Learning at work Organisational readines
In: improving Workplacc Lcarning
Editors; G. Castleton et al., pp. 3-19
Chapter
ISBr.\ 1 59451-566-9
O 2006 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
I
LnennING AT WoRK: OncIxISATIOI{AL READINESS
AI\D IXNTVTNUAL EXCECEMENT
Stephen
Billett
INJrnonucrIoN
This chapter addresscs the theme of this book by discussing factors that influence how
leaming can best proceed in workplaces" ln particular, the discussion focuses on the dual
considerations of horv workplaccs afford opporfunities for leaming, on the one hand, and how
individuals eiect to cngage in activities and with the support and guidance provided by the
workplace, on the other hand. Together, these dual bases for participation at work, and the
relations between them, are held as being central to understanding the kinds of learning that
lvorkplaces are able to provide to those r,vho work within them. Accordingly, the preparedness
or readincss of thc rvorkplace to afford and support opportunitics stands as a key determinant
of the quality of learning in workplaces. These affordances are salient to both structured
workplace learning arrangements, such as mentoring, as well as the contributions to learning
accessed through cveryday participation at rvork. Evidence and illustrative instances of
enterprise readiness and its consequences are provided through the findings of an
investigation of guided iearning in five different kinds of workplaces (Billett, McCann &
Scott 1998; Billett 2001a). It was found that guided learning strategies (Modelting, Coaching,
Questioning, Analogies and Diagrams') augmented individuals' learning tlirough
contributions that cannot be realised through everyday work activities alone. However, across
the five enterpriscs, the frcquency of guidcd leaming strategy use and pcrccptions of their
value were diverse. Factors such as variations in enterprise size, activities or goals did not
ftrlly explain these differences. Instead, from this sfudy the salience of the enterprises'
readiness to afford activities and guidance were identified as a key factor- Overall, learners
afforded the richest opportunities for learning and how engaged with what was being afforded
reported the strongest developrnent. This readiness goes beyond the preparedness for guided
iearning to proceed (c.g. the prcparation of mentors), although this was an important l-actor.
Readiness also includes factors associated with workplace nonns and practices that constitute
Stcphcn Billctt
Therefore' the
to parlicipate in ancl learn through work'
the invitational qualities lor workers
(Biere
n'orkp
degreebywhichworkplacesproviderichleamingoutcomesthrougheverydayactivitiesand
ancl support
rc-acliness lc'r allcrrcl opportunities
interventions will be shapecl, by its
I
\\-hos
-t tff;:lieless,
workplace tasks and
how individuals elect to engage in
opporlunities'
thcir work *ttit'itit' and intentional iearning
influences rvhat they learn through
participated fully'
opportunities to leam' not all individuals
Even when workplaces afford rich
u.'ork1
collaborativelyoreffortfully'Conversely,someworkersassisttheleamingofcoworkersby
doing so they
low levcls of readiness and support' In
making invitational o ,"nrkplu." r.vith
extendtheopporltrniticsandalfordancesofthatworkplace.Thesedualandinterdcpendent
(Bille
basesprovideawayofunderstandinghowlearningatworkproceedsandhavebeen
conceprualisetlas.co.participationatrvork'*thereciprocalprocessofaffordancesand
five enterprises
form the study of guided learning in
dilfer
understanding and perhaps improving
and interactions
factors that shape how opportunities
r,vorkplace. This inclurtes itlentifying
for rvorkplace
bases
workplaces ancl how, conespondingly'
proceeded differently across these
to
best proceed
setting' It conciuded that for learning
learning were manit'ested in each work
contil
intentional
interactions also
engagement (Biilett zobru). Findings
of coand illuminates bases to discuss aspects
(Billett, et al. 1998; tsillen 2001a) evaporates
learning in the
participation and its potential
for
'tiii
throughworkplaceactivitiesrequires(i)*appropriatesupportforthedevelopmentof
,r,. need to tailor workplace leaming
environment,
learning
workplace
invitational
are
inchitling the readiness of those rvho
parlicular enterprise needs,
learning
by both learncrs and,those guiding the
parriciparing; (iii) encouraging iarticipation
and(iv)theappropriateselectionun.ip,.pu*tionofthecoworkerstoguideandmonitor
curriculum
to
corvorkers' leaming'
PlRltctpATIoN
99i.
deter-r
1998r
ment(
oppoi
'oid-t
perso
those
oppol
I
99S
and r
\
inte n'
rvor-ti
n'ho
Oost,
attor
AT WoRK Ar\D LEARNING
same
appr(
to
Thereisnoseparaticlnbelweerrerrgaginginrvorkpracticeandlearning(Lave1993).
and observing and listening are consistently
Everyday activities, the workplace, otherv/o,t.,,
work (Billett
to learn their vocational activities through
reported as the sources for workers
learning or microgcnelic dcleloprncnt
1999a; Billett 2001a). Tllc rnomcnt-by-ilomciit
engage in' the
is shapecl by rhe activities inclividuals
(Rogoff 1gg0; lqssjiir"r occurs arwork
by the physical and
the indirect contributions provided
direct guidance tirey access and also
socialenvironment(Billett2001a).Dep.endingontheirfamiliaritytoindividuals'rr'orkplace
forms of
in the refinemenl or the generation of new
activities either act to reinforce, assist
what Piaget (1966) referred to
is
and moment-by-moment learning
knowledge. This ongoing
"and
reinforcing and refining our
assimilation, the ongoing process of
as accommoriation
in world' The quality of
thoughiu,riu"rion ln
krowledge as we engage in conscious
:1:]*"0
in rvork activities and
influencecl by how participation
workplace leaming.iili t" therelore be
the support providcd'
access thc guidance proccetls and
Consequentiy,l'o,"learningthrough'uo,kp,'o.."dsneedstobeunderstoodintermsof
theafforclancesthatsrrpportorinhibitindividrrals'engagementinwork.Theseaftbrdances
competence'
that beyond judgements of individuals'
are constifuted in workplaces. lt seems
gend'er
on hases including race (Hull 1997),
opportunities to participate are distrib.,t"d
p..
co\\
(
* orl
distr
learr
and
n'orl
fami
asp
attor
ri ill
acti(
$or
detc
pror
pre\
abo'
Lcarning at \\/ork
(Bierema 2001; Solomon, 1999; Somerville this volume), worker or employment stalus,
*'orkplace hierarchies (Darrah 1996;1997) workplace demarcations (Bernhardt 1999, Billett
i995; Danfcrrd 1998) personal relations, rvorkplace cliques ancl affiliations (Billett 1999b).
Whose participation is encouraged and lvhose is frustrated then becomes a central concem for
rvorkplace learning. Relations between supervisors and workers and among rvorkers
determine horv rvorkplace interactions proceed and the basis by rvhich they proceed (Danford
1998). For instance, at one
of the five workplaces, some workers interpreted the use by
mentors of questioning as a leanring strategy as inter-rogation to ascertain how little they knew
(Billett et al. 1998). Of course, workplaccs are contested environments. The availabilily of
opporfunities to participale may become the bases lbr contestation between newcomers' or
'old-timers'(i.ave & Wenger 1991), full or part-time workers lBernhardt 1999); teams with
different roles and standing in the workplace (Darrah 199; Huli 1991); between individuals'
personal and vocational goals (Dan'ah 1997) or among institutionalised arrangements such as
those representing workers, supervisors or management (Danford 1998). For instance,
contingent workers (i.e. those who are part-time and contractual) may struggie to be afforded
opportunities to pailicipate in the ways available to full-time employees (Bemhardt et. al.
1998). Part-time women workers ha"'e particular difficulty in maintaining their skills currency
and realising career aspirations (Tam 1997).
Moreover, limits on participation are not restricted to contingent workers. Support and
intentional opporrunities for learning are distributed on the basis of perceptions of workers'
rvorth and statns Fnterprise expendinrre on employees' further development privileges those
r.vho areyoung, highly educated, male andwhite (Rrunello & Medio 2001,Groot, Hartog &
Oosterbesk 1994). Lower stalus workers may bc dcnisd the affordances enjoyed by high
stafus rr,'orkers (Darrah 1996). Affiliations and demarcations rvithin rvorkplaces also distribute
affordances. Plant operators within an amalgamatcd union invitcd fcllow plant workers to
acccss training and practice while restricting opportunities to other kinds of lvorkers in the
samc union (Billett 1995). Also, tradeworkers rcfuscd to assist apprcntices unless they hold
appropriatc union affiliation. Personal affiliations in rvorkplaces also determine who is invited
to participate, what information is shared, and u'ith u,hom, how work is distributed and horv
coworkers' efforts are acknowledged (Billett, Barker & Hemon-Tinning 2004).It follows that
workplaces are not benign and the invitational qualities of the workplace are not evenly
distrihuted. The salient conceln is that more than participation in work tasks. opporhrnities for
learning are distributed asymmetrically. Tndividuals' ability to access and observe coworkers
and workplace processes assist in developing an understanding of the purpose and goals for
r.vork activities (Billett 2001a). Therefore, the degree by which individuals can access both
lamiliar and new tasks, and interact with coworkers, particularly rnore experienced workerS,,
as part of everyday work activities, will influence the richness of their learning. Moreover,
affordances including the openness, suppofi and preparedness ofmore experienced coworkers
r,vill also influencs the efficacy of intentional stratcgics such as mentoring, reflection on
action and coaching (Billett 2002).
However, and as foreshadowed, while acknowledging the contributions afforded by
workplaces, how individuals' decide to cngagc with workpiace activities and guidance also
dctcrmrnes the quahfy of what they lcarn. Leaming nclv knou,lcdgc (i.e. concepts about r,vork,
procedures to undertake tasks or attitudes towards work) and refining thc knolvledgc
previously learnt are mediated by thc individuals' existing knolr'ledge including their values
about rvhere and to which activities they should dircct thcir cncrgics. Therefore, engagement
Stephen
Bilictt
participation or unquestioned learning
in work activities is unlikely to result in unquestioning
by the workplace' Individuals are
(i.e. as in socialisation or.n.ulturation) of what is afforded
encounters' Tlierefore, it would be
active agents in what anci how they learn from these
(Engestrom & Middleton 1996)' In
mistaken to ignore the strength of human agency
mastery and appropriation'
consideration of this, wertsch (1993) distinguishes between
the ability to satisff public
rvith
Mastery is the superficial acceptance of knowledge coupled
commitment by the individual' The
performance requirements, yet which lacks the belief or
supermarket check out operators and
unenthusiastic utterance of standard salutations by
is the acceptance by the
airline cabin crews are illustrations of mastery- Appropriation
it part of their own repertoire of
individuals of what they are learning and their desire to make
l98l)' For instance' because of their distrust
understandings, procedures and beliefs (Leontiev
mastery of some employer
of mine site management, workers in coalmines may demonstrate
requestsforcertainprocedurestobeadoptedundernegotiatedagleements'while
by their union delegates' Participation
appropriating the ideas and -eans of working propose
Editors; G. Castleton et al., pp. 3-19
Chapter
ISBr.\ 1 59451-566-9
O 2006 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
I
LnennING AT WoRK: OncIxISATIOI{AL READINESS
AI\D IXNTVTNUAL EXCECEMENT
Stephen
Billett
INJrnonucrIoN
This chapter addresscs the theme of this book by discussing factors that influence how
leaming can best proceed in workplaces" ln particular, the discussion focuses on the dual
considerations of horv workplaccs afford opporfunities for leaming, on the one hand, and how
individuals eiect to cngage in activities and with the support and guidance provided by the
workplace, on the other hand. Together, these dual bases for participation at work, and the
relations between them, are held as being central to understanding the kinds of learning that
lvorkplaces are able to provide to those r,vho work within them. Accordingly, the preparedness
or readincss of thc rvorkplace to afford and support opportunitics stands as a key determinant
of the quality of learning in workplaces. These affordances are salient to both structured
workplace learning arrangements, such as mentoring, as well as the contributions to learning
accessed through cveryday participation at rvork. Evidence and illustrative instances of
enterprise readiness and its consequences are provided through the findings of an
investigation of guided iearning in five different kinds of workplaces (Billett, McCann &
Scott 1998; Billett 2001a). It was found that guided learning strategies (Modelting, Coaching,
Questioning, Analogies and Diagrams') augmented individuals' learning tlirough
contributions that cannot be realised through everyday work activities alone. However, across
the five enterpriscs, the frcquency of guidcd leaming strategy use and pcrccptions of their
value were diverse. Factors such as variations in enterprise size, activities or goals did not
ftrlly explain these differences. Instead, from this sfudy the salience of the enterprises'
readiness to afford activities and guidance were identified as a key factor- Overall, learners
afforded the richest opportunities for learning and how engaged with what was being afforded
reported the strongest developrnent. This readiness goes beyond the preparedness for guided
iearning to proceed (c.g. the prcparation of mentors), although this was an important l-actor.
Readiness also includes factors associated with workplace nonns and practices that constitute
Stcphcn Billctt
Therefore' the
to parlicipate in ancl learn through work'
the invitational qualities lor workers
(Biere
n'orkp
degreebywhichworkplacesproviderichleamingoutcomesthrougheverydayactivitiesand
ancl support
rc-acliness lc'r allcrrcl opportunities
interventions will be shapecl, by its
I
\\-hos
-t tff;:lieless,
workplace tasks and
how individuals elect to engage in
opporlunities'
thcir work *ttit'itit' and intentional iearning
influences rvhat they learn through
participated fully'
opportunities to leam' not all individuals
Even when workplaces afford rich
u.'ork1
collaborativelyoreffortfully'Conversely,someworkersassisttheleamingofcoworkersby
doing so they
low levcls of readiness and support' In
making invitational o ,"nrkplu." r.vith
extendtheopporltrniticsandalfordancesofthatworkplace.Thesedualandinterdcpendent
(Bille
basesprovideawayofunderstandinghowlearningatworkproceedsandhavebeen
conceprualisetlas.co.participationatrvork'*thereciprocalprocessofaffordancesand
five enterprises
form the study of guided learning in
dilfer
understanding and perhaps improving
and interactions
factors that shape how opportunities
r,vorkplace. This inclurtes itlentifying
for rvorkplace
bases
workplaces ancl how, conespondingly'
proceeded differently across these
to
best proceed
setting' It conciuded that for learning
learning were manit'ested in each work
contil
intentional
interactions also
engagement (Biilett zobru). Findings
of coand illuminates bases to discuss aspects
(Billett, et al. 1998; tsillen 2001a) evaporates
learning in the
participation and its potential
for
'tiii
throughworkplaceactivitiesrequires(i)*appropriatesupportforthedevelopmentof
,r,. need to tailor workplace leaming
environment,
learning
workplace
invitational
are
inchitling the readiness of those rvho
parlicular enterprise needs,
learning
by both learncrs and,those guiding the
parriciparing; (iii) encouraging iarticipation
and(iv)theappropriateselectionun.ip,.pu*tionofthecoworkerstoguideandmonitor
curriculum
to
corvorkers' leaming'
PlRltctpATIoN
99i.
deter-r
1998r
ment(
oppoi
'oid-t
perso
those
oppol
I
99S
and r
\
inte n'
rvor-ti
n'ho
Oost,
attor
AT WoRK Ar\D LEARNING
same
appr(
to
Thereisnoseparaticlnbelweerrerrgaginginrvorkpracticeandlearning(Lave1993).
and observing and listening are consistently
Everyday activities, the workplace, otherv/o,t.,,
work (Billett
to learn their vocational activities through
reported as the sources for workers
learning or microgcnelic dcleloprncnt
1999a; Billett 2001a). Tllc rnomcnt-by-ilomciit
engage in' the
is shapecl by rhe activities inclividuals
(Rogoff 1gg0; lqssjiir"r occurs arwork
by the physical and
the indirect contributions provided
direct guidance tirey access and also
socialenvironment(Billett2001a).Dep.endingontheirfamiliaritytoindividuals'rr'orkplace
forms of
in the refinemenl or the generation of new
activities either act to reinforce, assist
what Piaget (1966) referred to
is
and moment-by-moment learning
knowledge. This ongoing
"and
reinforcing and refining our
assimilation, the ongoing process of
as accommoriation
in world' The quality of
thoughiu,riu"rion ln
krowledge as we engage in conscious
:1:]*"0
in rvork activities and
influencecl by how participation
workplace leaming.iili t" therelore be
the support providcd'
access thc guidance proccetls and
Consequentiy,l'o,"learningthrough'uo,kp,'o.."dsneedstobeunderstoodintermsof
theafforclancesthatsrrpportorinhibitindividrrals'engagementinwork.Theseaftbrdances
competence'
that beyond judgements of individuals'
are constifuted in workplaces. lt seems
gend'er
on hases including race (Hull 1997),
opportunities to participate are distrib.,t"d
p..
co\\
(
* orl
distr
learr
and
n'orl
fami
asp
attor
ri ill
acti(
$or
detc
pror
pre\
abo'
Lcarning at \\/ork
(Bierema 2001; Solomon, 1999; Somerville this volume), worker or employment stalus,
*'orkplace hierarchies (Darrah 1996;1997) workplace demarcations (Bernhardt 1999, Billett
i995; Danfcrrd 1998) personal relations, rvorkplace cliques ancl affiliations (Billett 1999b).
Whose participation is encouraged and lvhose is frustrated then becomes a central concem for
rvorkplace learning. Relations between supervisors and workers and among rvorkers
determine horv rvorkplace interactions proceed and the basis by rvhich they proceed (Danford
1998). For instance, at one
of the five workplaces, some workers interpreted the use by
mentors of questioning as a leanring strategy as inter-rogation to ascertain how little they knew
(Billett et al. 1998). Of course, workplaccs are contested environments. The availabilily of
opporfunities to participale may become the bases lbr contestation between newcomers' or
'old-timers'(i.ave & Wenger 1991), full or part-time workers lBernhardt 1999); teams with
different roles and standing in the workplace (Darrah 199; Huli 1991); between individuals'
personal and vocational goals (Dan'ah 1997) or among institutionalised arrangements such as
those representing workers, supervisors or management (Danford 1998). For instance,
contingent workers (i.e. those who are part-time and contractual) may struggie to be afforded
opportunities to pailicipate in the ways available to full-time employees (Bemhardt et. al.
1998). Part-time women workers ha"'e particular difficulty in maintaining their skills currency
and realising career aspirations (Tam 1997).
Moreover, limits on participation are not restricted to contingent workers. Support and
intentional opporrunities for learning are distributed on the basis of perceptions of workers'
rvorth and statns Fnterprise expendinrre on employees' further development privileges those
r.vho areyoung, highly educated, male andwhite (Rrunello & Medio 2001,Groot, Hartog &
Oosterbesk 1994). Lower stalus workers may bc dcnisd the affordances enjoyed by high
stafus rr,'orkers (Darrah 1996). Affiliations and demarcations rvithin rvorkplaces also distribute
affordances. Plant operators within an amalgamatcd union invitcd fcllow plant workers to
acccss training and practice while restricting opportunities to other kinds of lvorkers in the
samc union (Billett 1995). Also, tradeworkers rcfuscd to assist apprcntices unless they hold
appropriatc union affiliation. Personal affiliations in rvorkplaces also determine who is invited
to participate, what information is shared, and u'ith u,hom, how work is distributed and horv
coworkers' efforts are acknowledged (Billett, Barker & Hemon-Tinning 2004).It follows that
workplaces are not benign and the invitational qualities of the workplace are not evenly
distrihuted. The salient conceln is that more than participation in work tasks. opporhrnities for
learning are distributed asymmetrically. Tndividuals' ability to access and observe coworkers
and workplace processes assist in developing an understanding of the purpose and goals for
r.vork activities (Billett 2001a). Therefore, the degree by which individuals can access both
lamiliar and new tasks, and interact with coworkers, particularly rnore experienced workerS,,
as part of everyday work activities, will influence the richness of their learning. Moreover,
affordances including the openness, suppofi and preparedness ofmore experienced coworkers
r,vill also influencs the efficacy of intentional stratcgics such as mentoring, reflection on
action and coaching (Billett 2002).
However, and as foreshadowed, while acknowledging the contributions afforded by
workplaces, how individuals' decide to cngagc with workpiace activities and guidance also
dctcrmrnes the quahfy of what they lcarn. Leaming nclv knou,lcdgc (i.e. concepts about r,vork,
procedures to undertake tasks or attitudes towards work) and refining thc knolvledgc
previously learnt are mediated by thc individuals' existing knolr'ledge including their values
about rvhere and to which activities they should dircct thcir cncrgics. Therefore, engagement
Stephen
Bilictt
participation or unquestioned learning
in work activities is unlikely to result in unquestioning
by the workplace' Individuals are
(i.e. as in socialisation or.n.ulturation) of what is afforded
encounters' Tlierefore, it would be
active agents in what anci how they learn from these
(Engestrom & Middleton 1996)' In
mistaken to ignore the strength of human agency
mastery and appropriation'
consideration of this, wertsch (1993) distinguishes between
the ability to satisff public
rvith
Mastery is the superficial acceptance of knowledge coupled
commitment by the individual' The
performance requirements, yet which lacks the belief or
supermarket check out operators and
unenthusiastic utterance of standard salutations by
is the acceptance by the
airline cabin crews are illustrations of mastery- Appropriation
it part of their own repertoire of
individuals of what they are learning and their desire to make
l98l)' For instance' because of their distrust
understandings, procedures and beliefs (Leontiev
mastery of some employer
of mine site management, workers in coalmines may demonstrate
requestsforcertainprocedurestobeadoptedundernegotiatedagleements'while
by their union delegates' Participation
appropriating the ideas and -eans of working propose