Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 795

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Organizational Learning: Debates Past, Present And Future

Easterby‐Smith, Mark, Crossan, Mary, Nicolini, Davide·2000·Journal of Management Studies

Abstract

In this paper we attempt to map the development of organizational learning as a field of academic study by examining the rise and fall of specific debates. This does not pretend to be a comprehensive review of the field since there is now far too much material available to allow full coverage in any single publication. Rather, we have identified some of the key debates, and these have been organized along the simplistic time‐line of past, present and future. Our purpose is two‐fold: first, to note how the nature and language of the key ideas in organizational learning have changed over time; and second, to locate the papers in this Special Issue within the context of the developing field. It is perhaps no accident that we see most of the papers as closely associated with new, and emerging, issues, but we also find it interesting to note that many of these current or emergent issues actually have roots within some of the earlier debates.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1467-6486.00203

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 795

Metadata

Authors
Easterby‐Smith, M., Crossan, M., & Nicolini, D.
Venue
Journal of Management Studies
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-09
Volume
37
Issue
6
Pages
783-796
ISSN
  • 0022-2380 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-6486
OpenAlex
W2058120279
Cited by
795
References
0
FWCI
26.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Organizational Learning: Debates Past, Present And Future. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1467-6486.00203
The paper
Easterby‐Smith, M., Crossan, M., & Nicolini, D. (2000). Organizational Learning: Debates Past, Present And Future. Journal of Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00203

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.