Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy

Amy C. Edmondson

Book | 2012

Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy

Abstract

Continuous improvement, understanding complex systems, and promoting innovation are all part of the landscape of learning challenges today's companies face. I show that organizations thrive, or fail to thrive, based on how well the small groups within those organizations work. In most organizations, the work that produces value for customers is carried out by teams, and increasingly, by flexible team-like entities. The pace of change and the fluidity of most work structures mean that it's not really about creating effective teams anymore, but instead about leading effective teaming. 'Teaming' shows that organizations learn when the flexible, fluid collaborations they encompass are able to learn. The problem is teams, and other dynamic groups, don't learn naturally. I outline the factors that prevent them from doing so, such as interpersonal fear, irrational beliefs about failure, groupthink, problematic power dynamics, and information hoarding. With 'Teaming,' leaders can shape these factors by encouraging reflection, creating psychological safety, and overcoming defensive interpersonal dynamics that inhibit the sharing of ideas. Further, they can use practical management strategies to help organizations realize the benefits inherent in both success and failure. Based on years of research, this book shows how leaders can make organizational learning happen by building teams that learn.

Keywords: Change; Interpersonal Communication; Learning; Values and Beliefs; Innovation and Invention; Management; Performance Improvement; Groups and Teams; Research; Strategy; Complexity; Value;

Format: Print

Find at Harvard Purchase

Citation:

Edmondson, Amy C. Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy. Jossey-Bass, 2012.

This case focuses on the genesis and development of the open innovation unit at BT, the strategic value of the unit, and its operating model. As the business environment becomes increasingly dynamic and firms are pressured to achieve faster innovation rates, there may be accompanying shifts in the way they pursue innovation. This case illustrates the challenges that this poses to large corporations as well as the key activities the open innovation unit engages in to deal with them. In particular, it must manage relationships with various stakeholders to leverage the value of matching external ideas and technologies with internal resources and capabilities. The case poses the question: Should the open innovation unit fully incubate some ideas, instead of always seeking partnership with commitment from a customer-facing unit?

Despite discussion in the management literature about agile organizations or learning organizations, many large organizations are top-down, slow to change, and fraught with obstacles to learning. We describe “strategy-as-learning” to contrast with the traditional concept of “strategy-as-planning.” Practicing the work of organizational strategy as a learning process implies eschewing a set of firm decisions and preconceived courses of action. Instead, strategy formulation and execution develop from setting a direction and posing a set of questions to be defined, refined, and iteratively answered. Strategy-making is thus about developing and advancing hypotheses to be tested. In this context, psychological safety plays a crucial role in shaping the quality of strategy-as-learning, as psychological safety enables speaking up, error reporting, dissenting, and candidly discussing risks. Without these behaviors, especially at the executive levels, organizations are at risk of strategic failures that could have been avoided.

Faculty & Research

Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author