Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice

The concept of community of practice was not born in the systems theory tradition. It has its roots in attempts to develop accounts of the social nature of human learning inspired by anthropology and social theory (Lave, 1988; Bourdieu, 1977; Giddens, 1984; Foucault, 1980; Vygotsky, 1978). But the concept of community of practice is well aligned with the perspective of systems traditions. A community of practice itself can be viewed as a simple social system. And a complex social system can be viewed as constituted by interrelated communities of practice. In this essay I first explore the systemic nature of the concept at these two levels. Then I use this foundation to look at the applications of the concept, some of its main critiques, and its potential for developing a social discipline of learning.

Communities of Practice and Social Learning Systems: the Career of a Concept

Continuing to learn is universally accepted and expected by professionals and other stakeholders across all professions. However, despite changes in response to research findings about how professionals learn, many professional development practices still focus on delivering content rather than enhancing learning. In exploring reasons for the continuation of didactic practices in professional development, this article critiques the usual conceptualization of professional development through a review of recent literature across professions. An alternative conceptualization is proposed, based on philosophical assumptions congruent with evidence about professional learning from seminal educational research of the past two decades. An argument is presented for a shift in discourse and focus from delivering and evaluating professional development programs to understanding and supporting authentic professional learning.

/pdf/reframing-professional-development-through-understanding-n4fws8j60n.pdf

Reframing Professional Development Through Understanding Authentic Professional Learning

This conceptual article introduces a dynamic learning perspective of entrepreneurship that builds upon existing “dominant” theoretical approaches to understanding entrepreneurial activity. As many aspects of entrepreneurial learning remain poorly understood, this article maps out and extends current boundaries of thinking regarding how entrepreneurs learn. It presents key conclusions from emergent empirical and conceptual work on the subject and synthesizes a broad range of contributory adult, management, and individual learning literature to develop a robust and integrated thematic conceptualization of entrepreneurial learning. Three distinctive, interrelated elements of entrepreneurial learning are proposed—dynamic temporal phases, interrelated processes, and overarching characteristics. The article concludes by demonstrating how a “learning lens” can be applied to create further avenues for research in entrepreneurship from a learning perspective.

https://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/48679/1/Document.pdf

Toward a Dynamic Learning Perspective of Entrepreneurship

Practice-Based Theorizing on Learning and Knowing in Organizations:

The paper discusses some of the main contributions to the theory of communities of practice (COP theory), especially as it relates to organizational learning The paper does not attempt a full overview but concentrates on the notion of power relations Early COP theory was formulated as part of situated learning theory, and promised to work on issues of social context and unequal power relations Foucault’s work and actor-network theory (ANT) is introduced and forms the basis of a constructive critique of COP theory The paper argues that COP theory and ANT can enrich each other and together make a stronger contribution to our understanding of organizational learning Specifically, these perspectives question the value in viewing organizations as formal, canonical entities as far as learning and change are concerned

Communities Of Practice, Foucault And Actor-Network Therory

This paper describes the differences between situated learning theory (SLT) and traditional cognitive theory (TCT). SLT is distinctive because it perceives learning to be a socially relational rather than a mentalist process. SLT places research attention upon knowledge productionin situ and in the course of work practices rather than upon learning transmission in the classroom. This paper argues that SLT's emphasis on the social context of learning is problematic and ambiguous. SLT sees context as pregiven, which is consistent with modernist thought, but also sees it as emergent, which is more consistent with postmodern thought. The implications of this are discussed and the SLT-TCT debate is used to shed light on management education from the perspective of management learning.

Situated learning theory versus traditional cognitive learning theory: Why management education should not ignore management learning

From management education and development to the study of management learning

This paper examines the increasing interest in practice-based theorising in the new social learning theory. It argues that this body of work does not pay sufficient attention to ethnomethodology's understanding of practical action. The paper then illustrates ethnomethodology's approach to understanding practical action, highlighting the concepts of ‘inquiry’ and ‘work’, and drawing upon examples from two phases in Garfinkel's work. Potential implications are then discussed for the new practice-based social learning theory and conclusions are drawn.

Inquiries of every imaginable kind: ethnomethodology, practical action and the new socially situated learning theory

The article addresses diversity work as a specific form of management work that involves complex micro-political strategies of resistance. Diversity work stems from an activist agenda that has been adopted by mainstream management practice, especially new public sector management. But in being adopted, it has been critiqued for also being co-opted, and as a result de-radicalized. The article seeks to examine this critique. First, we examine the politics of diversity, discussing critiques of diversity work from political theory and referencing femocrats, an earlier movement affecting women in management. Secondly, we recognize that the ambivalence of diversity work can be understood in terms of co-optation and resistance. Here our central contribution is to understand these two processes in a much more nuanced way, drawing on our own and other organizational studies of diversity work in practice. We locate this more nuanced analysis of diversity work in the emergent context of new public sector management. We draw attention to three micro-practices that help to exhibit a complex understanding of co-optation and resistance: (a) discursive resources, (b) embodied resources and (c) management technologies as resources. Finally, we conclude by outlining the article's contribution: extending Meyerson and Scully's notion of the tempered radical in four key ways. We do this by emphasizing the importance of the specificities of occupational resources of resistance, arguing that resources of resistance move beyond the discursive, emphasizing the gendered, classed and racialized variegated nature of insider/outsider dynamics and finally, stressing that co-optation and resistance are temporal, dynamic, intermingled processes in diversity work.

Stephen Fox

Papers

Communities Of Practice, Foucault And Actor-Network Therory

Situated learning theory versus traditional cognitive learning theory: Why management education should not ignore management learning

From management education and development to the study of management learning

Inquiries of every imaginable kind: ethnomethodology, practical action and the new socially situated learning theory

Playing the game: Strategies of resistance and co-optation in diversity work