# data[].attributes.body
I was initially interested in the 4I framework as it focuses on the dynamic relationship between individual and institutional learning. The theory suggests that learning begins at an individual, intuitive level, but through a dynamic cycle of 4 key processes, learning can become strategically and culturally embedded across an organisation. The four Is are: intuiting (individual experimentation and ideation), interpreting (when an individual insight becomes socially recognised and discussed), integrating (the next step of consciously taking co-ordinated action based on shared understanding) and institutionalising (when these new actions become institutional-wide routines, systems, processes and strategies). This process resonated for me as applicable and relevant to the ways teachers operate both individually and collectively in schools and I appreciated the agency it offers teachers to effect change at a grassroots level rather than 'top down' as earlier models advocated. Some of the examples provided of the 'intuiting' stage seemed to relate more to entrepreneurial creativity, though, rather than to research-informed practices, so after reading further, I was more drawn to hybrid models that incorporated the 'community of practice' approaches, which represent the communal and collaborative professional learning approaches that are gaining traction in schools and tend to produce more lasting pedagogical change.
I see the later adaptive and wayfinding models as really interesting layers that could be added to these foundational frameworks as they offer ways of navigating complexity and change, rather than a linear assumption of learning 'outcomes'. Schools are highly complex cultural organisations, constantly evolving to meet societal expectations and change. These theories offer a more realistic  acknowledgement of learning strategies being formed within these contexts.

Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E. (1999). An Organizational Learning Framework: From Intuition to Institution. The Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 522–537. https://doi.org/10.2307/259140

# data[].attributes.body
I selected CoP. I have been part of a number of CoP's in the past and I think they are a wonderful safe harbour for the sharing and collaboration between colleagues with a shared and common interest in all things organisational learning. I introduced one into an organisation and we called it a "Learning Community of Practice, LCoP. Drawing on this would certainly assist the learning strategy development piece.

# data[].attributes.body
I selected Wayfinding on the basis of the need for adaptability and flexibility in action and thinking in an organisation, especially in current times due to the impact of COVID-19. Best laid plans and strategies have been radically reworked as individuals and organisations need to pivot to provide stability and develop new expectations and practices for organisational learning.

# data[].attributes.body
Lave and Wanger (1991) - CoP are groups of people with common interests - may be working to solve a common problem or have other common interests such as a common project (in a workplace). The main tenets of CoP are that people learn from participating in a community - novices learn from experts and through experience, gained from working with more experienced members of the group. Having a shared identity is also important.
This could be useful for creating a learning strategy if there is a mix of skill level, and some there is a need to upskill in different areas. It may also be useful when there is need to bring a group of people together with a mixed skill set or experiences to work together on project based work.

# data[].attributes.headline
 Lisa Trewin - can I choose none of the above :(

# data[].attributes.subject
 Lisa Trewin - can I choose none of the above :(

# data[].attributes.body
While I am a big fan of Lave and Wenger 1991 a community of practice model does not suit my learning strategy.
Wayfinding with  its practice approach, and focus on emergence and becoming could be twisted to fit.
None of the OL models feel right in the context of what my scenario is attempting to achieve.
I'm not sure it is seen as an organisational learning model but a Decolonising /Critical Participatory Action model feels like it would be a better fit for my scenario. With its mutual learning and bottom up approach it is a model that is culturally situated and relational and could impact and elicit cultural change
However it is not, that I am aware of, an Organisational Learning tool.
If I was to choose one of the listed models it would be the Wayfinding model.

# data[].attributes.body
I'd like to adapt the Wayfinding theory by Chia, 2017. I think this OL approach is relevant to what we are experiencing now in terms of the pandemic. It is a practice-based approach in OL which presents itself during a time of unpredictability. Organisations also responds intuitively with improvisation as they go when learning. The learning in organisations mean it's much more flexible and adaptable and it relies on social practices for cognitive learning to take place. This theory is useful in utilising a learning strategy that is intuitive to environmental changes as well as promoting collaboration through social practices within a group. However, wayfinding may not be useful for set long-term strategic plans by organisations as a need to be flexible is necessary.

# data[].attributes.body
The theory that I chose to look at in more depth was ‘Wayfinding’.  I chose this one to examine as it seemed to be the most dynamic and adaptable of the theories.  The basic tenets of this theory proposes a practice-based approach to OL, this type of approach is something that has resonate with me over the prior subjects I have studied.  The main idea is that organisations remain flexible and able to respond to changing environments by sensing and adapting as they progress.  In this way it is the social practices that allow for cognitive learning to occur.  This theory might be useful in developing a learning strategy as it can help in creating a strategy that is dynamic and responsive to changing environments and stakeholder needs.  In my field of student wellbeing, this is something that any strategy must have.

# data[].attributes.body
I chose wayfinding as I think this is particularly relevant to the setting I am exploring.  There is constant change which requires a theory that allows for uncertainty and finding one's way as we collectively embed the learning in day-to-day practice.

# data[].attributes.body
Wayfinding is a modern, more recent theory for Organisational Learning, with its considerations from a practice approach. Essentially, an organisation learns through its daily operation, through its practice. Adapting to change, with an emphasis on the social elements for cognitive learning. Emergence and Becoming are the common features, as opposed to the more definitive descriptors of learning. Essentially, it is an organic learning environment through activity in process of the work in workplace. It can allow for an innovative approach to organisational learning, moreover open up other avenues to guide strategy.

I absolutely think that this theory should be considered within a learning strategy - it emphasises, and acknowledges, the practice of the workplace whereby there is bountiful value in the learning that takes place, that is indeed more difficult to necessarily define from a traditional idea of what learning actually is. I sense consideration in this theory with an empathetic viewpoint from the learner's perspective, especially useful within a broad Design Thinking conceptualisation. Within my own personal context and my disciplinary areas, this theory resonates from both a personal and workplace perspective.

# data[].attributes.body
Groups of people that meet together in a less formal setting to learn about an area that they are passionate or concerned about.
Groups often involve people of varied experience, from novice to highly experienced. When meeting, group members will be able to share their experiences and then learn from each other.
The four dimensions of learning through CoP are practice, community, meaning and identity.
It could be effective in developing a learning strategy as it involves learning individually and collectively. Learning needs are identified by the team and meet current needs in the organisation. CoP will increase staff collaboration and build individual self-efficacy as staff share their experiences with others.

# data[].attributes.body
This involves groups of people that come together with a common theme of learning. These people are passionate for something they do and are keen to learn ways together on how to do their job better. There are four dimensions of learning; practice, community, meaning and identity.
This could be useful in developing a learning strategy as the group of people are all passionate about the same thing, therefore they will all want to learn better and more about this.

# data[].attributes.body
Wayfinding is a practice-based and behavioural approach to OL. It is based on the idea that an over-reliance on clearly articulated plans isn't that helpful in times of great turbulence and uncertainty. I'm sure that is something most of us working with any kind of plan would have discovered over the last two years. Wayfinding is an approach that involves sensing, adapting and responding to evolving needs.

A number of people in my organisation like to use the image of a pilgrim to describe leadership to evoke the idea of a having a clear sense of direction and goal but being attentive to the twists and turns, the foggy mountains and swamps that come along the way. I think Wayfinding could be an organisational learning approach that would fit really well with that approach to leadership. It encourages flexibility and adaptability and acknowledges that so much learning occurs non-deliberatively and unconsciously. (Chia 2017)

# data[].attributes.body
I chose the SECI model, as I'm interested in delving into how knowledge & learning are often partnered together, or confused.

The SECI model describes how explicit & tacit knowledge is generated, transferred and recreated in organisations (https://sites.google.com/site/teacherknowledgeexchange/km-to-promote-learning/strategies-and-models/seci-model-for-knowledge-creation).

The main tenets are:
- There are four modes to knowledge conversion, that include how tacit knowledge & explicit knowledge interplay together)

- There is a concept called ba which is a translation from the Japanese model; it's often described a s content within which knowledge is shared, created & utilised (e.g. a website, a forum, a classroom, a workplace)

There's a great diagram of the four Four categories of knowledge assets (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995) on the above link, that shows how to use new & existing knowledge assets to create a knowledge system.

It's making me think about when I'm creating knowledge assets (sometimes also called training/learning resources!), how to mix tacit & experiential knowledge approaches.

- Amanda Ashby

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The SECI model is a well known conceptual model that was first proposed by Nonaka (1991 and expanded by Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). It describes how explicit and tacit knowledge is generated, transferred, and recreated in organizations. While it was first proposed within the context of business organizations, the model can easily be applied to education, as explored by Lin, Lin, and Huang (2008) and Yeh, Huang, and Yeh (2011).

The SECI model consists of four modes of knowledge conversion: socialization (tacit to tacit), externalization (tacit to explicit), combination (explicit to explicit), and internalization (explicit to tacit).

Socialization is the process of sharing tacit knowledge through observation, imitation, practice, and participation in formal and informal communities (Yeh et al., 2011). The socialization process is usually preempted by the creation of a physical or virtual space where a given community can interact on a social level.

Externalization is the process of articulating tacit knowledge into explicit concepts (Yeh et al., 2011). Since tacit knowledge is highly internalized, this process is the key to knowledge sharing and creation.

Combination is the process of integrating concepts into a knowledge system (Yeh et al., 2011).

Internalization is the process of embodying explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995).

The interplay between tacit and explicit knowledge is illustrated below.

The SECI model (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995).

Ba is an integral concept in the SECI model. While the term is hard to translate from its original Japanese since such a word does not exist in the English vocabulary, it is often described as a context within which knowledge is shared, created, and utilized (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). This teacher virtual community could, for example, be considered a ba.As with the modes of knowledge conversion delineated by Nonaka (1991), there are four categories of ba.

Originating ba can be described using this website as a place (whether physical or virtual) where individuals interact with one another (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). Again, this website could be considered an originating ba.

Dialoguing ba can be described as the sharing of tacit knowledge among professionals to create knowledge (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). For example, as professors dialogue on this forum, their tacit knowledge can be used to inform individual and collective classroom practices.

Systemizing ba can be described as the analysis and measure of created knowledge once it is applied in practice (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995).

Exercising ba based on the findings delineated above, best practices can be improved (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995).

The interplay between the four categories of ba is illustrated below.

Four categories of ba (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995).

Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) also delineated four knowledge assets that are considered indispensable to enhance the value of a firm. While again delineated to address the knowledge needs of a business organization, these four knowledge assets can be easily applied to educational institutions (Ozmen, 2010).

As in any organization, knowledge creation and exploitation in education must be effectively managed. The figure below helps to create an inventory of an institution's knowledge assets. Since knowledge assets are inherently dynamic, cataloging is not enough (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). New and existing knowledge assets must be effectively delineated and integrated to create a knowledge system.

Four categories of knowledge assets (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
SECI Model for Knowledge Creation - Teacher Knowledge Exchange

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The SECI model is a well known conceptual model that was first proposed by Nonaka (1991 and expanded by Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). It describes how explicit and tacit knowledge is generated, transferred, and recreated in organizations.

# data[].attributes.body
Main tenets:

·         They are 3 different types of organisational learning (zero, adaptive & generative), but they can be partnered together into a singular framework, called the ZAG framework.

·         “Zero learning means internalizing norms, routines, procedures or knowledge; adaptive learning implies improving them and finally generative learning involves questioning them” (Chiva & Habib, 2015, p. 350).

·         The framework contains three levels of focus; individual, group and organisation, which are bound by the different facets of “consciousness, emotions, stress or complex system behaviours” (Chiva & Habib, 2015, p. 351).

The ZAG framework is useful in the development of a learning strategy which has the aim of driving organisational change as it considers organisational learning to be the process which drives organisational to alter their knowledge, processes and rules. Also, employees are not emotionless robots, so factoring the feelings and stressors of staff in the framework is supportive of the real environment.

References

·         Chiva, R. and Habib, J. (2015) A framework for organizational learning: zero, adaptive and generative learning, Journal of Management and Organization, 21(3), p. 350-368

# data[].attributes.body
I chose to look closely at Wayfinding, as I was interested in modern or the most recent theoretical iteration of Organisational Learning. This theory posits that organisational learning is about moving through organically and learning on the job and as you move through a project etc. I think this is an interesting thought but I feel that this theory leaves a little to chance, there is a hope here that people will simply arrive at a way of thinking or a practice. I however agree that in many organisations there is too much reliance on plans and strategy and sometimes we must let the learning guide us.