Writer’s choice FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS/RUBRCS. 5 SOURCES TOTAL
Accelerating economic, technological, social, and environmental change challenge managers and policy makers to learn at increasing rates, while at the same time, the complexity of the systems in which we live is growing. Many of the problems we now face arise as unanticipated side effects of our own past actions. All too often, the policies we implement to solve important problems fail, making the problem worse, or create new problems.
— John Sterman (2000)
Systems archetypes are patterns of behavior exhibited by social, natural, or artificial systems. They include limits to success, success to the successful, tragedy of the commons, eroding goals, growth and underinvestment, escalation, fixes that fail, and shifting the burden. For example, the limits-to-success archetype or pattern is found in corporations, and one of them is described in marketing terms as the product life cycle. It is found in educational systems as most students graduate from high school while few complete their doctoral studies, and it is found in biological systems when food or water supplies limit population growth or success. Systems archetypes and other systems dynamics models include variables and their relationships. When feedback loops are formed, they are either positive (reinforcing) loops that amplify or negative (goal-seeking) loops that dampen or stabilize.
Consider the archetypes (patterns) you can find from a leadership perspective. How can those archetypes help you find possible interventions to organizational problems? This week, you examine the archetypes of an organization from a leadership perspective.
Learning Objectives
This week, you will:
Analyze barriers to learning organizations
Apply learning disciplines to organizations
Skills
You will develop the following skills:
Systems thinking
Learning Resources
Note: To access this week’s required Harvard Business Review resources, select the article link and navigate to the relevant article or go back to Blackboard and select Harvard Business Articles from the course navigation menu.
Recommended Readings
Reeves, M., & Deimler, M. (2011). Adaptability: The new competitive advantage. Harvard Business Review, 89(7–8), 135–141.
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Doubleday.
Chapter 8, “Personal Mastery” (pp. 129–162)
Chapter 9, “Mental Models” (pp. 163–190)
Chapter 10, “Shared Vision” (pp. 191–215)
Chapter 11, “Team Learning” (pp. 216–252)
Discussion: The Disciplines of Learning Organizations
To practice a discipline is to be a lifelong learner. You never arrive; you spend your life mastering disciplines. You can never say, “We are a learning organization,” any more than you can say, “I am an enlightened person.” The more you learn, the more acutely aware you become of your ignorance.
—Senge (2006, p. 10)
Senge (2006) explained that combining five learning disciplines (systems thinking, personal mastery, mental models, building shared vision, and team learning) can help organizations learn and innovate. It is important to note that each discipline hinges upon the success or failure of the others. Two of these disciplines are individual: mental models and personal mastery. Two of the disciplines are team- or group-oriented: building shared vision and team learning. Systems thinking integrates and extends these disciplines to achieve better outcomes.
Mental models are those values, beliefs, concepts, and ideas we tacitly hold in our minds. To the extent that our mental models are rigid, we may find it difficult to learn and do new things. To the extent that our mental models are more flexible, we may find it easier to learn and do something different. There is no fixed point on the spectrum of rigidity and flexibility that is optimal, but it is something to be aware of and perhaps consciously alter as circumstances change.
To prepare for this Discussion, review the resources and reflect upon Senge’s (2006) five disciplines. Consider how you may use the disciplines to help managers and leaders learn to improve organizations. Think of this discussion as a shared conversation with your peers.
By Day 3
Initial Post
Post an analysis of potential barriers faced by organizations in their attempts to become learning organizations. Next, provide two potential ways you might advise organizations to overcome those barriers using the five learning disciplines. Finally, explain how you, as a leader in a learning organization, might use learning disciplines to improve organizational learning.
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Name: MGMT_8007M_Week4_Discussion_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Superior Criteria Excellent Criteria Satisfactory Criteria Marginal Criteria Unacceptable Criteria
Element 1a: Initial Post – Potential Barriers
4.5 (15%)
Student presents a thorough and detailed analysis of potential barriers faced by organizations in their attempts to become learning organizations. Several resources and examples support thinking.
4.28 (14.25%)
Student presents a detailed analysis of potential barriers faced by organizations in their attempts to become learning organizations. Several resources or examples support thinking. There are one or two minor errors or details missing.
3.83 (12.75%)
Student presents an analysis with some details of potential barriers faced by organizations in their attempts to become learning organizations. Some resources or examples support thinking. Some details are missing and/or not fully developed.
3.38 (11.25%)
Student presents a cursory or incomplete analysis with vague or missing details of potential barriers faced by organizations in their attempts to become learning organizations. Few resources or examples support thinking. Most details are missing or lack clarity.
0 (0%)
Does not meet minimal standards.
Element 1b: Initial Post – Overcoming Barriers
6 (20%)
Student presents a thorough and detailed explanation of two potential ways he/she might advise organizations to overcome those barriers using the five learning disciplines. Several resources and examples support thinking.
5.7 (19%)
Student presents a detailed explanation of two potential ways he/she might advise organizations to overcome those barriers using the five learning disciplines. Several resources or examples support thinking. There are one or two minor errors or details missing.
5.1 (17%)
Student presents an explanation with some details of two potential ways he/she might advise organizations to overcome those barriers using the five learning disciplines. Some resources or examples support thinking. Some details are missing and/or not fully developed.
4.5 (15%)
Student presents a cursory or incomplete explanation with vague or missing details of two potential ways he/she might advise organizations to overcome those barriers using the five learning disciplines. Few resources or examples support thinking. Most details are missing or lack clarity.
0 (0%)
Does not meet minimal standards.
Element 1c: Initial Post – Improving Organizational Learning
6 (20%)
Student presents a thorough and detailed explanation of how he/she, as a leader in a learning organization, might use learning disciplines to improve organizational learning. Several resources and examples support thinking.
5.7 (19%)
Student presents a detailed explanation of how he/she, as a leader in a learning organization, might use learning disciplines to improve organizational learning. Several resources or examples support thinking. There are one or two minor errors or details missing.
5.1 (17%)
Student presents an explanation with some details of how he/she, as a leader in a learning organization, might use learning disciplines to improve organizational learning. Some resources or examples support thinking. Some details are missing and/or not fully developed.
4.5 (15%)
Student presents a cursory or incomplete explanation with vague or missing details of how he/she, as a leader in a learning organization, might use learning disciplines to improve organizational learning. Few resources or examples support thinking. Most details are missing or lack clarity.
0 (0%)
Does not meet minimal standards.
Element 2: Follow-up Responses to Colleagues and Interaction
4.5 (15%)
Student engages with several peers bringing the discussion to a higher level of inquiry and investigation. Responses are thorough and fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes.
4.28 (14.25%)
Student engages with several peers bringing the discussion to a higher level of inquiry and investigation. Responses fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes. However, there are one or two minor errors in content of responses.
3.83 (12.75%)
Student engages with at least two peers and helps extend the discussion. Responses somewhat contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes.
3.38 (11.25%)
Student engages with at least two peers. Responses are minimal and do not fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes. Responses may lack relevant examples and/or details to support reasoning.
0 (0%)
Does not meet minimal standards.
Element 3: Written Delivery Style & Grammar
4.5 (15%)
Student consistently follows APA writing style and basic rules of formal English grammar and written essay style. Student communicates in a cohesive, logical style. There are no spelling or grammar errors.
4.28 (14.25%)
Student consistently follows APA writing style and basic rules of formal English grammar and written essay style. Student communicates in a cohesive, logical style. There are one or two minor errors in spelling or grammar.
3.83 (12.75%)
Student mostly follows APA writing style and basic rules of formal English grammar and written essay style. Student mostly communicates in a cohesive, logical style. There are some errors in spelling or grammar.
3.38 (11.25%)
Student does not follow APA writing style and basic rules of formal English grammar and written essay style and/or does not communicate in a cohesive, logical style.
0 (0%)
Does not meet minimal standards.
Element 4: Formal and Appropriate Documentation of Evidence, Attribution of Ideas (APA Citations)
4.5 (15%)
Student demonstrates full adherence to APA style with respect to source attribution, references, heading and subheading logic, table of contents and lists of charts, etc. There are no APA errors. Citations and references support position and are from relevant peer-reviewed articles published within the last five years.
4.28 (14.25%)
Student demonstrates full adherence to APA style with respect to source attribution, references, heading and subheading logic, table of contents and lists of charts, etc. Citations and references support position and are from relevant peer-reviewed articles published within the last five years. There are one or two minor errors in APA style or format.
3.83 (12.75%)
Student mostly adheres to APA style with respect to source attribution, references, heading and subheading logic, table of contents and lists of charts, etc. At least one citation and reference supports position. Some errors in APA format and style are evident.
3.38 (11.25%)
Student demonstrates weak and/or inconsistent adherence to APA style with respect to source attribution, references, heading and subheading logic, table of contents and lists of charts, etc. No citations or references support opinion and/or several errors in APA format and style are evident.
0 (0%)
Does not meet minimal standards.
Name: MGMT_8007M_Week4_Discussion_Rubric
