1. c Annabi 2005 From Individual Learning to Organizational Learning Hala Annabi hpannabi@u.washington.edu

2. c Annabi 2005 Learning Objectives Critique the conceptual foundations to organizational learning Distinguish between individual level and organizational level learning Identify steps in the organizational learning process Identify steps in the organizational learning process Identify factors that enhance or impede organizational learning Identify factors that enhance or impede organizational learning Critique the conceptual foundation of the concept of CoP Explain how organizations may cultivate CoP Explain how organizations may cultivate CoP Identify effective practices within CoP Identify effective practices within CoP Explain how organizations may organize CoP to align with business objectives

3. c Annabi 2005 Overview Organizational Learning  Theoretical Foundation  Individual vs. organizational learning  OSS Example Break Communities of Practice  Presenting the case  Working on the case and Discussion  Research Recommendations

4. c Annabi 2005 Organizational learning in light of knowledge-based view of the firm Knowledge-based view “the primary role of the firm [is] integrating the specialized knowledge resident in individuals into goods and services. The primary task of management is establishing the coordination necessary for this knowledge integration.” Knowledge integration: organizational learning

5. c Annabi 2005 Why Organizational Learning? (Argyris & Schön, 1996; Argyris, 1999) adapting to the environment avoiding stability traps experimenting rethinking means and ends correcting for error innovating realizing human potential for learning in the service of organizational purposes creating organizational settings as contexts for human development

6. c Annabi 2005 Theoretical Orientations to Learning in Psychology TheoristView of the Learning ProcessLocus of Learning BehavioristThorndike, Pavlov, Skinner Change in behaviorStimuli in external environment CognitiveLewin, Piaget, Bruner Internal mental process (including insight, information processing, memory, perception) Internal cognitive structuring HumanistMaslow, Rogers A personal act to fulfill potentialAffective and cognitive needs Social and Situational Lave and Wenger, Handura Interaction and observation in social contexts. Movement from the periphery to the center of a community of practice Learning is a relationship between people and environment

7. c Annabi 2005 Questions of Organizational Learning? What does Organizational Learning mean? Who is learning? What is being learned? When does learning take place? What results does learning yield? How does learning take place?

8. c Annabi 2005 What is Organizational Learning? ReferenceDefinition Cyert and March (1963)Is adaptive behavior of organizations over time Cangelosi and Dill (1965)A series of interactions between adaptation at the individual, or subgroup level and adaptation at the organizational level Argyris and Schön (1978)The process by which organizational members detect errors or anomalies and correct them by restructuring organizational theory in use Duncan and Weiss (1979)The process within the organization by which knowledge about action-outcome relationships and the effect of the environment on these relationships is developed Fiol and Lyles (1985)The process of improving actions through better knowledge and understanding Levitt and March (1988)Organizations are seen as learning by encoding inferences from history into routine behavior Huber (1991)An entity learns if, through the processing of information, the range of its potential behaviors is changed…

9. c Annabi 2005 Who is learning? Individual Group Organization

10. c Annabi 2005 In groups of 3-4, please address the following questions? Who learns in organizations?  Individuals  Groups  Organizations What are the indicators of that learning?

11. c Annabi 2005 What is being learned? Rules and standard operating procedures (Cyert & March, 1963; Levitt & March, 1988) Decisions reached (Cangelosi & Dill, 1965), cognitive and behavioral changes (M. C. Fiol & Lyles, 1985) Theories-in-use (Argyris & Schön, 1978) Organizational knowledge (Duncan & Weiss, 1979; Huber, 1991).

12. c Annabi 2005 When does learning take place? Slack in resources (Cyert & March, 1963; Duncan & Weiss, 1979) Stress or tension (Cangelosi & Dill, 1965; M. C. Fiol & Lyles, 1985) Error or mismatch of expectations (Argyris & Schön, 1978; Levitt & March, 1988) Innovation (Annabi, 2005)

13. c Annabi 2005 What results does learning yield? Improved performance  better adaptation and alignment to the environment (Cyert & March, 1963; Duncan & Weiss, 1979; M. C. Fiol & Lyles, 1985; Levitt & March, 1988)  reduction of stress (Cangelosi & Dill, 1965)  better range of action strategies of potential behaviors (Argyris & Schön, 1978; Huber, 1991) Does all Learning Lead to Improvement?

14. c Annabi 2005 How does learning take place? FrameworkApproachOrientationLearning Cyter and March (1963) ExplanatoryBehavioral developmentExplicit Argyris and Schon (1978) NormativeSingle-loop vs. double-loop learning Lower vs. higher level cognition Explicit Fiol and Lyles (1985)ExplanatoryLower and higher-level cognition Explicit Levitt and March (1988) ExplanatoryBehavioral development and cognitive development Explicit and implicit Huber (1991)ExplanatoryBehavioral development and cognitive development Explicit and implicit

15. c Annabi 2005 From Individual Learning to Group Learning: The Case of Apache Web Server Project Annabi 2005

16. c Annabi 2005 The Issue OSS groups are distributed Rely on contributions from volunteers Many contributions come from outside the core Core development challenge: how to minimize the challenges of being distributed and manage large contributions from inside and outside of the core

17. c Annabi 2005 OSS Development Challenge Explored Difficult because of potential for: Miscommunication Misunderstanding Problems in product and process management Coordination difficulties Limited availability of expert knowledge

18. c Annabi 2005 Group Learning is Needed Integrate the knowledge of developers and users into an effective product through effective processes Need to understand the learning process in OSS groups

19. c Annabi 2005 Research Questions RQ1: What are the characteristics of the group- learning process in a distributed environment? RQ1a: How do distributed groups change rules and procedures? RQ1b: How do distributed groups change shared mental models? RQ2: What are the factors that impede or enhance group learning?

20. c Annabi 2005 Research Design Naturalistic setting Single embedded case study design  Apache Web Server  Learning opportunity episode Data Sources  Observation of email interactions  Documentation  E-mail interviews (limited) Content Analysis  Three content analytic schemes

21. c Annabi 2005 Theoretical Framework for Learning Process in Distributed Groups (Annabi 2005) Organizational Context Corporate participation Group Design Composition Task Task Management Discussion of strategy Critical analysis Developing shared mental models Group Learning: Rules, procedures or guidelines Shared mental models Facilitators and Barriers Resources Individual Contribution Leadership Group Interaction Core Developers’ Interest Input Learning Process Output Triggers: External Internal Group Structure SMM Rules, Procedures Role Structure Individual Learning Group Maintenance Interaction Cohesion Conflict resolution Learning Episode

22. c Annabi 2005 Content Analytic Schemes Episode Level (e.g.)  Focus (product, process, or both)  Type of Learning Opportunity  Learning outcome Learning Process  Task Management  Group Maintenance  Individual Contribution Learning Triggers  Internal  External

23. c Annabi 2005 Overview of Learning Opportunity Episodes Focus and Learning Outcomes Focus of Episode (Process or Product) Learning Outcome Total of focus of episode No Learning Shared Mental Models Rule Both Rules and Shared Mental Models Process 1610 1450 Product 9632579 Product and Process 32022449 Total Learning Outcome 28931443178

24. c Annabi 2005 Finding 1: Group learning requires interaction Individual contributions are important to group learning but are not sufficient

25. c Annabi 2005 Findings 2: Development of shared mental models is central to the group learning process 91% of learning episodes resulted in developing shared mental models 9% of learning episodes led only to developing rules and guidelines Shared mental model indicators were pervasive in all types of learning opportunity episodes

26. c Annabi 2005 Finding 3: A majority of learning opportunities had a product focus OutcomeNumber Percentage of Total Number of Episodes Percentage of Episodes that Led to Learning No learning2816%0% Change in shared mental model9351%62% Change in rule148%9% Change in both rule and shared mental model4325%29% 178

27. c Annabi 2005 Finding 4: Product-focused episodes produce different learning than process-focused episodes Focus of Episode (Process or Product) Learning Outcome Total of focus of episode No Learning Shared Mental Models Rule Both Rules and Shared Mental Models Process 1610 1450 Product 9632579 Product and Process 32022449 Total Learning Outcome 28931443178

28. c Annabi 2005 Findings 5: Core-developers are the main contributors to group learning Contributors to learning episodes are predominantly core-developers 75% of Learning triggers in Apache were generated from core-developers, and 25% of learning triggers are generated from external sources Internal learning triggers generate more complex learning episodes (88%)

29. c Annabi 2005 Findings 6: The group devised their own learning mechanism Sharing information on code status  made up 20% of all learning triggers  triggered 35% of complex episodes

30. c Annabi 2005 Findings 6: Example sharing information on code status Example (hyperreal 3/18/1995): I've put apache-0.2.tar.Z into http://www.hyperreal.com/httpd/dist/ It's based on the votes I read before sending this mail, which included Roy's which killed off some but revived others. Included are, B01_CERT_security.txt B02_linger.txt B06_log-no-stdio.txt [omitted due to space limitation] All remaining patches should now be replaced with new patches which are relative to apache-0.2. Drop them in http://www.hyperreal.com/httpd/patches/for_Apache_0.2/...then we can start discussing them. All votes collected so far have now expired.

31. c Annabi 2005 Factors affecting group learning Member contribution Levels of group interaction Task constraints and focus Leadership behavior to facilitate the process Resources Conflict resolution

32. c Annabi 2005 Closing “Knowledge about the process, or the know how, of learning facilitates corrections that simulate or accelerate learning” (Maier, et al. 2001, pg. 16).

33. c Annabi 2005 Questions? Break 10 mins

34. c Annabi 2005 Communities of Practice Hala Annabi Paul Arnold and Chris Rivinus

35. c Annabi 2005 The Issue Complex Organizations  Predominance of specialized knowledge work  Focus on core capabilities  distributed pockets of knowledge Management challenge: coordination of knowledge sources for business objectives University of Washington

36. c Annabi 2005 Management Challenge Explored.. Coordination of knowledge sources is problematic due to difficulties in:  Identifying sources of knowledge  Connecting disparate sources of knowledge  Protecting against knowledge loss  Applying knowledge towards business ends University of Washington

37. c Annabi 2005 Solution: Learning Organization Identify knowledge sources Create mechanisms to connect across geographical and disciplinary boundaries Integrate individual knowledge and experience into organizational procedures, routines, product and services, norms and culture University of Washington

38. c Annabi 2005 How to Harness the Power of CoPs for Business Objectives? CoPs have been used to help manage knowledge in organizations… Issues  Focus on knowledge exchange between individuals  Knowledge resides within single CoP- not across  Limited integration University of Washington

39. c Annabi 2005 The Research How to utilize CoPs to leverage knowledge towards business objectives? Instances in PB PANs  Human Resources  Knowledge exchange across PANs  Knowledge repository  Global integration  Increase efficiency  Business development  Innovation  Disseminate cutting edge knowledge Do these systematically in alignment with business strategy University of Washington

40. c Annabi 2005 Presentation Agenda Background  PB and Practice Area Networks Discussion Overview of Research Project Preliminary Research Results Discussion University of Washington

41. c Annabi 2005 Parson Brinkerhoff Practice Area Networks (PANs) PB History and Structure PANs History and Structure Knowledge Exchange at PB University of Washington

42. c Annabi 2005 History and Structure of PB 125 Year Old Firm Barclay Parsons & Klapp Over 9,000 Employees in over 200 Offices Project-Based Entrepreneurial Business Model Growth Through Project wins and Acquisition Accelerated Growth in the 90’s University of Washington

43. c Annabi 2005 Geographic Distribution: North America

44. c Annabi 2005 Geographic Distribution: Europe

45. c Annabi 2005 Geographic Distribution: Middle East

46. c Annabi 2005 Geographic Distribution: Asia

47. c Annabi 2005 Geographic Distribution: Australia/New Zealand

48. c Annabi 2005 Practice Area Network = PAN PANs Created in 1994 Leadership: Voluntary Membership: Voluntary History and Structure of PB University of Washington

49. c Annabi 2005 Knowledge Exchange at PB PAN Requestor PAN Coordinator

50. c Annabi 2005 Knowledge Exchange at PB Broadcast Request to PAN Members Around the Globe

51. c Annabi 2005 Knowledge Exchange at PB Responses Routed through Coordinator to Requestor

52. c Annabi 2005 Overview of Research Project Research Questions Study Approach

53. c Annabi 2005 The Question: How do we utilize CoPs to leverage knowledge towards business objectives? What are the challenges? What should we do? University of Washington

54. c Annabi 2005 Specific Research Questions To what extent do exchanges in the PAN contribute to business objectives? What are the characteristics of the learning process in the PANs? What are the factors that impede or enhance organizational learning process? University of Washington

55. c Annabi 2005 Approach: Two Phase Study Exploratory Interview Phase  Understanding the nature of the PANs and their activities  Determine the extent to which Organizational Learning is taking place in the PANs  Interview all PAN coordinators and some active members Investigation of Organizational Learning Episodes  In-depth analysis of learning episodes in several PANs University of Washington

56. c Annabi 2005 Study Preliminary Results Do PANs Contribute to Business Objectives? How do PANs contribute to business objectives? How to Best Harness the PANs for Business Objectives? University of Washington

57. c Annabi 2005 Do PANs Contribute to Business Objectives? Yes Contingent on PAN coordinator and steering committee efforts University of Washington

58. c Annabi 2005 How do PANs contribute to business objectives? Business Objectives  Human Resources  Knowledge exchange across PANs  Knowledge repository  Global integration  Increase efficiency  Business development  Innovation  Disseminate cutting edge knowledge University of Washington

59. c Annabi 2005 How to Best Harness the PANs for Business Objectives?

60. c Annabi 2005 How to Best Harness the PANs for Business Objectives? Align PANs to business strategy Design each PAN to fit its specific objectives and disciplinary nature Create Proper alignments between the PANs Empower PANs Prepare and empower PAN leadership University of Washington

61. c Annabi 2005 Align PANs with Organizational Strategy Determine where PANs reside within organizational structure Determine the role/roles of the PANs in contributing to strategy Communicate the roles of PANs Business Development Land Use Resource Center 1999 Facilitators  PAN Initiative  Support University of Washington

62. c Annabi 2005 Design PANs for Specific Objectives and Disciplinary Nature Diverse expertise and activities within PB Design to fit various roles Global Integration Interdisciplinary and far reaching topics (e.g. Environmental Planning) Transferring advanced practice around the globe Facilitators  Supportive culture  Individual willingness University of Washington

63. c Annabi 2005 Create Proper Alignments between the PANs Align PANs - related objectives and focus Facilitate interactions across PANs- creative collaborations Knowledge Exchange across PANs & HR: Transfer from IT PAN to CADD PAN to Project Administration PAN Facilitator  Alignment with CIO  Collaboration between PANS  OPP support University of Washington

64. c Annabi 2005 PAN Informal Collaboration

65. c Annabi 2005 Empower PANs Create supportive structure  Resources  Reward Systems  Authority and capabilities  Flexible tools Increased Efficiency Create a central processing for software purchases Facilitators  Collaboration with corporate  Initiative of PAN leadership  Supportive culture University of Washington

66. c Annabi 2005 Prepare and Empower PAN Leadership Articulate the Role of PAN leadership Time allocation Training and support Innovation: PB CommentSense Created New tool Facilitators  Initiative  Awareness of PAN members’ needs  OPP support University of Washington

67. c Annabi 2005 Take Away University of Washington

68. c Annabi 2005 The Learning Organization Move from organizational learning to the learning organization A system approach Align all organizational learning and knowledge management efforts to business strategy University of Washington

69. c Annabi 2005 How to Harness the Power of CoPs for Business Objectives? Align CoPs to organizational strategy Design each CoP to fit its specific objectives and disciplinary nature Create Proper alignments between the CoPs Empower CoPs Prepare and empower CoPs leadership University of Washington

70. c Annabi 2005 Questions and Discussion

71. c Annabi 2005 Episode Level Scheme Characteristic Date Topic Focus (product, process, or both) Type of Learning (shared mental models, rules, or both) Trigger Member initiating the episode Learning outcome (no learning, shared mental models, rules, both)

72. c Annabi 2005 Refined Learning Triggers Scheme Learning TriggerIndicator ExternalUser need* New technology* External influences* Offer to contribution or new member (Grant 1996) User identified error (Argyris & Schön, 1978) InternalMisrepresentations or gaps in understanding* Conflict (Gladstein) Lack of resources (Hackman) Error (Argyris & Schön, 1978) Summarize/update/share information of code and product status* Efficacy of the process (Anderson et. al.) Innovation in the process* Innovation in the product* Member identified error (Argyris & Schön, 1978)

73. c Annabi 2005 Group Learning Process Scheme ProcessOld Construct Group maintenance Interaction Cohesion Conflict Task managementDiscussion of strategy Critical Analysis Shared mental models Individual contribution Level of effort brought to bear on the task Amount of knowledge and skills applied