This paper considers the relationship between the stocks and flows of learning across levels in an overall organizational learning system. A survey instrument based on the Strategic Learning Assessment Map (SLAM) was administered to 15 individuals representing senior-, middle- and non-management levels from each of 32 organizations, resulting in a total sample of 480 respondents. This research supports the premise that there is a positive relationship between the stocks of learning at all levels and business poibrmance. Furthermore, the proposition that the misalignment of stocks and flows in an overall organizational learning system is negatively associated with business per, finance is also supported.

A Review and Assessment of Research This paper reviews and assesses the emerging research literature on information technology and organizational learning. After discussing issues of meaning and measurement, we identify and assess two main streams of research: studies that apply organizational learning concepts to the process of implementing and using information technology in organizations; and studies concerned with the design of information technology applications to support organizational learning. From the former stream of research, we conclude that experience plays an important, yet indeterminate role in implementation success; learning is accomplished through both formal training and participation in practice; organizational knowledge barriers may be overcome by learning from other organizations; and that learning new technologies is a dynamic process characterized by relatively narrow windows of opportunity. From the latter stream, we conclude that conceptual designs for organizational memory information systems are a valuable contribution to artifact development; learning is enhanced through systems that support communication and discourse; and that information technologies have the potential to both enable and disable organizational learning. Currently, these two streams flow independently of each other, despite their close conceptual and practical links. We advise that future research on information technology and organizational learning proceeds in a more integrated fashion, recognizes the situated nature of organizational learning, focuses on distributed organizational memory, demonstrates the effectiveness of artifacts in practice, and looks for relevant research findings in related fields. 2

In order for organizations to keep up with the onslaught of challenges inherent in the knowledge era they must continuously learn. From a normative perspective, groupware technologies facilitate organizational learning by providing a means of disseminating and codifying organizational knowledge. However, in practice the potential learning benefits of groupware are rarely achieved. This paper aims to contribute to the fields of organizational learning, innovation and information systems by examining possible reasons for groupware failures, which lead to lost potential learning benefits and thus unsustainable advantage.

Learning from experience, the cyclical interplay of thinking and doing, is increasingly important as organizations struggle to cope with rapidly changing environments and more complex and interdependent sets of knowledge. This paper confronts two central issues for organizational learning: (1) how is local learning (by individuals or small groups) integrated into collective learning by organizations? and (2) what are the differences between learning practices that focus on control, elimination of surprises, and single-loop incremental “fixing ” of problems with those that focus on deep or radical learning, double-loop challenging of assumptions, and discovery of new opportunities? We articulate these relationships through an analysis of learning practices in high-hazard organizations, specifically, problem investigation teams that examine the most serious and troubling events and trends in nuclear power plants and chemical plants. Our analysis suggests a four-stage model of organizational learning reflecting different approaches to control and learning. LEARNING FROM EXPERIENCE IN HIGH-HAZARD ORGANIZATIONS 1

Abstract not found

Abstract not found

A few of years have passed since the so-called dot-com crash and researchers are now conducting post-mortem reviews of the valuation debacle. At the time, there was widespread agreement within the analyst community that the value of a Website was inherently related to the number of potential customers who came to the site for information and eventually purchased a product or executed a service. As a follow-up to this mode of thinking, we consider the relationship between stock prices and Web metrics in addition to traditional accounting information for a sample of 15 top Internet companies. Specifically, we develop various regression models with the following four variables: unique visitors, revenues, gross margin, and sales and marketing expenses. Our results support the hypothesis that Web metrics did as equally good a job at explaining Internet stock prices as traditional accounting measures did. It seems that as stock price valuations for these companies increased, analysts required new metrics to justify their astronomical valuations and veered away from generally accepted accounting principles.

This study assesses the differential performance effects of learning mechanisms in alliance portfolios. Investigating two distinct types of learning mechanisms (i.e. integrating and institutionalizing mechanisms), the results show that different learning mechanisms have different performance effects at distinct levels of alliance experience.The results are based on a detailed survey among alliance managers and vice-presidents of 192 firms reporting on over 3400 alliances formed over the period 1997–2001.The main lesson from this study is that firms can deliberately develop their alliance capabilities by using integrating mechanisms to transfer prior experiences. Key words • alliance capabilities • alliance experience • alliance portfolio performance • learning mechanisms The road toward a thorough understanding of the learning mechanisms underlying

Knowledge management (KM) and organizational learning (OL) have developed in both divergent and convergent ways. In particular, these fields have relatively distinct intellectual traditions and conditions that gave rise to disciplines, as well as a certain level of disparity in research focus and view of knowledge. For example, KM focuses more on the content of knowledge and products of managing the knowledge, while OL emphasizes the process of meaning creation, decision making, and growth of learning capability. The two literatures also reveal, however, convergences with regard to the nature of knowledge and knowledge sharing in the organizational context. Thus the two fields have started to establish a consolidated view of knowledge, in which knowledge is related to practice and situated in the historical, social, and cultural context where it is created and acquired. In addition, both fields recognize the multi-level nature of knowledge and learning and are striving to bridge the gap between individual knowledge and collective memories.

This study investigates how the interactive influences of the nature of knowledge and multiple organizational and technological factors—trust, leadership, incentives and issues, group size and variety, implementation strategy, and technology—facilitated and/or impeded the knowledge sharing processes. Using a case study approach, the research focuses on the modifying effects of four characteristics of knowledge—codifiability, contextembeddedness, practice-embeddedness, and dynamics—on the processes and outcomes of knowledge sharing in a case of building the Multi-Purpose Access for Customer Relations & Operational Support (MACROS) System involving multiple organizations, divisions, and geographically separated offices. The case results suggest