Learning and forgetting – what at the first glance seems contradictory, turns out to interrelate. The authorship argues that forgetting constitutes the prerequisite for learning as it releases capacities to be able to deal with new stimuli. Out of this, a positive impact of forgetting on learning is apparent. But is this really the only effect? It is time to scrutinize forgetting and its implications more carefully.
In the intricate relationship between learning and forgetting, there is a surprising synergy at play. Forgetting, often seen as the antagonist of learning, actually serves as a catalyst for it. It is a process that liberates cognitive capacities, making room for the absorption of new knowledge.
This dynamic relationship is highlighted by Blaschke and Schoeneborn (2006), who argue that a higher organizational forgetting rate results in increased knowledge levels. To illustrate this, consider a bakery that has been forming pretzels using the same method for years. When the bakery owner introduces a more efficient technique, it's essential to eliminate the old knowledge. The deeply ingrained routine becomes a barrier to learning the new method. Only by allowing the old knowledge to fade into the background can the staff adapt to the better approach. Failure to forget hinders the organization's progress.
Table of Contents
1. Organizational Forgetting: The concept and its implications on organizational learning revisited
2. Learning and forgetting
3. Blinding out
4. Constructivism and learning
5. Complacent background conversations and framing
6. Autopoietic systems and external triggers
7. Methods for expanded learning
8. Summary and propositions
Objectives and Topics
The essay aims to critically examine the relationship between organizational forgetting and learning, arguing that while forgetting is a prerequisite for organizational change, it simultaneously acts as a cognitive filter that restricts the scope of potential new knowledge.
- The role of "forgetting" versus "blinding out" in organizational memory.
- The impact of constructivism on how organizations perceive reality and limit learning content.
- The influence of subconscious past experiences and routines on current organizational behavior.
- Autopoietic systems as a framework for understanding internal knowledge development.
- Practical strategies for broadening organizational learning perspectives.
Excerpt from the Book
Constructivism and learning
Constructivism means that reality is not objective, but that every individual has a subjective image of reality in mind. The individual constructs his own reality based on the senses used for perceiving and based on already made experiences (Glasersfeld, 1997). Here lies the crucial point: Past experiences actually represent knowledge which has been acquired in the past. Although previously acquired knowledge has been deemed for irrelevant and has been blinded out to make place for more appropriate knowledge, it is still existent and unconsciously influences the individual in the perception of reality. Due to this, an individual can never see the objective, whole reality, but only a limited snapshot of it. Within this narrow segment of reality lies also the potential new knowledge, which can be learnt. Thus, the scope of possible learning content is restricted beforehand. To put it in other words: Knowledge, even though deemed as irrelevant and „forgotten“, is still existent in a less conscious level of individual memory, and therefore still determines future actions and learning. This is especially the case, when the knowledge, which is blinded out now, has been used for a longer time before and is embedded in the individuals‘ long-term memory. Things once embedded in the long-term memory, can be stored there for years or even lifelong (Die Ebenen des Gedächtnisses, n.d.).
Summary of Chapters
1. Organizational Forgetting: The concept and its implications on organizational learning revisited: Provides the introduction and formal title of the inquiry into the relationship between forgetting and learning.
2. Learning and forgetting: Discusses the paradox of forgetting as both a prerequisite for learning and a potential barrier to innovation.
3. Blinding out: Critically evaluates the terminology of "forgetting" and "unlearning," suggesting the concept of "blinding out" as a more accurate description of organizational memory processes.
4. Constructivism and learning: Explains how subjective reality construction limits the scope of what organizations can learn.
5. Complacent background conversations and framing: Illustrates through examples how ingrained routines and mindsets influence the acquisition of new information.
6. Autopoietic systems and external triggers: Analyzes organizations as self-referential systems and the necessity of external triggers for true innovation.
7. Methods for expanded learning: Proposes strategies like increasing diversity in the learning process and challenging underlying assumptions to widen the scope of organizational reality.
8. Summary and propositions: Concludes by summarizing the findings into three core propositions regarding the nature of organizational forgetting.
Keywords
Organizational Forgetting, Organizational Learning, Blinding Out, Unlearning, Constructivism, Autopoietic Systems, Subconscious Memory, Knowledge Management, Framing, Organizational Memory, Routine, Innovation, External Triggers, Reality Construction, Cognitive Filters.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this paper?
The paper explores the complex, paradoxical relationship between organizational forgetting and the capacity for organizational learning.
What are the central thematic fields discussed?
The core themes include the mechanics of organizational memory, the constructivist view of reality, autopoietic systems, and the cognitive constraints on organizational development.
What is the main research objective?
The goal is to demonstrate that while forgetting is necessary to release capacity for new information, it simultaneously serves as a filter that constrains future learning outcomes.
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The author uses a conceptual and argumentative approach, synthesizing existing literature on organizational learning and social systems theory.
What topics are covered in the main body?
The main body examines the "blinding out" of knowledge, the influence of past routines on current behavior, and how organizational systems can overcome cognitive limitations to achieve innovation.
Which keywords best describe this work?
Key terms include Organizational Forgetting, Unlearning, Blinding Out, Constructivism, Autopoietic Systems, and Organizational Memory.
How does the concept of "blinding out" differ from "forgetting"?
The author argues "blinding out" better reflects the process where knowledge is moved to a less conscious level without being completely destroyed, keeping it available for potential future recall.
Why is an external trigger considered important for novel learning?
Because autopoietic systems tend to reproduce themselves based on internal rules, they often struggle to generate truly novel insights without external stimuli to push them beyond their constructed reality.
- Citar trabajo
- Nadine Butzhammer (Autor), 2018, Organizational Forgetting: The concept and its implications on organizational learning revisited, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/538600
