A. Organization design should be about fit - what is the design that best fits the strategy?
B. I use an approach of i. Agreeing criteria for selecting the organisation design, and I. Developing a range of possible org designs and testing them against the criteria (a la Michael Tuchman's work)
c. Therefore, if one of the main components of the strategy is to keep learning, then you would add it as one of the criteria, and when selecting and org design, would consider this criteria along with the others you've identified.
The article "Organizational Blueprints for success in high-tech startups" provides a good examination of the implications of different approaches to organizational design (structured as a combination of Attraction & Retention, Criteria for Selection, and Basis of Control). Although the study focuses on Silicon Valley and some of the implications may be specific to high-tech, much of the paper is generalisable.
See https://cmr.berkeley.edu/documents/sample_articles/2002_44_3_4776.pdf
Learning is the key to success—some would even say survival—in today’s organizations. But, it is a means to an end, not an end per se: its part is to further the higher purpose for which an organization was established and configured (or designed). So, one should only take "concrete" steps to ensure that organizational design supports learning goals where the current configuration is incontestably inimical to learning and learning is essential to the accomplishment of the purpose of the organization. (Of course, the nature and extent of the steps should be carefully worked out.) Dimensions of the Learning Organization and Building a Learning Organization, available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254583106_Dimensions_of_the_Learning_Organization and https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289424484_Building_a_Learning_Organization, respectively, may be of interest.