HR2002 Group Report

Learning Cultures In Singaporean Engineering

Organisations

Tutorial A32 Group 4:

Anand Ravindran (A0144027N)

Dean Wong Jun Wei (A0138970W)

Kelvin Kang (A0107177E)

Nicholas Sim Kwang Hong (A0124951H)

Attn: Prof Lowe Joo Yong

National University of Singapore

1
1. Introduction

An organisation’s value is derived from its assets and its people are its

most important assets. Each person is a summation of his or her

knowledge, skills and abilities. To facilitate the transfer of these qualities

between different people, organisations need to adopt a learning culture.

According to Peter Senge, learning organisations are ones that are

continually enhancing the capacity to create. People there can potentially

operate in ways that are fundamentally more generative, empowering and

inspiring.

The four pillars of a learning organisation are 1) information is shared and

accessible, 2) learning is emphasised and valued, 3) Mistakes are not

punished, and 4) People are expected to learn continuously. These 4

characteristics allow a learning organisation to differentiate itself from the

rest. They help to facilitate the free flow of information between members

within the organisation. Individuals can also orientate themselves to be in

line with these pillars. There are a few methods for individuals to do so; a

willingness to learn, humility and embracing multi-directional knowledge

transfer.

2
2. Willingness to Learn

Firstly, learning begins with oneself. An individual’s attitude, beliefs and

actions impact the learning culture of an organisation. Being inquisitive is

a useful trait to have. However, it is not sufficient to be simply inquisitive,

it is necessary to take an active approach to learning; setting learning

objectives and taking measures to further one’s course of learning. An

individual should constantly seek learning points and acquire new insights

even during everyday activities. Monitoring of one’s progress through

methods such as journal writing could also be adopted. As Tom Glocer

said, “the best employees are the curious employees and those that want

lifelong learning. Stimulate that curiosity and desire for learning within your

employees, and you will open the doors for innovation.”

Asian culture emphasizes humility and conservatism. However, it may be

counter-productive to adopt such an attitude during discussions and

meetings. For instance, blindly agreeing to a bad idea as it was from a

superior may result in poor results impacting the team and the supervisor

himself. We should be courageous and speak out on contentious issues

and radical ideas if it could contribute to discussions. These are type of

discussions that could break the norm, introduce change and bring about

innovation. Employers should actively identify ‘fringe dwellers’; quieter

3
individuals and encourage them to speak up. These potential change-

makers should also be given permission and the resources to experiment

with their ideas and push boundaries. Empowering these ‘fringe dwellers’

can also embolden and influence their colleagues as well as superiors to

‘think out of the box’ when tackling problems at work. This can be done

through online sharing platforms or ‘focus breaks’ where ideas can be

communicated freely amongst one another. The work environment is

therefore crucial in moulding a positive learning culture in a company.

Besides empowerment, employers should attempt to create a ‘giving-back

environment’ where learning and productivity can be enhanced through

generosity and purposefulness. For example, as Adam Grant pointed out,

a culture of help-seeking should be fostered. Such a work environment

provides a veil of psychological safety where people are not seen as weak

if they ask or help. We should also recognise and reward the ‘givers’

(contributors or helpers) and failures. After all, mistakes are potential

lessons by themselves. Hence the organisation should encourage and not

chastise failures. Another method is to encourage reciprocity – whereby

we encourage employees to share their problems and offer their help

towards one another. This allows us to see who are the ‘givers’, give them

credit where it is due and weed out the ‘takers’.

4
Although an individual’s values and beliefs have frequently been

overlooked in the discussion of cultivating a positive corporate learning

culture, they can affect our ability to learn new skills and acquire new

knowledge. It is human nature to stick to comfort and avoid change.

Hence, we often require some help broadening our perspectives. Some

employees may be born with the ability to interact and understand

everyone they work with, but most of us are not. This most strongly

resonates with the teaching and learning of essential and highly sought

after soft-skills such as leadership development, interpersonal

communications and diversity inclusion. It is because the employees’

values are their own, and they most certainly would not change during

their short stint at the company. The objective is for both employees and

employers to find common ground and align their values with the values

desired in the workplace. Doing so allows us to manage and align our

expectations especially in the behavioural aspect. For example, if one

values ‘accountability’, he or she would be better able to manage work-

related tasks as well as deal with problems in a more meaningful way

while gaining the trust of his or her colleagues. As such, other shared

values desired in the workplace include: a sense of purpose,

thoroughness, high standards, positivity, and honesty.

5
3. Humility in Learning

Secondly, Humility is an important virtue that determines both individual's

and teachers’ attitude towards learning.

However, there’s another side of humility that might not always pay-off in

the workplace. The article in the Harvard Business Review “Competent

Jerks, Lovable Fools, and the Formation of Social Networks” highlights

the paradoxical relationship that the people that are most friendly and liked

in the workplace can be a ‘fool’ and incompetent. While those who are

brash, uncaring and unlikeable can be the best at what he/she does.

However, colleagues would rate the likeable one to be more competent

that the ‘jerks’ simply because of their attitude. This will distort people’s

performance and can result in overall lower standards in the company.

Furthermore, another article by the Harvard Business Review “Are

successful people nice?” concludes that in general, people who are low in

agreeableness make significantly less than those who are high in

agreeableness (up to USD 10,000 per year). The research is conducted

on managers from several multinational corporations. The reason is that

6
dominant, ‘alpha-male’ kind of attitudes are associated more closely with

a leader. Therefore, those who are low in agreeableness tend to be

promoted to a managerial level more often. This raises the question if it is

worthwhile to remain humble and nice. Should we then act more rudely

and less agreeable to get ahead? Especially in the areas of learning, when

other people seem always to be busy, and the only way to capture their

attention is to stick out from the crowd.

I believe the answer is that it depends. Although it is an unsatisfactory

answer, the world is nonetheless complex. There is no one-size-fits-all

solution. There are times when you should be as humble as you can, but

there are also times when being more aggressive can get you ahead. One

major factor is the environment and colleagues that around you. I have

been on an internship where my supervisor is rather meek, soft-spoken

and does not look intimidating in a traditional “bossy’ fashion. He is

nonetheless a strong person and will not let other overpower him. To

obtain favour from him, you have to be humble and meek. By showing him

respect, I found it easier to get my point across. However, the opposite is

also true when I interned at a completely different environment where

everyone is more outspoken, direct, and confrontational. I needed to be

7
more aggressive when presenting my ideas and not be afraid to criticise

or be criticised in public.

Different people have a different disposition to a particular type of

behaviours. Psychologist and researcher can categorise human

tendencies and way of thinking, such as the famous Myers Briggs type

indicators. Although it is a great tool to understand our personal

preference and tendencies, it can give the impression that individuals will

be ‘stuck’ into those groups for life. This is because we believe that we

are born with those traits. However, it is increasingly important for

individuals to stretch beyond what these type indicators suggest. In the

end, they are just a gauge of a person’s personality which can never be

100% comprehensive, and we are constantly changing as we gain

experiences. Therefore, we should aim to break out of our comfort zone,

and be willing to play the role of the more aggressive ‘jerk’ when needed,

and play the role of the meek, humble person when required. This way,

we will be able to learn and make the best of every situation.

CS Lewis summarises humility succinctly in his quote: “humility is not

thinking less of yourself but thinking of yourself less”. We do not need to

8
think that we have to feel inadequate and incompetent to be humble. By

being flexible and show eagerness and willingness to learn, other

colleagues and our bosses will, in turn, be more willing to share and impart

their experiences and knowledge to us.

4. Knowledge Transfer

Thirdly, it is essential to have a good culture of knowledge transfer.

Knowledge transfer is the process of capturing and sharing knowledge

between individuals and throughout an organisation. Knowledge can be

differentiated into 2 different categories: 1) explicit knowledges, which are

those that is easily documented and taught via writings and tacit

knowledge; 2) experiences, which are know-how and perspectives that

are unstructured and are challenging to be recorded. Knowledge transfer

is of great importance to organisations and has many benefits such as

improvement of work practices, saves time through avoiding needless re-

invention of the wheel and also to allow organisations as a whole to learn

from mistakes and avoid repeating the same mistakes.

Several factors can prevent knowledge transfer. According to Andreasian

& Andreasian, there are various barriers to knowledge transfer, namely

9
barriers in technology, content, routines and procedures, organisation and

on a personal level. 1) Technology barriers are the lack of resources or

platform to document and share knowledge. 2) Content barriers are the

difficulty in articulating knowledge in an easily understandable manner. 3)

Routine and procedure barriers are seemingly trivial everyday tasks which

are not documented, but is vital to the operation of the organisations. 4)

Organisation barriers represent poor learning cultures and poor upper

management attitudes’ towards learning. 5) Personal barriers represent

reasons from an employee’s perspectives such as lack of trust and fear of

being replaced.

One of the personal barriers was due to individuals’ definitions of sharing

knowledge as losing out or even losing their jobs. Based on Chaudhry, it

was further shown that Singapore institutions’ system of career

advancement and performance appraisal seemed to be creating a culture

of “kiasuism”, an afraid-to-lose mentality that is discouraging individuals

from sharing knowledge. Individuals want to remain as the only ones with

“know-how” and are afraid of losing that exclusiveness. Another personal

barrier to knowledge transfer was lack of trust. According to Asrar-ul-Haq

and Anwar, who investigated numerous publications on this matter, trust

was shown as one of the most critical factors in knowledge transfe. From

10
the teacher’s perspective, lack of trust of the receiver’s intentions could

foster their fear of losing out hence causing them not fully to reveal their

knowledge. From the receiver's perspective, lack of trust of the teacher’s

honesty and capabilities could cause them to continually doubt the

knowledge and deter them from using that knowledge.

There are various solutions on the organisational and individual level that

can help improve knowledge transfer. Organizations often institutionalise

knowledge sharing through peer evaluation assessment methods and to

reward knowledge sharing behaviour. The reward could be monetary

rewards or could even promotions. However, this may not be a good

policy by itself. Under a reward system, individuals may be more inclined

to share knowledge rather than sharing their full knowledge seemingly.

Furthermore, Hall also noted that it was difficult to correctly measure the

amount of individual knowledge sharing. Organizations could implement

other schemes such as mentoring as well. Having a formal mentor and

mentee relationship could encourage individuals to adopt a “take you

under my wing” approach and cultivate individuals’ altruistic nature. A

study on mentoring also showed that 60% of mentors were intrinsically

motivated to share knowledge and felt it was the right thing to do. They

also felt internal satisfaction from doing so. I believe that mentoring could

11
also help to foster relationships and trust between employees from the

get-go which could help future attempts of knowledge transfer as well.

Individuals can also take action to improve their learning. New employees

can attempt to build trust and establish a good reputation by having good

learning attitudes as mentioned earlier in the report. Certain senior

employees may also be reluctant to share their knowledge fully. In such

scenarios, it is essential to identify the underlying reasons and to address

them. In general, if the senior employee is naturally insecure, it may be

useful to put in extra effort to reassure and build trust with that particular

person. If the situation is not improving, it may be helpful to seek

knowledge from other more helpful senior employees instead.

5. Conclusion

In conclusion, through the above, we can see how important the 3

mentioned aspects of being receptive to a learning organisation can be.

As mentioned earlier, learning organisations are dynamic and ever-

changing and most of the time they vary from organisation to organisation.

12
By maintaining a humble attitude, colleagues and seniors in the

organisation will be more willing to impart knowledge and share

information with you. However one should be able to distinguish between

being humble and having low self-esteem which could lead to adverse

effects of colleagues taking advantage of you. On the other hand, when

one is not humble enough, he can exude a ‘cocky’ vibe which will not be

considered well by others which will lead to the shutting of knowledge

transfer towards that person.

Having the personal drive to participate in learning activities will be of

great value to individuals in an organisation as well. It would be pointless

to have a world-class learning organisation if the individual is not putting

himself out there to take advantage of the situation and maximise his

learning potential.

One should not fear the transference of knowledge. By putting our ulterior

motives as our primary concern, the organisation suffers. When we want

to safeguard our power or position, we might not let knowledge be

transferred from us out of fear of being replaced. If the organisation’s

benefit is the primary objective of everyone in the organisation, it will

13
operate like a well-oiled machine, and meritocracy will prevail in the

system. Anything else would be detrimental to both the organisation and

potentially the very position you are trying to protect in the long run.

In conclusion, as an individual within an organisation, one should always

be receptive to the learning culture, and a clear channel of feedback and

action should be open to promoting a deeply entrenched learning culture

that everybody within the organisation can benefit.

14
6. References

1. Lobo, T. C. (2014, November 12). Competent Jerks, Lovable Fools, and the Formation of
Social Networks. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2005/06/competent-jerks-lovable-fools-and-
the-formation-of-social-networks

2. Andreasian, G., & Andreasian, M. (2013). Knowledge Sharing and Knowledge Transfer
Barriers. A Case Study.

3. Chaudhry, A. B. (2005). Knowledge sharing practices in Asian institutions: a multi-cultural

perspective from Singapore. IFLA 2005.

4. Asrar-ul-Haq, M., & Anwar, S. (2016). A systematic review of knowledge management and
knowledge sharing: Trends, issues, and challenges. Cogent Business & Management, 3(1),
1127744.

5. Hall, H. (2006). Exploring knowledge sharing in distributed organisations. Report on Research

in Progress.

6. American Productivity and Quality Centre (2002). Rewards and recognition in knowledge
management. Retrieved on 20 February, 2006 from www.providersedge.com

15