Article2007

Workplace learning in the New Zealand apple industry network

Roberta Hill · Phillip Capper · Ken Wilson · Richard Whatman · Karen Wong

34 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Workplace Learning

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Innovative Education and Learning Practices Organizational Learning and Leadership Appreciative Inquiry and Organizational Change

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe how, from 2004‐2006, a New Zealand research team experimented with the “change laboratory” learning process to create a new method of government policy development and implementation, referred to as “practice‐making”. The apple industry in Hawke's Bay was chosen because of the level of tension among government agencies and small/medium‐sized firms in the industry, particularly around the scarcity of seasonal labour, amid growing concerns about the possible collapse of the industry. Design/methodology/approach The team stimulated a cycle of expansive learning among the network of activity systems in the industry. Laboratory participants were growers, labour contractors, pack house operators, quality controllers, horticultural consultants and government officials. The expansive learning cycle is a core concept in developmental work research (DWR) and cultural‐historical activity theory (CHAT). Findings Participants created a shared “object” for apple production and its government policy and regulation built around quality, making a substantive shift from adaptive learning to transformational learning, and creating a major redesign of the industry. Many of the new practices are now being implemented in the industry and government. Practical implications The CHAT/DWR approach seems particularly well suited for complex problem solving in any network where there are intractable systems contradictions and a strong desire among participants to make real change. Originality/value It is understood that this is the first time a change laboratory process has been used for government “practice‐making” with industry, in contrast with traditional policy development and implementation that frequently does not address systemic problems.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 34 citations exist upstream.

References

2001Expansive Learning at Work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization 2014Learning by Expanding 2000Activity theory as a framework for analyzing and redesigning work 1995Polycontextuality and boundary crossing in expert cognition: Learning and problem solving in complex work activities 1999Expansive Visibilization of Work: An Activity-Theoretical Perspective 2004New forms of learning in co‐configuration work 1996The change laboratory as a tool for transforming work 1983From Policy to Practice

Cited by

2008Cultural studies of science education 2009Rethinking the Regulation of Vulnerable Work in the USA: A Sector-based Approach 2009“Development Radar”: the co‐configuration of a tool in a learning network 2019The Use of Design Thinking in the U.S. Federal Government 2013Development Curriculum for Knowledge-Based Organizations 2011The effect of interactive technology on informal learning and performance in a social setting

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.