Shared-Interest-Group Learning

A Response to a Course Reading

Louise Martin

Athabasca University

Shared-interest-group learning occurs at three levels of interest within organization: a technical-economic level, a political, and an ontological level.

Abstract

 Shared-Interest -Group Learning

      Organizations.  Shared-interest-group learning is been determined as an 'organizational' interest, where learning is in unity as to dialogue and experimentation,  and wherein a dimension of records of lessons acquired is been returned,  and shared among managers.  Shared-interest-group  learning also determines the way it affects organization behaviors. The  shared-interest  learning affects and plays an important role in a technical-economic level,  a political level, and an ontological level.       Therefore, the way shared-interest-group affects organization behaviors begs the question" why there is interest in 'organizational' learning"?  The answers can be found in the turbulent environment, knowledge as a resource, organizations complexity, boundaries,  reduced time available, and 'organizational' learning conceptual base weaknesses.

     Turbulent Environment

     It is very hard to accept an environment when it has become turbulent.  This occurs when the enterprises have become turbulent, because of the many changes due to the pressure of lower costs and increase profit, new technologies, competitors, and options.  In this environment one will adopt  to the rigid circumstances he or she is faced with.  Fields(2004) argues that "Faced with this environment, it is very attractive to imagine the enterprise as a living organism, which learns and adapts rapidly" (203). Therefore, knowledge as a resource will be affected.

     Knowledge as a Resource

     When we take into consideration, the success of enterprise depends on the knowledge extension and applicability. Morris (unknown ) indicates that "adult education,  in which knowledge is obtained not only is  about extending opportunities, but also about making learning part of the process of social change itself" (p. 593).  In every organization there are areas that will rely on knowledge and in particular sales, marketing, and purchasing which are profoundly dependant.  Finger (1989) indicates that in the case of learning there must  be always real relevance, and the generator of knowledge real usefulness" (p. 32).   Therefore,  within this learning one will find organization complexity.

     Organizations Complexity

     Where there is knowledge in organizations, there will always be organizations complexity.  The success of the enterprise relies greatly on integrated employee relations, organize work, skills, technology, and active information.  This occurs when people in the enterprise knowledge over perform specialities. Angus (2001 ) indicates that" even though people over perform the way the content of the politics of contemporary democracies is a consequence of the many struggles against exclusion and for extension of democracy to more and more citizens" (p. 45).  It also occurs when managers and employees understanding are opened to the need of the environment, and its organization, and the process in which learning is acquired.  There are boundaries, however.

     Boundaries

     There are lack of visibility between inside and outside boundaries. This then affects the retail and the manufacture practices, because they become effective when there is close relationship with suppliers.

Agencies of the Public Sector then become less insular and more responsible.  At the same time long term contracts are attained and established with sub-contractors becoming expertise in many industries. Benchmark within and between enterprises, allows collaboration of  visits to other site and intercompany boundaries of enterprises in the environment, which allows learning to take place throughout the organization.  However, Morris (unknown) indicates that internally, many activists believe that association need to adopt a more pro-worker stance' (p. 592).  This so because of the boundaries which is set by expertises.  Therefore ,  in this case time  will be reduced  time available.

     Reduced time Available

     This allows competency and faster access way of doing thing emerging from markets and enterprises.  These enterprises develop software and hardware, and take advantage of products, service and market privilege.  In this case the use of network and internet are the primary catalyst.  These catalyst improve efficiency and speed in businesses.   Fields (2004) indicates that "There is a direct correlation between the corporate need to speed up knowledge acquisition and application and the desire to improve 'organizational' learning" (p. 204). Habermas  intent belief is to see work tensions and incompatibilities between technical-economic and political interests enhances learning in the organization. A consideration of 'non-unitary' perspectives on life in an organization is looked upon as a focal point in the political interest of learning.  With this in mind 'organizational' learning conceptual base weaknesses can be addressed.

     'Organizational' Learning Conceptual Base Weaknesses

     Therefore, according  to the 'organizational' learning conceptual base weaknesses, when changes take place in most circumstances organizations reframed  to engage in 'organizations' learning.  The invisible learning specification for group managers and other organization is not disclosed.  There is also the problem of undisclosed learning by organizations.  Also, results from the conceptual confusion and reporting in literature give a false and a confusing interpretation of the terms 'organization and learning'.  The focus however, of 'organizational' learning is based on technical and economical  learning interests. There is also false impression of organizations as unitary: single -interest group.  Morris (unknown) indicates that WEA believed that a network of local adult class organized by the organization, but taught by university staff would permit able working class persons to breach the barriers of social stratification" (p. 592).  Here,  WEA  sees the weaknesses in the  'organizational' learning, and is looking forward that this weakness will be overcome through learning literature and other social stratification within the  shared-interest-group in the organization.  However, learning which is associated with a technical-economic  level is been looked into.

A Technical-Economic Level

The Concerns of Learning Which is Associated With The Interest Of Technical-economic

     As the concerns are addressed, when learning is taken into consideration the assumption that referred to learning associated with technical and economic interests  is ignored by the organization learning literature that deals with politics and emotions.  As the concerns are being explore, it is believed that technical-economic interests in productivity and profit is the commercial organizations raison detre.  The concerns also indicate that there are different kind of learning which takes place in an organization such as personal interests that relates to technical-economic interest for example in the case of downsizing, dismal inequitable bonus system or relocation.  However, Fields (2004) indicates that "they are areas of continuing learning such as participation and collaboration, management attitudes and behaviors, security, health, creativity and expression, awareness, society, one' s history and future" (p.206).  In this sense 'organizational' learning which embraced the political interest level is been investigated.

A Political Level

'Organizational' Learning Which Embraced The Political Interest

     In the case of finding from the investigation,  a better way in using 'organizational' learning literature to rethink learning about the organization is been pursued.  This idea came about by a researcher-consultant in Australian companies observing and interviewing for many years.  From their experiment  they learn that learning occur in many ways and forms.  Fields(2004) indicates that Habermas (1987) theoretical work on knowledge and interests relate goals such as understanding the human condition, and achieving personal human and group freed"(p. 208). He continues by saying "Habermas understanding of knowledge and learning in most cases referred to 'the forces of money and power'"(Fields, 2004, p. 208). Therefore,  the account of pluralist in the political arena is taken into consideration.

Account of Pluralist

     According to the account of the pluralist, the struggles that shared-interest-groups engaged in is political, and cause limited resources.  This is where protection and control is been looked into in order to further the shared-interest-groups interest, values and agenda, having authority to pressure and control workers, worker's resistant alliances nature, outcomes and protection of group interests.  Angus (2001) proclaims that "It is with the social movements our own time that the future of democracy resists" (p. 52). The pluralists will always be engaged in the future of democracy. This then bring us to the accounts of labour process.

Accounts of Labour Process

     Labor process is therefore an indication of how international capitalism operates.  The account of labor process gives in detail what is entail in the learning, which gives a good indication of shareholders pressure, threats of takeovers, major changes in marketplace, hidden agendas on empowerment, and the feasibility of pay arrangement  with the organization.  Angus (2001) argues that "Political parties and institutions have responded to these non-institutional cries for changes" (p. 48).   It is then safe to say that in Angus' mind democracy will bring about the changes  from these non-institutional organization within the stratosphere or internationally.  This then leads to the accounts of Postmodern organizational and community life.

Accounts of Postmodern Organizational and Community Life

     This is where the complexities of work life, including members reproduction and challenge practices and discourse are being examined. Chambers (2002) indicates that  "the essence of a discursive of principle of organization is that all affected by the organization role ought agree to the rule" (p. 106).  Discourse is also where an indication of the complexities  suggest caution of unitary notion of 'organizational' learning.  There is no doubt that this points the complexity , multi-interest and power-imbued learning view.  The accounts also allow 'non-unitary' perspective conception of the organization differently: allows group with political interests to engage in learning within the organization and allows triumph in the discourses.  From these major accounts of learning in the organization and community life, there is also a need to explore the ontological level.

A Ontological Level

'Organizational' learning and Ontological Interest

     This is where psychoanalytical literature maintained the sense of one's security and continuity when faced with external and internal threats.   Fields (2004) implies that "Its primary concern is with individual, and the 'organizational learning and  ontological interest therefore provides evidence that the common interest of the groups is the tendency to pressure and to protect themselves" (p. 212).  The evidence is quite clear, because it serves the interest of the psychoanalytical literature, which maintain the protection and the longevity  of the 'organizational' learning. This will then leads to a discussion of the three shared-interest-groups.

Discussion

The Three Shared-Interest-Groups

     It is believed that most learning is not 'organizational', but is considered as a interest in the shared-interest groups.  Therefore, learning is never restricted to situations, where interests of the people are aligned with the interest of the technical-economic enterprises.  Finger (1989) argues that "the most potent weapon is institutional politics: they see k to mobilize mass movements in order to put political pressure on the State on the political system, and on a variety of institutions" (p. 17). In context with this 'organizational' members and technical-economic enterprises always are at war, because there tensions and incompatibilities between these two, which is due  to learning results created from the friction.  Alongside this are the political and ontological interests, which are important to consultants in the organization such as Human Resources.  This kind of tendency is been treated through measures such as feedback, dialogue, formation of group, critical reflection and retention.  Therefore,  this  tendency will thereby bring about a conclusion.

Conclusion

     In conclusion, it is difficult to adopt a technological-economic assumption, and unitary group perspective tendency, because of the problem of 'organizational ' knowledge, and reason for change created.  The holistic account technical-economic interests pertaining 'organizational' learning is that the needs must go beyond the organization's need or expectation. Chambers (2002)  argues that when  democracy deliberation is seen as non-coercive means of creating the social solidarity necessary to overcome a culture of inequality" (p. 109).  It is safe to say that learning trend has created animosities between organization's technical-economic, political, and ontological interests of the 'organizational' interests of the' organizational' members.  There are evidence to say that 'organizational' literature causes learning to enhance management position.  This kind of learning is recognized and encouraged , but  learning that enhance political and ontological interest is not visible , and most likely is been discouraged.

     My assumption is that the whole organizations rarely adhere to learning.  The main backbone learners  in the 'organizational' learning literature within the organizations as the shared-interest groups.  The evidence provided allows a holistic and robust view on learning within the organizations where i n equality can be weighed in the three areas: technical-economic, political and ontological. Also, pluralistic  and conflictual view of  'organizational' learning must be recognised in order to differentiate the roles of different interests.  At the end , there must be a final examination of circumstances, if any,  to differentiate between actual learning and 'organizational' learning.

References

Angus, I. (2001).  "Always beginning again," in Emergent publics: an essay on social movement and  

     democracy, Winnipeg: Arbeiter Ring Publishing, 57-69.

Chambers, S. (2002). "A critical theory of Civil Society," in S. Chambers and W. Kulicka, eds. Alternative

     Conception of civil society.  Princeton: Oxford University Press, 90-110.

Fields, L. (2004).  "Rethinking 'organizational' learning," in G. Foley, ed. Dimensions of adult learning.

     CrowNest, Australia, 201-218.

Finger, M. (1989). "New social movements and their Implications for adult education," Adult education

     Quarterly, 40, 15-22.

Finlayson, J. G.(May 26, 2005). Language Arts & Disciplines, Oxford,156.

Morris, R. (unknown). "Social movements," in International Encyclopedia, 589-594.