Book review of “Parallel Learning Structures: Increasing
Innovation in Bureaucracies” by Gervase R. Bushe and A. B.
(Rami) Shani, published by Addison-Wesley, Wokingham in
1991 (ISBN 0 201 52427 9
Mairi Gudim, University of Paisley
Robert van der Meer, University of Strathclyde
This book is in the Addison-Wesley Series on Organization Development (OD), which is edited by
Richard Beckhard and Edgar Schein. If asked why a book on OD should be reviewed in a Journal of
Operational Research, we would suggest that the growing interest in 'soft' OR, with its focus on
problem-solving methods for complex and 'messy' problems, requires the OR practitioner to address
organizational issues as they affect the problem solving process and the management of change. 'Parallel
Learning Structures' illustrates one method of dealing with these issues.
The book is based on the premise that understanding of organization design is essential for large,
organizational change efforts. It advocates the use of technostructural intervention, or Parallel Learning
Structures (PLSs), as a means of ensuring the success of such change efforts. These strategic
interventions are viewed as a means of addressing the fundamental paradox between the organization's
need for structural predictability and stability as compared with the requirement for structural
adaptability, by aiming to promote system-wide change whilst retaining the advantages of bureaucracy.
A PLS aims to change the technology and/or structure of the organization, with the purpose of
improving the organization's socio-technical system. This is achieved through installing a second
structure (composed of a steering committee and a number of small groups), which is designed for
learning, and which emphasizes creating norms and procedures that facilitate learning and innovation.
Somewhat tenuous distinctions are drawn between PLSs and, say, task forces and teams; whereas the
semi-autonomous work group is given as an example of a PLS in action. The book continues with a set
of prescriptions for the simultaneous pursuit of efficiency and innovation; and with an explanation of
why bureaucracies find 'messy' problems hard to handle (the bureaucracy is based on functional
specialisms, whereas the PLS emphasizes an integrative, cross-functional approach to problem-solving
situations). Great emphasis is laid on the development of problem solving skills, and on the importance
of power equality among PLS members, irrespective of status within the learning structure. Several
examples of PLSs in action are given; and the book concludes with a discussion of seven metaphors for
organizational change.
The examples of PLSs in action are interesting and informative; and the book provides a fair (but already
well-documented) description of the difficulties associated with solving 'messy' problems within the
confines of a bureaucratic structure. Nonetheless, its appropriateness for use by the 'soft' OR practitioner
must be qualified by the following observations. First, although the socio-technical approach (based on
the Human Relations philosophy of Mayo et al.) has recently regained popularity with the onset of JIT
production systems; the old criticism that the approach ignores constraints imposed on behaviour other
than those related to the task (for example economic constraints), still prevails. Second, the examples
of PLSs quoted inform the reader of what the author judges to be the 'best fit' between technology and
design without giving information on other possible 'matches' for comparison. Third, we are a little
dubious about the difficulties associated with being part of a technostructural intervention which
involves learning but not implementation.
On a practical level, the wherewithal required to support such a venture may not be available; and
indeed the book concludes by acknowledging the time and money involved in supporting the PLS. More
importantly, however we would suggest that improvement activity in the organization can unite routine
management and managing for innovation in one set of organizational arrangements and practices; and
that far from detracting from the effectiveness of the innovation process, the linkage is likely to produce
This is an accepted author manuscript of the following output: Gudim, M., & Van Der Meer, R. (1992). Parallel Learning Structures :
Increasing Innovation in Bureaucracies. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 43(12), 1185-1186.
universally better results (e.g. Hill1). Despite our reservations, we conclude that for the 'soft' OR
practitioner, the book provides a useful insight into organizational issues associated with the
management of change.
1. HILL S. (1991). Why quality circles failed but Total Quality Management might succeed. British J.
Ind. Rei. 29, (4) 541-568.