“It’s important for us to say, that this is an experiment”: Exploring how short, time boxed, experiments can contribute to organizational learning

Based on a research and development project in the Danish financial sector including so far 5 intervention cases we explore the question of how short, time boxed, experiments with organizational micro change can inform sustainable organizational change and develop organizational capabilities.
Experiments has long been part of organizational research and development, and played a central role in developing Scandinavian working life and its’ tradition for employee/employer cooperation (Kristiansen & Bloch-Poulsen, 2018; Nielsen, 2001). Experiments can be argued to answer to organizational needs for agile change and for adapting to rapidly changing situations, while still urging to make well informed decisions based on some kind of evidence (Pickering et al., 2021). The idea that experiments can be used to handle complex environments of continual change were central to the development of the sociotechnical tradition (Enehaug, 2014), but is also present in as well public as private organizations of today (Ehn et al., 2014; Finansministeriet, 2014; Pickering et al., 2021). In such complex change-environments, experimenting appear as a way to obtain experiences and situated knowledge of the viability of a given change.
While the descriptions of experiments as a way to handle complex environments and continual change, may make experimenting sound as a very planned and rational process it is not. Experimenting implies constant adjustment of experiment to counter problems or frustration which require sensitive and flexible approach by the project manager. This was illustrated when representatives for financial companies responded to the manager of the research and development project’s invitation to partnership: When the project manager accentuated that “it is important for us to say, that this is an experiment” and emphasized the unknown outcome, they did not refrain from entering a partnership, but embraced it as exiting.
The concept of experimenting signals a somewhat playful and lighthearted approach to organizational change. This is engaging and appealing to employees and contain a promise of testing without having to make changes if the experiment is not successful.
This experience of preliminary organizational response to the experiments was supported by the method and manageable time frame of the projects’ experiments. Inspired by design thinking (Brown & Katz, 2019), the project has developed and used a method of experimenting. The method entails involvement of operating employees and middle managers in problem identification, development of tangible changes to be experimented with, a short (typically six week) experiment period containing pit-stops for evaluating and adjusting the experiment, and concluding evaluation that also involves as well employees and management.
To be manageable and relevant to participants, experiments were designed to involve what can be described as ‘micro changes’. Though sounding insignificant, micro changes can be argued to be vital for everyday organizational life and employee experiences (Bruskin, 2021). Building on a process-philosophical fundament, the conception of micro changes as vital emphasize organizational change as constantly ongoing and incremental as opposed to a conception of the orchestrated exception to organizational stability (Bruskin, 2021; Tsoukas & Chia, 2002).
In the research and development project, each case address a theme/problem through experimenting with micro changes in everyday work practices. For example, the need for community in the wake of corona-induced teleworking was addressed through experiments with scheduled collegial walks. By experimenting in everyday work practice with the involvement of employees and middle managers, organizational change and knowledge generation is addressed as a tangible matter, instead of abstract decision-making processes.
Pending between the method of experimenting and the actual changes being experimented with in the cases we will explore how the organizations develop organizational capabilities on the backdrop of the employees’ and middle managers experiences in the experiments and the knowledge of situational conditions for change.
In the paper, we will first make a short literature review to situate experiments in relation to experiments and organizational change. Then we will describe the method underlying the experiments in the project. Finally, we will discuss examples from the intervention cases and discuss how organizations develop organizational capabilities and what the applicability of the method might be.

Brown, T. & Katz, B. (2019). Change by design : how design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation (Revised an). HarperBusiness, an imprint of HarperCollinsPublishers.
Bruskin, S. (2021). Mikroforandringer : et medarbejderblik på organisationsforandringer (1. udgave). Dansk Psykologisk Forlag.
Ehn, P., Nilsson, E. M., Topgaard, R., Adler, M., Björgvinsson, E., Book, K., Emilson, A., Hillgren, P.-A., Hobye, M. & Krona, M. (2014). Making Futures : Marginal Notes on Innovation, Design, and Democracy. The MIT Press.
Enehaug, H. (2014). Læring i omstillingenes tid — et teoretisk innspill om arbeidsmiljø og organisasjonslæring. Tidsskrift for Arbejdsliv, 16(4 SE-Artikler), 69–84. https://doi.org/10.7146/tfa.v16i4.108978
Finansministeriet. (2014). Bekendtgørelse om Fonden for Velfærdsteknologi: Vol. Bekendtgør.
Kristiansen, M. & Bloch-Poulsen, J. (2018). Inddragelse i forandringsprocesser? Aktionsforskning i organisationer (1st, open ed.). Aalborg Universitetsforlag.
Nielsen, K. T. (2001). Udviklingen i den skandinaviske arbejdslivstradition: nogle eftertanker. Tidsskrift for Arbejdsliv, 3(2), 9–18.
Pickering, A., Olesen, F. & Danholt, P. (2021). Experimenting with experiments - an introduction. STS Encounters, 12(1), 5–16.
Tsoukas, H. & Chia, R. (2002). On Organizational Becoming: Rethinking Organizational Change. Organization Science (Providence, R.I.), 13(5), 567–582. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.5.567.7810