Organizational Learning Dichotomy: A Case Study Review

Introduction

Tsang (1997) presented in his research article a case study focused on research methods in organizational learning. The focus of this paper is to highlight and describe that case study, which called for a two-pronged approach designed to help communicate the concepts and ideas related to organizational learning. The central argument of the article examines how organizational learning has broken down into two separate approaches, creating problems in how researchers engage with the subject.

This essay first provides background information regarding the article and its contents by identifying the stakeholders presented in the work. A general overview of what is at stake is offered before narrowing down to the core problems identified in the research. Possible solutions are then highlighted and discussed before a practical recommendation is advanced.

Identification of Stakeholders and Their Problems, Goals, and Concerns

The data and analysis contained in Tsang (1997) are premised on the idea that there is no alignment or consensus regarding the study of organizational learning. Tsang wrote that "despite the growing popularity of the term 'organizational learning', writings on the topic have little consensus in terms of definition, perspective, conceptualization, and methodology." The article is further based on the idea that two streams of inquiry have emerged from this body of work: descriptive and prescriptive.

The comparison between descriptive research and prescriptive writings represents the two main approaches to the subject. According to the case study, each approach is insufficient on its own. Neither can stand alone, and a new paradigm must be developed to balance these two forces and provide a clearer pathway to understanding the subject. Once that happens, researchers and scholars can begin to apply its principles in a practical and reasonable manner based on scientific inquiry and sound reasoning.

Stakeholder #1: Researchers and Scholars

The article is grounded in the observation that researchers cannot find common ground on the concept of organizational learning. The term itself connects to many disciplines, including business management, sociology, psychology, education, and philosophy. Each researcher, by nature, brings a subjective interpretation to the concept that may align with either the prescriptive or the descriptive side of the argument. Unifying the approach could streamline research and scholarship across this broad subject area.

Stakeholder #2: Learning Institutions

Learning institutions depend on researchers and scholars to provide useful and practical information in order to prepare and educate students for careers in a given field. The alignment of the two sides of organizational learning can be realized in higher education classrooms where the work of scholars is applied. These institutions are most likely operating under the assumption that the research they draw on is valid and empirically tested. The case study suggests otherwise, noting that no consensus exists on the subject. By reducing this academic dissension, colleges and universities stand to benefit as stakeholders, as the quality and validity of their offerings would improve.

Stakeholder #3: Public and Private Organizational Management

Organizations—the actual focus of the study of organizational management—are major stakeholders in this case study. They depend on learning institutions to equip future workers with accurate and practical knowledge that advances organizational goals and objectives. Both public and private organizations can receive substantial benefits from resolving the lack of unity in approach to this subject. Refining the field could result in meaningful advances throughout society as organizations adopt and eventually master the concepts that would emerge from such an effort. The marriage between theory and practice is ultimately realized through these organizations.

Stakeholder #4: Students

The fourth group of stakeholders consists of future researchers, workers, scholars, and teachers—students themselves. The importance of developing a practical knowledge base that can genuinely be applied is evident when considering the significant investments that college students must make to earn their degrees.

Identification of Problems

The key problems discussed in this research article revolve around communicating a unifying idea that can be applied in the field of organizational learning. The diverse and abstract nature of the subject is the targeted problem addressed by Tsang (1997). He identified a distinct division that has evolved within academic investigation of the topic: one approach is subjective and the other is more objective or descriptive. As Tsang argued, "there is a growing dichotomy between the two streams of research, namely the descriptive stream dealing with the question 'How does an organization learn?' and the prescriptive stream, which asks 'How should an organization learn?'"

References

Garvin, D. A., Edmondson, A. C., & Gino, F. (2008). Is yours a learning organization? Harvard Business Review, 86(3), 109.

Milway, K. S., & Saxton, A. (2011). The challenge of organizational learning. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 9(3), 44–49.

Tsang, E. W. (1997). Organizational learning and the learning organization: A dichotomy between descriptive and prescriptive research. Human Relations, 50(1), 73–89.