Search results

Current management development techniques are obsolete. The West has passed through three eras ‐ those of the classical model, the human relations model, and the systems model. The authors, after a research study involving the CEOs of 50 major Australian organisations, believe that organisational thinking is taking a new direction. Development techniques are moving towards more holistic, empathetic, culture‐sensitive technology. The nature of the fourth “blueprint” is analysed, and the managerial competencies it will demand are outlined.

Current management development techniques are obsolete. The West has passed through three eras — those of the classical model, the human relations model, and the systems model. The authors, after a research study involving the CEOs of 50 major Australian organisations, believe that organisational thinking is taking a new direction. Development techniques are moving towards more holistic, empathetic, culture‐sensitive technology. The nature of the fourth “blueprint” is analysed, and the managerial competencies it will demand are outlined.

The traditional model of management, the human relations model, the systems model, are all overtaken by the fourth blueprint — a frame of reference claimed to be more relevant to the world we live and work in.

A review of the literature defining managerial skill draws the conclusion that the key to future management development lies in identifying the competencies required for individual managers' jobs and developing programmes to meet these, within the context of organisational goals and politics. Female managers face special stresses in addition to those identified for male counterparts. An attempt is under way to abstract key components of the self‐assessment programme for use in longitudinal research and development activities.

Suggests that changes in the environment have required changes in the marketing concept. Shows that these changes have been in fact evolutionary rather than revolutionary ‐ making explicit aspects of the concept which were previously implicit. Provides an outline of the most recent concept, the metastrategic concept, and shows its relationship to the learning organization and organizational identity. Sets out a series of injunctions for those who seek to implement the new concept and create a marketing learning identity for their own organization.

Synthesizes the ideas of the “transformational change” and “learning organization” literature. The concept of the action learning organization is presented as a bridge between learning and transformation as it involves collaborative questioning by organizational members of their own actions. Discusses the characteristics of an action learning organization in terms of its bias for reflection‐in‐action, formation of learning alliances, development of external networks, multiple reward systems, creation of meaningful information, individual empowerment, leadership and vision. The knowledge‐generating organization is the one which is most likely to be able to survive both equilibrium and chaos.

Many organizations now utilize action learning, and it is applied increasingly throughout the world. Action learning appears in numerous variants, but generically it is a form of learning through experience, “by doing”, where the task environment is the classroom, and the task the vehicle. Two previous reviews of the action learning literature by Alan Mumford respectively covered the field prior to 1985 and the period 1985‐1994. Both reviews included books as well as journal articles. This current review covers the period 1994‐2000 and is limited to publicly available journal articles. Part 1 of the Review was published in an earlier issue of the Journal of Workplace Learning (Vol. 15 No. 2) and included a bibliography and comments. Part 2 extends that introduction with a schema for categorizing action learning articles and with comments on representative articles from the bibliography.