TY - GEN
T1 - Characteristics of learning organizations within the military
AU - Letens, Geert
AU - Di Schiena, Raffaella
AU - Van Aken, Eileen M.
AU - Farris, Jennifer A.
PY - 2012
Y1 - 2012
N2 - In order to survive in a complex and risky environment, military organizations are expected to develop characteristics of Learning Organizations (LO). To verify this, differences between mission units of the Belgian Armed Force vs. units engaged in territorial activities were observed, with respect to the five dimensions of LO defined by Peter Senge (systems thinking, team learning, shared vision, mental models, and personal mastery) and to the 11 dimensions of the Learning Company identified by Pedler, Burgoyne and Boydell (learning approach to strategy, participatory policy making, informating, formative accounting and control, internal exchange, reward flexibility, enabling structures, boundary workers as environmental scanners, inter-company learning, learning climate, and self-development opportunities). Findings were consistent with the hypothesized results. Additional analyses on the mission units also revealed that mission context and mission success can be related to several LO dimensions. This paper explores these relationships and identifies areas for future research. Copyright, American Society for Engineering Management, 2012.
AB - In order to survive in a complex and risky environment, military organizations are expected to develop characteristics of Learning Organizations (LO). To verify this, differences between mission units of the Belgian Armed Force vs. units engaged in territorial activities were observed, with respect to the five dimensions of LO defined by Peter Senge (systems thinking, team learning, shared vision, mental models, and personal mastery) and to the 11 dimensions of the Learning Company identified by Pedler, Burgoyne and Boydell (learning approach to strategy, participatory policy making, informating, formative accounting and control, internal exchange, reward flexibility, enabling structures, boundary workers as environmental scanners, inter-company learning, learning climate, and self-development opportunities). Findings were consistent with the hypothesized results. Additional analyses on the mission units also revealed that mission context and mission success can be related to several LO dimensions. This paper explores these relationships and identifies areas for future research. Copyright, American Society for Engineering Management, 2012.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84883407138&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:84883407138
SN - 9781627482820
T3 - Annual International Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management 2012, ASEM 2012 - Agile Management: Embracing Change and Uncertainty in Engineering Management
SP - 436
EP - 445
BT - Annual International Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management 2012, ASEM 2012 - Agile Management
T2 - 33rd Annual International Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management 2012, ASEM 2012 - Agile Management: Embracing Change and Uncertainty in Engineering Management
Y2 - 17 October 2012 through 20 October 2012
ER -