Guest editorial Free

The motivation for opening the call for papers for this special issue came from the increase in scholarly attention to – and growth in societal relevance of interorganizational learning. The argument is that interorganizational learning is increasingly becoming a relevant theme because of its potential: it is recognized to create opportunities and outcomes that individual organizations cannot leverage and achieve by themselves (Bruneel et al., 2010; Peronard and Brix, 2019). This potential is relevant not only for private organizations (van Winkelen, 2010; Holmqvist, 2004; Argote, 2011; Martins, 2016) but also because of global tendencies such as the increase in collective impact projects (Kania and Kramer, 2011), the increased awareness of living up to the sustainable development goals (Dzhengiz, 2020), and the increase in co-production activities stemming from the Collaborative Governance wave (Bevir, 2013; Brandsen et al., 2018; Mortensen et al., 2020). Studying the organizing around the processes of exploration and exploitation and the roles required by the people taking part in this “two-level-game” is hence more important than ever (Beeby and Booth, 2000; Holmqvist, 2004; Jones and MacPherson, 2006; Mariotti, 2012; Brix, 2019) just like the increase in attention towards co-exploration and co-exploitation brings out new complexities that need to be better understood (Brix et al., 2021). Guest editing this special issue has therefore also been a very interesting, insightful process with many paper proposals that all in different ways have shed new light on the field of interorganizational learning and its connection to organizational learning. So to provide an answer to the question posed in the title of this editorial, “where are we now and where is research taking us,” I will continue to introduce to you the seven papers in this issue.

The first paper “Interorganizational learning: a bibliometric review and a research agenda” by authors Amitabh Anand, Louise Brøns Kringelum, Charlotte Øland Madsen and Louisa Selivanovskikh offers a thorough review of recent publications within the field of interorganizational learning. It thus serves as an important source of reference for existing and future studies that can be used to both frame the need for new research and to claim new knowledge to our field. This paper therefore represents an utterly relevant source of reference to answer to the question about “where the field of interorganizational learning is now” (Anand et al., 2021). The following six papers represent interesting examples of “where our field is going towards, both theoretically and empirically.”

The second paper “Interorganizational learning between knowledge-based entrepreneurial ventures responding to COVID-19” is written by Dag Håkon Haneberg. This interesting paper identifies examples of how entrepreneurial ventures have responded to a crisis as the COVID-19 pandemic, and it also addresses how interorganizational learning can assist entrepreneurial ventures to adapt, survive and grow in such turbulent times. This is a “must read” for scholars and practitioners interested in the strategic behavior of such organizations (Haneberg, 2021).

The third paper “Learning with start-ups: an empirically grounded typology” is written by Annika Steiber, Sverker Älange and Vincenzo Corvello. Their empirically grounded study offers a typology that can enable organizations in identifying relevant interaction models with startups that can foster interorganizational learning in such way that continuous relevancy of such organizations can be uphold. This paper therefore represents an important source of reference for scholars interested in strategic renewal of organizations and the interorganizational processes related hereto (Steiber et al., 2021).

The fourth paper “Come on, network! Empowering employees to utilize web-based interorganizational learning platforms in research and development” is written by Rebecca Reichenbach, Jörg Lindenmeier and Chris Eberl. Their study argues that Web-based platforms can represent online working arenas for interorganizational learning that can enable the balancing act between exploration and exploitation across organizational boundaries. Their study present interesting tendencies for how the acceptance and use of such Web-based platforms from the users’ perspectives can be augmented. This paper therefore represents an important source of reference for how digital technology can be adopted and used by organizations to transition potential innovations from exploration to exploitation (Reichenbach et al., 2021).

The fifth paper “Inter-organizational learning within an organization? Mainstreaming gender policies in the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs” is written by Marte C.W. Solheim and Sigrun M. Ross. Their study illustrates via an interesting case study how theories from interorganizational learning can be used to explain and understand learning processes that take place in large, multi-sited organizations. Their paper hence represents a thought-provoking, innovative study that seeks to further understand and explain the transitions of learning that take place within such complex organizations(Solheim and Moss, 2021).

The sixth paper “Interorganizational learning: a strategic framework for service networks” by Jean-Paul Peronard builds on the literature of service networks and interorganizational learning. The paper brings new knowledge to the intersection between these two fields of research by highlighting the opportunities and challenges of how different actors in service networks can strategically work with interorganizational learning to increase the performance output of their collaboration. The paper hence is a great example of the importance of organizational – and interorganizational learning in the service network literature, which is an emerging field in marketing studies (Peronard, 2021).

The seventh paper “Interorganizational learning in the tourism industry: conceptualizing a multi-level typology” is written by Kristina Buhagiar. In the study a multi-level typology is conceptualized that encompasses micro, mese and macro levels of the tourism industry into an ecosystem-line of thought. The author discusses how different approaches to interorganizational learning, being passive, active, interactive or asymmetric can take place. The paper is especially relevant for scholars and practitioners who are interested in understanding advantages and disadvantages of different approaches to interorganizational learning that occur in the tourism ecosystem (Buhagiar, 2021).

Inspired by Colquitt and Zapata-Phelan (2007), Figure 1 is developed to demonstrate an overview of the overall scientific advances made by the seven papers in the special issue. The bibliometric review by Anand et al. (2021) represents a new point of departure with a novel state-of-the-art of the field of interorganizational learning. This publication can, as mentioned above, beneficially act as a new “point of departure” for future studies in our field. Being the first paper accepted for publication in the special issue, the Anand et al.’s (2021) study therefore also serves as a logic starting point for the remaining six papers, that all relate their contributions to the work of this author group. On the “Y axis” you will see the construct “theory testing” and on the “X axis” you will see the construct “theory building.” By placing the six papers according to the spectrum on the X and Y axes, a mapping can be made that illustrates how this special issue adds new knowledge to our field.

The studies by Peronard (2021) and Buhagiar (2021) both advance our understanding of interorganizational learning by building new theoretical understandings through their conceptual work. Different is the thought-provoking study by Solheim and Moss (2021) who embark on a mission to understand how theories of interorganizational learning can be applicable in a new empirical context, being intraorganizational learning in a large, complex and multi-sited organization as the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Finally, the studies by Steiber et al. (2021), Haneberg (2021) and Reichenbach et al. (2021) all use empirical evidence to build new theoretical knowledge to our field; they would thus categorize as “theory-expanders” according to Colquitt and Zapata-Phelan (2007). The details of the concrete theoretical contributions can naturally be found in the individual papers in this special issue.

From my perspective it has been very interesting to see that all three types of theoretical contributions, theory building, theory expanding, and theory testing have found their way into the special issue; and also that this picture illustrates the classical problem with scientific work within social science and humanities: that we are much more oriented towards building new theory than we are oriented towards testing what we already have (Colquitt and Zapata-Phelan, 2007).

A key question stands out after having briefly unfolded the overall contributions of the papers in the special issue: Where is the field going from here? First of all, future studies in interorganizational learning would still benefit from studies that test to what extend the processes of (co-)exploration and (co-)exploitation across organizational boundaries take place and where our theoretical developments (still) cannot explain what happens (Brix, 2019; Anand et al., 2021; Brix et al., 2021). Such “complicated learning” processes (Anand et al., 2021) need to be examined more in detail empirically, especially in complex settings with multiple actors collaborating to remain continuously relevant, e.g. in different types of networks and ecosystems (Peronard and Brix, 2019; Reichenbach et al., 2021; Buhagiar, 2021; Peronard, 2021). Finally, the role of interorganizational learning in the theoretical context of organizational ambidexterity seems like a beneficial avenue for future research (Anand et al., 2021). The point is, that a concrete view on both how processes of exploration and exploitation and the work of “structuring” such processes across organizational boundaries brings out features important to understand the implicit (or explicit) organization design of new, interorganizational collaborations and also the innovation and types of learning outcomes that different versions of “structured settings” enable (Brix, 2019; Steiber et al., 2021; Brix et al., 2021).

In addition to this, Bapuji and Crossan argued back in 2004, that the field of organizational learning would need to get inspiration from other theoretical fields within organizational behavior and organization theory to make “major leaps” (Bapuji and Crossan, 2004). This would also in a natural extension be the case with interorganizational learning theory. The argument is, that the field of interorganizational learning could act as an important auxiliary theory to better understand and explain what happens in other empirical or theoretical fields. A good example in this special issue is Peronard’s (2021) study that illustrates the integration of interorganizational learning into the context of service networks (marketing). In addition to this, it is therefore also interesting to see that Solheim and Moss (2021) take interorganizational learning into the empirical context of the public sector which traditionally is founded more on research in public administration and political science. This orientation towards the public sector and the many new requirements that occur could lead to an increased need for understanding the role of organizational learning (and interorganizational learning) in politically governed organizations such as local governments, municipalities, etc. (Brix et al., 2021). More research in this domain would definitely also be of interest.

In the practitioner’s point of view paper “Interorganizational learning: a context-dependent process,” Nataša Rupčić reflects on and discusses the potential for organizations, business and society that is associated with interorganizational learning. She argues that interorganizational learning is a highly context dependent phenomenon that requires distinct managerial capabilities. The point is, that interorganizational learning can take many shapes and have multiple purposes which need to be understood and handled. For this reason, Rupčić also calls for further research on interorganizational learning in various contexts so that we can build a stronger, cumulative knowledge base for our field. Finally, she discusses each paper accepted for publication in this special issue. See Rupčić (2021).

Finally, the special issue is concluded with a review of the book Building an Innovative Learning Organization: A Framework to Build a Smarter Workforce, Adapt to Change, and Drive Growth written by Russell Sarder (2016). The review is thankfully made by Sununta Siengthai. She argues that the book is a relevant, easy-to-read source of reference and inspiration for scholars and practitioners interested in understanding how a learning organization can be build and also what managers can do to build such an organization. The review is finalized with a short critical discussion of the book’s content and framing from reviewer’s perspective.

I hope that you will find the special issue as interesting and thought provoking as I do – it has been an absolute pleasure to take on the guest editor role and I have enjoyed the collaboration with the Editor-in-Chief, Professor Anders Örtenblad and the Editorial team at Emerald. Finally, a special thanks goes to the amazing voluntary reviewers who have helped me for the past 18 months and not least to the authors for your patience with all my requests and comments.