Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Management Learning
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Snell, R.
Right arrow Articles by Chak, A. M.-K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Learning Organization: Learning and Empowerment for Whom?

Robin Snell

City University of Hong Kong, mgsnell{at}cityu.edu.hk

Almaz Man-Kuen Chak

City University of Hong Kong

In this article we develop a framework to assess organizational learning and the depth, breadth and spread of members' involvement. The framework incorporates the Morgan (1986) metaphors and the `learning company' characteristics of Pedler et al. (1991), along with the notions of single-, double-, and triple-loop learning. We draw up competing hypotheses setting Coopey's (1995a, 1995b) constitutionalist argument that a `learning organization' will enhance only the power of the `ruling court' unless democratic arrangements are explicitly laid down, against ideas of developmental leadership. Using case studies of two blue-chip companies-both cited as learning organizations, one claiming to have a democratically-oriented constitution-we illustrate how the framework may be used to assemble data for use in testing hypotheses in more empirically-grounded studies of empowerment in learning organizations. Our study compared the perspectives of top management, reflected in popular and professional publications, with grass-roots accounts from Hong Kong subsidiaries. While the data is inconclusive because it was collected opportunistically and from very few sources, it lends support to the constitutionalist position.

Management Learning, Vol. 29, No. 3, 337-364 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/1350507698293005


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Global Business ReviewHome page
D. Akella
Discipline and Negotiation: Power in Learning Organizations
Global Business Review, August 1, 2008; 9(2): 219 - 241.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Global Business ReviewHome page
D. Akella
Pain and Stress in Learning Organizations: A Question of Career?
Global Business Review, December 1, 2007; 8(2): 323 - 333.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Global Business ReviewHome page
D. Akella
Learning Organizations: Managerial Control Systems?
Global Business Review, February 1, 2007; 8(1): 13 - 28.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Management LearningHome page
J. F. L. Hong
Extended Reviews
Management Learning, June 1, 2003; 34(2): 259 - 262.
[PDF]


Home page
Human RelationsHome page
M. Driver
The Learning Organization: Foucauldian Gloom or Utopian Sunshine?
Human Relations, January 1, 2002; 55(1): 33 - 53.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Management LearningHome page
M. Easterby-Smith, R. Snell, and S. Gherardi
Organizational Learning: Diverging Communities of Practice?
Management Learning, September 1, 1998; 29(3): 259 - 272.
[Abstract]