Un de ra chiev eme nt i n the work place |1

Underachievement in the workplace: How learning organizations can save good people from bad outcomes By Ellen Ast LI805 Emporia State University

Un de ra chiev eme nt i n the work place |2

Abstract Two case studies discussed during the fall LI805 course each resulted in the termination of an employee. Despite satisfactory academic and professional backgrounds of the employees, both lost their jobs due to performance issues and poor relationships with colleagues. This paper discusses how both employees would have succeeded in their jobs if their workplaces were structured as learning organizations based on Peter Senges five principles of the learning organization model. Finally, an evaluation of how the learning organization model reflects the spirit of the library and information science industry is presented.

Un de ra chiev eme nt i n the work place |3

Introduction The decision to terminate an employee can be a difficult one for an administrator to make. At the same time, people who have been fired may find it difficult to keep a positive attitude, learn from what happened, and pick up where they left off in a new job. Each employee featured in the case studies What do you want in a library director? and Chronic low performance was fired mainly for not meeting performance expectations and for poor relationships with peers. A shy young library school graduate in What do you want in a library director failed at his first job, leading a small library. He found more fitting work behind the scenes at an art library, but his short administrative career was over. Then in Chronic low performance, a womans steady five-year career at a library ended when she failed to meet her new managers expectations. In both case studies, the terminated employees had to deal with the effects losing their jobs had on their careers. A learning-centered workplace, which literature since the 1970s has suggested as an alternative to traditional workplace structure, may have saved both employees in the case studies. Library and information institutions especially should promote internally and externally the values of learning organizations, which according to Peter Senge are shared vision, personal mastery, mental models, group learning and systems thinking. Promoting the dignity of the patron through freedom of access to information should ring as true as promoting the dignity of the employee through a secure environment rooted in learning. As more libraries and information organizations restructure their workplaces into learning-centered models, the collective environment of these structures will increase the odds of success for employees who would be otherwise terminated. When a qualified person is fired for having different learning styles or for being a poor fit for the job or the company, it can sometimes take years to make up for the dent it leaves in a persons personal and professional life. I chose this topic because I saw this happen more than once to qualified people who lost their jobs because they balked when their superiors called their performance or character into question over time. The two case studies I cited hit a raw nerve in me and I was not sure how to explain why until I read Transitioning to the learning organization by Joan Giesecke and Joan McNeil and thus researched Senges five principles of learning organization. It became clear to me that it is possible for a person to learn, at work, the lessons they would typically have to learn after being fired. In order for this to happen, more organizations will need to restructure themselves into learning organizations. I feel such changes in the long run will be worth it because they can save the careers and dignity of good people by promoting an atmosphere of peer harmony, mutual expectations and discipline through learning. These three concepts will now be discussed. Peer harmony Workplaces based on Senges foundations allow employees who might fail in traditional workplaces to enjoy meaningful work and successful careers. Both case studies emphasized poor relationships each employee had with colleagues. In What do you want in a library director, Sam Grillo lacked the people skills needed to lead a library. In Chronic low performance, the employees coworkers complained to their new manager that she acted disagreeable with others. In both cases, a bold bonding strategy would have been needed to turn things around. While a more traditional organization would simply remove the person, a learning organization would see the person they already have as an opportunity to re-examine itself grow. The challenge in the first case study was to use bold communication and coaching to align Grillos goals and

Un de ra chiev eme nt i n the work place |4

knowledge with the librarys needs. Then in the second case study, the challenge was to use bold bonding to align the employees abilities and goals with the rest of the department. Although such investments of time and resources could lead to nowhere, a learning organization values such risks. Studies on organizations that adopted the learning model reported greater staff collaboration The author of an article about North Suburban Library Systems transition to a learning organization said, A Learning Organization is the best means of aligning individual goals with organizational ones, because the organizational model values continual learning. This model offers a framework for transforming the library organization by tapping the skills, commitment, and creative potential of a broad group of staff members. (Baaske, I., Hayes, J. & Sullivan, M., 1999). In an article about the University of Arizona Librarys unprecedented transition into a learning-centered organization, the author said We are learning that collaboration, not competition, is key. (Bender, 1997). This article is significant because it talked about how the library was doing four years after it flattened its vertical workplace structure into one that was customer-driven and made up entirely of teams. Consequently, it led the way for more academic libraries to follow suit. One passage in the article, Most of the library staff were raised in our performancebased, individualistic culture. Adjusting to the concept of the learning organization and team organization is a hard, slow process, demonstrates the contrast between traditional and modern workplace structures. This is what the employee in the second case study was up against when her new manager began a series of documented meetings that involved performance expectations and follow-up evaluations. Clearly, the employees learning style did not fit this handling style because she failed to improve. However, she may have had the potential to improve if relations with her colleagues were more collaborative. Yet none of the other staff who complained to their manager about their co-workers disagreeable behavior were involved in the meetings. The manager didnt suggest employee team-building exercises, such as pizza lunches (Baaske, I., Hayes, J. & Sullivan, M., 1999). Group learning too goes hand-in-hand with shared vision. According to Bender (1997), Most all barrierswill be taken much more in stride once a shared vision is designed and adopted by the library. If the manager in the second case study would have considered this approach, she would have been challenged to see her department not as separate parts good employees and bad employees but rather as a collective. The latter paints a picture of peer harmony, with individuals learning about themselves, each other and how the sum of each others strengths and weaknesses. Senge also refers to this as systems thinking. When people truly share a vision they are connected, bound together by a common aspiration (Senge, 1990, p. 206). Expectations Individuals must still pull their own weight in an organization. Staff must realize that they are responsible and accountable for what happens in their teams and in the library. (Bender, 1997). However, the learning organization model presents an alternative to benchmarks set up by a superior that an employee either reaches or does not. Personal mastery will be factored into an employees overall performance appraisal and the employee will help establish performance benchmarks based on personal strengths and weaknesses at the time. Failures can

Un de ra chiev eme nt i n the work place |5

become opportunities to learn and improve rather than career-ending events. (Giesecke & McNeil, 2004). Senges principle of mental models influences the dynamic between how an employee performs and what is expected. In the second case study, the managers methodical series of meetings created a negative mental model for the employee. Because she was singled out as the problem in her department, the employee developed a negative subconscious assumption about herself, which in turn influenced her actions. Conflicting mental images the manager had about her employee, and conflicting mental images the employee had about herself, her colleagues and her organization, led to conflict in work performance and created distrust. Very often, we are not aware of' our own mental models and the assumptions that underlie our actions. We act based on our subconscious model rather than on the theories we claim to believe...In a learning organization, staff would recognize these different views and develop a shared understanding of how to work together to make the organization stronger. (Giesecke & McNeil, 2004). Discipline According to Senge, good work should be rewarded, a shared vision should unite members and individual performance should be evaluated on its contribution to the greater good and the self improvement process. Group learning and discipline go hand-in-hand: The effect bad behavior has on a group should challenge an individual to improve and when they do they should be rewarded. Termination should happen only in cases of insubordination and chronic neglect of duties. The individual in a learning organization takes responsibility for helping the organization attain that vision. This is done through a flatter organizational structure, teamwork, the sharing of information, and the empowering of staff at all levels. (Baaske, I., Hayes, J. & Sullivan, M., 1999). Rather than discipline for not meeting her bosss benchmarks, the employee in the second case study needed developmental coaching and then rewards when improvement was shown. Centres that foster continuous learning and encourage employees to improve, grow in place or make lateral moves to broaden their contribution can help establish a framework for systems that support changing organizational realities. (Davis & Daley, 2008). Such centers, add Davis and Daley, can help employees structure their various options better to meet priority learning needs. Adopting the strategies and behaviours of a learning organization should enhance individual, team, and organizational learning, which in turn, would yield performance gains. (Davis & Daley, 2008). According to Giesecke and McNeil, people are more likely to adopt behaviors that support and promote learning activities when learning is rewarded. Performance appraisals should include rewards for developing new skills, for teamwork, and for continuous personal development that supports organizational goals. (Giesecke & McNeil, 2004). Finally, systems thinking ties together Senges five principles. The concept of interaction of all parts of the whole replaces the concept of individual parts as they are. Therefore, group learning, shared vision, personal mastery and mental models draw emphasis away from blame or the individual as the cause of the problem. The individual, the cause of the problem, and the solution to the problem are all part of the same system. (Giesecke & McNeil, 1994). Conclusion If the organizations where the employees in the case studies worked were structured as learning organizations, superiors and colleagues would have perceived the issues differently and

Un de ra chiev eme nt i n the work place |6

treated them in ways that benefitted the organization and everyone involved. Senges five principles of a learning organization call for a shift at all levels in what caused the employees to lose their jobs. If more organizations adopt some or all parts of the learning organization model, more people will enjoy the freedom to make learning a part of their personal and professional growth without fear of failure. Learning organizations can put the adage learn from your mistakes into practice. Too many times, termination causes a person to create a negative mental model about themselves and sometimes about life in general, especially when a termination puts a dent in ones career path. As society advances and library and information science industries promote the dignity of the person through freedom of access to information, I hope they also promote the dignity of the person through collaborative and learning workplaces. The American Library Associations fifth article in the Code of Ethics says, We treat co-workers and other colleagues with respect, fairness, and good faith, and advocate conditions of employment that safeguard the rights and welfare of all employees of our institutions. (ALA, 1997). The best way library and information science administrators can achieve this vision is by taking more learning organizations.

Un de ra chiev eme nt i n the work place |7

References American Library Association. (1997). Code of ethics of the American Library Association. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/proethics/codeofethics/codeethics.cfm. Anderson, A.J. (2007). What do you want in a library director? Libraries Unlimited. Retrieved from http://lu.com/management/director.cfm Baaske, I., Hayes, J. & Sullivan, M. (1999). Choosing the road less traveled: the North Suburban Library System creates a learning organization. Public Libraries, 38, n2. p. 110(4). Retrieved from EducationFullText. Bender, L . (1997). Team organization - learning organization: the University of Arizona four years into it. Information Outlook, 1, n9. p.19(4). Retrieved from Academic OneFile. Davis, D., & Daley, B. (2008). The learning organization and its dimensions as key factors in firms' performance. Human Resource Development International, 11(1), 51-66. Case study 8 chronic low performance. (2010). Organizational performance and evaluation. Retrieved from http://elearning.emporia.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp. Giesecke, J. & McNeil, B. (2004). Transitioning to the learning organization. Library Trends, 53(1), 54-67. Senge, P. (I 990a). 'Ihe fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.