In this, my first article as a makers columnist, we're going to talk about learning culture in organizations.
In a world driven by hard KPIs, where we are used to discussing P&Ls and OKRs, talking about learning seems esoteric and has no real impact on business, but this conclusion couldn't be further from the truth. An organization is constantly evolving. If the world were static, this would already be true, because even in immutable areas (such as the laws of physics) our knowledge is limited and every small discovery brings us one step closer to the truth. However, in the hectic world of marketing, this becomes especially vital, as the competitive landscape and consumer trends are constantly changing. The target is eternally mobile. In this context, the organization that learns to learn has a great competitive advantage, adapts more quickly to the environment and sees these changes as opportunities rather than threats. This characteristic is behind many winning cultures, including the notorious example of Amazon's "Day 1".
A recent survey by McKinsey shows this impact clearly. Analyzing the companies in the top 10% for digital growth, the majority are more efficient than their competitors at testing new ideas for products, services and business models and, as expected, they pointed out that a learning culture is a prerequisite for this success. The same survey also showed thatsuccessful companies are twice as likely to agree that people in their organization are rewarded for taking an acceptable level of risk.
But if learning is fundamental, how can we create this culture in companies? Let's review some of what science tells us about this subject:
Researchers (Stasser and Titus, 1987) have noticed that various organizational characteristics influence the ability of groups to develop a learning culture. Two factors are the most important: the certainty that the learning will actually be used to improve the organization, and the level of "Psychological Safety" in the environment that creates the conditions for this (Edmonson, 1999).
Learning and Analysis. The first point is very important: for an organization to learn, it needs to reflect on the experiences it has collectively acquired. In cultures where the process ends in error, without proper analysis and incorporation of the lessons learned into decision-making, no one is motivated to actually contribute to this large catalog of experiences. A key role for leaders is to guarantee a bottom-up flow of information that allows real-time customer reactions to be captured, analyzed, interpreted and fed back into the strategy. This is in order to amplify the things that went right and, just as importantly, incorporate the lessons learned from those that went wrong.
Psychological Safety. However, it is equally important to address the second point. Research shows that in the workplace people are often afraid to expose themselves, ask questions, make mistakes and are very concerned about protecting their image, which leads them not to engage in risky discussions, admit mistakes, or seek solutions that could be misinterpreted. In an organization where employees feel threatened, they are even afraid to try to solve problems (MacDuffie 1997). The feeling of threat also has an impact on skills and behaviors linked to responsiveness, flexibility and adaptation. Of course, you've certainly experienced this feeling in the corporate world and know that it radically affects a group's ability to learn. The name of this characteristic, or the lack of it, is called "Psychological Security". The name of the term is scary, but it's actually very simple: the shared belief that a team is safe to take risks and make mistakes without reprisals.
As well as feeling more comfortable making mistakes, another characteristic of teams with high levels of psychological safety is that they proactively seek feedback, inviting other people or areas of the organization to actively contribute criticism. These teams assume positive intent in their colleagues, understanding that the interest in providing feedback is to help improve the product or service and deliver more value to customers and contribute to collective success, while those teams that manifest a low learning coefficient tend to fear their colleague's feedback and see it (whether justified or not) as an attempt to negatively impact their image. In other words, the famous fear of being "burned" by colleagues, which is typically a sign of low psychological security.
Another characteristic of teams with this attribute is that people feel free to be themselves. They feel they don't have to "wear a mask" as directly cited in the studies that were the source for this article. The team respects its members as individuals, perceives and values each one's individuality and diversity and allows members to express themselves freely. In a corporate world full of uniforms, dress codes, battle cries and other attempts to dissolve human individuality, it may be necessary to celebrate it so that each member feels free to give their unique vision. Belonging is important in all organizations, but it's crucial to think about the limits of these tools and when it becomes confused with homogenization. After all, if we are all the same and think alike, why should I bring my point of difference to the table? Why should I have to try to do things differently if what is valued around here is following the standard?
The solution lies in the group. A common misconception about this topic is that it is exactly the same as the level of trust and security between team members as individuals. Of course, individual trust in the person working alongside you is important, but the concept of psychological safety is a collective issue. Interesting studies on the subject show that the level of psychological safety in a team tends to have a high Interclass Correlation Coefficient (Edmonson, 1999), which means that people within a team tend to have a similar assessment on the subject. Unlike personal motivation, for example, which varies greatly from person to person. In general, employees tend to converge in their assessment of the level of psychological safety. There is therefore no point in trying to improve this indicator through 1:1 coaching, but rather by analyzing the habits, customs and culture of the group.
What's next? In short, in a world where all sectors are under extreme pressure to innovate, we shouldn't just look at the most advanced techniques, software and processes, but a large part of your transformation roadmap starts with culture. Psychological Safety and its consequent Learning Culture, despite being aspects that are still extremely underestimated in digital and innovation transformations within companies, need to be at the center.
Perhaps this is an interesting component to include in your next 360 or organizational climate survey. If that's not possible, ask your people for honest feedback and reflect: do they feel safe to make mistakes? Do they feel their individuality is celebrated? I would add to this scientific review my opinion as a leader and as an employee: in this regard, the day-to-day details make all the difference. A leader's attitude counts for a lot - how you treat people who ask an unconventional question, how you deal when things go wrong, how you value the best within each member of your team without them feeling like they have to put on a mask every day when they go into the office. The road to a more innovative culture starts with you and the way your team collaborates.
In the world of "move fast and break things", no team should "walk on eggshells".
Legal studies as source:
Stasser, Garold, and William Titus 1987 "Effects of information load and percentage of shared information on the dissemination of unshared information during group discussion." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
MacDuffie, John Paul 1997 "The road to 'root cause': Shop-floor problem-solving at three auto assembly plants." Management Science.
Edmonson, Amy 1999 "Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams Au
https://web.mit.edu/curhan/www/docs/Articles/15341_Readings/Group_Performance/Edmondson%20Psychological%20safety.pdf
