從實踐中反映學習型組織的理論與介入模式

Reflection on Learning Organization Theory and Its Practices

楊仁壽(Jen-Shou Yang)；卓秀足(Hsiu-Tsu Cho)

學習型組織 ； 介入模式 ； 脈絡因素 ； learning organization ； intervention model ； contextual factors

應用心理研究

33期（2007 / 03 / 01）

175 - 198

繁體中文

實踐場像一面鏡子，反映出理論的能耐，經過實踐，我們得以從中檢驗理論的基本假定，測試理論的適用條件。本文比較兩個導入學習型組織(Learning Organization，LO)到企業的個案，他們接受同一個顧問，以相同的理論基礎所設計的LO介入過程，但是卻產生不同的結果。我們藉由比較兩個個案的異同點，反思LO的基本假定，並歸納LO及這套介入理論的適用條件。我們發現LO的兩個假定：(1)組織可以形成共同願景而產生驅動學習、改變與創造；(2)學習系統思考與團隊學習的能力可以促成心智模式的改變，而產生組織學習，改變個人、團體、與組織的常規，促進創新與改變，在實踐上有其適用的情境脈絡，包括分權與穩定的政治環境、領導者用以身作則與鼓勵實踐的方式來支持、以及心理安全與學習就要應用的組織文化。

Practice reflects robustness of a theory. Assumptions and boundary conditions could be examined in practices. The present paper compared two cases that initiated Senge's learning organization. The two companies had the same consultant who designed identical intervention model based on Senge's intervention theory. However, the outcomes of the two cases were different to some extent. We examined the basic assumptions of learning organization and boundary conditions of the intervention model through the comparison between the two cases. The results indicated that assumptions of LO, i.e., shared visions drive motives of learning, change, innovation and the capabilities of team learning and systems thinking facilitate changes and innovations of individual, team and organization, have their boundary conditions when practicing. Three contextual factors to moderate the success of LO projects founded in this study were (1) decentralization and stable organizational politics, (2) leaders' assertion of their supports by role model and encouragement of practice, (3) organizational culture of psychological safety and ”learn to apply”. We conclude that an ideal type of learning organization has been invented, but an ideal intervention model will be waited in the future.

1. Argyris, C.(1993).Knowledge for action: A guide to overcoming barriers to organizational chang.San Francisco:Jossey Bass.
2. Coopey, J.(1995).The learning organization power, politics and ideology.Management Learning,26(2),193-213.
3. Coopey, J.,Burgoyne, J.,M. Easterby-Smith,L. Araujo,J. Burgoyne (Eds.)(1999).Politics and learning.Organizational learning: 3rd international conference
4. de Bono, E.(1990).Six thinking hats.Mica Management Resources (UK).
5. Isaacs, W. N.(1999).Dialogue and the art of thinking together.New York:Doubleday.
6. Jones, G. R.(2004).Organizational theory, design, and change: Text and cases.New Jersey:Pearson.
7. Roth, G.,Kleiner, A.(1996).Field manual for a learning historian. Cambridge.MA:MIT-COL and Reflection Learning Associates.
8. Schein, E. H.(1999).Process consultation revisited: Building the helping relationship.Mass:Addison-Wesley.
9. Senge, P. M.,P. M. Senge,C. Roberts,R. B. Ross,B. J. Smith,A. Kleiner (Eds.)(1994).The fifth discipline field book: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization.New York:Doubleday Currency.
10. Senge, P. M.,Roberts, C.,Ross, R. B.,Smith, B. J.,Kleiner, A.(1994).The fifth discipline field book: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization.New York:Doubleday Currency.
11. Senge, P. M.、郭進隆譯(1990)。第五項修練：學習型組織的藝術與實務。台北:天下。
12. Senge, P.,C. Roberts,R. Ross,B. Smith,G. Roth,A. Kleiner(1999).The dance of change.New York:Doubleday Currency.
13. Yang, Jen-Shou,Chen, Chin-Yi(2004).Systemic design for improving team learning climate and capability: a case study.Total Quality Management,16(6),1-14.

1. 李志鴻、王思峰(2007)。涉入型臨床研究：一個次文化遭逢之研究設計芻議。應用心理研究，36，193-222。
2. 石冀忻(2018)。組織學習與創新在公務機關的困境與對策。中國行政評論，24(1)，75-91。
3. 鄭湘鈴,李素真(2019)。護理團隊應用學習型組織於代謝症候群病友團體照護。護理雜誌，66(6)，27-32。