Is yours a learning organization? Donal Hartman, Jr., J.D., LL.M Program Director, College of Graduate & Continuing Studies Norwich University, Northfield, Vermont Member, APWA Leadership and Management Committee
The APWA Leadership and Management Committee has introduced a new series of articles entitled “The Great 8” which focus on leadership traits and qualities. This is the eighth series of articles contributed by the committee over the past several years. The Leadership and Management Committee, working with a subcommittee composed of public works leaders with decades of experience, has identified a number of qualities required for success as a leader of a public works organization. The series will explore the following traits over the next eight months: 1. Vision 2. Charisma 3. Symbolism 4. Empowerment 5. Intellectual Stimulation 6. Integrity 7. Knowledge Management 8. Power of Relationships One of the most important questions for the public works leader is whether the organization is a learning organization. The answer to this question says a lot about the organization, and even more about the leader. It is a critically important inquiry as it reflects on a number of issues—innovation, willingness to learn new ways of doing business, commitment to lifelong learning, sharing knowledge, the vision for the organization, and whether the leader is moving the organization forward. What is a learning organization? The Harvard Business Review offers this 46 APWA Reporter
August 2012
definition: “A learning organization is an organization skilled at creating, acquiring, and transferring knowledge, and modifying its behavior to reflect new knowledge and insights.”* Best practices today tell us we must be a learning organization. Studies have shown a learning organization is more informed, adaptable, flexible, more inclined to see things in different ways, and willing to change and innovate. It will be more resilient, more confident of its capacity to meet challenges. Just as importantly, the organization which views education as an important value will be more democratic with a higher commitment from everyone to advance the interests of the organization. From an external perspective the learning organization maneuvers itself into position to create opportunities by challenging the status quo. Look at the experience of Nokia; it was a pioneer in the development and use of cell phones, but got stuck on its vision for the cell phone. It didn’t see its greater potential for photos, e-mails, and so forth. It took Apple and others to exploit the cell phone’s potential as a mini-computer. A learning organization recognizes stability is not the same as being static. Stability means viability, growth, and constant learning. Stability is best achieved from sharing knowledge and welcoming ideas. Just as important as meeting the demands of external challenges is creating positive dynamics within
the organization. Recently I asked a group of graduates if they: (1) were in an organization where information was hoarded, not shared; and (2) were regularly solicited for their views and advice. The answers were not favorable: Information was collected and hoarded by leadership; and information was not shared. Why? Leadership perceived knowledge and information as a source of power. Leadership saw input from the ranks and junior management as threatening. The natural result was lower-level managers felt marginalized and unimportant.
What does a learning organization look like? Learning organizations are skilled at five main activities: (1) systematic problem solving; (2) experimentation with new approaches; (3) learning from the organization’s experiences and past history; (4) learning from the experiences and best practices of others; and (5) communications, particularly the transfer of knowledge quickly and efficiently throughout the organization. Each is accompanied by a distinctive mind-set—the keys of our thinking patterns.** Systematic problem solving asks us to engage in the scientific approach in finding solutions. In other words, we rely on observation, creating a hypothesis, testing the hypothesis, and continued evaluation over time. The unscientific approach relies on historical anecdotes, chance, guesswork or trial and error followed after considerable time and expense
