This paper differs from previous examinations of organizational learning in that it is broader in scope and more evaluative of the literatures. Four constructs related to organizational learning knowledge acquisition, information distribution, information interpretation, and organizational memory are articulated, and the literatures related to each are described and critiqued.

The literature on knowledge acquisition is voluminous and multi-faceted, and so the knowledge acquisition construct is portrayed here as consisting of five subconstructs or subprocesses: 1 drawing on knowledge available at the organization's birth, 2 learning from experience, 3 learning by observing other organizations, 4 grafting on to itself components that possess knowledge needed but not possessed by the organization, and 5 noticing or searching for information about the organization's environment and performance. Examination of the related literatures indicates that much has been learned about learning from experience, but also that there is a lack of cumulative work and a lack of integration of work from different research groups. Similarly, much has been learned about organizational search, but there is a lack of conceptual work, and there is a lack of both cumulative work and syntheses with which to create a more mature literature. Congenital learning, vicarious learning, and grafting are information acquisition subprocesses about which relatively little has been learned.

The literature concerning information distribution is rich and mature, but an aspect of information distribution that is central to an organization's benefitting from its learning, namely how units that possess information and units that need this information can find each other quickly and with a high likelihood, is unexplored. Information interpretation, as an organizational process, rather than an individual process, requires empirical work for further advancement. Organizational memory is much in need of systematic investigation, particularly by those whose special concerns are improving organizational learning and decision making.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/2634941.pdf

Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures

In this article I describe and compare a number of alternative generic strategies for the analysis of process data, looking at the consequences of these strategies for emerging theories. I evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the strategies in terms of their capacity to generate theory that is accurate, parsimonious, general, and useful and suggest that method and theory are inextricably intertwined, that multiple strategies are often advisable, and that no analysis strategy will produce theory without an uncodifiable creative leap, however small. Finally, I argue that there is room in the organizational research literature for more openness within the academic community toward a variety of forms of coupling between theory and data.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/259349.pdf

Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data

Erik Eriksen is a remarkable individual. He has no college degrees yet is Professor of Human Development at Harvard University. He came to psychology via art, which explains why the reader will find him painting contexts and backgrounds rather than stating dull facts and concepts. He has been a training psychoanalyst for many years as well as a perceptive observer of cultural and social settings and their effect on growing up. This is not just a book on childhood. It is a panorama of our society. Anxiety in young children, apathy in American Indians, confusion in veterans of war, and arrogance in young Nazis are scrutinized under the psychoanalytic magnifying glass. The material is well written and devoid of technical jargon. The theme of the volume is that it is human to have a long childhood which will leave a lifelong residue of emotional immaturity in man. Primitive groups and

Childhood and Society.

Editor’s Note. Three years ago, I invited Robert (Bob) Gephart to write a “From the Editors” column designed to help authors improve their chances of success when submitting qualitative research to AMJ. Judging from the increasing number of qualitative studies that have been accepted and published in AMJ since that time, I would like to think that his article, “Qualitative Research and the Academy of Management Journal,” has had a positive impact. Continuing in this tradition, I asked Roy Suddaby—an excellent reviewer (and author) of qualitative research—to tackle another “big issue” that the editorial team has noticed with respect to qualitative submissions to AMJ: overly generic use of the term “grounded theory” and confusion regarding alternative epistemological approaches to qualitative research. Like Bob before him, Roy has, I believe, produced an analysis that will greatly benefit those who are relatively new to qualitative research or who have not yet had much success in getting their qualitative research published. Hopefully, Roy’s analysis will help even more authors to succeed, thus allowing AMJ and other journals to continue to increase the quality of insights provided by rich qualitative studies of individual, organizational, and institutional phenomena. Sara L. Rynes

/pdf/from-the-editors-what-grounded-theory-is-not-4m06hi87m3.pdf

From the Editors: What Grounded Theory is Not

This article addresses how individuals make sense of their organization's response to a nontraditional and emotional strategic issue. The reported research also concerned microprocesses involved in...

Keeping An Eye on the Mirror: Image and Identity In Organizational Adaptation

Little is known about work relationships, other than mentoring relationships, that contribute to adult and career growth. A biographical interview study of 25 relationship pairs indicated that rela...

/pdf/mentoring-alternatives-the-role-of-peer-relationships-in-3nnjtn1ksc.pdf

Mentoring Alternatives: The Role of Peer Relationships in Career Development

The purpose of this research was to develop a model of how managers construe organizational events as a change unfolds. The model, built from in-depth interviews with 40 managers, suggests that int...

Evolving Interpretations as a Change Unfolds: How Managers Construe Key Organizational Events

Age vs stage models of career attitudes of women: A partial replication and extension

Downsizing: Survivors' assessments

Summary This study addresses the question of how career stage affects the meaning managers attribute to key organizational events. Propositions were developed suggesting that career stage provides a frame of reference when interpreting events and that the frequency with which this frame of reference is used differs in each career stage. In depth interviews with 40 managers across three career stages supported these propositions.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/2488092.pdf

Lynn A. Isabella

Papers

Mentoring Alternatives: The Role of Peer Relationships in Career Development

Evolving Interpretations as a Change Unfolds: How Managers Construe Key Organizational Events

Age vs stage models of career attitudes of women: A partial replication and extension

Downsizing: Survivors' assessments

The effect of career stage on the meaning of key organizational events