Organisational learning in the “knots”

Abstract

Purpose Drawing from findings of a case study of inter‐organisational collaboration, this paper aims to employ organisational theory to examine the potential learning that opens between educational organisations. The focus is discursive practices. Two questions guide the analysis. What (unique) practices are implicated in the “knotworking” of inter‐organisational collaboration? What knowledge and capacities are learned in these discursive practices? Design/methodology/approach A case study was conducted of a collaboration between a university unit, school district, elementary school and parent executive board to govern a laboratory school. Documents were examined and 17 interviews conducted and analysed inductively. Document analysis and second stage transcript analysis employed methods of discourse analysis. Findings The case analysis suggests that collaborations open unique sites for organizational learning. Actors (teachers, administrators, parents) engage with various discourses in the “knots” of inter‐organisational networks. Those who thrive in the “knot” of collaboration learn how to be flexibly attuned to shifting elements that emerge in negotiations. Further, these actors appear to develop capacities of mapping, translating, rearticulating, and spanning boundaries among the diverse positions of organisations. Research limitations/implications The case study is limited in scope in order to allow in‐depth discourse analysis of the data. Originality/value The combination of theories employed here – a practice‐based organizational learning theory called “knotworking” and critical organisational discourse analysis – is unique in educational administration research. It is argued that together, these theories provide a useful analytic approach for administrators wanting to understand and work through the cultural and political complexities of inter‐organisational collaborations.

Cite this work

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

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 26 citations exist upstream.

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