Document Type : Original Article


1 Department of Information Technology Management, Management Faculty, Islamic Azad University Sout of Branch, Tehran, Iran.

2 Department of Information Technology Management, Management Faculty, Islamic Azad University South of Branch, Tehran, Iran.


Purpose: This article seeks to provide a flexible structure for the learning organization tailored to the conditions of Iranian schools. Using this structure, schools, as an educational organization, facilitate innovation and effectiveness in the face of an ever-changing environment. Also, teaching human values and principles of education help students become people who live in a healthy and civilized way in a world rich in future technologies.
Methodology: This paper uses multi-criteria decision-making methods and fuzzy techniques such as fuzzy Delphi and DEMATEL and ANP techniques to provide an executive and operational framework in school learning organizations.
Findings: The results show the structures of the learning organization, the skills of the learning organization, and the technologies of the learning organization as the main criteria of the learning organization in Iranian schools, respectively. Also, reinforcing leadership sub-criteria, knowledge management technology, personal abilities, and subjective models with the nature of cause play a crucial role in forming learning organizations in schools.
Originality/Value: Researchers have identified the way for Iran to achieve the economic goals envisaged in the Iran Vision 2025 document, the transformation of Iranian organizations into learning organizations. However, the study of databases such as Irandak, scientific information of Jihad Daneshgahi, and the citation database of sciences of the Islamic world shows that limited efforts have been made in this direction, especially in schools in Iran. Without focusing on why and what the learning organization is, this article, using the dimensions and criteria introduced for the learning organization, points out how to provide a flexible structure for the learning organization appropriate to the conditions of Iranian schools.


Main Subjects

  • Alzahrani, L., & Seth, K. P. (2021). Factors influencing students’ satisfaction with continuous use of learning management systems during the COVID-19 pandemic: an empirical study. Education and information technologies, 26, 6787–6805.
  • Aljaber, A. (2018). E-learning policy in Saudi Arabia: challenges and successes. Research in comparative and international education, 13(1), 176-194.‏
  • Bui, H. T. (2020). From the fifth discipline to the new revolution: what we have learnt from Senge’s ideas over the last three decades. The learning organization, 27(6), 495-504.‏
  • Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: the art & practice of the learning organization. Doubleday Currency.
  • Senge, P. M., Cambron-McCabe, N., Lucas, T., Smith, B., Dutton, J., & Kleiner, A. (2000). Schools that learn–a fifth discipline fieldbook for educators, parents, and everyone who cares about education. Currency Doubleday.‏
  • Fadaei, N., Khorshidi, A., Fathi, K., & Abbasi Servak, L. (2019). Modeling the learning organization for elementary education in Tehran, Iran. Educational and scholastic studies, 8(1), 99-126. (In Persian).‏
  • Marquardt, M. J. (2011). Building the learning organization: achieving strategic advantage through a commitment to learning. Nicholas Brealey.
  • Garvin, D. A. (1993). Building a learning organization. Harvard business review, 71(4), 78-91.
  • Babaeinesami, A., & Ghasemi, P. (2021). Ranking of hospitals: a new approach comparing organizational learning criteria. International journal of healthcare management, 14(4), 1031-1039.‏
  • Senge, P. M. (1991). The fifth discipline, the art and practice of the learning organization. Performance + instruction, 30(5), 37–37.
  • Örtenblad, A. R. (2020). Background and introduction. In The oxford handbook of the learning organization (pp. 3-18). Oxford University Press.
  • Örtenblad, A. (Ed.). (2013). Handbook of research on the learning organization: adaptation and context. Edward Elgar Publishing.‏
  • Burgoyne, J., Pedler, M., & Boydell, T. (1991). The learning company: a strategy for sustainable development. England: McGraw-Hill.‏
  • Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J. (1993). Sculpting the learning organization: lessons in the art and science of systemic change. Jossey-Bass Inc.
  • Garratt, B. (2000). The learning organization: developing democracy at work. London: HarperCollinsBusiness.‏
  • Hansen, J. Ø., Jensen, A., & Nguyen, N. (2020). The responsible learning organization: can Senge (1990) teach organizations how to become responsible innovators?. The learning organization, 27(1), 65-74.
  • Shariatmadari, M. (2016). System approch in management & planning with emphasis on the education system. Kohsar Publishing. (In Persian).
  • Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: a theory of action perspective. Addison-Wesley.
  • Fiol, C. M., & Lyles, M. A. (1985). Organizational learning. Academy of management review, 10(4), 803-813.‏
  • Dodgson, M. (1993). Organizational learning: a review of some literatures. Organization studies, 14(3), 375-394.‏
  • Kumar, M., Paul, J., Misra, M., & Romanello, R. (2021). The creation and development of learning organizations: a review. Journal of knowledge management, 25(10), 2540-2566.‏
  • Shaked, H., & Schechter, C. (2019). Systems thinking for principals of learning-focused schools. Journal of school administration research and development, 4(1), 18-23.‏
  • Senge, P. M. (2003). The leaders new work: building learning organizations. Routledge.
  • Forrester, J. W. (1994). System dynamics, systems thinking, and soft OR. System dynamics review, 10(2‐3), 245-256.‏
  • Sterman, J. (2000). Business dynamics : systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. Irwin/McGraw-Hill.
  • Flood, R. L. (1998). “Fifth discipline”: review and discussion. Systemic practice and action research, 11, 259-273.‏
  • Craik, K. J. W. (1967). The nature of explanation (Vol. 445). Cambridge University Press.
  • Rupčić, N. (2020). The fifth discipline: looking ahead. The learning organization, 27(6), 555-566.‏
  • Schwaninger, M. (2000). Managing complexity—the path toward intelligent organizations. Systemic practice and action research, 13, 207-241.‏
  • Babaeinesami, A., & Ghasemi, P. (2018). The relationship between emotional intelligence and organisational learning. International journal of knowledge and learning, 12(2), 99-118.‏
  • Garvin, D. A., Edmondson, A. C., & Gino, F. (2008). Is yours a learning organization?. Harvard business review, 86(3), 109.‏
  • Erkutlu, H., & Chafra, J. (2015). The mediating roles of psychological safety and employee voice on the relationship between conflict management styles and organizational identification. American journal of business, 30(1), 72–91.
  • Mubarak, R. Z., Awang, M., Khan, N. R., & Mubarak, S. (2020). Validating learning organization in the medical profession: a preliminary analysis. International journal of experiential learning & case studies, 5(1), 031-040.‏
  • Marquardt, M. J. (2002). Building the learning organization: mastering the 5 elements for corporate learning. Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
  • ‏ Loon Hoe, S., & McShane, S. (2010). Structural and informal knowledge acquisition and dissemination in organizational learning: an exploratory analysis. The learning organization, 17(4), 364-386.‏
  • Quinn, J. B. (1992). Intelligent enterprise: a knowledge and service based paradigm for Industr. Simon and Schuster.
  • Park, S., & Kim, E. J. (2018). Fostering organizational learning through leadership and knowledge sharing. Journal of knowledge management, 22(6), 1408-1423.‏
  • Morton, M. S. S. (Ed.). (1991). The corporation of the 1990s: Information technology and organizational transformation (Vol. 9). Oxford University Press on Demand.‏
  • Farzaneh, M., Moradi, K., & Mollaei, R. (2016). The effect of ethical leadership on development of learning organization in urban high schools. New educational approaches, 11(2), 45–58. (In Persian).
  • Ghanbari, S., & Eskandari, A. (2014). Relationships of simple and synthetic of learning organization characteristics with organizational effectiveness in board of trustees schools and state-run schools. Journal of educational scinces, 21(2), 207–230. (In Persian).
  • Sina, H., & Mazini, M. (2013). Attainability of the components of learning organization from the point of view of the secondary school principals in the first district of education organization in Shiraz. Journal of new approaches in educational administration, 4(14/2014), 155-168.‏ (In Persian).
  • Ehsani Ghods, H., & Seyed Abas Zadeh, M. (2012). On the relationship between learning organization components and high school teachers’ creativity and innovation. Journal of new approaches in educational administration, 3(12), 1-20. (In Persian).
  • Salehi, M., GHeltash, A., & Jabari Zahirabadi, A. (2013). On the relationship between learning organization and organizational intelligence in education. Journal of new approaches in educational administration, 3(3), 89-104. (In Persian).
  • Aminbeidokhti, A., & Maisami, S. (2011). A survey of the requirements for creating learning organization in Semnan city educational system. Journal of educational scinces, 18(1), 207-226. (In Persian).
  • Jamalzadeh, M., Rahgozar, H., & Panahi, I. (2011). A comparative study of public and private high schools in district three of shiraz in terms of the characteristics of learning organizations. Journal of new approaches in educational administration, 2(8), 115–131. (In Persian).
  • Salimi, G., & Shahmandi, E. (2008). Relationship of transformational and transactional leadership style with the application of the learning organization. Journal of management and planning in educational systems, 1(1), 21-34. (In Persian).
  • Dehdasht, G., Mohamad Zin, R., Ferwati, M. S., Mohammed Abdullahi, M. A., Keyvanfar, A., & McCaffer, R. (2017). DEMATEL-ANP risk assessment in oil and gas construction projects. Sustainability, 9(8), 1420.‏
  • Bamdad Soofi, J., Saeidpour, S., & Mohammadnezhad Chari, F. (2020). Providing a model for sourcing in manufacturing companies by combining DEMATEL, ANP, and PROMETHEE methods. Journal of decisions and operations research, 5(3), 312-329. (In Persian). DOI: 22105/dmor.2020.229586.1148
  • Zarrinpoor, N., Amiri, M., & Nematolahi, M. H. (2021). The risk evaluation of green buildings using a hybrid procedure of DEMATEL and analytic network process. Journal of decisions and operations research, 6(1), 115-131. (In Persian). DOI: 22105/dmor.2021.247961.1213
  • Oranga, H. M., & Nordberg, E. (1993). The Delphi panel method for generating health information. Health policy and planning, 8(4), 405-412.‏
  • Wechsler, W. (1978). Delphi-methode: gestaltung und Potential für betriebliche Prognoseprozesse. München: Florentz.‏
  • Rahmani, A., Vazirinejad, R., Ahmadineja, H., & Rezaian, M. (2020). Methodological principles and applications of the Delphi method: a narrative review. Journal of Rafsanjan University of medical sciences, 19(5), 515-538. (In Persian).
  • Su, C. H., Tzeng, H. L., & Tzeng, G. H. (2013). Building a evaluation of performance model for the cloud e-learning service using hybrid MCDM. Proceedings of the international symposium on the analytic hierarchy process (pp. 1-8).‏ Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
  • Rahimi Ghazikalayeh, A., Amirafshari, M., Mkrchyan, H. M., & Taji, M. (2013). Application of fuzzy hybrid analytic network process in equipment selection of open-pit metal mines. International journal of research in industrial engineering, 2(3), 35-46.‏
  • Yang, J. L., & Tzeng, G. H. (2011). An integrated MCDM technique combined with DEMATEL for a novel cluster-weighted with ANP method. Expert systems with applications, 38(3), 1417-1424.‏
  • Pourkhandani, M. H., Iranban, S. J., & Seyedi, S. M. (2014). QFD application using combined ANP-DEMATEL approach for improving service quality: a case study of dental clinic. Journal of applied research on industrial engineering, 1(2), 112-129.‏
  • Etraj, P., & Jayaprakash, J. (2017). An integrated DEMATEL and AHP approach multi criteria green supplier selection process for public procurement. International journal of engineering and technology, 9(1), 113-124.‏
  • Chiu, W. Y., Tzeng, G. H., & Li, H. L. (2013). A new hybrid MCDM model combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-store business. Knowledge-based systems, 37, 48-61.‏
  • Modiri, M., Mirzaee Khaki, M., & Karimi Shirazi, H. (2014). Setting prioritizing nanotechnology application in vehicle industries with combinational fuzzy decision model. Journal of technology development management, 2(2), 137-160.‏ (In Persian).
  • DeMarco, A. L. (2018). The relationship between distributive leadership, school culture, and teacher self-efficacy at the middle school level. Seton Hall University.‏
  • Hsu, S. W., & Lamb, P. (2020). Still in search of learning organization? Towards a radical account of the Fifth Discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization. The learning organization, 27(1), 31-41.
  • Alruwaie, M., El-Haddadeh, R., & Weerakkody, V. (2020). Citizens' continuous use of eGovernment services: the role of self-efficacy, outcome expectations and satisfaction. Government information quarterly, 37(3), 101485.‏
  • Adabavazeh, N., & Navabakhsh, M. (2020). Maturity of knowledge management evaluation in organizational units using data envelopment analysis. Innovation management and operational strategies, 1(1), 38-47.‏ (In Persian).
  • Eilam, B. (2012). System thinking and feeding relations: learning with a live ecosystem model. Instructional science, 40, 213-239.‏
  • Lewis, E., Mansfield, C., & Baudains, C. (2014). Ten tonne plan: education for sustainability from a whole systems thinking perspective. Applied environmental education & communication, 13(2), 128-141.‏
  • Ireland, J. J., & Monroe, M. C. (2015). Should we use wood for energy? an education for sustainable development case study. Applied environmental education & communication, 14(2), 82-89.‏