Informal Learning and Complex Problem Solving of Radiologic Technologists Transitioning to the Workplace
Year: 2012
Type: book-chapter
Abstract: Knowledge use can be highly dependent on the judgment of professionals who translate "book knowledge" into practice.Practitioners use judgment and interpretation to create new knowledge suited to local circumstances.Some of this knowledge is unique to individuals, but often local knowledge is valuable if shared with others facing similar challenges.Knowledge use can be difficult under the best of circumstances.Professionals regularly take many human and technical factors into consideration when learning to apply what they know to new circumstances.Much of this learning is informal.It takes place on the job as professionals learn through and from their experience of using what they know to meet the needs of a range of unanticipated circumstances.Organizations can reap dividends when conditions support effective informal learning on the job.The consequences of not doing so can be seen in lost opportunities and ineffectiveness.In some settings, such as healthcare, life or death outcomes can weigh in the balance.In all cases, lost learning diminishes the quantity and quality of knowledge generated and shared, and as such, detracts from the goals of knowledge management.In this chapter, we address the relationships between informal learning and knowledge creation, sharing and management in organizations.We first explore the social dimensions of knowledge management in relationship to the informal learning literature in order to examine potential links between the two with a focus on how professionals learn and generate new ideas or practices at work.We turn then to the heart of this chapter based on a multiple case study of informal learning and complex problem solving of radiologic technologists.This research provides an in-depth look at knowledge creation and sharing through the lens of informal learning. Linking knowledge management and informal learningA good deal of learning, especially for professionals, happens organically and informally as people tackle common challenges at work.The proportion of informal-to-formal learning in organizations is estimated at 70-80%, a ratio confirmed by several studies (e.g., Leslie, Aring, & Brand, 2003; Loweinstein & Spletzer, 1999; McCall, Lombardo, & Morrison, 1998).Knowledge management and informal learning are often examined in separate literatures, www.intechopen.comNew Research on Knowledge Management Applications and Lesson Learned 172 yet there are important links between them.Conversation, social interaction and collaboration, relationships, and work-based learning practices form the heart of informal workplace learning.These practices are also key to conceptualizations of knowledge creation and sharing that emphasize its social dimensions and a constructivist view of what knowing means.O'Toole (2011) points to two main approaches to knowledge management, one that emphasizes "semantic knowledge retention in the form of databases" and a second that "emphasizes knowledge management as a social communication process" (p.26).This depiction parallels the frequently cited classification of knowledge as explicit or tacit, although as many authors have also noted, both types of knowledge can sometimes co-exist in any given circumstance.Explicit knowledge is more easily captured and shared via IT databases and communication systems, whereas tacit knowledge is often not fully conscious or understood, and is shared through conversation, storytelling, nonverbal communication, and art or drama or other aesthetic experiences.Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) built their understanding of knowledge creation on the importance of converting tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge as a means of creating new knowledge in the workplace.Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) purported that "tacit knowledge is deeply rooted in an individual's action and experience, as well as in the ideals, values, or emotions he or she embraces" (p.8).They recognized two dimensions of tacit knowledge, the first being technical knowledge or "know-how" specific to a particular craft, and a cognitive dimension consisting of "schemata, mental models, beliefs, and perceptions so ingrained that we take them for granted) (p.8).Van Krogh et al. (2000), building on these ideas, emphasized the difference between managing knowledge and knowledge enabling.The latter "depends on an enabling context" which they further define as "a shared space that fosters emerging relationships" that resembles "the Japanese idea of ba (or 'place')" which "is connected to …two points: knowledge is dynamic, relational, and based on human action; it depends on the situation and people involved rather than on absolute truth or hard facts" (p. 7).In doing so, they take a constructivist view of knowledge creation, that is, that people make their own meanings in interaction with one another in context.Constructivism is "postmodern" in that its adherents do not believe in an objective truth that is separate from the people who create it.Knowledge, therefore, is constructed and interpreted individually based on a person's history and experience, but knowledge can be shared because social realities often overlap and interact.Cianciolo, Matthew, Sternberg, and Wagner (2006) describe tacit knowledge as "an adaptive intellectual resource stemming from the active interaction between individuals and their dynamic environment" (p.617).A trusting environment is essential for this to happen.Building on Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), Van Krogh et al. (2000) identify five key steps for knowledge creation: sharing tacit knowledge, creating a concept, justifying a concept, building a prototype, and cross-leveling knowledge (p.9).They note that "managing conversations" is one of only two links that are common to all five steps."Effective conversations," they continue, "allow for higher creativity; stimulate the sharing of tacit knowledge, concept creation, and justification; are essential for developing a powerful prototype; and lubricate the flow of knowledge across various organizational levels" (Ibid).Conversations take place in relationships and social interaction.Context -in particular a www.intechopen.comInformal Learning and Complex Problem Solving of Radiologic Technologists Transitioning to the Workplace 173 supportive caring ba, conducive to trust -affects this kind of knowledge creation and sharing.In organizations, context is influenced by group and organizational structures, practices, climate and culture. Social dimensions of knowledge management Informal learningSimilar ideas -constructivism, tacit knowing, meaning making through interaction with others, and the critical importance of context to learning that is highly situated -likewise permeate research and practice focused on informal learning.Informal learning is often defined in contrast to formal learning.It is organic, and typically motivated, directed and sustained by one's own intentions and interests.An online survey by The American Society for Training & Development and the Institute for Corporate Productivity of 1,104 human resources and learning professionals-managers, directors, vice presidents, or C-level officers in large enterprises operating in multiple nations defined informal learning: "as a learning activity that is not easily recognizable as formal training and performance support.Generally speaking, it takes place without a conventional instructor and is employeecontrolled in terms of breadth, depth, and timing.It tends to be individualized, limited in scope, and utilized in small chunks" (Paradise, 2008, p. 53).In 1990, drawing on work by John Dewey, Marsick and Watkins (1990) defined informal and incidental learning by contrasting it with formal instruction.Informal learning is intentional, although often highly tacit.Sometimes it is incidental, that is, an accidental byproduct of another activity.Incidental learning is not intentional, although the originating activity may be.It can be noted or not, recognized in the moment or not, processed through subsequent reflection, or often through less conscious processes involved in adaptive socialization.Conditions that might delimit such learning include ability to reframe one's understanding of a situation, as well as capacity for seeing a situation in complex or nuanced ways.Informal learning is enhanced when people are, and encouraged to be, creative in their thinking and approaches to challenges they face; when they proactively pursue interests and solutions to problems; and when they are able to step back and look at "why" things are as they are and how they can be differently understood.Marsick and Watkins (1990) proposed an enriched problem-solving model of informal learning that was heavily influenced by Argyris and Schon's (1974) double-loop learning, that is, learning that examines underlying assumptions, values and beliefs that influence meaning making.Marsick and Watkins' (1990) model started with deep probing of the situation in order to frame one's understanding of the challenge or problem, followed by identification and consideration of a range of alternatives.Learning typically occurs informally in these early phases, often in experimenting with solutions.A learning review follows action to learn from both intended and unintended consequences, and to plan for a new cycle of framing, experimentation with solutions and learning from results.This early model emphasized the individual as learner.Marsick and Watkins, in collaboration with Cseh (Cseh et al., 1999), revisited this model based on a study of managers in Eastern Europe that revealed the central role of context to what and how managers learned.Marsick et al. (2009) further revised and expanded their model based on examination of newer scholarship: on implicit and tacit learning theory, emotions and intuition, collaboration and social learning, and the dominant role of context in informal learning.They concluded that while the outlines of their earlier understanding hol
Source: InTech eBooks
DOI: 10.5772/35739
Authors: Victoria J., Jennifer L.
Institutions: Merritt College, Columbia University
Language: English
Subfield: Human Factors and Ergonomics
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: hybrid
OpenAlex ID: W1516987489