Abstract
Possibly the most fundamental skill that is required in the emerging Knowledge Age is the ability to learn. This capability resides not only with individuals, but also at every other systemic level from dyads, groups and teams, to organisations, institutions and society at large. Indeed, learning is a veritable haystack of complex, interacting and inter-related elements that span the levels of the social system. Thus, research into learning that focuses on one or another level of analysis is necessarily limited in its explanatory capacity. It cannot be said that any element or isolated set of elements enables learning; to take this view is to err on the side of naiveté.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Checkland, P., and Scholes, J. (1999). Soft Systems Thinking: A Thirty Year Retrospective, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.
Cook, S.D.N., and Brown, J.S. (1999). “Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing,” Organization Science, l0(4):38l–400.
Crossan, M., Lane, H.W., and White, R.E. (1999). “An organizational learning framework: From intuition to institution,” Academy of Management Review, 24(3):522–537.
Forrester, J., (1961). Industrial Dynamics. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Guba, E.G., and Lincoln, Y.S. (1998). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Landscape of Qualitative Research. (N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln, eds.) Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Hitt, M.A., Ireland, R.D., and Lee, H. (2000). “Technological learning, knowledge management, firm growth and performance: an introductory essay,” Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, l7(3–4):231–246.
Lam, A. (2000). “Tacit knowledge, organizational learning and societal institutions: An integrated framework,” Organization Studies, 21 (3 ):487–513.
Mingers, J., and Brocklesby, J. (1997). “Multimethodology: Towards a Framework for Mixing Methodologies,” Omega: International Journal of Management Science 25(5):489–509.
Nonaka, I., and Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Ricoeur, P. (1984). Time and Narrative Volume 1, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Simpson, B., McGregor, J., Seidel, R., Kolb, D., Henley-King, J., and Tweed, D. (2000). “Learning in the Manufacturing Sector”. University of Auckland Business Review, 2( 1):38–50.
Simpson, B., Seidel, R., Byrne, S., and Woods, C. (2001). “Technological learning: Towards an integrated model,” Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Organizational Learning & Knowledge Management - New Directions, London Ontario, 1–4 June 2001. Richard Ivey School of Business, University of Western Ontario.
Spender, J. C. (1996). “Making knowledge the basis of dynamic theory of the firm,” Strategic Management Journal, l7( Winter Special Issue):45–62.
Sterman, J. (2000). Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modelling for a Complex World, Irwin McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Byrne, S., Todd, D., Simpson, B., Woods, C., Seidel, R. (2002). Inquiring into Learning as System. In: Ragsdell, G., West, D., Wilby, J. (eds) Systems Theory and Practice in the Knowledge Age. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0601-0_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0601-0_14
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-5152-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-0601-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive