Abstract
The study reported in this paper suggests that in order to achieve optimal benefits from implementing process improvement programs, organisations must move towards becoming what is termed “a learning organisation.” Software process assessment “leads to the identification and selection of key activities for improvement and the continuous application of improvements to match business needs” (ISO/IEC 1996). Continuous improvement requires a commitment to learning on the part of the organisation (Garvin 1993). A model to help identify evidence of learning (the Organisational Learning Evaluation Cycle [OLEC] has been developed and empirically tested in the study. We have found evidence to suggest that the case study organisation had not moved through all three of Garvin's (1993) overlapping phases of organisational learning and as a result the firm's improvement program did not achieve optimal benefits for the organisation. The paper concludes by discussing why significant improvement in performance was not achieved.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Agarwal, R., Krudys, G. and Tanniru, M. 1997. Infusing learning into the information system organisa-tion, Eur. J. Inform. Syst. 6:25–40.
Argyris, C., and Schon, D. A. 1978. Organisational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley.
Ciborra, C. U., Patriotta, G., and Erlicher, L. 1995. Disassembling frames on the assembly line: The theory and practice of the new division of learning in advanced manufacturing. Proc. IPIF WG8.2 Working Conf. Inf. Technol. Changes Org. Work, December.
Dodgson, M. 1993. Organisational learning: A review of some literatures, Org. Stud.14 r 3:75–394.
Field, L., and Ford, B. 1995. Managing Learning Organisations, Melbourne, Longman.
Garvin, D. A. 1993. Building a learning organisation, Harvard Bus. Rev., July-August, pp. 78–91.
Giddens, A. 1976. New Rules of Sociological Method, New York, Basic Books.
Halloran, P. J. 1998. Using a software process assessment model to examine organisational learning. Proc. Austr. Conf. Inform. Syst., Sydney, Australia, September 29-October 2, pp. 253–265.
Halloran, P. J. 1999. Organisational learning from the perspective of a software process assessment and improvement program, in Proc. 32nd Hawaii Int. Conf. Syst. Sci., January 5–8.
Huber, G. P. 1991. Organisational learning: The contributing processes and literatures, Org. Sci., February 2 1.
ISO 9000–3. 1990. Quality Management and Quality Assurance Standards—Part 3: Guidelines for the application of ISO 9001 to the development, supply and maintenance of software.
ISO r IEC 15504–1. 1996. Information Technology—Software Process Assessment, ISO r IEC JTC1 r SC7 N1592.
ISO r IEC 15504. 1996. Part 1 Information Technology—Software Process Assessment Part 1: Concepts and Introductory Guide, ISO r IEC JTC1 r SC7 N1605.
Orlikowski, W. 1992. The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organisations, Org. Sci. 3(3): 398–427.
Pedler, M., Boydell, T. and Burgoyne, J. 1989. Towards the learning company, Manag. Educ. Dev. 20(1):1–8.
Rhodes, C. 1996. Researching organisational change and learning: A narrative approach, Qual. Rep. 2(4), http:rr www.nova.edu r sss r QR r QR2–4 r rhodes.html.
Schein, E. H. 1985. Organisational Culture and Leadership, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
Thurbin, P. 1994. Implementing the Learning Organisation: The 17 Day Learning Programme, London, Pitman Publishing.
Watkins, E., and Golembiewski, R. 1995. Rethinking organisational development for learning organisations, J. Org. Anal. 3(1):86–101.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gasston, J., Halloran, P. Continuous Software Process Improvement Requires Organisational Learning: An Australian Case Study. Software Quality Journal 8, 37–51 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008974818812
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008974818812