Yahoo Web Search

  1. About 244,000 search results
  1. Apr 11, 2019 · Peter M. Senge is the founding chair of SoL (Society of Organizational Learning), a global network of organizations, researchers, and consultants dedicated to the “interdependent development of people and their institutions”, Senior Lecturer, Sloan School of Management MIT, and cofounder of the Academy for Systemic Change, which seeks to accelerate the growth of the field of systemic ...

  2. en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Peter_SengePeter Senge - Wikipedia

    Peter Michael Senge (born 1947) is an American systems scientist who is a senior lecturer at the MIT Sloan School of Management, co-faculty at the New England Complex Systems Institute, and the founder of the Society for Organizational Learning.

  3. Peter Senge (1947) is an American scientist, teacher and director of the Center for Organizational Learning at de MIT Sloan School of Management.He is known as the author of the book The Fifth discipline (1990) and founder of the five disciplines of learning organizations.

  4. Peter Senge has been at the forefront of organizational learning since publishing his classic text – The Fifth Discipline – in 1990. The Fifth Discipline provides the theories and methods to foster aspiration, develop reflective conversation, and understand complexity in order to build a learning organization.

  5. Dec 21, 2021 · Peter Senge is an advocate for decentralizing leadership so all people in an organization can work together towards a common goal. Born in 1947, Senge has earned multiple degrees, including a Ph.D ...

    • 5 min
    • 25K
    • Lucinda Stanley
    • Peter Senge
    • The Learning Organization
    • Systems Thinking – The Cornerstone of The Learning Organization
    • The CORE Disciplines
    • Leading The Learning Organization
    • Issues and Problems
    • Conclusion
    • Further Reading and References
    • References
    • Links

    Born in 1947, Peter Senge graduated in engineering from Stanford and then went on to undertake a masters on social systems modeling at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) before completing his PhD on Management. Said to be a rather unassuming man, he is is a senior lecturer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is also founding chair of the Society for Organizational Learning (SoL). His current areas of special interest focus on decentralizing the role of leadership in organizations so as to enhance the capacity of all people to work productively toward common goals. Peter Senge describes himself as an ‘idealistic pragmatist’. This orientation has allowed him to explore and advocate some quite ‘utopian’ and abstract ideas (especially around systems theory and the necessity of bringing human values to the workplace). At the same time he has been able to mediate these so that they can be worked on and applied by people in very different forms of organization. His ar...

    According to Peter Senge (1990: 3) learning organizationsare: The basic rationale for such organizations is that in situations of rapid change only those that are flexible, adaptive and productive will excel. For this to happen, it is argued, organizations need to ‘discover how to tap people’s commitment and capacity to learn at all levels’ (ibid.: 4). While all people have the capacity to learn, the structures in which they have to function are often not conducive to reflection and engagement. Furthermore, people may lack the tools and guiding ideas to make sense of the situations they face. Organizations that are continually expanding their capacity to create their future require a fundamental shift of mind among their members. For Peter Senge, real learning gets to the heart of what it is to be human. We become able to re-create ourselves. This applies to both individuals and organizations. Thus, for a ‘learning organization it is not enough to survive. ‘”Survival learning” or wh...

    A great virtue of Peter Senge’s work is the way in which he puts systems theory to work. The Fifth Discipline provides a good introduction to the basics and uses of such theory – and the way in which it can be brought together with other theoretical devices in order to make sense of organizational questions and issues. Systemic thinking is the conceptual cornerstone (‘The Fifth Discipline’) of his approach. It is the discipline that integrates the others, fusing them into a coherent body of theory and practice (ibid.: 12). Systems theory’s ability to comprehend and address the whole, and to examine the interrelationship between the parts provides, for Peter Senge, both the incentive and the means to integrate the disciplines. Here is not the place to go into a detailed exploration of Senge’s presentation of systems theory (I have included some links to primers below). However, it is necessary to highlight one or two elements of his argument. First, while the basic tools of systems t...

    Alongside systems thinking, there stand four other ‘component technologies’ or disciplines. A ‘discipline’ is viewed by Peter Senge as a series of principles and practices that we study, master and integrate into our lives. The five disciplines can be approached at one of three levels: Each discipline provides a vital dimension. Each is necessary to the others if organizations are to ‘learn’. Personal mastery. ‘Organizations learn only through individuals who learn. Individual learning does not guarantee organizational learning. But without it no organizational learning occurs’ (Senge 1990: 139). Personal mastery is the discipline of continually clarifying and deepening our personal vision, of focusing our energies, of developing patience, and of seeing reality objectively’ (ibid.: 7). It goes beyond competence and skills, although it involves them. It goes beyond spiritual opening, although it involves spiritual growth (ibid.: 141). Mastery is seen as a special kind of proficiency....

    Peter Senge argues that learning organizations require a new view of leadership. He sees the traditional view of leaders (as special people who set the direction, make key decisions and energize the troops as deriving from a deeply individualistic and non-systemic worldview (1990: 340). At its centre the traditional view of leadership, ‘is based on assumptions of people’s powerlessness, their lack of personal vision and inability to master the forces of change, deficits which can be remedied only by a few great leaders’ (op. cit.). Against this traditional view he sets a ‘new’ view of leadership that centres on ‘subtler and more important tasks’. In a learning organization, leaders are designers, stewards and teachers. They are responsible for building organizations were people continually expand their capabilities to understand complexity, clarify vision, and improve shared mental models – that is they are responsible for learning…. Learning organizations will remain a ‘good idea’…...

    When making judgements about Peter Senge’s work, and the ideas he promotes, we need to place his contribution in context. His is not meant to be a definitive addition to the ‘academic’ literature of organizational learning. Peter Senge writes for practicing and aspiring managers and leaders. The concern is to identify how interventions can be made to turn organizations into ‘learning organizations’. Much of his, and similar theorists’ efforts, have been ‘devoted to identifying templates, which real organizations could attempt to emulate’ (Easterby-Smith and Araujo 1999: 2). In this field some of the significant contributions have been based around studies of organizational practice, others have ‘relied more on theoretical principles, such as systems dynamics or psychological learning theory, from which implications for design and implementation have been derived’ (op. cit.). Peter Senge, while making use of individual case studies, tends to the latter orientation. The most appropria...

    John van Maurik (2001: 201) has suggested that Peter Senge has been ahead of his time and that his arguments are insightful and revolutionary. He goes on to say that it is a matter of regret ‘that more organizations have not taken his advice and have remained geared to the quick fix’. As we have seen there are very deep-seated reasons why this may have been the case. Beyond this, though, there is the questions of whether Senge’s vision of the learning organization and the disciplines it requires has contributed to more informed and committed action with regard to organizational life? Here we have little concrete evidence to go on. However, we can make some judgements about the possibilities of his theories and proposed practices. We could say that while there are some issues and problems with his conceptualization, at least it does carry within it some questions around what might make for human flourishing. The emphases on building a shared vision, team working, personal mastery and...

    Block, P. (1993) Stewardship. Choosing service over self-interest, San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. 264 + xxiv pages. Calls for a new way of thinking about the workplace – arguing that notions of leadership and management need replacing by that of ‘stewardship’. Organizations should replace traditional management tools of control and consistency with partnership and choice. ‘Individuals who see themselves as stewards will choose responsibility over entitlement and hold themselves accountable to those over whom they exercise power’. There is a need to choose service over self-interest. Heifetz, R. A. (1994) Leadership Without Easy Answers, Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press. 348 + xi pages. Just about the best of the more recent books on leadership. Looks to bring back ethical questions to the centre of debates around leadership, and turns to the leader as educator. A particular emphasis on the exploration of leadership within authority and non-authority relationships. Good on distinguis...

    Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1978) Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective,Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley. Argyris, C. and Schön, D. (1996) Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice, Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley. Bolman, L. G. and Deal, T. E. (1997) Reframing Organizations. Artistry, choice and leadership2e, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 450 pages. Castells, M. (2001) ‘Information technology and global capitalism’ in W. Hutton and A. Giddens (eds.) On the Edge. Living with global capitalism, London: Vintage. DePree, M. (1990) Leadership is an Art, New York: Dell. Drucker, P. (1977) Management, London: Pan. Easterby-Smith, M. and Araujo, L. ‘Current debates and opportunities’ in M. Easterby-Smith, L. Araujo and J. Burgoyne (eds.) Organizational Learning and the Learning Organization, London: Sage. Edmondson, A. and Moingeon, B. (1999) ‘Learning, trust and organizational change’ in M. Easterby-Smith, L. Araujo and J. Burgoyne (eds.) Organizational Learning and...

    Dialogue from Peter Senge’s perspective– brief, but helpful, overview by Martha Merrill fieldbook.com – ‘home to The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook Project’ – includes material on Schools that Learn and The Dance of Change Peter Senge resources – GWSAE online listing includes interviewwith Senge by Jane R. Schultz. A Primer on Systems Thinking & Organizational Learning– useful set of pages put together by John Shibley @ The Portland Learning Organization Group Resources on Peter Senge’s learning organization– useful listing of resources from the Metropolitan Community College, Omaha. sistemika– online Peter Senge resources Society for Organizational Learning– various resources relating to Senge’s project. Systems thinking– useful introductory article by Daniel Aronson on thinking.net. Acknowledgement: Photograph of Peter Senge by Larry Lawfer (used with permission of SoL) Bibliographic reference: Smith, M. K. (2001) ‘Peter Senge and the learning organization’, The encyclopedia of pedago...

  1. People also search for