|← Journal of Business Ethics||Organizational Learning and Crisis →|
Buy custom Organization Science essay
How much homogeneity and heterogeneity will be present in the change you are proposing (Haunschild & Sullivan, 2002)? How will this impact learning and the potential barriers (Smith & Elliott, 2007) that you might encounter as you strive to learn from incidents which occur during the change?
Haunschild and Sulivan (2002) explained that heterogeneous causes of crisis are due to several factors that interact in a complex way to result in one crisis. If one of these factors is not present, a crisis may not occur. Contrast to this, homogeneous cause of the crisis is caused by one factor. I am proposing to introduce new innovative products that will help to improve our market share in private equity investments. Homogeneity may occur since not all the employees may support this change since they may fear that these products may not be successful in the market. Heterogeneity may occur as some employees may feel that their job security may be threatened since new products will require the hiring of new financial analysts. Other employees may feel that this change may tie up many organizational funds, thus hindering expansion. This may affect the learning and potential barriers in my proposed change in several ways. The employees may opt to remain in their present condition and thus they may not be willing to adopt a culture that supports the change (Smith and Elliott, 2007).
What level of learning do you think that your organisation is most oriented to (Simon & Pauchant, 2000)? How can you use your proposed change to help your organization break through to the next level (Smith and Elliott, 2007)?
My organization is most suited to the second level of learning. This is because our organization encourages the contribution of all the employees’ ideas and feelings during the process of learning (Simon and Pauchant, 2000). Furthermore, we encourage our employees to come up with different means that would help us to achieve our organizational goals. We also encourage our employees to shift from one paradigm to another when faced with a crisis. I will use my proposed change to break to the next level by encouraging corporate responsibility of our organization. Smith and Eliot (2007) argued that corporate responsibility was one of the barriers that affected learning and change. By encouraging the employees to practice corporate responsibility and support the change since it will help us to become a market leader, we will move to the next level.
Come up with a situation in your organisation where employees likely need to learn from a sample of one or fewer (March, Sproull & Tamuz, 1991) How can your organisation learn both from and through such rare events (Christianson, Farkas, Sutcliffe & Weick, 2009)?
Our organization may be faced with a fire outbreak in its head office. This fire will threaten operations of our firm since it will destroy all our clients’ records in addition to destroying our assets like furniture and building. Our organization needs to learn both from and through this rare event. We will learn from this rare event since it will teach our employees on the benefits of maintaining fire safety through ensuring that they report any live wires that they may encounter. Furthermore, the organization will learn on the benefits of installing the latest fire detecting systems and training its employees on how to fight the fire. Our organization will learn through this rare event since we see the benefits of teamwork while handling crisis. Moreover, we will learn how beneficial is changing normal routines while handling crisis (Christianson, Farkas, Sutcliffe and Weick, 2009).
Identify some of the routines that exist in your organisation. How are these routines harmful given the external environment’s complexity (Haunschild & Sullivan, 2002)? How can you cross-institutional learning patterns to break these routines (Crossan, Lane & White, 1999)?
Several routines exist in our organization. Every worker is supposed to work for only eight hours per day. Furthermore, we only accept investment projects after carrying portfolio analysis and determining whether they are beneficial to the overall growth of our organization. We also hire only a limited number of employees per year from other companies since we try to encourage career growth in our organization. These routines are harmful, given the external complexity, since high client turnover may force employees to work extra hours (Haunschild and Sulivan, 2002). Furthermore, we may be forced to invest in projects that would create our public image although they may not be profitable. We may also be forced to hire experienced employees from other organizations in order to improve the management of our company. I will use cross-institutional learning patterns to break these routines by encouraging the organization to adopt flexibility and change its culture so that it incorporates policies and structures that would favor our organization (Crossan, Lane and White, 1999).