IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jadmsc/v7y2017i3p26-d106829.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interest Differences and Organizational Learning

Author

Listed:
  • Laurie Field

    (Faculty of Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia)

Abstract

This paper argues that interest differences are the key to understanding the nature of organizational learning and the processes by which it occurs, yet the concept of ‘interest’ is very much underdeveloped in the organizational learning literature. Drawing on the work of Habermas and Lukes, the paper proposes a model of the relationship between shared learning and interests and elaborates on it using a case study of pay and performance management change at a large Australian finance-sector company, DollarCo. The case study provides many examples of shared learning associated with both common and competing interests, including a great deal of learning resulting from tensions between DollarCo’s economic and technical interests, on the one hand, and employees’ ontological interests on the other. By doing so, it underlines the value of foregrounding interests and interest differences in studies of workplace and organizational learning and raises questions about the extent to which many published accounts of so-called ‘organizational’ learning are actually describing ‘shared interest group’ learning.

Suggested Citation

  • Laurie Field, 2017. "Interest Differences and Organizational Learning," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-14, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jadmsc:v:7:y:2017:i:3:p:26-:d:106829
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/7/3/26/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/7/3/26/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ian Shapiro, 2006. "On the Second Edition of Lukes’ Third Face," Political Studies Review, Political Studies Association, vol. 4(2), pages 146-155, May.
    2. Stewart Clegg & David Courpasson & Nelson Phillips, 2006. "Power and organizations," Post-Print hal-02298067, HAL.
    3. Alessia Contu & Hugh Willmott, 2003. "Re-Embedding Situatedness: The Importance of Power Relations in Learning Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 283-296, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Florian Becker-Ritterspach & Christoph Dörrenbächer, 2011. "An Organizational Politics Perspective on Intra-firm Competition in Multinational Corporations," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 51(4), pages 533-559, August.
    2. Emmanuelle Vaast & Geoff Walsham, 2009. "Trans-Situated Learning: Supporting a Network of Practice with an Information Infrastructure," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 547-564, December.
    3. Andrew J. Rosman, 2011. "Auditors' going‐concern judgments: rigid, adaptive, or both?," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 10(1), pages 30-45, February.
    4. Raissa Ulbrich & Claudia Pahl-Wostl, 2019. "The German Permaculture Community from a Community of Practice Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-21, February.
    5. Anne Kokkonen & Pauli Alin, 2015. "Practice-based learning in construction projects: a literature review," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(7), pages 513-530, July.
    6. Sandra A. Slaughter & Laurie J. Kirsch, 2006. "The Effectiveness of Knowledge Transfer Portfolios in Software Process Improvement: A Field Study," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 301-320, September.
    7. Nathalie Duval-Couetil & Michael Ladisch & Soohyun Yi, 2021. "Addressing academic researcher priorities through science and technology entrepreneurship education," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 288-318, April.
    8. Asad Aman, 2019. "Managing Internal Marketing Channel Conflict: A Proposal for Narrative Epistemology," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 20(4), pages 901-916, August.
    9. Rachael Pope, 2017. "The NHS: Sticking Fingers in Its Ears, Humming Loudly," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 145(3), pages 577-598, October.
    10. Helin, Sven & Jensen, Tommy & Sandström, Johan & Clegg, Stewart, 2011. "On the dark side of codes: Domination not enlightenment," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 24-33, March.
    11. Shelly Meyers & David Lester, 2013. "The Effects of Situated Learning Through a Community Partnership in a Teacher Preparation Program," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(3), pages 21582440134, August.
    12. Ferguson, J.E. & Huysman, M.H., 2009. "Between ambition and approach: towards sustainable knowledge management in development organizations," Serie Research Memoranda 0003, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    13. Koreff, Jared & Weisner, Martin & Sutton, Steve G., 2021. "Data analytics (ab) use in healthcare fraud audits," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    14. Dirk Nicolas Wagner, 2019. "The Opportunistic Principal," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(4), pages 637-657, November.
    15. Clark, Michael & Cornes, Michelle & Manthorpe, Jill & Hennessy, Catherine & Anderson, Sarah, 2015. "Releasing the grip of managerial domination: the role of communities of practice in tackling multiple exclusion homelessness," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64325, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Mark J. Zbaracki & Mark Bergen, 2010. "When Truces Collapse: A Longitudinal Study of Price-Adjustment Routines," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 955-972, October.
    17. Kuok Kei Law & Andrew Chan, 2017. "Managing knowledge work in Asia Pacific contexts: case studies of Hong Kong SMEs," Asia Pacific Business Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 475-492, August.
    18. Paul Vallance, 2011. "Relational and Dialectical Spaces of Knowing: Knowledge, Practice, and Work in Economic Geography," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 43(5), pages 1098-1117, May.
    19. Yves Fassin, 2012. "Stakeholder Management, Reciprocity and Stakeholder Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 83-96, August.
    20. Tuomas KOKKO & Tommi AUVINEN & Pasi SAJASALO & Tuomo TAKALA, 2018. "Shortcomings Of New Public Management Ideology From The Power Perspective: Exploration Of Power Relations In A Finnish Municipal Organization," Management Research and Practice, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 10(2), pages 5-26, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jadmsc:v:7:y:2017:i:3:p:26-:d:106829. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.