Sachi Hatakenaka

Learning from experience in high-hazard organizations

Abstract Learning from experience, the cyclical interplay of thinking and doing, is increasingly important as organizations struggle to cope with rapidly changing environments and more complex and interdependent sets of knowledge. This paper confronts two central issues for organizational learning: 1. (1) how is local learning (by individuals or small groups) integrated into collective learning by organizations? and 2. (2) what are the differences between learning practices that focus on control, elimination of surprises, and single-loop incremental “fixing” of problems with those that focus on deep or radical learning, double-loop challenging of assumptions, and discovery of new opportunities? We articulate these relationships through an analysis of learning practices in high-hazard organizations, specifically, problem investigation teams that examine the most serious and troubling events and trends in nuclear power plants and chemical plants. Our analysis suggests a four-stage model of organizational learning reflecting different approaches to control and learning.

Naturalistic Decision Making and Organizational Learning in Nuclear Power Plants: Negotiating Meaning Between Managers and Problem Investigation Teams

We explore the linkages between naturalistic decision making, which examines decisions in context, and team and organizational learning, which examines how feedback from decisions affects context. We study 27 problem investigation teams in three nuclear power plants, a setting that combines complex team decisions with organizational learning. Further, managers who commission the teams and receive team reports are a key aspect of context for the teams and a critical conduit for organizational learning and change. Questionnaires were given to both team members and manager recipients of written team reports, and team reports were coded for qualities of their analyses and recommendations. We find that team members value reports in which the team discovered causes or lessons that could be used in other contexts, whereas managers appreciate reports with logical corrective actions from teams with investigation experience. Teams with managers or supervisors as team members are better able to reach shared understanding with their manager customers. Teams with more diverse departmental backgrounds produce deeper and more creative analyses. Teams need access to information and analytical skills in order to learn effectively, but they also need management support and boundary-spanning skills in order to diffuse their learning.

The regional dynamics of innovation: a comparative study of oil and gas industry development in Stavanger and Aberdeen

This paper reports on a comparative case study of the development of local innovation systems in two key gateways to the North Sea oil and gas province: the Stavanger region on the southwest coast of Norway and the Aberdeen region in northeast Scotland. These two regions provide an ideal setting for a matched pair comparison, since the global market conditions and local geotechnical environment within which they developed into ‘oil capitals’ are strikingly similar. Despite these similarities, the development of local technological and industrial capabilities followed different paths in the two locations. Yet these differences do not appear to have led to significant differences in industrial competitiveness. Although Stavanger and Aberdeen are characterised by very different local innovation systems, the available evidence suggests that outcomes have been similar along significant dimensions of industry performance.