Ten Steps to a Learning Organization, Ch 1-3, P. Kline and B. Saunders/ Review & Musings by J. Colannino

Ever since Peter Senge’s “The Fifth Discipline” made its big splash, people have been trying to figure out how to make their organization a learning one. Peter Kline and Bernard Saunders purport the recipe. According to them, the ten steps are

1. Assess your organization
2. Promote the positive
3. Make the workplace safe for thinking
4. Reward risk taking
5. Help people become resources for one another
6. Put learning power to work
7. Map out the vision
8. Bring the vision to life
9. Connect the systems
10. Get the show on the road

Of course, I have my own ideas about this. My one step would be

1. Treat people like human beings.

I know this sounds trite, but it is not. Human beings were created in God’s image. They yearn to live, love, and laugh. They seek higher spiritual meaning and deep relationship. They long to belong, to create and build. They seek meaning. This is one of the philosophical reasons I cannot brook Darwinian evolution – because if it is true, life is essentially meaningless; but that is not what I see, and that is not how people act or how they know to treat their children. But if we were created in God’s image then relationship makes sense because God is relational. Creativity makes sense because God is creative. Living and loving and joy make sense too. This is not to say that we can’t almost bleach these things out of a person. Dehumanize people loud enough and long enough and you will create a dehumanized culture full of dehumanized employees who behave as little more than part of the machinery. But deep down, a fellow’s humanity is always there.

My company is, in many ways, a learning organization. And yet it could be so much more if it would eliminate the remaining bits of its ritual abuse. This happens in many organizations. Consider a company unwilling to upgrade travelers to business class on overseas flights. Often, business trips are taken on short notice – for example, damage control to solve an on-site problem or a last minute sales meeting or presentation. In those cases, employees are stuck in a middle seat in economy class for an extended period of time – say Australia (10+ hours) or India (20+ hours). A marathon flight in a middle coach seat an effective way to say “we don’t care.” Why would an organization that cares about its employees do such a thing? It wouldn't.

What a shame. Only a small portion of employees travel, so a change in policy would not cost the employer much. But the policy is known to all, so the lack of a policy change hinders everyone’s morale. In other words, this dehumanizing policy is costing them much more than the change would. That kind of leverage goes in the wrong direction. Moreover, the policy could be deadly – literally. Really, this kind of policy is more the hallmark of a retarded organization rather than a learning one. But it seems one can always find a mix of sense and stupidity in every collective. I have observed a dehumanization of employees in many companies in other subtle ways. For example, what does it mean when a company says “we treat our employees as an asset”? You mean, like a desk or a chair? An acquaintance of mine is “Manager of Human Capital” for a Fortune 500 company. Human capital? When was the thirteenth amendment repealed?

My class assignment was to read Chapters 1 – 3, and the chapters are spot on. In the introduction, the authors quote John Naisbitt’s Megatrends in calling for “high tech, high touch” – that is, a re-humanizing of the work force.

I do have a couple of minor quibbles. First, for whatever reason, it has become popular for authors addressing social issues to genuflect at Darwin’s altar. I have no idea why. If one were arguing for oppression, tyranny, or abuse, Darwinism would be a logical philosophy. But it is illogical to espouse if we want to treat persons as more than mere animals; and, as is usual, no understanding of any essential feature of the book would be harmed (or is indeed supported) by this Darwinian drivel.

Second, (again, as is typical for social issues arguments) political correctness rears its ugly head, and (again, as is typical) no understanding of any essential feature of the book would be harmed (or is indeed supported) by it. For example,

“A white male doesn’t know… that if he were a woman he’d have to work twice as hard to succeed… or if he were African-American or Hispanic he’d have to work even harder…. In any event, a white male can learn to appreciate these realities only in the abstract. He cannot experience them directly.”

Why can’t I know what Kline and Saunders know? Like me, they are middle-aged white males. As a second contradiction, if Kline and Saunders would like to experience the reality of prejudice directly rather than in the abstract, I can e-mail them some locations to take a midnight stroll. When it comes to error, no one has a corner on the market. We all have our handicaps. It seems to me that the goal ought to be to live life correctly in whatever station or situation we find ourselves, because ontologically, we are all fallen human beings trying to get back to the garden.

Fortunately, Kline and Saunders peddle such clichés very infrequently. The overwhelming majority of the time, they stick to the knitting, and that’s what makes “Ten Steps to a Learning Organization” a great read. Is your organization a learning organization? A 36-question survey on pages 61–63 lets you find out.