The fifth discipline: art and practice of learning organizations

Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization

The following will be a review of a book known as The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization by Peter M. Senge. It is a book that describes how a company can become successful by adapting learning organization practices. In the long run the book explains that one has to learn faster than the competition in order to be the most successful.

Chapter one sees Senge introducing the reader to the ideas of learning organizations and how they are needed for one to become successful in this day and age. As the world becomes more complex and interconnected, according to Senge, businesses and organization must become more "learningful" which is something I believe in. If a business wants to top as the best they have to learn the trade or quirks pretty fast (Senge, 2006). According to Senge it seems that the primary reason for building learning organizations is that now we are starting to truly understand the capabilities that these organizations come to have (Senge, 2006).

Senge points out five "technological components" that make a learning organization. They are systems thinking, personal mastery, mental models, team learning, and building shared vision (Senge, 2010). Therefore the five disciplines are now addressed. Discipline to Senge refers to a body or theory of technologies that need to be mastered and studied in order to be put into practice (Senge, 2010). Senge mentions that each of these disciplines requires more to do with how one thinks and how one interacts and learns from one another (Senge, 2006).

Senge believes that systems thinking is the most important discipline of the five mentioned. He states that it is the one that fuses all of the disciplines into one coherent and harmonic body of practice (Senge, 2006). I think he is correct. Think about it. Can a piece of artwork truly have meaning and purpose if there is no thought process that goes into it? Systems thinking is what makes individuals perceive themselves in new ways and connected to the world. A learning organization is the place to apply those new perceptions (Senge, 2006).

Senge examines the word known as metanoia. It means shift of mind and that is what happens when one learns especially in an organization (Senge, 2010). Real learning is the heart of being human according to Senge. We can do things we never thought we could do.

Senge concludes this chapter by saying that The Fifth Discipline is a book mainly for learners. It is for the collective learners and managers that can learn the tools to building learning organizations. It can be for parents who want to help let their children to be our teachers as well as us being theirs (Senge, 2010). If communities, societies, and organizations are going to become more adapt learners than certain tools are going to be needed. I believe that without those tools than how can learning come about successfully? There would be no foundation and without one not that much can happen.

Chapter 2

Senge examines the idea of the corporate mortality rate being due to poor learning or learning disabilities (Senge, 2010). The disabilities are always there despite the efforts of certain people within the organization. Sometimes the harder that one tries to clear the problem the worse it tends to get according to Senge (Senge, 2010). Senge mentions that in order to start getting rid of the "learning disabilities" that a certain organization may have it is important to know all seven of the disabilities (Senge, 2010).

The seven learning disabilities of an organization, as listed by Senge, are I am my position, the enemy is out there, the illusion of taking charge, the fixation of events, and the parable of the boiled frog (Senge, 2010). The last two are the delusion of learning from experience, and the myth of the management team (Senge, 2010). If an organization has any one of these disabilities something needs to be done. How can an organization reach its true potential when there is something holding it back like a disability? I believe that if they were not looked upon as just something to patch a band aid with than most organizations today would not be in the dire situations they are in. They need to deal with these issues head on and they need to make sure learning comes from the mistakes that were made so nothing happens again.

The chapter is concluded with Senge mentioning that the learning disabilities mentioned above have been around for quite a while. He mentions that Barbara Tuchman states in The March of Folly that devastating large-scale policies that were for self-interest has been seen since the fall of Troy to the tie of Vietnam (Senge, 2010). It is a history of leaders not learning the consequences of their policies. Other examples used by Senge include Britain in the mid-1700s with the American Revolution the collapse of the Mayan civilization. All are due to poor policies of leaders. These same problems, again, are now seen today in the 21st century. Senge concludes by saying, "The five disciplines of the learning organization, I believe, act as antidotes to these learning disabilities (Senge, 2010) He mentions that the disabilities need to be examined more clearly in order to learn how to deal with them. I think that, as Senge says, one must look into what the problem is and examine it. That way one can learn how to deal with it and eliminate it entirely.

Chapter 3

Senge examines what is known as the beer game in this chapter. It aims to help an organization isolate their disabilities and the causes of the disabilities by interacting in a laboratory replica of a real setting. It was first seen in the 1960s at MIT's Sloan School of Management (Senge, 2006). More often than not it reveals that they come out of basic problems in thinking and interacting more than abnormalities of organization policy and structure. The organization replicated is one that is prevalent but not really noticed (Senge, 2006). The players in the game are to manage their positions as best as they can in order to get the most out of profits. It is played out as a story with the characters being the wholesaler, the retailer, and the marketing director and the story is told through the eyes of each of these players (Senge, 2006).

At the end of the game/story certain key lessons are learned. These lessons are structure influences behavior, leverage often comes from new ways of thinking, and structure in human systems is subtle (Senge, 2006). Despite five continents playing the game which would consist of a variety of different cultures and business ideals the same problems ensue or are brought to life as a result of the game (Senge, 2006). Problems such as growing demand never being met and depleted inventories are two such problems. If all of these different players bring about the same issue than the cause must be in the structure of the system itself (Senge, 2006).

If one wants to improve their performance in the beer game and in the actual organizational world they have to redefine their scope of influence (Senge, 2006). One way to start doing this, according to Senge, is to follow the "no strategy" plan or in other words consider out players outcome if nothing was changed to correct their problem. If that does not work than redefining that scope is the way to go. Two guidelines are recommended by Senge if the case comes to be. They are "take two aspirin and wait" and "don't panic" (Senge, 2006).

Senge concludes that the learning disabilities seen in Chapter 2 are all in the beer game (Senge, 2006). The insight one gets from that is seeing how all of these learning disabilities are connected to alternative ways of thinking in situations/events that are complex (Senge, 2006). Event explanations are keys to that thinking process and the three levels of explanation are system structure, patterns of behavior, and reactive events. Senge comments that structural explanation is the most powerful one since it answers the question of what causes the pattern of behavior (Senge, 2006). It addresses the underlying cause of the behavior in a way that can help change the behavior effectively. I believe the beer game should be implemented in all organizations today even the ones that are not failing. It is beneficial to have a system that can give one the picture of where their company can head if certain things happened. For a business that is successful and noticed a picture is given on what behaviors should be avoided in order to avoid failure. For a business or organization in a dire situation it gives them the guidance towards those structural issues that need fixing.

Chapter 4

In this chapter Senge lists down all the laws of the Fifth Discipline. The laws are today's problems come from yesterday's solutions, the harder you push, the harder the system pushes back, behavior grows better before it grows worst, and the easy way out usually leads back in (Senge, 2006). The other laws are the cure can be better than the disease, faster is slower, cause and effect are not closely related in time and space, and small changes can produce big results-but the areas of highest leverage are often the least oblivious (Senge, 2006). The final three are you can have your cake and eat it too, but not at once and dividing an elephant in half does not produce two small elephants, and there is not blame (Senge, 2006).

I believe that what Senge says under the there is no blame rule is true. He mentions that we always go on blaming others or tend to do so for all of our problems. People of organizations tend to blame others for their own issues (Senge, 2006). They will blame the government, the press, changing mood of the marketplace and the competitor. I think he is right when he says there is no separate "other." Everyone is part of a single system and the answer to the problem comes to changing the relationship with the perceived "enemy." If we all cannot see that we are part of the same thing than how anything could be solved in this world let alone organization learning disabilities?

Chapter 5

Senge focuses on how much systems thinking is needed in the world today due to the scale of complexity seen in the modern era. He mentions how global warming, climate change, and the U.S. are similar to organizational breakdowns (Senge, 2006). All are unable to pull diverse functions and talents all together to make one whole unit that gets the job done. That is what systems thinking needs to be examined as (Senge, 2006). It needs to be seen as a whole. He also makes it clear that again systems thinking is the cornerstone on how learning organizations think about the world (Senge, 2006).

Senge uses an example of the war on terrorism as in example as a reason for why systems thinking is needed (Senge, 2006). The U.S. still does not have a true system view is due to the problem of dynamic complexity. Dynamic complexity allows one to see major interrelationships that underlie a problem and therefore one gets new insight in what needs to be done. It all leads to what is known as the feedback cycle (Senge, 2006). The two types of feedback looked at by Senge are reinforcing feedback and balancing feedback. These two feedbacks both contain one such element known as delay.

Delay, according to Senge, can actually work to ones advantage especially in an organization. One has to learn how to recognize and work with them (Senge, 2006). They are everywhere in human systems. For example one may invest on a project that can take much longer to complete than projected due to delays (Senge, 2006). If we can recognize the delay that is to occur we can make it work in a positive way. It is when one goes into something and does not know what to expect in any way that is when the delay can be worrisome. I think no one can get something good out of going in blindly. Know yourself and know what you are planning on getting the organization into.

In the end Senge believes that reinforcing feedback, balancing feedback, and delays can all be quite simple (Senge, 2006). They are the building blocks for the system itself. They are structures that occur in the lives of humans again and again, both professional and personal.

Chapter 6

This chapter looks at is learning to recognize the certain patterns that recur in systems again and again. We need to learn how to see the structures in which we operate from within. In other words gaining knowledge (Senge, 2006). Mastering the system archetypes in the end is what will put the system perspective into practice (Senge, 2006). This when system thinking will become alive. 12 archetypes have been identified and nine are used in this book.

Senge states that limits to growth and shifting the burden are the two archetypes that recur frequently (Senge, 2006). As these archetypes are mastered they combine into an elaborate system. Think of it this way or the way Senge puts it. The sentence becomes a paragraph, the paragraph becomes a simple story (Senge, 2006). The simple story becomes a complex story. The simple business becomes a global empire.

I think that learning the system from the inside out is what will take one somewhere. Once we know our base of operations that is when we can launch. Think of it this way. Can one be an engineer if they do not know how to work the tools to build their machine? What if they do not know the machine itself? Then what happens?

Chapter 7

Senge looks at how leverage can be found by the two archetypes known as limits to growth and burden (Senge, 2006). He uses the tale of a company known as WonderTech in order to bring up an example of how looking at an archetype can help solve why a company may be failing. WonderTech failed as a result of a reputation for poor delivery service which made it harder to get more sales. Therefore there is the limit to growth structure (Senge, 2006).

The managers were unable to detect cause and effect separated in time. Therefore they could not pick up on the problem (Senge, 2006). The burden shifted to disgruntled customers and now one has a company that is "addicted" to limiting its growth. Many managers today claim that they lack information due to the vast complexity of the world seen today (Senge, 2006). Senge disagrees with that. He concludes by mentioning that it is not due to too little information. They have too much information (Senge, 2006).

He mentions that we need to know what problems need more of one's focus and the ones that do not. If one can master basic archetypes such as underinvestment and growth then one can absorb information in term of patterns (Senge, 2006). Mastering this system language requires all of the other learning disciplines mentioned in the book. I agree with Senge in the sense that if one does want to master something they need all of the components that come with it. They cannot just want to learn one thing of it and then aim to become an expert the next day. It is a process that requires obtaining knowledge of several things (Senge, 2006). These things come together in order to make that one system. Senge concludes with saying (Senge 2006), "Each contributes important principles and tools that make individuals, teams, and organization more able to make the shift from seeing the world primarily from a linear perspective to seeing and acting systematically."

Chapter 8

The idea of personal mastery and how it applies to the learning organization is examined in this section. Personal mastery is the phrase that refers to the aspect of discipline that involves personal growth and learning (Senge, 2006). People who have it use it continuously and are able to expand the ability to create the results they want in life. Organizations in the end learn through the individuals that learn (Senge, 2006).

When people grow and develop it allows the organization to become more effective. Senge puts it simply by saying, "we want it because we want it." The person who was uncomfortable and nervous at the beginning of their time in the organization is now the head of a certain part of the organization (Senge, 2006). That is what personal mastery is. It is the aspirations for life and for success. However organizations tend to resist it. It is to them considered to be one of the most radical departures they would have to do from traditional business practices in a learning organization (Senge, 2006). Cynicism and the feeling of a threatened established order are other resistors as well (Senge, 2006).

To get that sense of personal mastery there are a series of principles one has to apply in order to lay the groundwork to expand this discipline on themselves (Senge, 2006). Senge lists these principles to be personal vision, holding creative tension, commitment to the truth, and integrating reason and intuition (Senge, 2006). Other principles include seeing our connectedness to the world, compassion, and commitment to the whole.

Senge concludes by advising that if leaders want to bring about a climate in which personal mastery can be practiced they need to build an organization where people can create visions and challenging the status quo is expected (Senge, 2006). An organization like that will reinforce the idea that personal growth is valued and personal mastery provides on-the-job training. It is a process that is continuous (Senge, 2006). Commit oneself to their own personal mastery and be a model. Be being serious in your own quest you can encourage others to go on their quest as Senge says. I believe there is nothing more powerful to get encouragement across than being a model (Senge, 2006). The world needs more of them. Without models where is the drive to succeed in life? Where would the desire be for personal mastery? It would not be anywhere.

Chapter 9

Chapter 9 looks into the idea of mental models and how they can be the breakthrough needed for building learning organizations. New insights brought about in businesses can more than likely fail because they clash with what is familiar (Senge, 2006). Mental models try to take care of that. According to Senge reflective practice is the discipline that drives mental models. One also has to implement advocacy and inquiry balance. (Senge, 2006)

When advocating one has to make their reasoning explicit, encourage others to explore your view, encourage others to provide different views, and inquire into other views that differ from your own. When inquiring into other views one has to make sure to state their assumption clearly and acknowledge they are assumptions (Senge, 2006). One also has to state their data and only answer questions if they are interested in the response. It is also wise to keep in mind that the primary goal in these models is not agreement or convergence. Many of them can exist in agreement and some will disagree (Senge, 2006).

With the mental models systems thinking needs to be kicked into gear. There needs to be a philosophy and understanding of the models within the organization (Senge, 2006). The ultimate payoff, to Senge, by integrating systems thinking and mental models is that not only would it improve our mental models but it will also alter ways of thinking. There will be a shift to mental models that like long-term patterns of change. Learning organizations of the future will make decisions based on understandings of patterns of change and interrelationships (Senge, 2006).

I think mental models should be examined and worked to their full potential. New ideas are needed for many businesses today and mental models can provide that. If the same thing is happening each day in an organization where is the growth? It is this never ending crutch. The mental model can kick that crutch and put it into high gear that would lead to growth.

Chapter 10

Senge explains how shared vision is vital to the learning organization since it provides the drive needed for learning. A shared vision is when people are connected in regards to having a common aspiration. It gives a sense of commonality that goes through the entire organization (Senge, 2006). It also gives a greater coherence to the diverse activities that the organization does. Senge states that Apple, Ford, and AT&T are all companies that developed as a result of shared vision (Senge, 2006).

According to Senge shared visions uplifts aspirations, changes people's relationship with the company for the better, and compels courage to pursue a vision (Senge, 2006). It can also encourage healthy risk taking and experimentation as well as addressing the solution to how can long-term commitment be fostered (Senge, 2006). So how does it come about? It all starts with a personal vision. The first step is to give up the idea that visions have to come from the institutions process, top management has to have the resulting vision build up on the personal visions of the people, and vision has to be seen as more than a mere solution to the problem (Senge, 2006). Now when a group of people come together to share their visions each one sees their own image of the organization at its best. When you have common visions come out of the group that is when the magic happens.

Senge lists the certain attitudes that people may have towards a vision. They include apathy, commitment, enrollment, noncompliance, and grudging compliance (Senge, 2006). The last two are genuine compliance and formal compliance. Senge states that people who truly want the vision to come to light are ones who are enrolled and committed (Senge, 2006). He also advises that people who are enrolled and committed to follow certain guidelines such as be on the level, to be enrolled yourself, and let the other people choose when it comes to wanting to be a part of the vision or not (Senge, 2006).

The vision is a piece of developing what is known as governing ideas for the enterprise or organization itself (Senge, 2006). The governing ideas answer the critical questions of what, why, and how. They answer the ultimate question of what the organization as a whole believes in. So why can a shared vision fail?

Senge believes that the discipline of shared vision lacks an underpinning if it is not practiced without systems thinking. Organizations and their leaders tend to jump on the bandwagon (Senge, 2006). The expectations do not arrive on schedule and that causes people to disassociate from the vision. It fads away in the end. Managers do not experience the contribution they are contributing to shaping their reality (Senge, 2006). People need to grasp how existing policies are creating their current reality in order to get the confidence needed to make the change. I think if one truly wants to change their current reality and not merely adapt than they need the courage to stand up and voice that vision. That vision can make all the difference of the future. When that vision it shared by other it comes from being a vision to reality.

Chapter 11

The aligned team has the commonality of purpose and a shared vision that complements the actions of one another (Senge, 2006). The team that is aligned functions as a whole. It is what brings the shared vision mentioned in chapter 10 an extension of the personal visions. Team learning is the team developing the capacity to create the results the team desires and learning the process of aligning (Senge, 2006). It builds up on that personal mastery. It is about getting the ability to learn how to "play" with one another. I mean think about it. Can a sports team really be a team when players do not trust one another and want only themselves to make the winning shot? How would it be if they did not see the win as a collaborative effort of everyone coming together and playing a true game?

Team learning in organizations is essential. Senge lists three critical dimensions of team learning within the organization (Senge, 2006). There is the need to think insightfully about complex issues, the need for innovative and coordinate action, and the role of team members on other teams (Senge, 2006). The team needs to master the practices of dialogue and discussion. It also needs to learn how to deal creatively with forces that oppose those productive discussions and dialogue. It involves practice (Senge, 2006). Despite these key components team learning is still not really understood. Once certain mysterious parts of it are clear than it can be fully implemented.

Practice is that missing link. Team learning is quite challenging to do but practice makes it easier (Senge, 2006). The absence of that practice is what keeps management teams becoming effective learning units. Yes they have their abstract, ideas, and many team members learning intellectual opinions of one another (Senge, 2006). However where is the "stage" to practice those techniques? That is what Senge is saying. I believe he is right in saying that practice is needed in order to get the full picture. The ideas, opinions, and tools are not enough. One needs the stage or platform to work out those ideas and really practice what they mean (Senge, 2006). It reflects the saying that actions can be more powerful than words. The stage for practice is the action and the words are the ideas.

Once a team has "the same language" They can deal with complexity of ideas and strategies that make the business (Senge, 2006). When they can converse with one another and use it than the possibilities are endless. I think of organizations were to use "language" effectively no one would have problems with bringing up their ideas and learning from others. That unity is what leads to a solid picture.

Chapter 12

Chapter 12 looks at the ideas of reflective openness and participative openness. Participative openness concerns with speaking about ones view and reflective openness is the cornerstone of the mental models discipline mentioned earlier (Senge, 2006). In the end it leads to the idea of foundation. The foundation is in turn the organization itself. It is the environment that everyone will come to each day and therefore it should be a beneficial one (Senge, 2006).

The start to making that environment, according to Senge, starts with having a purpose that people will want to commit to. I think that is why many organizations have trouble with changing and implementing new ideas in the first place (Senge, 2006). How is anything going to happen if they cannot convince their people it will be worth the time and effort that is required of it? It all starts with the leader (Senge, 2006). The leader has to look into their own part of what is going on. The leader needs to be the one to be the most willing to learn. From there the rest is history.

Senge uses an example between two men known as Sandow and Allen (Senge, 2006). They did work that bridges the practice of reflection, the understanding of organizations as living systems, and the importance of relationships (Senge, 2006). By viewing the organization as a living system it puts focus on things as a whole, focuses on interactions, it focuses on integration, and focusing on systems to include the observer.

If that view can be held to its true potential Senge concludes that we will probably be able to truly see what it means to work together for something worth going for (Senge, 2006). I believe that once we get that view entirely we will have a different outlook on working together for any kind of scenario. Whether it be organization work or something to personally overcome in life.

Chapter 13

Senge points out three motivations that compel people to take on the work of building learning organizations Senge, 2006). He states that some are looking to seek a better model for how to lead change and manage it, some are trying to build an organizations capacity for continual change adaptation, and increase the performance of the workplace (Senge, 2006). Senge uses Marv Adams as an example of a long line of people who are drawn to learning organization work in order to build organizations that have greater capacity to deal with change and to have ways to lead it (Senge, 2006).

He states that Adans believes that increased adaptive organizational abilities represents the future of all organizations especially IT (Senge, 2006). One major example of creating a meaningful and rewarding work environment that Sheng uses is that of Commissioner Khoo (Senge, 2006). Khoo was able to take the Singapore Police Force and make it an organization that means business and that has meaning (Senge, 2006). As a result their crime solving rate increased to 60% and they have improved their bonds with their community by securing trust and cooperation.

Senge concludes by mentioning that happiness is the by-product by living life that pursues what one wants and by doing work with people who value friendship with one another (Senge, 2006). It is the motivation for practitioners of the learning organization. Think about it. If no one is happy what will get done or be accomplished?

Chapter 14

Chapter 14 looks at what it means to think strategically and the various strategies that people will follow in different settings. Senge presents a framework of what it means to think strategically (Senge, 2006). The framework addresses the questions of what are the aims and where do the leaders focus their attention and efforts on. It is known as strategic architecture. Another term is the deep learning cycle (Senge, 2006).

Five elements make up the deep learning cycle and they are beliefs and assumptions, established practices, skills and capabilities, networks of relationships, and awareness and sensibilities (Senge, 2006). All of them influence one another in some way or form. This leads to structuration. Structure influences the behavior of the system and the want for change increases as we learn how to strategize (Senge, 2006). We need to focus on the structure rather than events. The structure changes when we see it differently and operate differently.

The eight strategies that people will follow in different settings are integrating learning and working, starting where you are with whoever is there, becoming bicultural, and creating practice fields (Senge, 2006). The final four are connecting with the core of the business, building learning communities, working with the other, and developing learning infrastructures (Senge, 2006).