About BRINT | News About BRINT | Help & FAQs | Contact Us | Advertise Here |
Welcome to the World's No. 1 Resource for Business Technology Management and Knowledge Management

Services: Knowledge Portals · Knowledge Map · Knowledge Network · Book of Knowledge · NEWS· INFORMATION Channels: General Business · Business Technology · E-Business · Knowledge Management Community: Join the Network! · Global Network · Events Calendar · Executive Jobs	SEARCH [HELP]

Join Community of Practice Discussions in Knowledge Management Think Tank.

Friday, July 25, 2008

Do Universities Need to Function as Learning Organizations?

"Do universities have to be learning organizations to communicate to others learning, rationalizing, reasoning, understanding, explaining, contrasting skills and so forth?" Or can they fulfill this grandiose objective by "just talking the talk." In other words, won't proactive actions as archetypes of desired [or undesired] behaviors be more forceful than verbal and written regurgitation of theories and case studies of other organizations actions and behaviors. What are the implications of this issue for academia, in particular business academia?

The key question that seems of interest is: "Do universities have to be learning organizations to communicate to others learning, rationalizing, reasoning, understanding, explaining, contrasting skills and so forth?" Or can they fulfill this grandiose objective by "just talking the talk." In other words, won't proactive actions as archetypes of desired [or undesired] behaviors be more forceful than verbal and written regurgitation of theories and case studies of other organizations actions and behaviors.

Assuming that knowledge and action are closely tied together, would a blank slate of action be enough to impart to others knowledge of whatever issue is of interest. Alternatively, how does one know that one knows, unless one has 'lived' the experience of knowing in some proactive pursuit. Taking it to more operational levels, the question is: Can an institution that has not grappled with the strategy, design and implementation of information systems has the "knowledge" that it can impart to others on such issues? Similarly: Can an institution that has not grappled with the "reality" of marketing its own products and services, and competitive and environmental challenges involved in the process, really impart to others such "knowledge in action" that it may itself not have?

These issues seem relevant and interesting because the final and ultimate proof of any theory rests in the acid-test of its "truth" in the reality of a business environment. If merely reading about others' theories, actions and behaviors was adequate for competitive success, the current barrage of business best-sellers would have resulted in a utopian world where everyone would be living and performing at the peak level.

However, as noted earlier the challenge lies not only in hypothesizing theories based on what is observed, but more importantly in "living" the reality of implementation of such theories in the messy world of practice.

Therefore, the universities and all kinds of professional schools have a very important role to play in the formation of people who will be able to contribute to "learning organizations". However, if they can do so without themselves being "learning organizations" is a moot issue.

A related issue is that of credibility of the institution, school, university or whatever claims to be in the "professing role" about the shape and form of knowledge on any aspect of business life. Wouldn't one want to see that such institutions can not only 'talk the talk' but 'walk the walk' to substantiate their validity as those capable of "professing" to others how and why whatever is to be done or undone should be done or undone [simplistically speaking]?

Comments welcome...

Join in the Discussion by Clicking on the Following Link

"Talking the Talk" and "Walking the Walk"

Join for discussions in the Online Community Network.