[Content]

2.1 Theoretical layout

Before we present the company and the resulting cases of organisational learning in detail, we will first recapitulate some important parts of our theoretical framework, as laid out in a previous publication (Fisher & Röben, 2001).

In his contribution to this framework, Mariani (2001) refers to an article by Snyder & Cummings (1998) who defines learning as organisational "to the extent that: (a) it is done to achieve organisation purposes; (b) it is shared or distributed among members of the organisation; (c) learning outcomes are embedded in the organisation’s system, structures and culture". This definition of organisational learning emphasises organisational knowledge creation and dissemination. As a result, in this paper we will focus on the aspect of the construction, the distribution and the institutionalisation of knowledge. This implies that we will look at how new knowledge, that can be gathered from the environment or that can be created within the organisation, affects how organisational work routines are being evaluated. This structural aspect of learning and of knowledge creation, retention and dissemination forms one of the pillars of the framework as elaborated on by our research group. As Argyris and Schön argue, organisational learning in the sense of double-loop and deutero learning "implies that the organisation has created a structure through which individual learning is permanently stimulated, documented and evaluated" (Boreham, Fisher et al., 2001: 132).

Berger and Luckmann (1966) give a description of the process of institutionalisation in their principal work ‘The social construction of reality’. How can this process of institutionalisation be regarded? Huysmans & van der Vlist (1998) define it as "a process in which social practices become sufficiently regular and continuous in order to regard them as institutions that have a normative, compulsory influence on the behaviour of members of an organisation". This process of institutionalisation can thus be regarded as a process, which is a central element to organisational learning to us, that individual knowledge is transformed into organisational knowledge.

Berger and Luckmann (1966) identify three stages that can be discerned during the process of institutionalisation: externalising, objectifying and internalising. The learning of an organisation can be looked upon from the viewpoint of these three stages.

Source: Adaptation of figure, based on Huysmans & van der Vlist (1998)

Figure 1 Learning as a process of institutionalisation

During the process of externalisation, personal knowledge is transferred to others. This can happen in different ways, through formal and informal channels, by personal contact or by use of communication technology. This knowledge can be objectified by the organisation in the form of rules, procedures, structures, etc. and can thus function as a kind of organisational memory. This doesn’t mean that this organisational memory is static. Objectified knowledge is also liable to change. Through internalisation, an employee reabsorbs this organisational knowledge, in order to become, and remain, a member of the organisation.

This process of organisational learning through the institutionalisation of knowledge, as described above, follows a circular motion. This however does not mean that this circle is fully closed. It is permeable to knowledge from the environment, which can influence the individual, the communicated and the organisational knowledge at any stage. This means that external knowledge can influence the individual, communicated and organisational knowledge at any time.

We can illustrate this process by means of an analogy of finding how to get from place X to Y. When an individual knows how to get there, we can call this individual knowledge. If he explains this to someone else, this is communicated knowledge. In order to avoid the repetition of explaining this to each person who does not know how to get from X to Y, he may alternately draw a map. This map is objectified knowledge or organisational knowledge. From the moment that other people start using this map, they are internalising this knowledge. What we try to study, is how these maps come into being.

Essential to this framework are the five criteria that have been developed by the Orglearn research consortium. These criteria that stem from the theoretical framework will in a later stage be used to relate our cases. In a previous paper (Fisher & Röben, 2001), these criteria have been elaborated. In short, they cover the evaluation of the work routines and of the formal and informal learning processes, the transformations in the culture of the organisation, the creation and dissemination of knowledge and the learning from the environment.

In what follows, we will present several cases of organisational learning within the steam cracker plant of Company B, but first, we would like to present the company and the role of the steam cracker.

[Content]