Talk:Organizational learning/Archives/2015

Anyone willing to take a stab at improving this article?
A significantly improved and referenced discussion of organizational learning, individual learning, and organizational progress is needed for this article. It is a high priority topic in the fields of I/O psychology, management, even ergonomics. I would contribute more if I had the time. This topic is discussed in many course textbooks.

Due to the "style" of how this article is written, I believe a complete re-work with a blank template would be the best option. ~ Opinionated Squirrel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.34.147.6 (talk) 05:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

This article has potential, but needs both cleanup, better in-line references, and accessible to new readers. Anyone willing to take a stab at improving this article? Harvey the rabbit (talk) 01:32, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * based on the comment at an edit just now: "Remove [a particular external link]... we're closing the journal" it seems this article shows major signs of OWNership, and needs some outside attention.    DGG ( talk ) 04:07, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, a partner and I are taking this page on for a class project in Organizational Communication. Any suggestions for an approach to this article? Firstly, is rewriting from scratch the consensus for the article or should we use some of the existing content with a new structure? Open to any ideas and proposed formats or sources! Thanks. Finding Zeno (talk) 22:47, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Models
The models should specify results of studies, not just explain what the study was about. Overall they need better wording/clearer explanations, and they should be uniform in length. Here are some notes for revising the models mentioned. Would cutting down the models to maybe the five most important or relevant ones be good?

i.	Argyris & Schon model: need clearer explanation ii. Kim model: what is the single comprehensive model? Need to identify the main takeaway from the model iii. Nonaka & Takeuchi model: better wording, but clear explanation iv. Bontis, Crossan & Hulland model: define stocks v.	Flood model: specify results vi. Watson model: need to simplify vii. Imants model: better wording, but clear explanation viii. Common model: need to simplify/identify main takeaway ix. Bontis & Serenko model: clearer wording x.	Van Niekerk & Von Solms model: results? xi. Busche model: more concise

Apasilia (talk) 01:44, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I wrote a question. that says how to learn french. but they gave me how to learn spanish:<


 * Not sure as to your question; that said, this article could be improved by in-line references. Harvey the rabbit (talk) 21:32, 9 November 2008 (UTC)