Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Intellectual ...

Annukka Jyrämä et al.
development work. Most respondents agreed with <strong>the</strong> statement “<strong>the</strong>re are people within my
workplace that are not at all excited <strong>of</strong> development work”. Thus, it may well be that <strong>the</strong> general
attitude towards development work is not good in <strong>the</strong> city organization. Moreover, it was perceived
that <strong>the</strong> results <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> development work were not applied to everyday work activities. This might be
due <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> development work is mainly organized as separate projects within <strong>the</strong> city that
may have become ra<strong>the</strong>r separate from everyday activities and practices. For example, it was noted
that “once a development project ended, a new one starts with no time nor resources allocated for
implementation and disseminating <strong>the</strong> knowledge and learning created to <strong>the</strong> everyday practices”.
However, it needs to be pointed out that many employees also had positive experiences on
development project work.
I have a good atmosphere at my work place where it is easy to
exchange spontaneously opinions on our work with so-workers
My ideas on developing our work are usually well received and
encouraged by my co workers
I have a good atmosphere at my work place where is is easy to exchange
spontaneously ideas and experiences on work with my superiors
My ideas on developing our work are usually well received and
encouraged by my superiors
The working culture in my work place allows also failures when trying
new activities
My tasks at work as such that I cannot make any mistakes
I have enough time for education and learning in my work
I have enough time for creating new ideas and for innovating
in my work
Agree Not agree or
disagree
0 20 40 60 80 100
%
Have not
thought about
it
Disagree
Figure 1: Work place atmosphere
Many respondents shared <strong>the</strong> view that development projects rarely pass to everyday activities. This
viewpoint might also relate to <strong>the</strong> fact that even though co-workers reacted positively to new ideas,
managers’ attitudes were <strong>of</strong>ten less encouraging, yet <strong>the</strong>ir role is vital in implementing new ideas and
development projects knowledge. The managers generally held more positive views on <strong>the</strong> openness
and on <strong>the</strong> atmosphere <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> workplace than employees. This result might affect <strong>the</strong> practical
activities in development work: if managers have a predominantly positive attitude towards
development projects, <strong>the</strong>y might not realize <strong>the</strong> more negative views held by many employees and,
thus, may not see any need for change in development work practices (Table 3).
Moreover, <strong>the</strong> statement “in my workplace, we actively use o<strong>the</strong>r similar organization’s experience on
developing practices” was perceived as <strong>the</strong> least valid. Thus, learning from peer organizations is seen
as ra<strong>the</strong>r non-existing activity, which might point out that a barrier has been created within <strong>the</strong> joint
dominant logic; whose views are listened to in an organization. This impedes learning from outside
one’s own organization, or from o<strong>the</strong>r communities within <strong>the</strong> city (see Figures 1. and 2.).
The results on development work also show how <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> communities and <strong>the</strong>ir dominant logic can
act as a barrier to learning and knowledge creation. The results point out that <strong>the</strong>re exists established
ways to assess, for example, who is listened to and how <strong>the</strong> communities might create barriers for
cross -community or peer learning.
The results also seem to point out that within <strong>the</strong> city, <strong>the</strong>re exist some common general
characteristics, but, on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, distinct differences in culture and dominant logic among
296