Introduction
Organizational Learning has become an important theory in the development of leadership and organizational growth. There are many works available on the topic but Peter M. Senge’s book “The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization” is held as the foremost organizational learning concept that others have built upon. In 1990, Senge outlined the five disciplines as follows:
1. System Thinking: is the conceptual framework where organizations see the total picture to make effective change. It is considered the cornerstone of the disciplines.
2. Personal Mastery: is dependent on the commitment of the organization’s members to effect change so the organization may learn.
3. Mental Models: exposes the biases that we carry with us, which we may be unaware of. In order to learn and change it is necessary to “turn the mirror inward.” It opens the member to “learningful” conversations and other’s input.
4. Building Shared Vision: this is the shared commitment of the future goals of the organization. The key component of this discipline is that the vision is shared by the stakeholders and not dictated by the organization.
5. Team Learning: this is the foundation to the organization’s ability to thrive. It is a vital component of modern organizations as the learning unit is the team, as opposed to the individual. The teams must learn so the organization may learn.
Senge defined his framework as disciplines because he considered them a practice with each building upon the other. For a company to truly become a learning organization, the disciplines must be implemented as a whole, building the skills to become a lifelong learning organization. This essay reviews the practical application of the organizational learning theory, the developments on the theory itself, and its impact on the firm and its stakeholders.
Article Review Based on the readings the key to organizational learning is system thinking whereby a broader view of the issue is considered. Without this cornerstone discipline the other components do not have the same impact to effect change, however; it is important to note that the five disciplines are an ensemble cast and each need the other for learning to be attained. How does this work at the leadership level where the CEO ultimately has the power to progress or regress the learning organization?
Senge’s research built upon the Single Loop and Double Loop models of learning by Chris Argyris and Donald Schon. They determined that decision making is hindered by the single loop practice as it is does not consider the broader picture and tends to isolate the learning to single snapshots of the issue. “An espoused theory of action based on single-loop learning is found to be the most general model of action. A double-loop model is proposed as providing feedback and more effective decision making” (Argyris 1976, p.363). The prevailing research at the time during which Argyris and Schon developed their theories recommended leadership strategies that were “mini Machiavellian and organized anarchies” that thrived on deceit (Argyris, 1976, p.363). An example of this sanctioned deceit was noted in a suggested recommendation the “president of a university wants to untangle an Administrative Science Quarterly curriculum reform from an issue of social justice, he should create a garbage can attractive enough to seduce the social justice proponents away from the immediate action” (Cohen and March, 1974 as cited by Argyris, 1976). These types of deceitful leadership strategies give rise to a heavily dysfunctional organization. The largest issue found with the Single Loop Model is it promotes a setting for unilateral controlling behaviors, which limits open dialogue by creating a defensive environment. “As a result, leaders would tend to receive little genuine feedback.”….“Many of the hypotheses or hunches that the leaders generate would then tend to become limited and accepted with little oppositions” (Argyris, 1976, p.368). In contrast, the Double Loop Model of organizational learning avoids the pitfalls of the single loop model by creating a team of competent members who share the decision making power. This diminishes the potential defensiveness among the team members and promotes an atmosphere of discovery for many ideas and contributions. This model requires a leader to be skilled in this theory where “every significant action in the double-loop model is evaluated in terms of the degree it helps the participants generate valid and useful information, including relevant feelings, and solve the problem so that it remains solved without reducing the level of problem solving effectiveness” (Argyris, 1976, p.369).
The Double Loop model may be considered the foundation for the five disciplines, outlined in the introduction, it considers the larger picture (system thinking), incorporate a team of competent members (team learning and personal mastery), it focuses on a committed future goal (shared vision) and it promotes open discussion and inputs (mental models) to become a learning organization. It also further solidifies that System Thinking is the bedrock of the organizational learning theory where there is a “shift of mind-from seeing ourselves as separate from the world to connected to the world” (Senge, P., 1990. p. 30). The catalyst for most structured “learnings” or “post-mortems” develop from an error or mistake that was made on a significant project, which the organization does not want to repeat. Argyris and Schon’s theory was based on the “detection and correction of errors” (Senge, P., 2003. p. 47). Making mistakes carries a host of emotional context where by public acknowledgement may be career suicide and many work cultures globally still maintain a “saving face” atmosphere and therefore deny the error even exists. (Argyris as cited by Senge, P., 2003. p.48). This begs the question what does an organization need to do to ensure that it learns from its mistakes? Human errors are prevalent in most, if not all, organizations (Ramanujam & Goodman, 2003, as cited by Zhao, B., 2010). Errors can be costly to organizations and are often associated with negative consequences such as economic costs, damaged reputations, stress, and dissatisfaction (Helmreich, 1997; Zhao & Olivera, 2006 as cited by Zhao, B., 2010). Assistant Professor Bin Zhao (2010) conducted a study between negative emotionality and learning from errors. She has considered the impacts of a blame culture and managerial intolerance for errors and the impact of that on the individual employee.
Zhao (2010) conducted a laboratory study of 127 undergraduate business student participants, 46 were female and 81 were male ranging in age of 17-36. “In a business simulation called the ‘‘Furniture Factory’’ (e.g., Goodman & Wood, 2004), participants took the role of special-order department managers that must make task and incentive allocation decisions” (Zhao, B., 2010, p. 442). The students were displayed a white board with “4 minimal errors! Errors are costly to the factory! Errors will have a strong negative effect on your performance evaluation!” (Zhao, B., 2010, p. 444). The students were given immediate feedback to their decisions both positive and negative.
The finding of the study indicates that managerial attitudes and beliefs about errors do influence employees’ emotions and ability to learn from mistakes. Zhao further concluded that organizational learning will occur in a work culture that promotes an environment of learning and development rather than a blame culture. Organizations should provide employees with resources that can help them learn from errors. The key to such practices is to ensure employees that their organization is a safe environment where errors can be openly discussed (Zhao, B., 2010). A key component to becoming a learning organization is knowledge management and dissemination of the findings. This important factor is an off shoot of Organizational Learning called “Strategic Learning,” which “began with a basic premise that knowledge generation and assimilation processes can be a sustainable source of competitive advantage” (Barabba and Zaltman 1991, Nonaka 1994 as cited by Thomas, J. et al, 2001). Organizations need to maximize their ability to learn effectively over the long term and this ability suggests performance advantages in the competitive market (Senge 1990, McGill and Slocum 1994 as cited by Thomas, J. et al, 2001). Learning behaviors and processes that enable such long-run adaptive capability have been referred to as "strategic learning" (Kuwada, 1998 as cited by Thomas, J. et al, 2001). Amy Edmondson (2002) looks at the dissemination of the learnings through a group perspective. She looks at “two components of the collective learning process-reflection to gain insight and action to produce change-and to explore how teams allow an organization to engage in both radical and incremental learning, as needed in a changing and competitive environment” (Edmondson, A., 2002). Her studies were only exploratory but they did show some anecdotal evidence that supports the Organizational Learning theories discussed in this essay. For example, her study found that team leaders who promoted a “safe environment” and promoted input enabled a healthy progression to organizational learning goals. Edmondson’s study further validated the issues with a single loop learning model where “when power differences created perceptions of interpersonal risk, interpretive learning processes gave rise to an enacted goal of self-protection” (Edmondson, A., 2002).
Conclusion
Organizational Learning theory has a vast amount of literature and studies available to understand how a company may progress to a learning organization. It does seem that more research is necessary as “clearly Argyris and Schon's ideas are essentially about cultural change, and a quarter of a century is not a long time for cultural change” (Senge, P., 2003 p.47). In conclusion:
• for organizations to continue to be competitive they must institute a system wide perspective, avoiding a myopic view, to understand the issue to effect change,
• build a safe work environment that promotes an open dialogue, between employees and leaders, to learn from mistakes,
• understand that errors will happen and the most effective way to mitigate further mistakes is to acknowledge the error,
• assign a competent team with a shared learning goal to analyze the mistake and outline the process enhancements,
• effectively manage and disseminate the learnings quickly to advance change for future improvements.
Ultimately the goal of any organization is to maintain a competitive advantage in the market place. I would suggest implementing the Organizational Learning theories outlined in this essay will be a significant step to becoming a long term learning organization.

References
Argyris, C. (1976). Single-Loop and Double-Loop Models in Research on Decision Making. Administrative Science Quarterly, 363-375.
Edmondson, A. (2002). The Local Variegated Nature of Learning in Organizations: A Group Level Perspective. Organization Science, 128-146.
Thomas, J., Sussman, S., & Henderson, J. (2001). Understanding "Strategic Learning": Linking Organizational Learning, Knowledge Management, and Sensemaking. Organizational Science, 331-345.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: DoubleDay.
Senge, P. M. (2005). Taking Personal Change Seriously: The Impact of Organizational Learning on Management Practice. The Academy of Management Executive, 47-50.
Zhao, B. (2010). Learning from Errors: The role of context, emotion, and personality. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 435-463.