Content area
Full text
Few names are more closely associated with organizational learning than those of Argyris and Schon. Nevertheless, their impact on the literature of organizational learning has been fairly tenuous. Examination of references to Argyris and Schon shows that they are frequently drafted to support an author's or authors' arguments rather than to be followed or critiqued ("Chic"). From an analysis of Argyris and Sch&n's conceptual framework, and of their use of this framework in their consulting practice, the author suggests that the superficiality of Argyris and Schon's influence is due to their focusing on important, attractive, but hard-to-realize aspects of organizational learning ("Mystique"). As a result, the literature overlooks some important and more feasible substantive lessons that may be learned from Argyris and Schon ("Misconception").
The title of a recent article in Organizational Dynamics is "An Interview With Chris Argyris, the Father of Organizational Learning" (Fulmer & Keys, 1998). Indeed, few names are more closely associated with organizational learning than those of Argyris and Schon. Nevertheless, their impact on the literature of organizational learning has been somewhat tenuous. Similar to Beethoven's last five string quartets, which were widely acclaimed but rarely followed (or understood) for more than 50 years, Argyris and Schon's work is frequently referenced but rarely followed or fully understood. The fact that Argyris and Sch6n have left their mark principally on the rhetoric of organizational learning is unfortunate, because they have much more to offer to students and to practitioners of organizational learning. The purpose of this article is to document and explain the superficial impact of Argyris and Schon on the literature of organizational learning and to show what can be learned from careful study of their conceptual framework and their practice.
Five sections follow. In the first section, I examine how Argyris and Schon have been treated by some writers on organizational learning and conclude that they were drafted essentially to support various authors' arguments rather than to be followed or critiqued ("Chic"). The second and third sections present the essential aspects of Argyris and Schon's conceptual framework and how they apply it in practice. The fourth section attributes the superficiality of Argyris and Schon's influence to their tendency to focus on aspects of organizational learning that are important and...