This paper differs from previous examinations of organizational learning in that it is broader in scope and more evaluative of the literatures. Four constructs related to organizational learning knowledge acquisition, information distribution, information interpretation, and organizational memory are articulated, and the literatures related to each are described and critiqued.

The literature on knowledge acquisition is voluminous and multi-faceted, and so the knowledge acquisition construct is portrayed here as consisting of five subconstructs or subprocesses: 1 drawing on knowledge available at the organization's birth, 2 learning from experience, 3 learning by observing other organizations, 4 grafting on to itself components that possess knowledge needed but not possessed by the organization, and 5 noticing or searching for information about the organization's environment and performance. Examination of the related literatures indicates that much has been learned about learning from experience, but also that there is a lack of cumulative work and a lack of integration of work from different research groups. Similarly, much has been learned about organizational search, but there is a lack of conceptual work, and there is a lack of both cumulative work and syntheses with which to create a more mature literature. Congenital learning, vicarious learning, and grafting are information acquisition subprocesses about which relatively little has been learned.

The literature concerning information distribution is rich and mature, but an aspect of information distribution that is central to an organization's benefitting from its learning, namely how units that possess information and units that need this information can find each other quickly and with a high likelihood, is unexplored. Information interpretation, as an organizational process, rather than an individual process, requires empirical work for further advancement. Organizational memory is much in need of systematic investigation, particularly by those whose special concerns are improving organizational learning and decision making.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/2634941.pdf

Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures

The present historical moment may seem a particularly inopportune time to review Bowling Alone, Robert Putnam's latest exploration of civic decline in America. After all, the outpouring of volunteerism, solidarity, patriotism, and self-sacrifice displayed by Americans in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks appears to fly in the face of Putnam's central argument: that \"social capital\" -defined as \"social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them\" (p. 19)'has declined to dangerously low levels in America over the last three decades. However, Putnam is not fazed in the least by the recent effusion of solidarity. Quite the contrary, he sees in it the potential to \"reverse what has been a 30to 40-year steady decline in most measures of connectedness or community.\"' As an example of how the current \"war on terrorism\" could generate a durable civic renewal, Putnam points to the burst in civic practices that occurred during and after World War II, which he says \"permanently marked\" the generation that lived through it and had a \"terrific effect on American public life over the last half-century.\" 3 If Americans can follow this example and channel their current civic

Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community

Over the past few decades, a new form of governance has emerged to replace adversarial and managerial modes of policy making and implementation. Collaborative governance, as it has come to be known, brings public and private stakeholders together in collective forums with public agencies to engage in consensus-oriented decision making. In this article, we conduct a meta-analytical study of the existing literature on collaborative governance with the goal of elaborating a contingency model of collaborative governance. After reviewing 137 cases of collaborative governance across a range of policy sectors, we identify critical variables that will influence whether or not this mode of governance will produce successful collaboration. These variables include the prior history of conflict or cooperation, the incentives for stakeholders to participate, power and resources imbalances, leadership, and institutional design. We also identify a series of factors that are crucial within the collaborative process itself. These factors include face-to-face dialogue, trust building, and the development of commitment and shared understanding. We found that a virtuous cycle of collaboration tends to develop when collaborative forums focus on ‘‘small wins’’ that deepen trust, commitment, and shared understanding. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of our contingency model for practitioners and for future research on collaborative governance. Over the last two decades, a new strategy of governing called ‘‘collaborative governance’’ has developed. This mode of governance brings multiple stakeholders together in common forums with public agencies to engage in consensus-oriented decision making. In this article, we conduct a meta-analytical study of the existing literature on collaborative governance with the goal of elaborating a general model of collaborative governance. The ultimate goal is to develop a contingency approach to collaboration that can highlight conditions under which collaborative governance will be more or less effective as an

/pdf/collaborative-governance-in-theory-and-practice-4734b9fqbj.pdf

Collaborative governance in theory and practice

The Social Psychology of Organizations.

Human institutions—ways of organizing activities—affect the resilience of the environment. Locally evolved institutional arrangements governed by stable communities and buffered from outside forces have sustained resources successfully for centuries, although they often fail when rapid change occurs. Ideal conditions for governance are increasingly rare. Critical problems, such as transboundary pollution, tropical deforestation, and climate change, are at larger scales and involve nonlocal influences. Promising strategies for addressing these problems include dialogue among interested parties, officials, and scientists; complex, redundant, and layered institutions; a mix of institutional types; and designs that facilitate experimentation, learning, and change.

/pdf/the-struggle-to-govern-the-commons-5a060zxyju.pdf

The Struggle to Govern the Commons

There has been a great deal of research in recent years concerning the use of substantive policy analysis in public policy-making. This paper seeks to integrate those findings - e.g., the ‘enlightenment function’ of policy research - into a more general model of policy-making over periods of a decade or more. The conceptual framework focuses on the belief systems of advocacy coalitions within policy subsystems as the critical vehicle for understanding the role of policy analysis in policy-oriented learning and the effect, in turn, of such learning on changes in governmental programs.

An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein

* The Study of Public Policy Processes Hank C Jenkins-Smith and Paul A Sabatier The Advocacy Coalition Framework * Policy Change over a Decade or More P A Sabatier * The Dynamics of Policy-Oriented Learning H C Jenkins-Smith and P A Sabatier Qualitative Case Studies Of Policy Change And Learning * An Advocacy Coalition Approach to Change in Canadian Education Hanne B Mawhinney * Competing Advocacy Coalitions, Policy Evolution, and Airline Deregulation Anthony E Brown and Joseph Stewart Jr * California Water Politics: Explaining Policy Change in a Cognitively Polarized Subsystem John F Munro * Managing Technological Change in Federal Communications Policy: The Role of Industry Advisory Groups Richard P Barke Quantitative Analyses Of Policy Change * The Politics of Offshore Energy: Empirically Testing the Advocacy Coalition Framework H C Jenkins-Smith and Gilbert K St Clair * From Vague Consensus to Clearly Differentiated Coalitions: Environmental Policy at Lake Tahoe, 19641985 P A Sabatier and Anne M Brasher Conclusion * The Advocacy Coalition Framework: Assessment, Revisions, and Implications for Scholars and Practitioners P A Sabatier and H C Jenkins-Smith Methodological Appendix * Measuring Longitudinal Change in Elite Beliefs Using Content Analysis of Public Documents H C Jenkins-Smith and P A Sabatier *

Policy Change And Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach

Since the first edition published in 1999 with editor Paul Sabatier, Theories of the Policy Process has served as the quintessential gateway to the field of policy process research for students, scholars and practitioners alike. This enduring and well-regarded volume provides a forum for the creators of, or scholars with deep expertise in, the most established and widely used theoretical frameworks to present the basic propositions, empirical evidence, latest updates, and promising directions for future research. This brief but comprehensive volume covers such classics as Multiple Streams (Zahariadis), Punctuated Equilibrium (Jones et al), Advocacy Coalition Framework (Jenkins-Smith et al.), Institutional Analysis and Development Framework (Ostrom et al.), Policy Diffusion (Berry & Berry), and Social Construction and Policy Design (Schneider et al). This thoroughly updated third edition, with new editor Christopher M. Weible, includes a new introduction on the trajectories and needs of public policy research and two new chapters-- Policy Feedback (Mettler and SoRelle) and Narrative Policy Framework (McBeth et al). A revised chapter presents a comparative analysis and evaluation of the frameworks included in this edition (Cairney & Heikkila), and a new conclusion looks at future directions and emerging areas in the field.

Theories of the Policy Process

This paper first reviews the implementation literature of the past fifteen years, with particular emphasis on the relative strengths and weaknesses of the ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ approaches. It also argues that the 4–6 year time-frame used in most implementation research misses many critical features of public policy-making. The paper then outlines a conceptual framework for examining policy change over a 10–20 year period which combines the best features of the ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ approaches with insights from other literatures.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0143814X00003846

Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Implementation Research: a Critical Analysis and Suggested Synthesis

The advocacy coalition framework (ACF) has generated considerable interest among European policy scholars. This article summarizes some of the more important findings concerning, and changes to, the ACF since the last major revision in 1993. These include: (1) a much clearer model of the individual; (2) a clearer, more integrated concept of ‘policy subsystem;’ (3) much greater attention to the problematic nature of collective behavior among people who share policy beliefs; and (4) some suggestions concerning methods of ascertaining the existence and membership of advocacy coalitions. The article also briefly addresses the ACF's applicability to parliamentary systems, to the countries of Eastern Europe, and to the dynamic politics of the European Union.

Paul A. Sabatier

Papers

An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein

Policy Change And Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach

Theories of the Policy Process

Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Implementation Research: a Critical Analysis and Suggested Synthesis

The advocacy coalition framework: revisions and relevance for Europe