Organizational Learning And Performance – A Case Study Of Unilever

With time the importance of organizational learning is increasing. More and more organizations are inclining towards becoming learning organizations. Considering this importance, the study is conducted to find out impact of organizational learning on performance of organizations. This study is conducted to explore the available literature on organizational learning and minimize the ambiguity in concepts and understanding of organizational learning. To study impact of organizational learning on performance Unilever is selected. The aim of the study is fulfilled by giving a short overview of literature about organizational learning and exploration of models, strategies and mechanisms of organizational learning adopted by Unilever. This findings of study showed that Unilever is promoting organizational learning by leadership, organizational environment and a learning model consists of continuous learning, valid information, transparency, orientation and accountability.

 

 

1.Introduction

1.1.Introduction

As time is passing the trend of “knowledge-based economy” and “learning organization” is increasing (William, 2009). Until now, there is no clear understanding of learning organization and different researchers have given many descriptive but confusing and difficult to understand definitions of learning organization (Atkinson et al, 2000). In today’s competitive world, the knowledge has become one of the important resources for all organizations. Now many organizations are using the learning and knowledge as a source to gain competitive advantage (Gold et al, 2001). Even though there is no specific definition of organizational learning and knowledge researchers Yu (2010) suggest that there are two type of learning i.e. explicit and tacit.

Learning ability is something that is considered as a natural phenomenon. Every individual when sees something new, he/she try to adopt newly learning things in his/her behaviour. In daily life, human beings learn hundreds of new things and they adapt/adopt them according to their environment (Argote, 2012). Like individuals organizations also work on same mechanism, they learn and adapt/adopt new things that can contribute in overall success of organization. As said by Garratt (1990), a “learning organization” is the result of implementation of learned knowledge. Considering this all organizations are focusing on their learning abilities so they could become able to enhance overall performance.

Better information technology, expert employees of an organization and systematic organizational procedures plays an important role in bringing innovations and improvements in products, services and processes. Organizational success of failure heavily depends on these factors. The financial performance of an organization is not enough to be measure organizational performance in long run (William, 2009). The organizational performance can be measured with goals, innovation and improvement in products, services and processes and benefit of all stakeholders. Now, as suggested by (Atkinson et al, 2000) the organizational performance is not only measured in terms of shareholders but it is measured in terms of all stakeholders. To analyze the impact of organizational learning on organizational performance, UNILEVER is selected. UNILEVER is basically a multinational company that deals in computer technology and information technology consultation. This company is selling fast moving consumer goods from many years. Along with this, it offers a wide range of products e.g. health and care products, beauty products and food products. It has employed over a million of employees all over the world and earning profit in millions. UNILEVER is known as ‘strategic enabler of change’ because it always learned from changes and using these learning it took many initiatives and met the evolving needs of customers.  In this case study, organizational performance would be analyzed in terms of customers, employees and shareholders

1.2.Statement of the problem and Background

From the last two decades, there are observed many changes in work and business environment. From management styles to the strategies and work design, everything is changing on continuous basis.  This dynamic environment has increased the complexities of employees and organizations. To deal with this dynamic complex environment role of learning is increased. According to Atkinson et al, (2000) any organization that intents to deal with change should involve in knowledge generation and information creation process. The ability to learn and apply learned knowledge is one of the most attractive competencies of an organization.

The newly introduced socioeconomic trends are playing an important role in emphasizing significance of organizational learning. As said by Yu (2010) from in history organizations never tried to understand their abilities to learn and test something new from past experiences. But in 1980s, the concept of organizational learning was introduced in few organizations and in 1990s researchers started to explore this issue.

The recent trends in business environment like rightsizing, down scoping, joint ventures and mergers and acquisitions, globalization, innovations in information technology and continuously evolving needs and social trends are calling for organizational learning to be sustainable in long term. The most successful organizations can also not avoid considering it an important resource to become successful and improve performance (Bapuji & Crossan, 2004). Now organizations cannot rely on typical capabilities e.g. market share, technology, to gain competitive advantage. It has been concluded by many scholars that organizations can survive only on basis of their competence to learn and implement their learning in fulfilling needs of customers. Now the competitive advantage of organizations has to be shifted from traditional capabilities to the ability to learn and they can give a tough competition to competitors only on basis of ability to learn more.

The problem statement of the research is

What is impact of organizational learning on performance of an organization?

1.3.Purpose of the study

Learning is a very old phenomenon. Human beings have been learning from the first day. The individual learning and organizational learning are two different phenomena. In individual learning, every individual is in charge of learning new things at their own. That is a self motivated phenomenon. The individual discrete learning models have been used by businesses from many years to train employees to enhance organizational performance. But the use of discrete learning systems has not been that much effective as organizational learning can be. Organizational learning is the effort of all team members. They learn from external and internal environment and their learning is used in a collective and cooperative manner. The discrete learning models focus on micro while organizational learning focuses on macro approach. The macro approach is far more effective, efficient and flexible and easy to manage. By using organizational learning organizations can reap benefits more than equal distribution of training for all employees. As the organizations do not know that how they can get maximum benefit from this newly introduced phenomenon, in this study case of UNILEVER is selected. UNILEVER is an organization that is using organization learning as a tool to gain competitive advantage and improve performance.

This study is beneficial for managers of organizations who are unable to adopt organizational learning systems. By understanding how UNILEVER is getting advantage from organizational learning they can implement the most suitable and appropriate models in their organizations and they can also get benefit like other successful organizations. Many previous researches remained unable to find out the mechanism that can help managers of organizations to adopt this tool for improved performance. As UNILEVER is working on this phenomenon from many years, to explore and analyze learning systems, in terms of UNILEVER, will be beneficial for other organizations and researchers as well. The findings of this study underpin practical importance of organizational learning motivating organizations to adopt this new phenomenon.

1.4.Aims of the study

This study is conducted to explore the available literature on organizational learning and minimize the ambiguity in concepts and understanding of organizational learning. This study aims to find out the practical importance of organizational learning in performance of UNILEVER.  

The study will analyze which factors of organizational learning positively contribute in organizational performance of UNILEVER. This study explores the most effective mechanisms of organizational learning that has positive impacts on organizational performance.

1.5.Objectives of the study

In order to fulfil aim of this study research intends to work on following objectives. In accordance with above stated aims following are the objectives of current study.

  • To give an overview of literature on organizational learning
  • To explore the mechanisms that can explain organizational learning into improved performance of organizations.
  • To find out principles, models of learning and organizational characteristics of UNILEVER those results in effective organizational learning and improved performance.
  • To find out role of managers and employees of UNILEVER in learning process and thus improved performance

This study aims to fulfil above mentioned objectives in terms of organizational learning adopted by UNILEVER and its impacts on its performance.

1.6.Research questions

Even many researchers have proved that organizational learning is an important tool to achieve long term success. It is still not clear that by which mechanism organizational learning pave the way of an organization to improve its performance. Many researchers are not remained successful in describing the term “learning organization” and they remained unable to explore the models, systems or mechanisms of organizational learning contributing in improved performance of an organization. Still, organizations do not know that how the learned knowledge can be used to bring changes in processes and systems to increase the overall performance.

These questions are mandatory to be explored because there is still confusion that whether the learning in an organization contributes to the organizational performance or not.

The questions of the research are mentioned in the following points

  • What is organisational learning and what are the antecedents of organisational learning?
  • How the performance of the company is impacted by organisational learning?

 

 

2.Literature Review

2.1.Learning

In 1990’s the research on organizational learning, increase realizing its importance, thus various authors define it in a different perspective (Bapuji & Crossan, 2004) and developed distinctive models and theories. The most important concern of organizations and researchers is being on exploring what is learned. According to many researchers, e.g. Scott (2011), learning is a cognitive and behavioural process. It is a cognitive perspective in the sense that as it occurs, it develops new insights and revised assumptions or interpretive schemes of individuals. Sometimes this new learning brings changes in behaviors and actions of individuals, but the behavioural change is not mandatory to occur for completion of the successful learning process. On the other hand, researchers Cha et al (2008) favours cognitive-behavioural approach and states that change in behaviour is mandatory to occur as an end result of a learning process. Researchers, e.g. Janz & Prasarnphanich (2003) suggest that learning of an organization can only be measured in terms of actions that it takes to identify and correct errors. The cognitive learning is about facilitation of development in mental models, beliefs and assumptions. On the other hand behavioural learning is about facilitation of testing and application of new learned strategies, insights and actions. This cognitive learning is basically about “know what” while behavioural learning focuses on “know how”.

According to Esterby-Smith et al (2000) learning can never be detached from the experiences of an individual or organization. For this study, as suggested by Scott (2011) we can define learning as an active process of cognitive insight and behavioural applications in an organization. As suggested by Wenger (2006) it is important to consider that only to acquire and preserve knowledge is not enough knowledge is beneficial only when it can be observed in practices. Therefore, it is also important to evaluate knowledge, ideas and perspectives on the basis of its relevance with the organization.

2.2.Organizational Learning Theory

According to Hurly et al (2000) the organizational learning is based on three learning processes. It starts with information acquisition then information is interpreted and ends with cognitive and behavioural changes in information according to requirement supported by continuous feedback. The organizations that are effectively managing organizational learning focuses on acquiring information through creating a learning environment utilize and interpret it in every possible way and modify it according to organizational needs.  Therefore, as said by Janz & Prasarnphanich (2003) all organizations must acquire, utilize, interpret and modify information to get maximum advantage out of it.

Figure 1: Organizational Learning Theory

OLT.jpg

Source: Adopted from Hurly et al (2000)

2.3.Organizational Learning Process

The learning process in an organization is a continuous process of four interrelated components i.e. discovery, invention, production and generalization (Figueiredo, 2003). Organizations analyze and discover problems in processes and systems, then they investigate the causes of problems and appropriate solutions and strategies are invented. Then these solutions are used in production and a conclusion is drawn from learning. This conclusion is then generalized for that problem and implemented again and again (Scott, 2011).

Figure 2: Organizational Learning Process

Source: Adopted from Figueiredo (2003)

2.4.Can organizations learn?

This question remains the center of researchers because many researchers state that the organization does not learn only the people of organization learns. According to Esterby-Smith et al (2000) organizational learning can occur only in two ways i.e. either through the learning of employees or by attracting, selecting and retaining only those employees who have a high level of knowledge. Another important way, resulting in organizational learning is transmission of information and knowledge within employees of an organization. It can be said that, organizational learning is a cumulative result of learning of employees of an organization (Chou et al, 2008). Therefore, it is important for organizations to get maximum advantage out of knowledge of their employees.

2.5.Learning organization

Wenger & Snyder (2000) says when organizational development and organizational learning is applied in an organization; it results in a ‘learning organization’. Many organizations use this learning to satisfy their customers through learning abilities of employees. According to Scott (2011) this is a long and dynamic process that has its foundation in knowledge and moves to different levels. The different levels are individuals to groups, groups to organize and then again organizing towards individuals.  According to Cha et al (2008) organizational learning has antecedent and foundation on knowledge.

2.6.Features of Learning Organizations

The ability of an organization to learn is dependent on learning features in an organization. The learning organizations also known as adaptable and responsive organization learning is considered as the most important and common norm and value (Cha et al, 2008). Different researchers have identified different characterises. According to Janz & Prasarnphanich (2003) learning organizations have such strategies that support innovation. These promote capability development through different techniques (Vera & Crossan, 2004). In such organizations ethical leadership and delegation of authority exists (James, 2003). The whole system of organization supports learning through norms, beliefs and core values. Every process, planning and decision making promotes knowledge sharing and learning. These organizations do not neglect information and knowledge from any source. These gave special importance to learning from their employees. They learn not only from fast learners of organizations, but from slow learners as well and incorporate their learning in procedures, strategies and norms of the organization.

2.7.Organizational Performance

According to Skerlavaj & Dimovski (2006) Organizational performance is a vast concept. Even though performance of an organization is enhanced by improvement in quality of offered products and services, used processes, skills of employees, technology orientation and alignment of organizational procedures.. But so far the most widely accepted tool to measure organizational performance is only through financial performance measures. In history, it was evaluated as suggested by Profit Theory. But now researchers recommend to measure organizational performance in perspectives of stakeholders, supported by stakeholder theory (Sigry, 2002). So it can be said that, organizational performance is a combined evaluation of financial well being, supplier relations, employees’ performance and customers’ satisfaction (Skerlavaj & Dimovski, 2006)

2.8.Organizational Learning and Performance

Wilcox & Zeithaml (2003) said that performance and quality of an organization is based on knowledge management and it’s a tool to compete in market with competitors. According to Bogner & Bansal (2007) knowledge management has three important components that influence organizational performance.  The ability of an organization to create knowledge and to use this knowledge in an effective way decides organizational success in terms of performance (Chen & Mohamed, 2008). Only those companies gain competitive advantage on the basis of knowledge management who make it their core competency (Hoffman et al., 2005). Actually, organizations achieve competitive advantage through competitive advantage because it improves the quality of performance and their organization becomes more responsive, flexible and quicker for external environment and challenges (Brockman & Morgan, 2003). The evidence from a study conducted by Jiménez-Jiménez &  Sanz-Valle (2011) suggest that organizational learning enhances the innovation level in an organization and this results in improved business performance. 

2.9.Organizational Learning Model

According to this organizational learning model the learning process of an organization is heavily influenced by the present condition of an organization. This means that external and internal factors that influence an organization decide the effectiveness and efficiency of the organizational learning process. The end result of organizational learning process is knowledge in form of invisible assets, core competencies, organizational capabilities, organizational culture and memory of organization. This influences the overall performance of an organization Bapuji & Crossan (2004).

Figure 3: Organizational Learning Model

Source: Adopted from Bapuji & Crossan (2004)

2.10.Organizational Learning and Competitive Advantage

According to Yu (2010) the knowledge has two types i.e. explicit and tacit knowledge. According to Gold et al (2001) organizations can use knowledge management to gain competitive advantage.  Wenger & Snyder (2000) relate organizational learning to the individuals and says that as every human being has natural talent to learn new things and he/she adapts himself/herself according to external environment. Same happens in organizational learning and organizations have capability to learn new things from past experiences, competitors, industry practices and many other things and thus it adapts itself accordingly. But in case of organization it’s not only learning that matters but its quality of learning that results in competitive advantage (Yu, 2010).

2.11.Summary

Learning is a combination of behavioural and cognitive changes. It must result in change in beliefs, assumptions and mental models of individuals and change in behaviour should be visible. The organizational learning theory states that learning process is based on information acquisition, interpretation and action along with feedback. On the other organizational learning process is also based on discovery, invention, production and generalization. It is not organization that learns but its members of organizations that learns. The implementation and promotion of learning in an organization makes it ‘learning organization’. There are certain features of a learning organization and these all features are related to promotion and implementation of learning in an organization through every possible way. The organizational learning model states that organizational performance is dependent on organizational performance. Organizations are using learning as a tool to gain competitive advantage. Basically, organizational learning improves organizational performance and this result in competitive advantage for an organization.

 

 

3.Methodology

The purpose of this study is to examine which issues of organizational learning absolutely donate in organizational presentation of UNILEVER. This learning discovers the majority of effective instruments of managerial learning that have optimistic impacts on managerial performance.

The main intend of this revise study intends to labour on subsequent objectives. In agreement with beyond affirmed aims subsequent are the objectives of present learning i.e. to offer an impression of text on organizational knowledge, to discover the mechanisms which can clarify organizational learning hooked on enhanced presentation of organizations, to discover out main beliefs, models of learning as well as organizational individuality of UNILEVER those consequences in efficient organizational knowledge in addition to improved performance as well as to find out position of managers plus employees of UNILEVER in knowledge process furthermore thus improved presentation. Even lots of researchers have showed that organizational learning is an imperative instrument to achieve long phrase achievement. It is at a halt not apparent that through which device organizational learning paves the method of an association to get better its presentation. Numerous researchers are not lingered successful in telling the expression “learning organization” furthermore they hanged about unable to discover the models, schemes otherwise mechanisms of managerial learning causative in improved recital of an association. At rest, organizations do not be acquainted with that how the erudite knowledge can be worn to transport changes in procedures as well as systems to augment the general performance.

These questions are obligatory to be discovered since there is still bewilderment that whether the knowledge in an association adds to the organizational recital or not. So we need to know that what is managerial learning as well as what is the background of organizational erudition and how the presentation of the corporation is impacted by organizational knowledge?

In this research we have used secondary data where different journals from different subjects were taken and data was collected on the basis of them. Secondary research (moreover recognized as desk study) engross the synopsis, collation plus/or mixture of existing study somewhat than primary research, in which data is composed from, for instance, study subjects otherwise experiments. A mean performance region inside secondary investigate is the complete citation of unique foundations, typically in the shape of a total listing or glossed listing. Secondary basis comprised previous examine reports, broadsheet, magazine in addition to journal content, plus government as well as NGO figures. Secondary research is able to be protracted, except that it will comply precise information concerning your district. Secondary research be capable of be used unaccompanied, or in combination with other investigate techniques (for example focus groups otherwise telephone reviews). In this study data has been collected from journals ad research articles as mentioned in the citations. The reason to choose this secondary research is speed, ease and cost. Secondary investigate can frequently be carried out rapidly by admission to statistical information which has previously been available online. The majority of information can be attained at no or else low price.  Statistics can usually be obtained by people with an incomplete investigate backdrop or technological know-how.

 

 

 

4.Finding and Analysis

4.1.Organizational Learning Mechanisms

Subsequent this row of consideration, it appears suitable to charge the height of managerial learning as the degree to which the central association make use of the managerial learning mechanisms (Simon, 2003). At the association stage of psychoanalysis, these are cleared as prearranged institutionalized preparations that allow the compilation, examination, storing, as well as distribution of sure information; as well as its use for the development of together individual as well as organizational presentation (Popper & Lipshitz, 2001). In UNILEVER about six knowledge mechanisms are recognized by which levels of managerial knowledge might be deliberate. They include Data compilation, Data hoarding, Data Analysis, sketch conclusion, distributing Information, as well as operation of data.

4.2.Learning Supportive Culture

Organizational traditions has been normally cleared as "the deposits of principles, directing beliefs, understanding, as well as customs of thoughts, that is communal by associates of an association as well as is trained to novel members as accurate"(Simon, 2003). UNILEVER believes that the fundamental suppositions of this viewpoint continue that to endure in extremely vibrant surroundings, organizations effort to preserve an inner civilization that supports education from knowledge. Popper et al., (2000) classify five ideals underlying association society that ropes organizational principles. These are (1) Continuous Learning – the faith that sequentially to cultivate, organizations must invest in education all the era; (2) Valid knowledge – the faith that knowledge ought to be supported on accurate information; (3) Transparency – the faith that education should be bare for examination, mostly in the expression of evils; (4) Issue Orientation – the faith that assessment should be supported on particulars somewhat than on chauvinisms; (5) Accountability – the faith that populace should suppose personal blame for errors plus letdowns. In a knowledge helpful society, the organization's contributors share this deposit of principles, sustaining that these are the correct habits of education from knowledge (Nonaka, 2011).The positive association flanked by association traditions that supports education as well as the submission of the stated learning mechanisms was established in a not many experiential studies. At UNILEVER, persons are confronted to pursue objectives, develop efficiently, and continue equilibrium between their specialized and individual lives. UNILEVER judge that each person, applying power in addition to fervour to their business confronts is their strength with greatest asset (Unilever, 2012).

4.3.Leadership Style

UNILEVER follows following theories in its management and leadership approach that are Taylor, Maslow in addition to Fayol. All of assumptions of organizational learning speak to a different feature of the employee-administration association. Leadership might be apparent as a procedure of inspiring populace to achieve tasks during the submission of ways that are not coercive in environment (Popper et al., 2001). In UNILEVER associations, leadership provides as significant forces, which concern inspiration, presentation, as well as knowledge by managerial members. The authority of headship on knowledge gets hold up from a variety of formal as well as informal ways for instance allotment of capital for knowledge behaviour, evaluating as well as rewarding effectual knowledge, as well as the operation of knowledge mechanisms. There is a differentiation among transactional leadership style as well as transformational leadership approach (Unilever, 2012). The major mechanism of transformational management is the subsequent ones: Individualized Consideration, Intellectual Stimulation, Inspirational Leadership, plus Idealized Influence. Experiential studies demonstrated that transformational method put forth a huge outcome on subordinates’ incentive, promise, efficacy, as well as presentation in the association; while the transactional leadership method is likely to put forth incomplete authority on subordinates’ approaches as well as performance. Organizational learning is as well probable to be absolutely prejudiced by transformational management.  Such a connection is most probably owing to the information that the major mechanisms of this manner of guidance raise a weather of penetrating, evaluating, as well as picturing termination by the associates of such an association (Nonaka, 2011). Therefore, UNILEVER focuses on transformational leadership.

4.4.Organizational Environment

The sight of associations as untie systems necessitates us to concentrate here to exterior forces that might affect procedures of managerial learning happening within organizations. Presumably, things that are fraction of the supposed “task surroundings” are probable to have straight authority on organizational knowledge (Popper, et al., 2000). Those issues might be typified by way of two proportions – that is, via complexity measurement, in addition to through the stability measurement. There are three features of complexity measurement – that is, the digit of issues, their difficulty as well as their heterogeneity (Schein, 2003). The constancy measurement is basic, dazzling the degree to which a range of issues in the job surroundings modify often over the occasion. In the structural possibility assumption, an association’s endurance relies on its well to its assignment surroundings. Organizational learning stands for one method of organizational version to ecological restraints; since it allows organizations to clutch the forces of their surroundings in addition to create the essential internal alter sequentially to manage with them. Surrounded by other such heaviness, the speeds of ecological change as well as its altitude difficulty are mainly probable to influence procedures of organizational learning. As stated in Unilever (2013) in UNILEVER the chain of command is very incline, in broad the complete setup is federal, and all the materials are to be accounted to the chief office along with all the policies in addition to goals are standard at the senior level. Other than that the local office level the arrangement is decentralized. Every one of employees allocating at UNILEVER are extremely loyal as they are specified a magnificent learning atmosphere to labour, pay presented to them is as well very striking along with plenty possibility of development inspires them to labour more. The employees are certainly very content as well as motivated.

4.5.Learned Knowledge to Increase the Overall Performance

UNILEVER propose that managerial learning mechanisms are probable to acquiesce fruitful learning on a condition that they are entrenched in a suitable organizational culture, that is, a normative scheme of common values as well as viewpoint that form how association members feel, believe, plus take action. UNILEVER works on a chain of command of five principles (Figure below). Located at the top of the chain of command is continuous learning that in turn needs accountability, valid information, and issue orientation, in addition to transparency. These principles are obvious whichever by well-matched oratory (espoused principles) otherwise (more persuasively) through a definite asset of capital as well as the readiness to acquire wounded in order to understand well-matched outcome (principles in use).

 

 

Source: Peter (2011)

4.5.1. Continuous Learning

Continuous learning is necessary for existing – let unaided flourishing – in energetic as well as spirited surroundings. Education is next to the spirit of a corporation’s skill to adjust to fast changing surroundings (Pavitt, 2007). UNILEVER thinks that continuous learning is the answer to being capable both to recognize prospects that others may not observe as well as to develop those chances rapidly plus completely . . . The CEO of UNILEVER stated that in sort to produce unexpected worth for shareholders, a corporation has to study superior than its opponents as well as concern that information all over its commerce faster as well as more extensively than they act . . . any person in the group who is not openly answerable for building a profit ought to be concerned in creating as well as distributing facts that the business can utilize to create earnings (Peter, 2011). As population is increasing day by day this is called by UNILEVER ‘feat up, feat down, plus feat wide’; its achievement is resting on Unilever by continuously improving their comprehensive supply chain as well as marketing plus sales processes so that they are nimble as well as adaptable, making sure that the crop consumers insist are always obtainable, correctly displayed, as well as at the correct price (Unilever, 2013).

4.5.2.Valid Information

UNILEVER has understood that learning equally at individual as well as organizational points involves the alteration of information (continuous information) into acquaintance (construe information). To be prolific, learning obviously requires total, undistorted, as well as demonstrable information (Sitkin, 2003). Therefore, UNILEVER associates are frequently forced to keep back, distort or construct information sequentially to guard themselves as well as/or others. As suggested by Peter (2011) holding suitable information like a worth works as a contradict gauge to such pressures. We infer that valid information is a value of the UNILEVER’s culture from the constant efforts that the appearance energy makes to advance the impartiality as well as range of the knowledge that is obtainable for after-action appraisals, as well as from empoyees’ socialization to work as well as meticulously slice up their hold as well as others’ presentation.

4.5.3.Transparency

It is the readiness to make oneself (along with one’s events) unfastens to examination sequentially to obtain suitable criticism. Transparency provides suitable information via sinking the probability of self- trickery, by opposing forces to deform or repress intimidating information, as well as by expansion the range of one’s knowledge stand plus points of sight for its understanding (Bass & Avolio, 2000). As discussed in Goldsmith et al., (2004) the organization structure of UNILEVER is transparent and its helps not only to know what the people in business units are doing but also help senior management to know better what they have to do. There will be ongoing conversation with them which leads to improve presentation and construct the prospect.

4.5.4.Issue Orientation

UNILEVER believes that subject orientation is critical for organizational learning. As stated by Popper et al., (2000) the assessment of information severely on its worth without hold to immaterial characteristics for instance the social position of its foundation or receiver. One chore of administration in learning organizations is to picture failure as well as fruitfully promote opposes and UNILEVER do so. This mission cannot be talented except information is obtainable – and conventional – theme to issue course. Issue course is connected to (but is more focused than) democratization, authority equalization, as well as contribution which as well open message controls, thereby pleasing to the eye novelty with education. As suggested by Schein (2003) in UNILEVER, inflexible hierarchical scheme is poised, thus raising the probability that assistant will articulate their truthful views to their advanced.

4.5.5.Accountability

In UNILEVER the policy of accountability is followed that if you make a mistake follow it and understand how this happened and avoid it next time thus according to UNILEVER it’s the key to continuous improving and learning. Accountability is making oneself accountable for his proceedings in addition to their penalty plus for erudition from these costs. It makes easy conquering obstruction to effectual education in the shape of deed barriers that put off the execution of teaching educated. This price is mirrored in the voyage instructors’ commands that apprentices debrief themselves. In termination, it can be said that UNILEVER has understood that managerial learning is possible to be creative if the association’s learning instruments are entrenched in a civilization of education. Numerous, if not the majority, associations cannot maintain to encompass this mixture (Prokesch, 2007). Therefore, UNILEVER is promoting association’s learning.

 

5.Conclusion

An all-purpose theoretical termination of the current revise is that the assignment surroundings, the organization’s mores, as well as the managers’ management approach are all linked in one shape otherwise one more to the methodical submission of organizational learning mechanisms (Pavitt, 2007). More specially, as compared to the management approach or to the character of the job surroundings, the exploit of organizational learning mechanisms is firmly connected to a learning-supportive civilization. In addition, supported on this learn, an additional conclusion preserves that the faithfulness of the rivalry in the job surroundings comprise an overriding variable amid transformational leadership as well as organizational learning mechanisms. Under circumstances of an extremely changing spirited environment, the want for organizational adjustment becomes necessary. A transformational leader likely is probable to furnish confidence his or her assistants to acquire essential steps towards a better robust with the altering surroundings, such as the completion of the organizational learning. Over all, the mixture of together the external as well as internal features of associations accounts for a substantial piece of their propensity to study. This termination ropes the theoretical advance accessible here, which proposes that organizational learning is a many-sided occurrence (Patil et al., 2013).  

 

In Unilever organizational learning is also likely to be positively influenced by transformational leadership. They should adopt it as this is a connection seemingly owing to the actuality that the chief mechanisms of this method of leadership raise an environment of penetrating, investigating, along with depiction of conclusions through the associates of that kind of organization. Thus the more the leadership style of a given manager be likely to be transformational, the better the employ of learning mechanisms via the association beneath his or else her straight management (Pavitt, 2007).

 

Culture of UNILEVER is also very important as it should follow that kind of culture that s very supportive and allows employee to be flexible and without any hesitation do their work and participate (Unilever, 2012). The further an organization’s society is helpful of erudition, the superior the exercise of the learning mechanisms through that association. And for UNILEVER to attain their company’s aspiration of doubling-up the mass of their business at the same time as plummeting the environmental collision as well as growing their positive societal force, it is vital that they build a varied as well as engaged labour force where everyone can expand to his or else her full latent (Peter, 2011). The reimbursements of containing a gender-balanced organization are simple to observe; it assists power creativity in addition to innovation, extends the talent puddle as well as allows UNILEVER to better dish up their diverse customer base. For Unilever the more complex the mission surroundings of an association, the better the exploit of knowledge mechanisms and the more unbalanced the task environment is of an association, the better the employ of these learning mechanisms (Unilever, 2012). In termination, we propose that managerial learning is possible to be creative if the association’s learning instruments are entrenched in a civilization of education. Numerous, if not the majority, associations cannot maintain to encompass this mixture (Sitkin, 2003).

There used to be intelligence amongst administrators that learning only happened instinctively: organizations succeeded as well as endured, or they failed. However, study has demonstrated that the performance of learning, whether it is person or managerial, endorses learning in further individuals and/or associations. And that it has to be knowledgeable to be capable. Effective knowledge is not fairly that occurs by accident or merely by possibility. Effectual organizational learning is urbanized as a fraction of the civilization, integrated hooked on daily carry out as observed in case of UNILEVER. Innovative learning is rising in organizations as well as business environments in addition to be obsessed by the quick paced beginning of information plus novel ideas as of a diversity of causes. It is very important that organizations appreciate the cadence of the knowledge tides as well as the up-and-coming learning follows will be faraway dissimilar as compared to those in precedent. Trends propose that learning performs will be as of a diversity of sources as well as not necessarily directorially or theory ambitious."The degree en route for which these carry outs actually assist organizations attain learning objectives will depend lying on how sincerely and seriously their associates engage in reviewing their knowledge" (Schein, 2003).

One objective for placing organizational learning ideas into apply is modernism. When the entire obtainable possessions are efficiently worn across the practical sections of an association, creativity as well as cleverness can become known. As a consequence, the procedure of an association functioning together to conquer an obstruction can guide to a novel inventive procedure to dish up the clients need. Sooner than an association can be inventive, leadership has to generate a society of novelty as well as communal knowledge in addition to organizational learning (Schein, 2003). An association cannot turn into a learning organization in anticipation of it comprehends how it discovers as well as moves that knowledge from entity to business customs. Part of sympathetic an association plus its aptitude to subsist a learning surroundings can be established by learning the past of that association. Fear wrote, consecutively “to light up managerial learning, a historian would require to deconstruct the method legality was rhetorically as well as emblematically shaped within the association over time, not immediately in a exacting photograph of occasion. To inspect this procedure of transform, organizational learning theorists might analyze vital rotating tips in time when previous forms of legitimate reasoning made way for new ones”. Through examining the ladder of growth as they happen, an association can purify it's performs to superlative discern how they study, develop, as well as grow. They then can start to set up a suitable organizational learning structure (Sitkin, 2003).

 

 

 

References

  1. Argote, L. 2012. Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining and Transferring Knowledge. 2nd edition, New York: Springer
  2. Atkinson, A.A., Waterhouse, J.H., & Wells, R.B., 2000. A Stakeholder approach to strategic performance measurement, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 25-37
  3. Bapuji, H., Crossan, M. 2004. Reviewing Organizational Learning Research – From Questions to Answers. Management Learning, 35(4), pp. 397-417
  4. Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. 2000. The implications of transactional and transformational leadership for individual, team and organizational development. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 4: pp.  231-272.
  5. Bogner, W.C., & Bansal, P., 2007. Knowledge management as the basis of sustained high performance. Journal of Management Studies, 44(1), pp. 165-188
  6. Brockman, B.K., & Morgan, R.M., 2003. The role of existing knowledge in new product innovativeness and performance. Decision Sciences, 34(2), pp. 385-419
  7. Chen, L., & Mohamed, S., 2008. Contribution of knowledge management activities to otganizational business performance. Journal of Engineering. Design and Technology, 6(3), pp. 269-285
  8. Cha, H. S., Pingry, D. E., & Thatcher, M. E., 2008. Managing the Knowledge Supply Chain: An Organizational Learning Model of Information Technology Offshore Outsourcing, MIS Quarterly, 32(2), June, pp. 281-306
  9. Easterby-Smith, M., Crossan, M., & Nicolini, D. 2000.Organizational learning: Debates past, present and future. Journal of Management Studies, 37(6), pp. 784–796.
  10. Figueiredo, P.N., 2003. Learning Processes Features: How do They Influence Inter-firm Differences in Technological Capability – Accumulation Paths and Operational Performance Improvement?. International Journal of Technology Management, 26(7), pp. 655-689
  11. Garratt, B., 1990. Creating a learning organization: A guide to leadership, learning and development, Institute of Directors
  12. Gold, A.H., Malhotra, A., & Segars, A.H., 2001. Knowledge management: an organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information, 18(1), pp.185-214
  13. Goldsmith, M., Morgan, H., & Ogg, A.J., 2004. Leading organizational learning: Harnessing the power of Knowledge. San Francisco: Jossey Bass
  14. Hoffman, J.J., Hoelscher, M.L., & Sherif, K., 2005. Social capital, knowledge management, and sustained superior performance. Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(3), pp. 93-100
  15. Hurly, R. F., Giunipero, L. C., & Nichols Jr., E. L., 2000. Organizational Learning in Global Purchasing: A Model and Test of Internal Users and Corporate Buyers, Decision Sciences 31(2), spring, pp. 293-325.
  16. Janz, B. D., & Prasarnphanich, P., 2003. Understanding the Antecedents of Effective Knowledge Management: The Importance of a Knowledge-Centred Culture. Decision Sciences, 34(2), spring, pp. 351-385
  17. James, C. 2003. Designing learning organizations. Organizational Dynamics, 32(1), pp. 46-61
  18. Jiménez-Jiménez, D., &  Sanz-Valle, R., 2011. Innovation, organizational learning, and performance. Journal of Business Research, 64(4), pp. 408-417
  19. Nonaka, L., 2011. The Knowledge-creating Company. Harvard Business Review, 69(6), pp. 96–104.
  20. Patil, B., & Wadekar, S., Mudaliyar, R., 2013. Organizational Change at Unilever. [online]. Available at: http://www.slideshare.net/Rajes1990/Unilever-organizational-change. [accessed on 9th march, 2014]
  21. Pavitt, K., 2007. Key Characteristics of the Large Innovative Firm. British Journal of Management, 2, pp. 41–50.
  22. Peter, M.S., 2011. The Beginning of Beginning: Building Sustainable Organizations and Societies. Society for Organizational Learning
  23. Popper, M., Katz, N., Altman, A., 2000. Leadership developing systems – theory and applications. Organizational Development in Israel, 2, pp. 22-28.
  24. Popper, M. & Lipshitz, R., 2001. Organizational Learning Mechanisms: A Cultural and Structural Approach to Organizational Learning. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 34, pp.  161–78.
  25. Prokesch, S.E., 2007. Unleashing the Power of Learning: An Interview with British Petroleum’s John Browne. Harvard Business Review, 77(5), pp. 147–68.
  26. Rodgers, R. & Hunter, J.E., 2004. Impact of Management By Objectives on Organizational Productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, pp. 322–36.
  27. Scott, B.B., 2011. Organizational Learning: A literature Review, IRC Research Progra
  28. Schein, E.H., 2000. Organizational Culture. American Psychologist, 45, pp. 109–19.
  29. Simon, H.A., 2003. Bounded Rationality and Organizational Learning. Organization Science, 2, pp. 125–34
  30. Sirgy, J. M., 2002. Measuring corporate performance by building on the stakeholders’ model of business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 35(3), pp. 143-162
  31. Sitkin, S.B.,2003 .Learning Through Failure: The Strategy of Small Losses. Research in Organizational Behavior, 14, pp. 231–66.
  32. Skerlavaj, M., & Dimovski, V., 2006. Influence of organizational learning on organizational performance from the employee perspective: The Case of Slovenia. Management, 11(1), pp. 75-90
  33. Unilever, 2012. Unilever U.K. Limited Annual Report 2012
  34. Unilever, 2013. Unilever U.K. Limited Annual Report 2013
  35. Vera, D., & Crossan, M., 2003. Organizational learning and knowledge management: Toward An integrative framework. In M. Easterby O Smith M.  Lyles (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of organization learning and knowledge management. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
  36. Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J., 1993. Sculpting the learning organization: Lessons in the art and science of systemic change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  37. Wenger, E. C., & Snyder, W.M., 2000. Communities of practice: The organizational frontier.
  38. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), pp. 225–246.
  39. Wenger, E.C., 2006. Learning for a small planet, version 2, revised September 2006.Appendix 1: Social learning theory: identity, social structure, and meaningfulness. [Online]. Available at: www.ewenger.com/research. [accessed on: 21 February, 2014]
  40. Wilcox King, A., & Zeithaml, C. P. 2000. Measuring organizational knowledge: a conceptual and methodological framework. Strategic Management Journal, 24(8), pp. 763-772
  41. Yu, Y., 2010. Exploring the relationships of knowledge management, organizational innovation and financial performance. Paper presented at the Advanced Management Science (ICAMS), 2010 IEEE International Conference

 


Get in Touch With us

Get in touch with our dedicated team to discuss about your requirements in detail. We are here to help you our best in any way. If you are unsure about what you exactly need, please complete the short enquiry form below and we will get back to you with quote as soon as possible.