IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i15p4230-d254906.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expansive Social Learning, Morphogenesis and Reflexive Action in an Organization Responding to Wetland Degradation

Author

Listed:
  • David Lindley

    (Freshwater Programme, World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), P.O. Box 5, Braamfontein 2017, South Africa
    Environmental Learning Research Centre, Department of Education, Rhodes University, P.O. Box 87, Grahamstown 6140, South Africa)

  • Heila Lotz-Sisitka

    (Environmental Learning Research Centre, Department of Education, Rhodes University, P.O. Box 87, Grahamstown 6140, South Africa)

Abstract

This study (conducted as PhD research at Rhodes University, South Africa) describes a formative interventionist research project conducted to explore factors inhibiting improved wetland management within a corporate plantation forestry context and determine if, and how, expansive social learning processes could strengthen organizational learning and development to overcome these factors. A series of formative interventionist workshops and feedback meetings took place over three years; developing new knowledge amongst staff of Company X, and improved wetland management practices. Through the expansive learning process, the tensions and contradictions that emerged became generative, supporting expansive learning that was reflectively engaged with throughout the research period. The study was== supported by an epistemological framework of cultural historical activity theory and expansive learning. Realist social theory, emerging from critical realism, with its methodological compliment the morphogenetic framework gave the research the depth of detail required to explain how the expansive learning, organizational social change, and boundary crossings that are necessary for assembling the collective were taking place. This provided ontological depth to the research. The research found that expansive learning processes, which are also social learning processes (hence we use the term ‘expansive social learning’, supported organizational learning and development for improved wetland management. Five types of changes emerged from the research: (1) Changes in structure, (2) changes in practice, (3) changes in approach, (4) changes in discourse, and (5) changes in knowledge, values, and thinking. The study was able to explain how these changes occurred via the interaction of structural emergent properties and powers; cultural emergent properties and powers; and personal emergent properties and powers of agents. It was concluded that expansive learning could provide an environmental education platform to proactively work with the sociological potential of morphogenesis to bring about future change via an open-ended participatory and reflexive expansive learning process.

Suggested Citation

  • David Lindley & Heila Lotz-Sisitka, 2019. "Expansive Social Learning, Morphogenesis and Reflexive Action in an Organization Responding to Wetland Degradation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-31, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:15:p:4230-:d:254906
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/15/4230/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/15/4230/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Seely Brown & Paul Duguid, 1991. "Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 40-57, February.
    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. Michael Kaethler, 2019. "Curating creative communities of practice: the role of ambiguity," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 8(1), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Verena Brinks, 2016. "Situated affect and collective meaning: A community perspective on processes of value creation and commercialization in enthusiast-driven fields," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 48(6), pages 1152-1169, June.
    3. Francesco Rullani, 2005. "The Debate and the Community. “Reflexive Identity” in the FLOSS Community," LEM Papers Series 2005/18, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    4. Duniesky Feitó Madrigal & Alejandro Mungaray Lagarda & Michelle Texis Flores, 2016. "Factors associated with learning management in Mexican micro-entrepreneurs," Estudios Gerenciales, Universidad Icesi, vol. 32(141), pages 381-386, December.
    5. Guido Fioretti, 2007. "A connectionist model of the organizational learning curve," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, March.
    6. Ankita Tandon & Unnikrishnan K. Nair, 2015. "Enactment of knowledge brokering: Agents, roles, processes and the impact of immersion," Working papers 183, Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode.
    7. Andrea Morrison, 2005. "Inside the Black Box of ‘Industrial Atmosphere’: Knowledge and Information Networks in an Italian wine local system," Working Papers 97, SEMEQ Department - Faculty of Economics - University of Eastern Piedmont.
    8. 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.
    9. Weiling Ke & Lele Kang & Chuan-Hoo Tan & Chih-Hung Peng, 2021. "User Competence with Enterprise Systems: The Effects of Work Environment Factors," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 860-875, September.
    10. Alvesson, Mats & Sveningsson, Stefan, 2011. "Management is the solution: Now what was the problem? On the fragile basis for managerialism," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 349-361.
    11. Cédric Dalmasso & Sebastien Gand & Frederic Garcias, 2017. "Enterprise social networks for the benefit of ambidextrous organisation? The case of a major oil company," Post-Print hal-03698884, HAL.
    12. Dupouet, Olivier & Yildizoglu, Murat, 2006. "Organizational performance in hierarchies and communities of practice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(4), pages 668-690, December.
    13. Wirth, Steffen, 2014. "Communities matter: Institutional preconditions for community renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 236-246.
    14. Franke, Nikolaus & Shah, Sonali, 2003. "How communities support innovative activities: an exploration of assistance and sharing among end-users," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 157-178, January.
    15. Levent Yilmaz, 2011. "Toward Multi-Level, Multi-Theoretical Model Portfolios for Scientific Enterprise Workforce Dynamics," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 14(4), pages 1-2.
    16. Sarah Mokaddem & Sinda Mhiri, 2017. "Le Co-working comme alternative émergente pour promouvoir le « bien-être » au travail," Post-Print hal-01867742, HAL.
    17. Frédéric CREPLET, 2004. "Les Portails d’entreprise : une réponse aux dimensions de l’entreprise « processeur de connaissances »," Working Papers of BETA 2004-07, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    18. Schmid, Stefan & Schurig, Andreas, 2003. "The development of critical capabilities in foreign subsidiaries: disentangling the role of the subsidiary's business network," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 12(6), pages 755-782, December.
    19. Hong Jiang & Shuyu Sun & Hongtao Xu & Shukuan Zhao & Yong Chen, 2020. "Enterprises' network structure and their technology standardization capability in Industry 4.0," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 749-765, July.
    20. Louie Rivers & Tamara Dempsey & Jade Mitchell & Carole Gibbs, 2015. "Environmental Regulation and Enforcement: Structures, Processes and the Use of Data for Fraud Detection," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(04), pages 1-29, December.

    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:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:15:p:4230-:d:254906. 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.