Micha Popper

Organizational Learning Mechanisms A Structural and Cultural Approach to Organizational Learning

This article presents a two-faceted (structural and cultural) approach to organizational learning. The structural facet focuses on organizational learning mechanisms, which are institutionalized structural and procedural arrangements allowing organizations to systematically collect, analyze, store, disseminate, and use information that is relevant to the performance of the organization. The cultural facet focuses on the shared values, without which these mechanisms are likely to be enacted as rituals rather than as means to detect and correct error. The authors describe how this proposed approach deals with the problem of anthropomorphism in organizational learning and discuss its utility for researching organizational learning and for introducing it into organizations.

The relationship between vision strength, leadership style, and context ☆

Abstract This investigation examined the relationship between leadership style and the content of vision tapes produced in a comprehensive leadership workshop with community leaders. The transformational leadership style of 141 leaders positively predicted the inspirational “strength” of their vision statements, as reflected in the level of optimism expressed in the videotaped presentation of their visions. Organizational size was related to vision strength and moderated the relationship between passive leadership style and vision strength.

A Multifacet Model of Organizational Learning

The objective of this article is to map the manyfacets of organizational learning into an integrative and parsimonious conceptual framework that can help researchers and practicioners identify, study, and introduce organizational learning to organizations. The article addresses the gap between theoryand practice of organizational learning byproviding a working definition of “productive organizational learning” and then describing the conditions under which organizations are likelyto learn. The model presented draws on scholarly organizational learning literature, practicioner accounts, and our own experiences as researchers and practitioners. It argues that learning by organization, as distinct from learning in organizations, requires the existence of organizational learning mechanisms. These mechanisms, which represent the “structural facet, ” are necessarybut not sufficient for generating productive organizational learning. The qualityof organizational learning depends on additional facets of organizational learning (cultural, psychological, policy, and contextual), which facilitate or inhibit learning and are also explored in this article.

Building Learning Organizations: The Design and Implementation of Organizational Learning Mechanisms

This article concerns the first phase of a project introducing organizational learning into the Ordnance Corps of the Israel Defense Forces. Conducted as a joint experiment, the project was guided by a set of principles and metaphors that constituted a vision of learning organizations. The article describes the conceptual rationale underlying the project, difficulties encountered and their solutions, and implications of our experience for building learning organizations.

Back to basics: applying a parenting perspective to transformational leadership

Developmental processes lie at the heart of the relationship between transformational leaders and followers. First, three major domains in which developmental outcomes have been mostly discussed, namely motivation, empowerment, and morality, are highlighted, expanded, and discussed. Next the analogy between transformational leaders and ‘‘good parents’’ is employed to explore the underlying developmental processes. Specifically, conceptualizations, notions, and findings are borrowed from the vast literature on parenting to help us understand these processes. Several major arguments and propositions, which can be tested empirically, are formulated by means of this analogy. These propositions and their conceptualization can broaden our perspective about the processes that underlie many of the outcome variables so frequently investigated and discussed in the leadership literature, and offer a major opportunity to probe the currently less explored developmental and dynamic aspects of leadership.

Organizational Learning in a Hospital

The authors present a case study of organizational learning in an internal medicine ward and a cardiac surgery ward of a university-affiliated hospital. The study is based on a structural and cultural approach to organizational learning. The structural facet of this approach consists of organizational learning mechanisms (OLMs), which are institutionalized structural and procedural arrangements that allow organizations to systematically collect, analyze, store, disseminate, and use information relevant to the performance of the organization. The cultural facet consists of shared values without which OLMs are likely to be enacted as rituals rather than as mechanisms to detect and correct error. Based on semistructured interviews and unstructured observations, the authors identify the OLMs that operate in the two hospital units and the cultures in which they are embedded.

Coaching on Leadership

Coaching is a much‐discussed topic on which little has been written at a thoeretical level. Relates coaching to Bandura′s theory of sefefficacy and Schon′s work on developing reflective practitioners. Claiming that enhancement of self‐efficacy (a sense of mastery in a particular domain) is central to coaching, describes how self‐efficacy is acquired in general, how it can be enhanced in coaching on leadership, and what characterizes good coaches.

The Mystification of Organizational Learning

Despite the growing popularity of organizational learning and the proliferation of literature on the subject, the concept remains elusive for researchers and managers alike. This article argues that enduring uncertainty about the meaning and practice of organizational learning reflects its so-called mystification. It attributes mystification to five features of the field: (a) ever-increasing conceptual diversity, (b) anthropomorphizing organizational learning, (c) a split in the field between visionaries and skeptics, (d) the reification of terminology, and (e) active mystification of the concept. The article explains and illustrates how the literature on organizational learning has contributed to these processes of mystification. It concludes by specifying a number of strategies that researchers and practitioners can employ to demystify the concept of organizational learning.

Leadership styles and organizational learning in community clinics

Purpose – The correlation between organizational unit managers’ leadership styles and the level of organizational learning in their units was tested.Design/methodology/approach – A positive correlation was hypothesized between transformational leadership and organizational learning as manifested by organizational learning mechanisms – OLMs (the structural component) and by organizational learning values (the cultural component). The research was conducted at 44 community clinics of a health‐care organization in Israel.Findings – The findings attested to the central role of organizational leaders in determining the effectiveness of organizational learning. The theoretical, methodological, and practical implications of the findings are discussed.Originality/value – Suggests that, in addition to separating the sources of reporting, and increasing the number of measures, future studies should also extend the research to different kinds of organizations, addressing different purposes, environments, work forces...

How Organizations Learn: Post-flight Reviews in an F-16 Fighter Squadron

We present an in-depth analysis of post-flight reviews in a fighter aircraft squadron of the Israel Defense Force Air Force. Our findings demonstrate how organizations can learn non-metaphorically and highlight the dynamics of learning in a central organizational learning mechanism in this type of after-action review. They also show that learning in the post-flight reviews is a multi-layered process of retrospective sense-making, detection and correction of error, social comparison, social control, socialization, and bonding, where lessons-learned pertain to different domains and different levels — individual, unit, and Force-wide. The process is facilitated by five values specified by the multi-facet model (Lipshitz, Popper and Friedman 2002), and the assumption that learning through critical examination of ones own experience is the key to improvement.