The Learning History Methodology: An Infrastructure for Collective Reflection to Support Organizational Change and Learning

Q3 Business, Management and Accounting
Julie Béliveau, A. Corriveau
{"title":"The Learning History Methodology: An Infrastructure for Collective Reflection to Support Organizational Change and Learning","authors":"Julie Béliveau, A. Corriveau","doi":"10.34190/ejbrm.19.2.2510","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Organization members often complain about insufficient time to reflect collectively as they grapple with constant significant changes. The Learning History methodology can support this collective reflection. Given the scant empirical studies of this action research approach, the present paper fills this gap by giving an overview of this methodology and by presenting a qualitative study that answers the following research question: How does the Learning History methodology contribute to collective reflection among organization members during major organizational change? To answer this question, an empirical research project was led within five healthcare organizations in Canada during their implementation of the Planetree person-centered approach to management, care, and services. The data set includes 150 semi-structured interviews, 20 focus groups and 10 feedback meetings involving organization members representing all hierarchical levels in the five participating institutions. The results highlight the five types of contributions of the Learning History methodology to collective reflection within the five institutions that participated in the study: 1) a process of expression, dialogue, and reflection among organization members; 2) a portrait of the change underway; 3) a support tool for the change process; 4) a vector for mobilizing stakeholders; and 5) a source of organizational learning.  The results also show how organization members’ collective reflection is built through the various stages of the Learning History methodology. By demonstrating that this collective reflection leads to true organizational learning, the findings position the Learning History as a research-action method useful both from a research standpoint and as an organizational development tool. In the conclusion, lessons learned using the LH approach are shared from a researcher’s perspective. This paper should interest researchers and practitioners who seek research methodologies that can offer an infrastructure for collective reflection to support organizational change and learning.","PeriodicalId":38532,"journal":{"name":"Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34190/ejbrm.19.2.2510","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Organization members often complain about insufficient time to reflect collectively as they grapple with constant significant changes. The Learning History methodology can support this collective reflection. Given the scant empirical studies of this action research approach, the present paper fills this gap by giving an overview of this methodology and by presenting a qualitative study that answers the following research question: How does the Learning History methodology contribute to collective reflection among organization members during major organizational change? To answer this question, an empirical research project was led within five healthcare organizations in Canada during their implementation of the Planetree person-centered approach to management, care, and services. The data set includes 150 semi-structured interviews, 20 focus groups and 10 feedback meetings involving organization members representing all hierarchical levels in the five participating institutions. The results highlight the five types of contributions of the Learning History methodology to collective reflection within the five institutions that participated in the study: 1) a process of expression, dialogue, and reflection among organization members; 2) a portrait of the change underway; 3) a support tool for the change process; 4) a vector for mobilizing stakeholders; and 5) a source of organizational learning.  The results also show how organization members’ collective reflection is built through the various stages of the Learning History methodology. By demonstrating that this collective reflection leads to true organizational learning, the findings position the Learning History as a research-action method useful both from a research standpoint and as an organizational development tool. In the conclusion, lessons learned using the LH approach are shared from a researcher’s perspective. This paper should interest researchers and practitioners who seek research methodologies that can offer an infrastructure for collective reflection to support organizational change and learning.
学习史方法论:支持组织变革和学习的集体反思基础
组织成员经常抱怨没有足够的时间集体反思,因为他们正在努力应对不断发生的重大变化。学习史方法可以支持这种集体反思。鉴于对这种行动研究方法的实证研究很少,本文通过概述这种方法并提出一项定性研究来填补这一空白,该研究回答了以下研究问题:在重大组织变革期间,学习史方法如何有助于组织成员的集体反思?为了回答这个问题,加拿大五家医疗保健组织在实施Planetree以人为本的管理、护理和服务方法期间,领导了一个实证研究项目。该数据集包括150次半结构化访谈、20个焦点小组和10次反馈会议,涉及代表五个参与机构所有层级的组织成员。研究结果强调了学习史方法对参与研究的五个机构内集体反思的五种贡献:1)组织成员之间的表达、对话和反思过程;2) 正在发生的变化的写照;3) 变革过程的支持工具;4) 动员利益攸关方的载体;以及5)组织学习的来源。研究结果还表明,组织成员的集体反思是如何通过学习历史方法论的各个阶段建立起来的。通过证明这种集体反思导致了真正的组织学习,研究结果将学习史定位为一种研究行动方法,无论从研究角度还是作为一种组织发展工具都是有用的。在结论中,从研究人员的角度分享了使用LH方法所学到的经验教训。这篇论文应该引起研究人员和从业者的兴趣,他们寻求能够为集体反思提供基础设施的研究方法,以支持组织变革和学习。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods
Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods Business, Management and Accounting-Business and International Management
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊介绍: The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods (EJBRM) provides perspectives on topics relevant to research methods applied in the field of business and management. Through its publication the journal contributes to the development of theory and practice. The journal accepts academically robust papers that contribute to the area of research methods applied in business and management research. Papers submitted to the journal are double-blind reviewed by members of the reviewer committee or other suitably qualified readers. The Editor reserves the right to reject papers that, in the view of the editorial board, are either of insufficient quality, or are not relevant enough to the subject area. The editor is happy to discuss contributions before submission. The journal publishes work in the categories described below. Research Papers: These may be qualitative or quantitative, empirical or theoretical in nature and can discuss completed research findings or work in progress. Case Studies: Case studies are welcomed illustrating business and management research methods in practise. View Points: View points are less academically rigorous articles usually in areas of controversy which will fuel some interesting debate. Conference Reports and Book Reviews: Anyone who attends a conference or reads a book that they feel contributes to the area of Business Research Methods is encouraged to submit a review for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信