マネジメントにおけるメタ学習：IT 企業のマネジャーの長期に渡る学習の分析

Translated Abstract

Proficiency in higher-order learning, i.e., meta learning, is required in situations where discontinuous environmental changes is the norm. This study explores factors affecting meta learning in managers from this perspective, using an insight problem-solving model in cognitive science. A seven-year field study of a general manager in an IT service company revealed that, as suggested by the model of insight problem-solving, two factors promote meta learning: increased fluctuation (increased variety of trials) and better vision (increased appropriateness of evaluation), each accompanied with emergent goal setting through improvisational interaction with others and artefacts. By grasping meta learning in this way, the possibility was identified of viewing higher-order expertise in the workplace, which has been viewed as sudden, discontinuous changes, as continuous ones.

References

• 安藤 史江 (2019). コア・テキスト組織学習　ライブラリ経営学コア・テキスト 5　新世社
•  Argyris,  C., &  Schön , D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Addison-Wesley.
•  Barley , S. R., &  Kunda,  G. (2001). Bringing work back in. Organization Science, 12 (1), 76–95. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.12.1.76.10122
•  Boden , M. A. (2004). The creative mind: Myths and mechanisms (2nd ed.). Routledge.
•  Bryman,  A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
•  Dunbar,  K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. J. Sternberg, & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 365–395). The MIT Press.
• Fayor, H. (1949). General and industrial management. Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons. (ファイヨール, H.　山本 安次郎 (訳) (1985). 産業ならびに一般の管理　ダイヤモンド社)
•  Hatano,  G., &  Inagaki,  K. (2000). Domain-specific constraints of conceptual development. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 24 (3), 267–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/01650250050118240
•  Hebb , D. O. (2002). The organization of behavior: A neuropsychological theory. Psychology Press. (Original work published 1949, Wiley). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410612403
• 開 一夫・鈴木 宏昭 (1998). 表象変化の動的緩和理論：洞察メカニズムの解明に向けて　認知科学, 5 (2), 69–79. https://doi.org/10.11225/jcss.5.2_69
•  Hislop,  D.,  Bosley,  S.,  Coombs , C. R., &  Holland,  J. (2014). The process of individual unlearning: A neglected topic in an under-researched field. Management Learning, 45 (5), 540–560. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507613486423
• 軽部 大 (2017). 関与と越境：日本企業再生の論理　有斐閣
•  Korica,  M.,  Nicolini,  D., &  Johnson,  B. (2017). In search of ‘managerial work’: Past, present and future of an analytical category. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19 (2), 151–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12090
• Kotter, J. P. (1982). The general managers. Free Press. (コッター, J. P.　金井 壽宏・加護野 忠男・谷 光太郎・宇田川 富秋 (訳) (2009). J・P・コッタービジネス・リーダー論　ダイヤモンド社)
•  Levitt,  B., &  March , J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14 (1), 319–338. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.14.080188.001535
•  Mainemelis,  C. (2010). Stealing fire: Creative deviance in the evolution of new ideas. Academy of Management Review, 35 (4), 558–578. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.35.4.zok558
•  March , J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2 (1), 71–87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
•  Meyer , A. D. (1982). Adapting to environmental jolts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27 (4), 515–537. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392528
•  Miner , A. S.,  Bassof,  P., &  Moorman,  C. (2001). Organizational improvisation and learning: A field study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46 (2), 304–337. https://doi.org/10.2307/2667089
• Mintzberg, H. (2009). Managing. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. (ミンツバーグ, H.　池村 千秋 (訳) (2011). マネジャーの実像：「管理職」はなぜ仕事に追われているのか　日経 BP 社)
• 三輪 和久・寺井 仁 (2003). 洞察問題解決の性質：認知心理学から見たチャンス発見　人工知能学会論文誌, 18 (3), 275–282. https://doi.org/10.11517/jjsai.18.3_275
•  Patrick,  J., &  Ahmed,  A. (2014). Facilitating representation change in insight problems through training. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40 (2), 532–543. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034304
• Sarasvathy, S. D. (2022). Effectuation: Elements of entrepreneurial expertise (2nd ed.). Edward Elgar Publishing. (サラスバシー, S. D.　加護野 忠男 (監訳) 高瀬 進・吉田 満梨 (訳) (2015). エフェクチュエーション：市場創造の実効理論　碩学舎)
•  Siggelkow,  N. (2007). Persuasion with case studies. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (1), 20–24. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24160882
• 鈴木 宏昭 (2004). 創造的問題解決における多様性と評価：洞察研究からの知見　人工知能学会論文誌, 19 (2), 145–153. https://doi.org/10.1527/tjsai.19.145
• 鈴木 宏昭・宮崎 美智子・開 一夫 (2003). 制約論から見た洞察問題解決における個人差　心理学研究, 74 (4), 336–345. https://doi.org/10.4992/jjpsy.74.336
• 高田 直樹 (2022). 逸脱と革新 組織学会(編) 組織論レビューIII：組織の中の個人と集団 (pp. 149–171)　白桃書房
• 武石 彰・青島 矢一・軽部 大 (2012). イノベーションの理由：資源動員の創造的正当化　有斐閣
•  Tengblad,  S. (2002). Time and space in managerial work. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 18 (4), 543–565. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0956-5221(01)00031-8
•  Tosey,  P.,  Visser,  M., &  Saunders , M. N. (2012). The origins and conceptualizations of ‘triple-loop’learning: A critical review. Management Learning, 43 (3), 291–307. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507611426239
•  Wiltbank,  R.,  Dew,  N.,  Read,  S., &  Sarasvathy , S. D. (2006). What to do next? The case for non-predictive strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 27 (10), 981–998. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.555
• 横山 拓 (2023). 変化するビジネス環境におけるゴールの創発的構成　日本認知科学会第 40 回大会発表論文集, 843–846.
• 横山 拓・鈴木 宏昭 (2018). 変化する環境における動的なマネジメント　電子情報通信学会論文誌 D, 101 (2), 294–305. https://doi.org/10.14923/transinfj.2017HAP0006
• 横山 拓・鈴木 宏昭・寺尾 敦 (2023). 認知的資源と状況-知覚的資源の相互作用過程としてのメタ学習　認知科学, 30 (3), 255–268. https://doi.org/10.11225/cs.2023.026