What is a Learning Organization?

It takes most everyday notions of
learning, i.e. it is a process whereby
individuals enhance the capacity to do
what they want and taking that to the
aggregate of organizations. So Learning
Organization is really nothing more than
an organization that continually enhances
the capacity to create outcomes (as
distinct from leaders having to manage
performance) members as a whole want
to create.

It comprises
five disciplines i.e. Personal
Mastery, Shared Vision, Mental Models,
Team Learning and Systems Thinking.
Each of the five disciplines represents a
lifelong body of study and practice for
individuals and teams in organizations.

Business and other human endeavors
are systems, bound by invisible fabrics of
interrelated actions, which often take
years (the process of change) to fully
play out their effects on each other. This
is often the reason why issues become
resistant to change. And since we are
part of the lacework, it’s doubly hard to
see the whole pattern of change.

Instead there is a deep tendency to see
the changes we need to make as being in
our outer world, not in our inner world.
The central message of the five
disciplines is more radical than “radical
organization design” – which our
organizations and patterns of change
work the way they work, ultimately
because of how we think and how we
interact.

It is by changing how we think that we
can change deeply embedded policies and
practices. Only by changing how we
interact can shared visions, shared
understandings, and new capacities for
coordinated action be established.

However, instead of the above, we tend
to focus on snapshots of isolated parts
of the system, and wonder why our
deepest problems never seem to get
solved. Learning Organization is a
conceptual framework, of knowledge and
tools, to make the full patterns clearer,
and to help us see how to change them
effectively and often at substantially
lower costs.

The central territory of the work is made
up of three core processes:

  • Shifting from aiming for goals to
    members building and sharing
    aspirations.

  • Creating productive conversations
    (generative). This is a shift from
    talking at each other (advocacy) to
    talking with each other (inquiry).  
    Speak the truth but hold my truth
    as contingent. This allows the
    coming together of our thinking
    (harmonization of our thinking)
    because we see and appreciate the
    differences in the perspectives. It is
    only then that we work together.

  • Seeing the whole. People together
    can see the whole together.


For more information on this
programme, contact :
Office of the President,
+267-7138-3023, Botswana

    Background and Context
  • Work to-date and what we may expect to see happen going forward
    What is Learning Organization (these programme were also originally referred to as Systems
    Thinking)?

    Project Part A:  Workshop on Understanding the Learning Organization Framework Leaders for
    Learning Organizations
  • Anticipated Learning
  • Audience
  • Detailed Course Description
  • About the Facilitator
  • What you need to know about attending the Open Workshops?
  • What you need to know about attending the In-house Workshops?
  • What you need to know about attending the Sub-district Workshops?
  • Pre-readings

    Project Part B:  Developing systemic strategies


Work to-date and what we may expect to happen going forward

This project is the extension of a series of programes we have had for the public sector since mid-2007 in
understanding and using the works of
Learning Organization in dealing with persistent issues of the day.


Work in 2005-7:

2005 - Facilitation of a one-day retreat for the cabinet (in Oct 2005).  The tools of Systems Thinking
offered a systemic way of understanding (complex) issues that had stayed resistant to change and
implementation.

2007 - Did a four-day workshop session for Permanent Secretaries.  This led to the compilation of the
Botswana Key Success Loops.  These present a systemic ‘perspectivee’ of causes of the deepest
challenges we face as a country and ways our eforts may overcome them.

    Since mid-2007, the trainer/facilitator/steward of this work, Ms Sheila Damodaran worked
    intermittently with senior management - Permanent Secretaries, Deputy Permanent Secretaries,
    Directors, and Performance Improvement Coordinators - across the public service of all Ministries.  
    This paved the way to enable Ministries develop key action areas critical for their Ministry.


Work in 2008:

Apr-June: 21 of such loops were developed.  

Plans are afoot to develop the remaining 22 or so of such works and equip key senior, middle and
leadership management within Central and Local Government learn to help bring the lessons of this work to
personnel with their Ministries and parastatals.  All Ministries have begun that journey.


Work in (early) 2009:

The findings from the loops were used as input towards the drafting of the National Development Plans 10
(NDP10) in mid 2008.  The intention was to help teams zoom in on leverage action strategies (small well-
focused actions) that did not dig deep into our pockets to get there.  This effort realized a savings of BWP
60B.

However, it also became apparent during this exercise that anyone lacking in these skills can significantly
impede the quality of strategic interventions that we could use to lead systemic changes in this country.  
The project recognized the need to close this gap.


Work in 2009-2011:

The purpose of this project was to level this playing field across the public sector.

This time the programmes included more levels within the Central and Local Government.

There are two
parts to these programmes:
  1. Part A:  Series of workshop programmes (four modules spanning a total of eight days) that helps
    you learn to use the tools of this work.
  2. Part B:  On completing the workshops, you would be invited to participate in developing or using the
    Key Success Loops in Strategic Planning and Implementation

All would go through both parts.

Specifically, the project aims at training all personnel in senior and mid-level leadership positions across the
public sector in understanding and using the (five) disciplines of this work to lead the public service in
improving performance strategically.  Click
here for notes on planning for these sessions.

The programmes are intended to develop capacities in the areas of Leadership Development, Strategy
Development and Implementation; aspects we hope would spread across the nation.   Increasingly
Ministries are seeing more of their middle and senior management (including officers till Heads of Divisions)
staff attend the programme.

Outcome to-date:

  • We have brought about two-thirds of the intended audiences of the public sector to a fairly good
    understanding of Module 2 and more than three-quarters have already been assigned tables to
    collect data on the persistent issues they have identified.  This has happened consistently across
    teams both in the central and local government.

  • It means, there is a good number of officers within the public sector that appreciates the language,
    can recognize archetypes when guided and can ably participate in a guided discussion of the KSL.
    They would need to know who are the other officers who have a similar capacity as they do.  This
    means we are now at a critical juncture that requires someone to monitor and help teams to cross an
    important threshold and that is the identification and collection of data.

  • This requires someone with able but firm hands (and a quick mind) in guiding the teams through the
    rest of their schedule.  There are some that have yet to go through the workshops in the likes of OP,
    the judiciary, NSO, parts of MTrans-Comm, MoESD, NACA, MTI, Foreign Affairs, Water and Energy
    Affairs, to name a few, requiring more workshops to help them get to the same place.  The part of
    the table marked with the red colour represents the bottle-neck / constraint that needs to be met
    and cleared before the project proceeds to the next step for these groups.

  • We believe that should this exercise continue, most if not all statistics data required for this work,
    across the public sector will be tied up.  This is to allow us to  see interrelating nature of functional
    areas.This mode of preparation is a departure from the way these sessions were facilitated when the
    units first developed their KSLs in 2008, since the individuals participating in those earlier sessions
    had not had an opportunity then to undergo most of the workshop modules.

  • This could see the eventual phasing out of its current strategies while at the same time seeing
    stubborn problems gradually lowering its resistance against the Ministry's efforts and eventually do
    away with costly corrective measures.

  • The project continues to suffer project coordination at three levels:
  • That the intended audience of each unit are not present for the session.  A case in point, on
    completing two rounds of workshop programmes for NACA by 2011, out of 33 core officers of
    the organization, seven have so far managed to be included within the workshop sessions.  
    Units continue not to be clear who and why those officers need to be included within the
    programme.  If officers who primarily deal with HR, logistics, IT or Finance matters are instead
    assigned to the programme, they will not be in a position to draw out the causal loop for HIV &
    AIDs.  This would mean after three years of work, we are no where close to progressing on the
    project for officers at NACA.  Another example, having done up to Module 2 by early 2012, AGC
    saw ten of its officers progress to that stage when 27 out of 54 of the intended audience have
    not started Module 1 as yet.  This outcome continues to resonate for units across the project.
  • That the project continues to suffer lapses in workshop / programme scheduling either of dates
    or the participation of the participants.  There are several levels of timing issues that have to be
    tightly monitored by the project coordination team either in terms of communicating participant
    selection criteria, timings of different stages leading up to the setup of the programme or just
    how much advance timings were given to the participants so that they were able to work this
    programme around their own / other schedules without causing schedule conflicts.  When these
    were not tightly managed, the project suffered lapses in terms of dates where the consultant
    did not have programmes or when she arrives at the session, the participants are not ready for
    the session.  These have significant impact on the progress of the project.  It was worse in
    2010, but improved somewhat in 2011, but other mistakes (see above) are happening in the
    project which would cause the project to lose ground with the sector.  As of early 2012,
    summarily whilst the consultant have been in the country for three years on the project, the
    effective utilization of her time is just beginning to hit two years.
  • That the 'coordination' of the project is 'administered' by trainers.  This is deliberate on the part
    of the Project Manager.  However, it has consequences.  Trainers usually prefer others to
    'coordinate for them'.  They are not suitably equipped or qualified to understand what
    administration of a project looks like or organize for another trainer much less  facilitate  
    strategy management for the country.  Till, as of early 2012, despite the project has been up
    and about since 2009, it has not seen suitably equipped with qualified project manager /
    administrator assigned to it.  Imagine trying to construct a road by a trainer.  We would not do
    that, would we?  It is the same for this project.  It is heartening that we have managed to pull
    through as much as we have, despite these significant lapses in the project.


Work going forward:

We continue to be somewhat concerned (a concern shared in early 2010) that we have not seeng the very
senior personnel (PS, DPSs and some Directors) within organizations undergo the in-house programmes.  
We notice when units see their members co-attend the workshops with them, they more likely able to use
and pracrice the tools they learn at the workshops at their workplaces.

Over time as internal directorate staff along with their regional staff appreciate the tools of this work
together, they are more likely to appreciate the systemic issues facing their Ministry and therefore become
more mindful of the approaches needed in turning the issues around that face them.

We propose planning a series of open as well as jointly held workshops for the groups in the coming
quarters.

This could eventually include the Ministers, Assistant Ministers, the MPs, the tribal leaders, parastatals and
anyone who had missed the earlier rounds.
Building Capacities for Learning Organizations
FOR THE PUBLIC SECTOR OF THE REPUBLIC OF BOTSWANA