place in their organization? Typically due to a need, something isn’t working well, the company is doing poorly, the employees are collectively not working as productively or collaboratively as possible and perhaps it’s beginning to effect the bottom line…Regardless the point remains the same, those that are charged with making decisions decide to make a change. They are then ready to take in the Org. Learning opportunity that is necessary at the time, they embrace it and then put it out to the larger organization. The organization as a whole then begins to collectively learn and change together. That new knowledge then becomes a part of the culture of that organization and as individuals come and go in the company, the learning is passed on and embraced by them as the current way of knowing. In this instance it may then return to being considered as an individual learning opportunity; the new person is learning, but yet the way of knowing still remains rooted within the culture of that organization until another change uproots it. And yet it also remains rooted in the individual as something that has been learned, whether they are still a part of the organization or not. Consider how many have resisted change by saying, “we’ve always done it this way so why change now?” So then can it be both depending on how it is viewed?

So as I try to gather these rampant thoughts that seem to continuously contradict conclusions as to which came first; I think back to a quote from page 378 of the article, “Organizational learning, then, describes a category of activity that can only be done by a group. It cannot be done by an individual.” So perhaps then, the true argument is who has the power to turn their individual learning into something that may spark what can only be described as organizational learning. But then, can we have one without the other?

Who’s Passion Do We Seek to Explore? Are We Sharing Our Own or Building on Theirs?

As I read the assigned chapters in our Vella text, I was struck by the idea of structureless teaching.  Not so much from the standpoint of walking into a classroom with no agenda or framework for your session, but perhaps structured – yet, without involvement.  While the examples she gave on pages 13 and 14 were relatable, it also brought me to realize that at times perhaps the structure I create is based on what I think I want or should tell them.  But do I always consider what they may be bringing to the table already?  What drove them to come in the first place?  And how does that feel to those students that have been lead by their passions or situations to attend, but yet the structure does not speak to what it is that they were hoping to come to know?

I consider a conversation I had just today as a fellow instructor set up for a class; an all day course that includes difficult conversation and multiple opportunities for students to begin to change (or decide to change) their behavior.  Learning opportunities perhaps that could be even more so enhanced simply with a little pre-knowledge of your audience.  A fact that was recognized as we discussed two of the attendees and what we knew of them as she considered the best group assignment for them, and perhaps ensuring that they did not end up together.  While this speaks perhaps more to knowing their personalities, we also considered their knowledge, experience and individual needs in hopefully ensuring the best learning environment for them and those around them…..And yet, how often do we truly get to know our participants like this?  But how beneficial can it be when we do?

And I’m not saying that we should begin to host a spaghetti dinner at our house before each class, but even a simple email to reach out when we send out our reminders?  Or when they call to sign up, ask them a few questions to really see what they are bringing to the table and what they are hoping for.  As I contemplate these thoughts, I find myself more eager to discover what these “seven design steps” are as I turn the page to chapter three.  How often am I truly living up to the structured design that Vella speaks of, or am I instead structuring it more based on myself  and what I think they need instead of simply…asking?  After all, asking does not form the course – as Vella points out- it really only informs (and perhaps enhances:) it.

“Designing means preparing a flexible structure for inviting and enhancing learning by explicitly naming who is present, what the situation is that calls for this learning, the time frame and the site for the event, the comprehensive content and learning objectives (…) and finally, the learning tasks and necessary materials.” (Vella, pg 31)

Is it Dialogue Education as Vella Would Describe It?

This blog post is written as more of a question than a statement….a question of whether or not a session I have been facilitating on team building is perhaps structured in a format that is more conducive to what Jane Vella has described in her text, On Teaching and Learning, as ‘dialogue education’ without perhaps having the label to place upon it at the time I began to try it out.

Vella points out in her preface (page xv) that we tend to “teach the way we have been taught until we stop long enough to examine how we are teaching and decide to do otherwise.” I went back to this quote in reflection later on in my reading. So often I had structured and conducted my sessions or classes following the guideline of creation or design that I had been shown when I first took the position. It was not a bad way to design, and in fact appeared to often very effective. But over time I noticed, especially in the topics that I facilitate, that discussion could be very powerful when time was allowed for it in the design. I found people would become passionate about the subject, would seemingly connect or question the concepts more as they felt validated perhaps, and would often cite on their evaluations that the dialogue was the most helpful portion of the class.

So perhaps it is with these findings in mind that I decided to try something different with my Team Building bi-weekly session. Or perhaps it was also more about not wanting to do the same old thing? Regardless I thought about the power of the discussion in other classes and my own VCU based learning centered on the learner and what they already bring to the table. And I decided, why not see what they know? Why not ask them the questions about how each concept may relate to their world, why not attempt to lead them to the link between the ideas that we’d like to present to them while helping them make that connection to what they already know?

So as I cleaned up the game I now use one day after the session, I reveled in what connections they had made that others had not brought up, what new things I had learned from them and the concepts that they nodded in agreement to as I shared with them my piece of the puzzle. “Thank you for letting us share what we know and what we think for once instead of just telling us” someone said as I closed the box. I smiled understanding that while the message at the end of the day was the same, I did still cover all of the important things in my ‘lesson plan’, perhaps the learning was so much more than it used to be simply because I asked them instead of telling. Is this what Vella means? I’d like to think so. Because if it is, I can absolutely see why she emphasizes its power and importance in our field.

Put Down the Hammer

As you read the title I would imagine the first image that comes to mind is someone with a hammer driving a nail into a board or some sort of something. And with that image I now ask you to consider, have you ever felt that way when an organization you were a part of began to institute a change?

This is not to imply that change is always forced or that your organization does not attempt to get your input, but after reading the fourth chapter of the text The Organizational Learning Cycle by Nancy Dixon, I cannot help but wonder about missed opportunities in the way changes are instituted and why they may at times end up failing.

As we’ve learned in our reading, experiences shape a significant part of our belief system. And, as a result, trying to reshape that belief system, especially when it’s on a grander scale like the whole organization, can prove difficult when you neglect to include them or consider the variety of experiences, perceptions, opinions, etc. that shape the beliefs that you are trying to revamp. Changes in our tacit knowledge cannot, or should not, be hammered in, they should be learned instead.

Take for example how Dixon relates the Kolb learning cycle to Organizational learning on the collective scale. While Kolb’s theory speaks of individual experiences and how a change in our action can change our experiences, thus resulting in learning; we sometimes forget the impact of the organization as a whole on that individual’s ability to apply the necessary action that results in change. It is becoming more and more evident that in order for change and learning to occur, the environment that the individual is in must be open and/or supportive of that change. As Dixon cites on page 66, “everyone needs all of the information everyone else has. The task is one of integrating newly generated information into the organizational context.”

And in this process known as the Organizational Learning cycle, one must remember to appreciate each member’s perspective, background and experience level (etc.) as they are brought to the table. For, “without difference learning does not occur.” (pg 66) And yet the ability to consider the importance of these varied perspectives is frequently forgotten. Further still, “because there are many potential solutions, it is less critical that the collective come to a right answer and more critical that collective meaning is made, so that those that must act upon the meaning (and often that is everyone) can support their actions with their own reasoning.” (pg 55) So if we fail to involve all at the very start, or fail to encourage a variety of perspectives, how can we truly expect learning or the investment of all in a change that we seek? H0w can we truly expect to be successful?

Final Thoughts

As I begin this final entry, I reflect on the past several months and what I’m taking away from this experience.  I always pride myself in being someone that tries to consider that everyone has their own perspectives, each person is entitled to their way of looking at things and that we should always consider individuals and their differences as a positive contribution to our world.  And yet how often do we say that we are accepting only to find that our subconscious doesn’t always allow us to be?

This class has truly caused me to pause and reflect on my own actions, responses and assumptions.  While I live and interact with someone that has ADD every day, I’m not sure that I can honestly say that I have taken the time to walk in their shoes or consider what it may mean for them when they are out of school.  More importantly however, I have found myself considering the way that I interact with others in the workplace as well.  Considering how invisible a learning disability can be, I cannot help but wonder how often I have come across someone with a difficulty or difference and not realized it.  How often have I asked someone to read aloud in class, to try and help create the interaction that I feel can make the class valuable for them-yet I do not consider that there may be someone among us that is terrified of this type of interaction?  And if this has ever been the case, how much did I actually take away from their experience in the class as a result?

So as I end my summer session in Adult 688, I am thankful for the opportunities that I have experienced that have truly opened my mind.   I have recognized the difference between a learning disability and an intellectual disability, what resources are available to individuals with disabilities, that the ADA is not the American Dental Association (at least not for this class:), that a person with a learning disability must be their own advocate, that a learning disability can create barriers and yet can also create opportunities to see things in a way most can’t, and…perhaps most importantly…that when we open our minds to the possibilities and assist individuals with learning disabilities on their journey, they can become someone that surpasses what anyone could have ever imagined for them. I can’t help but remember a famous line from the movie Dirty Dancing as I close out this line of thought,  “No one puts Baby in the corner.” An individual with a learning disability should not be cast aside or considered to be someone of lesser value or worth; LD can be more than a difference.  It can be a whole new world of possibilities.

Do We Consider the Needs of Undisclosed LD Participants in Our Classes?

As I read the article, Common Misconceptions Preventing Job Advancement, I couldn’t help but consider my current job role and how it may relate.  In the article, persons with learning disabilities are said to have many misconceptions regarding job advancement and reasons that they may or may not be eligible or a good fit.  One of the common misconceptions listed, difficulty with getting along with others, is said to be a skill that can be strengthened or improved; a thought or theory that I tremendously agree with.  Successful and positive social interactions among coworkers are becoming more and more crucial in the workplace.  We are in a world that holds great value in getting along with others, team work, and high levels of productivity; all of which are impossible if you do not get along with the individuals that are part of it.  So as I read all of this information and thought about the importance that social skills truly do play in the workplace, I began to question whether or not we consider those individuals that may struggle with these skills as we plan for educational activities during the year.  Should we perhaps consider offering a class that would speak to these needs, assuming there are some individuals that struggle with these skills?  But then I thought about it, perhaps we already do…….

            Consider first the recommendation found on page 2 of the article, “while on the job try to make friends.”  Currently I offer a class called Building Positive Relationships at Work.  The entire premise behind the class is considering your actions and how they may impact your relationships with others.  We also discuss the importance that those relationships play in each individual’s success in the workplace.  Would this assist an individual that needed more than just a “review” of social skills in this particular area?   Consider the next two, “observe body language” and “trust nonverbal cues if they are different from the verbal communication”; both topics of intense discussion during a class that I do on Communicating and Listening as well as sessions on Cultural Interactions.  Further still, “in stressful situations make an effort to observe nonverbal behavior”.  While this is touched on in Communicating and Listening, we do specifically discuss the importance of observing these cues in my sessions on Working Through Conflict. 

“Try to see things from the point of view of others as well as your own.”  I could not help but end this particular entry with this one final quote from the 2^nd page of the article because of my sincere belief in the statement itself.  As I lead the sessions mentioned above, my true goal is to help someone step outside of the world that they see and consider how important it can be to align their interactions with the expectations or needs of others in order to be successful in life and especially in the workplace.  Understanding the variances in perspectives can be so huge in helping someone consider the changes they need or should make; could these simple and short discussions also prove valuable to someone with a learning disability that struggles in the social realm?