A preliminary typology of organizational learning: synthesizing the literature

Journal of Management, Fall, 1996 by Danny Miller

Other researchers, while endorsing such methodical inquiry, have called attention to the time and resource limitations that constrain its thoroughness. They describe learning that is characterized by bounded, problem-driven search, incremental experimentation and satisficing behavior (Braybrooke & Lindblom, 1963; March & Simon, 1958). Managers are said to engage in little reflection, to gather only the most accessible information, and to consider only a few alternatives on the way to an "adequate" solution. The latitude for dramatic action is thus limited.

Another methodical mode that allows still less scope for voluntarism is structural learning, which is driven by routines that standardize information processing and behavior. Routines specify what data managers must gather and attend to, and they guide how managers interpret that information (Levitt & March, 1988; Nelson & Winter, 1982; Starbuck, 1985; Starbuck & Milliken, 1988).

Analysis, experiment and structural learning are all methodical and deliberate. They test ideas by systematically gathering factual information and changing behavior. Results are then monitored, and the cycle begins again. However, as we move from analysis to routines there is a progression towards less voluntarism. Analysis places few restrictions on learners, small experiments limit action, and routines channel both thought and action.

Three emergent forms of learning are also quite common, and again, they may be distinguished according to their degree of voluntarism. Some scholars, for example, have pointed to synthesis - learning that is intuitive and holistic (Miller, 1990b; Mintzberg, 1989; Palmer, 1969). Such learning represents an instinctive form of pattern recognition an ability to generate global insights about issues facing an organization. It is internal to a manager, usually mysterious, and may even be unintentional.

Table 1. Modes of Learning

                                       Mode of Thought and Action
                                       Methodical        Emergent

Constraints (Voluntarism)
Few constraints                         Analytic         Synthetic
Action constrained                    Experimental      Interactive
Action and thought constrained         Structural
Institutional

A less voluntaristic form of emergent learning takes place via interaction and occurs when there is much social and political activity. Contrasting ideas and conflicting objectives among members of an organization may cause search and choice to be based on - and limited by - a complex forcefield of different aims and issues (Cyert & March, 1963; March & Olsen, 1976). Actors infer a course of action by discovering patterns in the pressures and opportunities facing them as they interact with a host of allies and rivals.

Institutional learning is determined by ideologies - by institutional forces such as laws, social norms or personal values that shape managerial thinking (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). Here learning is a product of indoctrination, either subtle or direct (Selznick, 1957; Scott, 1995).