We are developing a model herein Tartu for what I call a “learning institution”. I know. The phrase is not new. It has been around for a long time. But we are using the term in a special sense. We want to study how well firms learn from what their workers do.
Given how low worker engagement levels are in general (studies show less than 40%), my best guess is that workers are not motivated to learn from what they do. For that reason, our proverbial learning institution has a challenge right away — if workers are not learning from what they do, how can they share learning with management?
Some firms meet the above challenge. They created high levels of engagement and sharing as part of their culture. But it appears that this is not the norm. Here is a thought about why that might be.
To what extent are workers provided the tools to do “deep work”? I make a distinction here between shallow work — work that can be done by following rules or taken over from a training session — and deep work hat
Cognitively demanding activities that leverage our training to generate rare and valuable results, and that push our abilities to continually improve.
Stowe Boyd points out for GigaOm that our “collaborative work tools” do not promote deep work.