경영관행의 조직 내 확산과 편향적 조직학습 : 다국적 금융기업의 팀형성과 그 성과를 중심으로 (Intra-organizational Diffusion of Management Practice and Biased Learning: Team Formation and Team Performance at a Global Bank)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국인사조직학회
· 수록지 정보 : 인사조직연구 / 21권 / 2호 / 75 ~ 113페이지
· 저자명 : 정동일

초록

새로운 경영관행이 조직에 도입되면, 조직의 구성원들이나 구성단위들은 이를실행하기 위한 학습을 시작하게 된다. 새로운 관행은 기존의 제도적 배열이나 업무현실과 긴밀히 결합(tight coupling)되어 성공적으로 제도화될 수도 있고, 기존의 기술이나제도적 배열과는 분리(decoupling)된 채 아예 실행되지 않거나 최소한으로 실행될 수도있다. 하지만 때에 따라서는 조직 상층부의 강력한 지원 하에 단위부서들 사이에 빠르게확산되고 광범하게 실행되지만, 머지않아 그 확산의 속도만큼이나 빠르게 소멸되어가는 소위 ‘유행적 결합’(faddish coupling) 현상이 나타나기도 한다. 이 논문에서는강한 시간적 압박과 조직적 압력 하에서 진행되는 조직 구성단위들의 편향적 조직학습이유행적 결합을 만들어내는 한 가지 기제가 될 수 있다고 주장한다. 전사적 차원에서강하게 추진되고 있는 전략적 지향에 빠르게 승선해야 하는 구성단위들은 폭넓은 탐색과면밀한 분석에 의존한 조직학습을 수행하는 대신, 소수의 가시적인 성공 사례들에과도하게 주목하는 편향적 조직학습을 수행할 가능성이 높다. 학습 표본의 편향적인선정과 더불어 성공에 대한 높은 기대치는 의사결정의 질을 떨어뜨리고 실행의 성과와그 지속성에 부정적인 영향을 줄 뿐만 아니라, 궁극적으로는 경영관행에 대한 좌절과광범한 거부를 초래할 수 있다. 이 논문은 1990년대 말 품질경영 프로그램을 도입한한 다국적 금융기업을 대상으로 다기능팀의 형성과 그 성과에 대한 경험적 분석을수행함으로써 이러한 주장을 검증한다. 분석 결과, 높은 조직적 압력 하에 놓인 부서들은탐색의 범위를 극도로 제한하는 경향이 있었다. 구체적으로 부서들은 시간적으로 근접한경험, 특히 높은 가시적인 성과를 보인 팀활동을 학습표본으로 선정하여 경험적 학습및 대리학습을 수행했다. 또한 이러한 편향적 조직학습은 팀활동의 지속성과 그 성과에부정적 영향을 주는 것으로 나타났다. 편향된 조직학습으로 인한 성과의 하락과 그로부터형성되는 부정적 피드백은 전사적 차원에서 품질경영 프로그램의 빠른 쇠퇴에 적지않게 기여한 것으로 판단된다. 이러한 결과를 토대로 이 연구가 어떻게 조직학습이론의발전과 경영유행 현상의 이해에 기여할 수 있는지 토의한다.

영어초록

Once an organization adopts a management practice, its members begin to learn how to implement the practice in their business units. Prior research has proposed two scenarios: (1) Tight coupling,where the organization successfully implements the formally adopted practice and integrates it with existing business routines, or (2) Decoupling, where the organization adopts but does not effectively implements the practice. A third scenario is also possible, where the management practice is initially implemented and diffused widely among organizational members / subunits, but winds down rapidly soon after a short period of implementation. While anecdotally this third scenario,which I term ‘faddish coupling’, seems to be a likely outcome for many organizations, little attention has been paid to how such a trajectory comes about.
Building on organizational learning theory, this paper argues that biased organizational learning by organizational members and subunits results in faddish coupling of an organizational practice.
Organizational subunits can learn from their own experiences and other units’ experiences, but such experiential and vicarious learning may be extremely biased, especially when members /subunits are under pressure to commit to company strategies and newly established organizational goals. When boundedly rational decision makers are faced with such strong pressures but not equipped with related knowledge about novel management practice, they tend to narrow their search scope down to a few salient and easily accessible activities such as the most recent high-performance experiences and examples, thereby carrying out organizational learning on the basis of positively-biased information. Organizational learning from a biased sample often produces positive sentiments and perceptions about the management practice, leading to its organization-wide diffusion. However, such biased learning, together with an elevated aspiration level, is likely to aggravate the quality of decision-making, drive below-aspiration practice performance levels, incur rapidly increasing frustration, and result in the sudden collapse of the adopted practice.
Using data from cross-functional process improvement teams of a leading global financial service organization (under the pseudonym Global Financial) which adopted a total quality management program in the first quarter of 1997 and formally abandoned it in the last quarter of 2000, this paper tests several hypotheses regarding the processes and consequences of biased organizational learning involved in quality team formation in 174 organizational units operating in 77 countries.
I evaluated the data against the following hypotheses regarding learning bias under conditions of strong organizational pressure:Hypothesis 1: A subunit’s team formation rate will be positively affected by the most recent team performance within that subunit.
Hypothesis 2: A subunit’s team formation rate will be positively affected by the most recent team performance of reference units (geographically and operationally similar units).
Hypothesis 3: A subunit’s team formation rate will be positively affected by the most salient team performance of reference units.
But such biased learning may not last long. As the experience with team activities accumulates,organizational units become aware that biased learning brings about relatively poor outcomes,for example, low team performance and reduced conclusion of team activities. In hypothetical terms:Hypothesis 4: As the experience with team formation accumulates, biased learning from a selected sample will decrease.
Hypothesis 5: Learning from a positively biased sample will decrease team performance.
Hypothesis 6: Learning from a positively biased sample will decrease the probability of successful completion of team activities.
Empirical analyses of quality team formation in Global Financial’s organizational subunits support all of the hypotheses. Organizational units’ learning appears to be biased toward the most salient team activities of their own and reference units, but such biased learning gradually tapers off as the experience with team activities within units accumulates. In addition, the findings show that biased learning has a negative impact on teams’ financial performance and their substantiality.
The unexpected negative outcomes created a negative learning loop, which was followed by the rapid demise of the quality program in this organization.
Finally, I discuss some implications for organizational learning theory and management studies and provide several possible future directions for organizational research. Traditional approaches to organizational learning have maintained an unjustifiable assumption that organizational learning almost always expands sound knowledge stock, enhances organizational capabilities, and improves performance. However, this paper suggests that researchers should reconsider this assumption and pay more attention to the negative effects of organizational learning. To reach a full understanding of how organizations learn and the consequences of organizational learning, it is important to establish a balanced view of organizational learning. The paper also suggests that future research should delve deeply into the area of so-called meta-learning (i.e. learning to learn), because when prior organizational learning does not deliver desired outcomes, organizations can change learning methods, information sources, and search scope.

참고자료

· 없음