[ 36 ] Journal of European Industrial Training 23/ 1 [ 1999] 36–43 © MCB University Press [ ISSN 0309-0590] Keywords Company performance, Management, Organizational learning, Small firms, Surveys, United Kingdom Abstract It is increasingly the case that within the academic literature, firms seeking to survive in rapidly changing and/ or highly competi- tive markets are being advised to consider adopting an organisa- tional learning philosophy as a strategy through which to develop new approaches to delivering greater customer value. This view is apparently shared by the UK Government, which has incorpo- rated the concept of Lifelong Learning into its small firms support policy. This is despite the fact that to date in the academic literature, there is only limited anecdotal evidence of the positive contribution that organisational learning can make to enhancing the performance of firms. Surveys of small firm advisors and small manufacturing firms were under- taken. These surveys revealed significant differences of opinion between advisors and owner/ man- agers over the need to utilise organisational learning to upgrade management practices. This survey also revealed that small firm advisors perceive most of their client firms as exhibiting a lower-order learning style. The implications of these findings are discussed. A pilot scheme to embed a learning philosophy into SME sector is described and proposals presented on the needs for further research. Received July 1998 Revised October 1998 Small firm organisational learning: comparing the perceptions of need and style among UK support service advisors and small firm managers Ian Chaston Plymouth Business School, University of Plymouth, UK Beryl Badger Plymouth Business School, University of Plymouth, UK Eugene Sadler-Smith Plymouth Business School, University of Plymouth, UK Introduction With firms striving to find new ways of ensur- ing their survival in the face of turbulent and/or highly competitive market conditions, de Geus (1988) has suggested that in situa- tions where products and processes can be rapidly copied, the only real source of com- petitive advantage is to stimulate learning by employees. This then permits these individu- als to identify new ways of achieving organi- sational differentiation. Similar views have been expressed by Slater and Narver (1995) who define competitive advantage in terms of the skills learned by employees which are difficult to imitate and that permit the organ- isation to offer superior value to customers. Woodruff (1997) presented the concept of learning about the marketplace as an activity central to offering greater customer-based value. Earlier Bell (1973) had proposed that the information and knowledge acquired by employees is now more important than the more traditional orientation of assuming the technology contained within the firm’s fixed capital assets can provide the basis for deliv- ering products superior to competition. In proposing employee initiated strategic responses to changing market conditions, most authors have drawn upon the increas- ingly popular area of academic theory known as “organisational learning”. The literature on this topic has grown very rapidly over the last five years, attracting interest from the six academic perspectives of psychology/organi- sational development, management science, strategic management, production manage- ment, sociology and cultural anthropology (Easterby-Smith, 1997). In his review of the theoretical roots from which the subject has evolved, this author suggests the contribu- tions that these various perspectives have provided are as follows: • Psychology/ OD which focuses on the issues of the hierarchical nature of learning, adjusting individual learning to suit organ- isational learning needs and recognition of the importance of cognitive maps underly- ing the thinking process. • Management science where the primary concern is with the creation, utilisation and dissemination of information. • Strategic management which is concerned with how the principles of learning can lead to competitive advantage and how the capability of firms to learn can permit new responses to changing market circumstances. • Production management where the pri- mary concern is with the use of productiv- ity as a measure of learning and the impact of organisational design on the learning process. • Sociology where the interest is directed towards the broader issues of the nature of learning, the processes which underpin it and how organisational realities such as power, politics and conflict impact on process. • Cultural anthropology where the primary concern is the importance of values and beliefs, especially as these relate to the cultural differences which exist in different societies and the impact these may have on the learning process. Organisational learning and management functions Given the increasing academic interest in organisational learning, perhaps not unsur- prisingly, numerous definitions have been presented in the literature. Schein (1996) has concluded that as a result, there is consider- able confusion about what is really meant by the term. Possibly one of the reasons to explain this situation is the problem about the degree to which various authors have endeavoured to present inclusive definitions covering all of the issues surrounding knowl- edge acquisition, organisational structures and systems for processing new information. A not unusual outcome of the desire of some authors to present a totally inclusive defini- tion is that one encounters statements which treat the subject with almost a religious, inspirational fervour. Such a perspective is, for example, present in the definition offered by Senge (1990), who defines the learning enterprise as “organisations where people continually strive to expand their capacity to create the results they truly desire, where