Transforming Bureaucratic Organization into Learning ...

ISSN 2309-0081 Bagram, Rehman & Saeed (2021)

1

I

www.irss.academyirmbr.com April 2021

International Review of Social Sciences Vol. 9 Issue.4

R S S

Transforming Bureaucratic Organization into Learning

Organization: Role of Job Performance and Creativity in

Learning Organizations

Dr. MUHAMMAD MAJID MAHMOOD BAGRAM Associate Professor, Department of Business Administration,

Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad, Pakistan.

Email: [email protected]

Dr. MUHAMMAD SAFDAR REHMAN CEO, Multi Emerging Solutions, Toronto, Canada.

SAQIB SAEED Advocate, Member IBA, MS (Management Sciences),

Department of Business Administration,

Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad, Pakistan.

Abstract

The present research tries to study the concept and characteristics of learning organizations, based on

Peter Senge’s original model ‘The Fifth Discipline’ (personal mastery, shared vision, mental model, team

learning and system thinking) in Pakistan’s private and public sectors. This explanatory study is conducted

to determine the structural relationship of learning organization and its dimensions with job performance

and creativity. In order to conduct this correlational study, the primary data have been collected by

distributing questionnaires to employees in 5 public and private organizations of Pakistan and after

primary data collection, the researchers performed parametric testing via regression analysis and inter-

correlational matrix. Our statistical analysis results have proved that there is a highly significant

relationship between learning organization and its dimensions, having a direct and positive relationship

with job performance and creativity. The idea of learning organization has increased acceptance in private

and public sectors and popular researches on this issue are on the relationship of learning organization

with its ultimate consequences, such as increased creativity, increased job performance, increased

capacity, increased innovation, increased productivity and increased higher competitive advantage for

organizations. Nevertheless, many researchers have conducted the said research in the private sectors but

paid little attention towards public sectors of Pakistan. This research is aimed to fill the gap by

introducing and discussing the concept of learning organizations which demonstrate the relevant steps in

transforming private and public organizations into learning organizations.

Keywords: Learning Organization (LO), Personal Mastery (PM), Shared Vision (SV), Mental Model (MM),

Team Learning (TL), System Thinking (ST), Job Performance (JP), Creativity (C).

Introduction

The world of business is facing different challenges day by day and different new approaches are being

adopted to cope up with all the challenges. Businesses are now so much in competition with each other that

they result in application of new approaches to properly manage their business in the wars of competition.

Now organizations are striving to gain maximum knowledge so that they can build their skills, form new

efficient systems to motivate their workforce and align all the employees under the same purpose. With the

mailto:[email protected]


2

I



R S S

advancement of technology, there are number of challenges in various organizations. If the firms want to

launch new services, develop new markets for their businesses and to retain the skillful employees, the

most important factor is to create and learn knowledge (Dodgson 1993 & Tsang 1997). To meet all these

challenges, organizations are adopting the concept of LO. Organizations need to understand that if they

want to build learning culture in their organizations, it will not build in short span of time as it is a

continuous process (Marleen Huysman, 2000).

The evolution in the concept of LO from the last few years has gained the acceptance in public and private

sectors because of increased global rivalry and hasty changing technology that have become increasingly

essential to the organizations (Gardiner, Leat, & Sadler- Smith, 2001). There is lack of empirical evidence

on how to transform the learning from the individual employees to the organization, how organizations

learn, how the performance of employees will improve (Mavrinac, 2005 & Maden, 2011). Senge 1994 has

worked so hard in making people understand the concept of LO. According to him, management and

employees have key roles in implementation of learning culture. So implementing the learning culture has

greatly impacted on the JP of employees. It is predicted in the study of Mavrinac, 2005 that the idea of

organizational learning arises through the individuals and work groups because it is the natural need and

want of every human and it is “boundary less” and gives every individual employee a supportive

environment and culture. Several authors believe that the LO is transformational and motivates

organizations to follow a learning culture (Mavrinac, 2005 & Maden, 2011).

The concept of a „LO has come out with the approach to build their learning competence at all levels of the

organization, uses in a way that is integrated with its work (Davis & Daley, 2008). In the study of Alexiou,

2005 it is stated that the LO is the key of all the problems which are faced by the structured and

bureaucratic organizations. LO refers to a particular type of organization that is culturally and structurally

organized such that innovation, creativity, performance, participation, SV, and total quality management in

employee‟s work can be assured.

It is really important to know that how much JP is affected by introducing and implementing the learning

culture in the organizations and in what direction. In this context, it is equally important to know how much

creativity and innovation process can be affected by creating the learning culture in organizations.

Nevertheless, the majority of the studies on LO had focused on private sectors and paid little attention

towards public sectors. The people are not much aware about the concept of LO (Maden, 2011).

The purpose of this study is to fill the above mentioned gaps to transform organizations into LO by defining

the existing relationship among the learning organizations with employee`s JP, and creativity because the

thought of the LO is still new and people don‟t know what does it mean. The idea of LO is not widespread

and implemented in organizations yet (Levine, 2001).

Learning

In the previous studies, it is stated that learning is the essential component not only in academic fields but

also in organizations as it assists organizations towards change (Symon, 2000). According to (Argyris and

Schön 1978; Garratt 1987; Handy 1989; Senge 1990; Nonaka 1996), learning is a continuous process which

can never decline but it gives opportunity to organizations to reinvent. It gives the open and supportive

environment to total system of the organization and thinks beyond the individuals and teams who come and

go because it is the natural need of every human and present everywhere e.g., pursue organizational culture.

Learning can be defined as the change in attitude and behavior of individuals due to certain experiences

(Mavrinac, 2005; Levine, 2001).

Furthermore, there are three loops of learning namely Single Loop (SL), Double Loop (DL) and Triple

Loop TL) of Learning. In SL of learning, for instance, employees have to obey the decisions of their

supervisors that is do as directed. Whatever is ordered is obeyed as it is without any change, improvement


3

I



R S S

or correction. In DL of learning, the employees may give suggestions, like how to improve any working

method, better teaching methodologies, improvements, changes and so on. In TL of learning, there is a

concept of unlearning in which one has to neutralize, bring changes then implement these suggested

changes. In nutshell, it can be said that TL of learning is recommended. There is creativity and innovation

in case of learning organization as employees are given flexibility not only in their thinking but also in their

actions. Employees as a result of TL of learning learn more, have low resistance towards change, more

participative in official matters, more effective two-way communication and so on.

The researchers after going through detailed literature review came to a conclusion that learning is a

prerequisite to creativity and innovation. People who lack learning environment are reactive in most cases

instead of being proactive. Out of the box thinking also comes in learning organizations as there is high

motivation among employees towards their responsibilities. As it is a known fact that there are three phases

namely creativity, critical thinking and innovation. All of these three phases are mandatory and are

interdependent on each other. In the article of (Sun, 2003) Collins COBUILD Dictionary, defines learning

as “the process of gaining knowledge through studying.”

Learning Organization

Numerous authors have worked on different perspectives of LO and define LO in different behaviors.

According to Peter Senge, 1990, “learning organizations are those that are continually expanding their

capacity to create their future require a fundamental shift of mind among their members.”

After the Fifth Discipline of Peter Senge “The Art & Practice of the LO” the concept of LO exploded and

gets admired (Mavrinac, 2005). He stated that few organizations will invest in learning organization if the

results were exclusively to “expanding its capacity” (Senge, 1990; King, 2001). Garvin in 1993 also give

definition of LO as “there is an ongoing increase in the abilities and competencies of individuals

performing in organizations.” He stated that there should be more specific definitions needed if the working

managers want to derive value from the idea. According to him, few firms would be willing to invest in LO

if the results are solely being “modifying of behavior” (Garvin 1993). Many authors, practitioners and

executive‟s discussions on the LO concluded that the Garvin view about learning organization is

insufficient because it doesn‟t include the view about organizational results (King, 2001). Furthermore,

when people give a different response to the same stimulus then real learning occurs as we may move

towards creativity and innovation. When employees give similar responses to the same stimulus then it is

not the example of a learning organization. It is therefore necessary for learning that people are giving

different responses when they are asked about their opinions in any same situation or challenge. It is

generally observed that in most cases people are giving similar responses hence one can call these robotic

responses as we already know how they will respond. In this situation, there is lack of creativity or

innovation.

Field and Ford (1995, p. 24) define the LO as:

“an organization with a well-developed capacity for double-loop learning; where there is ongoing attention

to learning how to learn; where the key aspects of organizational functioning support learning”.

According to Nevis et al. (1995, p. 73) LO means:

“The capacity or processes within an organization to maintain or improve performance based on

experience”.

LO is important for organizational survival for the health and wealth in rapidly changing environment

because it develop higher valued knowledge, information, changing behaviors of individual, improves the

output of the organization and set up the abilities to understand the organizational culture, working

environment, processes, creates, acquire and communicates daily working activities and do some changes

where there is need for the better and improved results (Levine, 2001, Mavrinac, 2005 & King, 2001).


4

I



R S S

Watkins and Golembiewski (1995, p. 88) define LO as:

“Involves creating systems which put in place long term capacities to capture knowledge, to support

creation, and empower continuous transformation”.

The organizational members continuously transform organization by finding the solutions for the problems

and promote the improvements to enhance the competitiveness of the organization (Shieh, 2011). Learning

is a process by which the members of the organization construct their knowledge, skills, capabilities,

communication, ideas so on through learner (Sun, 2003). Organizations create learning environment for the

continuous change as there are seven distinct that tells how organizations develop as LO namely create

constant learning opportunities, support inquiry and dialogue, persuade team learning and work, build

system, empower people, associate the organization with its environment, and provide strategic leadership

for learning (Davis & Daley, 2008).

Learning is not a sole activity which is possible alone to contribute in the enhancement of the activities, it is

the cumulative effect. By transforming the organization towards LO, the JP, Total Quality Management and

Creativity also positively affected by this. LO is the best answer to the question that is, how the

organization can best survive in the changing environment? (Love, Li, Faniran, & Olusegun, 2000).

We can find different models of LO like Senge‟s (1990) model on the LO with a name of Fifth Discipline

and the model given by Pedler et al.‟s (1989) “Learning Company”, but Senge‟s model is more suitable

than the model which is given by Pedler et al.‟s (1989) and other authors. In this research paper, the

researcher followed the Senge‟s model of LO. As we mentioned earlier that there are five components of

Senge‟s model with the name of “Five Disciplines” namely; PM, SV, MM, TL and ST. The fifth

Discipline, ST, is the one discipline that binds the other four disciplines.

Dimensions of Learning Organization

Peter Senge categorizes LO into five components in his book “The Fifth Discipline” these are PM, SV,

MM, TL and ST (Senge 1990 & Mavrinac, 2005). Senge defines personal mastery as the strengths of

employees who know about their organizational values and also know about their actual performance. It

means, employees know well about their actual and desired performance as a result have a good idea about

their performance differences. These employees are also proactive who plan in advance mostly. Employees

are the most important asset of any organization and every employee in the organization has some values,

aims and beliefs. It is impossible for an organization to learn without individual learning. So, personal

mastery is a motivational force that helps to achieve the objectives of an organization.

Organizations pay so much attention to select the employees of SV. For the achievement of organization‟s

goals and objectives, it is very important that all the employees have SV, they must know that what are the

goals and what their roles are in achieving those goals. All employees should have purpose and vision that

result in better organizational performance.

The MM are a cognitive process that focuses on the thinking of employees. How one person views the

external world in his mind, how he creates meanings of the external things into his mind, how he interprets

the meanings and how he creates sense from these meanings, all these reflect from MM of a person.

Communication and cooperation among the employees are very important. Employees should work and

learn as a team. Better results can be achieved through teamwork because in this way, employees bring into

line their purpose and energies which result in creating the TL culture in an organization. A team can

recognize a general agreement of the acquired customer knowledge if they are able to carry out

communication and cooperation in the track of learning.


5

I



R S S

Everything in the world is interrelated hence it is incorrect to say that there are some practices in the

business world that are not related. Organizations have complex set of interrelated activities therefore, it is

significant to acknowledge the systematic linkages of all the processes of an organization.

Job Performance

The key to success in LO is the employee‟s aptitude to learn in valid time and apply the learning in

practical situation as quickly as possible. For this, there is need of effective transformational leadership

(Daniel Belet, 2007). When organization applies the learning culture, there are lots of obstacles and barriers

that the managers have to face. Some employees have hidden agendas, political mindset and leg pulling

behavior hence for implementing the learning culture in an organization effectively, it is very important for

the managers to recognize all these barriers and obstacles. With all these, there is also presence of

facilitators, which contribute in applying the learning environment and recognition of these forces which

have also the same importance. (Ruth Belling, Kim James & Donna Ladkin, 2004).

The JP is interconnected with three factors. First is individual capacity which is related with individual

skills, abilities towards the performance. Second is opportunity to perform, it means by taking the effective

decision how employee of the organization decreases the hurdles and make improvements in the

organization. Third is willingness of the employee towards the organization that how he can improve his

performance (Khan, 2005).

Organizations are now hiring the experienced employees because the past experience enables the

employees to perform better their new tasks in organization. Organization should recognize the productive

importance of past experience and this recognition will certainly give help in job designing and

socialization process (Dock, Wilk & Rothbard, 2009). The motivation of employees can be increased

through job rotation; it leads the employees to build their learning skills, so by job rotation, employee

learning and JP increases (Ortega 2001).

The organizations in which learning culture are prevailing, it is very imperative that employees should be

communicated all the learning practices like new knowledge and skills. If learning processes are

communicated effectively, it increases the job satisfaction which lead to increase in JP (Goris, R.2007).

Organizations must have a high regard for the skills and abilities of their employees because it will help the

employees to get better their perception about their personal skills utilization, so it also contributes in the

higher performance of the employees (Westover, H. Westover, R. & Westover, 2010).

Organizations should give employee‟s independence regarding formation of their own priorities,

performance and learning goals. If organizations force the employees to follow their rules and goals, then

there will be no need for achievement for the employees. The absence of need for achievement results in

low involvement of jobs from the employees, so by creating need for achievement, organizations should

increase the job relating learning (Loon & Casimir, 2008). Cognitive and behavioral aspects of a person`s

personality develop through learning and final result of learning is raise in knowledge or abilities.

Knowledge helps the employees to do their tasks efficiently and effectively which lead to the better

performance of the employees (Boyatzis & Kolb, 1995). When management of any organization bring

some changes in an organization then these changes also affect the performance of employees, to manage

these changes effectively, there is a need of managerial learning framework, through this, the positive

implications of the changes can be brought out which ultimately facilitate in the increase of JP of every

individual (Garg & Rastogi,2006).

Creativity

For the success of any organization, creativity plays a major role. According to Kippenberger in 1997, the

creativity means when ideas are made, advanced and changed into values.” Shalley et al. 2000, p. 215

defines creativity as “the making, conceptualization or growth of original and beneficial thoughts,


6

I



R S S

procedures, or actions.” Drazin et al, 1999, defines creativity as “the course of commitment in inventive

actions, regardless of whether the subsequent results are fresh, valuable or innovative”.

There are five dimensions of creativity in organization, namely; organizational structure and system,

organizational culture, climate of organization, resources and skills; and leadership styles (Andriopoulos,

2001). These five factors contribute differently in the concept of creativity of employees. Among these

factors, leadership style is highly significant (Scott and Bruce, 1994; Tierney et al., 1999). Thinking

creatively may be the responsibility of the employees in order to get work done effectively or it may be just

beyond that (Unsworth, 2001). When leader supports the employees in doing their work done efficiently

and effectively and does not impose his ideas on the employees then the creativity of the employees rises

(Millissa, Cheung & Wong, 2011). When organizations follow the learning culture and make their

employees encourage in attaining the productive knowledge then it leads to the creativity of employees

because through learning culture, employees seek different knowledge collectively which help them in

brainstorming of different new ideas (Hoyle, 1995). The business environment of today demands that

managers should not focus only on simple learning like skills and new methods but also should pay more

attention on managing the uncertainties of the environment which give confidence to the employees in

performing their tasks according to the expectations of the managers and the management, so that the

creative process in the employees can be enhanced (King, S .1995). LO should conduct trainings and

workshops for their employees that result in their stress management that leads to higher contribution of

employees in achieving their organizational goals and objectives (Amabile, Hadley & Kramer, 2002). By

these workshops and training programs, the employees should be encouraged in a way that they develop

and generate new ideas for the organizations (Sutton & Hargadon, 1996).

Theoretical Framework

The basic purpose of the present research is to explore the relationship of LO and its dimensions with JP

and Creativity as shown below:

Hypotheses

H1: Learning organization has a significant impact on job performance.

H2: Learning organization has a significant impact on creativity.

H3: Personal mastery is positively correlated with job performance.

Learning

Organization

Job

Performance

Creativity

Personal Mastery

Shared Vision

Mental Model

Team Learning

System Thinking


7

I



R S S

H4: Shared vision has a significant impact on job performance.

H5: Mental model has been positively associated job performance.

H6: Team learning directly and positively influences job performance.

H7: System thinking and job performance has a significant relation.

H8: Personal mastery has been positively associated with bringing creativity.

H9: Shared vision and creativity has a significant relation.

H10: Mental model is positively correlated with bringing creativity.

H11: Team learning directly and positively influences creativity.

H12: System thinking has a significant impact on creativity.

Methodology

The population of the present research comprises of Pakistan Television Corporation (PTV), Ufone

Telecommunication, Warid Telecommunication, United Bank Limited (UBL), and Summit Bank. The

researchers used non probability convenience sampling technique for data collection. The researchers

distributed questionnaires to respondents belonging to public and private sectors. The researchers received

completely filled 170 questionnaires as a sample to test the relationship of learning organization and its

dimensions with dependent variable that is JP and Creativity.

The researchers used interval scale and in instrument used 5 Point Likert Scale (1= Strongly Disagree; 2=

Disagree, 3= Neither Agree nor Disagree, 4= Agree, 5= Strongly Agree) in questionnaire consisting of 52

items. In order to evaluate the role of LO, Creativity and JP; 15 items were on LO, 3 items were on PM, 3

items were on SV, 3 items were on MM, 3 items were on TL, 3 items were on ST, 10 items were on JP, and

12 items were on Creativity. For the data analysis, the researchers used SPSS and did Correlational Study in

non-contrived environment which has generalizability.

Results and Data Analysis

For the goodness of instrument, the researchers found the value of Cronbach‟s Alpha and internal

consistency. Furthermore, reliability was measured for each instrument. The values of Cronbach‟s Alpha

are:

Reliability Statistics (Table 1)

Variables Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Items

Learning Organization 0.940 15

Personal Mastery 0.890 3

Shared Vision 0.681 3

Mental Model 0.868 3

Team Learning 0.663 3

System Thinking 0.630 3

Job Performance 0.847 10

Creativity 0.806 12

Since values of Cronbach‟s Alpha of both predictor and response variables is greater than 0.6, so it is

substantiating with the confidence that the researchers have used reliable research instrument to measure

the impact of LO on Creativity and JP as shown in table 1.

The researchers performed regression analysis and correlation matrix tests. In order to measure the

relationship of independent variable that is LO & its five dimensions i.e., PM, SV, MM, TL and ST with

dependent variables i.e., JP and Creativity; the researchers used R-square, adjusted R-square and ANOVA

to calculate how much the dependent variable is contributing to the change in independent variable and

evaluate either there is a significant relation or not.


8

I



R S S

Learning Organization and Job Performance

JP is the utmost important research area as it contributes to learning and non- LO both because all types of

organizations need to see their employees more efficient and effective towards achievement of

organizational goals and objectives.

Table 2: Model Summary

R-Square Adjusted R-Square F S

i

g

.

ß

et

a 0.859 0.

8

5

8

1014.779 .0

00

a

0.9

27 a. Predictors: (Constant), Learning Organization

b. Dependent Variable: Job Performance

Table 2 results show that a statistical value of R-square is 0.859, which is equal to 85.9% meaning

independent variable LO includes PM, SV, MM, TL and ST contributes 85.9% variation in the dependent

variable that is JP.

The value of adjusted R-square for this model is 85.8% which shows only 0.1% loss of predictive power or

shrinkage when we apply the model on the population from which the sample was taken. It shows the

model is well predictive and adjusted R square value does not take into account impact of Interco linearity

of predictor variables.

In Table 2, p = 0.000 which is less than 0.05, hence it is proved that overall effect of LO on JP is highly

significant and it validates that the predictor variable that is LO includes PM, SV, MM, TL and ST are

useful in predicting the dependent variable that is JP. So, the null hypotheses are rejected and alternative

hypotheses are accepted (H1, H3, H4, H5, H6, and H7) and it is found that:

i. Learning organization has a significant impact on job performance. Therefore, employee`s JP in

public and private sectors increases.

ii. The five dimensions of the LO i.e. PM, SV, MM, TL and ST have a positive correlation with JP.

Every dimension of the LO is contributing significantly on increase of JP of employees.

Learning Organization and Creativity

In the former studies, it is stated that Creativity has many factors that influence learning in the

private and public sectors towards LO.

Table 3: Model Summary

R-Square Adjusted R-Square F S

i

g

.

ßet

a 0.56

8

0.56

5

219.448 .

0

0

0

a

0.75

4 a. Predictors: (Constant), Learning Organization

b. Dependent Variable: Creativity

A statistical value of R- Square is showing the variation in the respond variable that has been explained as

an outcome of the predictor variable. The value of R-square is 0.568 which shows there is 56.8% variation

in the dependent variable i.e. creativity due to the variation in independent variation that is LO which

includes its five dimensions PM, SV, MM, TL and ST. The value of adjusted R-square is 56.5% which is

equal to the value of R-square. Thus, there is 0.3% loss in predictive power or shrinkage when we apply

this model on the population. So it shows our model is well predictive model.

In Table 3, the value of P = 0.000 which is less than 0.05, therefore it proves that results are highly

significant and validates that the predictor variable i.e. LO includes: PM, SV, MM, TL and ST are useful in


9

I



R S S

predicting the dependent variable i.e. creativity. Hence, we have rejected our null hypotheses and accepted

alternative hypotheses (H2, H8, H9, H10, H11, and H12) and it is found that:

i. Learning organization has been positively associated with bringing creativity in employees work

and in organization. Employees do their work more efficiently and effectively.

ii. The five dimensions of the LO i.e. PM, SV, MM, TL and ST have a positive correlation with

Creativity. Every dimension of the LO is contributing significantly on increase of creativity of

employees. In LO, the leaders do not impose his ideas on employees, every employee is

independent to bring with his creative idea as mentioned in the paper of Millissa, Cheung &

Wong, 2011.

Value of βeta can prioritize the value. If value of beta of any dependent variable is high, then it is

contributing more in the model. Beta value of JP and Creativity is 0.927 and 0.754 respectively. Here, JP is

most important variable in our model since its value is higher than Creativity i.e. 0.927 or 92.7%.

Table No 4: Correlation

LO PM SV MM TL ST JP C

Learning

Organization

Pearson Correlation 1.000 .930** .913

** .795

** .670

** .670

** .927

** .754

**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170

Personal Mastery

Pearson Correlation .930** 1.000 .826

** .859

** .686

** .662

** .879

** .688

**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170

Shared Vision

Pearson Correlation .913** .826

** 1.000 .708

** .588

** .580

** .927

** .699

**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170

Mental Model


** .708

** 1.000 .865

** .846

** .764

** .599

**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170

Team Learning


** .588

** .865

** 1.000 .859

** .615

** .480

**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170

System Thinking


** .580

** .846

** .859

** 1.000 .644

** .667

**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170

Job Performance


** .927

** .764

** .615

** .644

** 1.000 .787

**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170

Creativity


** .699

** .599

** .480

** .667

** .787

** 1.000

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

In Table 4, Inter-Correlation Matrix is showing the Pearson Correlation between the dependent and

independent variable and their level of significance and number of respondents who filled the

questionnaires. Pearson Correlation Value of LO and its dimensions PM, SV, MM, TL and ST with

dependent variables i.e. JP and Creativity is high i.e. 48-93% which is showing high and positive

correlation. JP is highly correlated with LO and its two dimensions i.e. PM and SV, where Creativity is


10

I



R S S

highly correlated with LO and its one another dimension i.e. SV. Therefore, all the independent variables

found to be significant and positively correlated with dependent variables. So, all the null hypotheses

rejected in this case also, and alternative hypotheses are accepted.

Discussions

In our present explanatory research, the researchers have estimated not only relationship but also the impact

of independent variable and its dimensions on the dependent variable that is JP and Creativity. LO has great

position and is measured as a highly encouraging and positive approach to private and public sectors

towards its future. It brings changes in organization`s system, work environment, employee‟s JP,

procedures, network, processes and so on. It also brings the Creativity in work of an organization and

employees which also influence their JP. The PM, SV, MM, TL and ST contributing their important

role in bringing and implementing LO in public and private sectors of Pakistan. It has now become easy

for organizations to achieve its goals and objectives because PM and SV related with employee‟s values,

beliefs and aims help and motivate employees to achieve more efficiently and effectively.

The results of the present research are highly positively correlated with each other but there are few

questions which are inevitably come under this situation like what is the future of this discussion, will the

private and especially public sectors be ready to accept the concept of LO, and will this LO concept be

researched more and rise with new concepts or cannot be touched. It is a fact that there is survival of the

fittest in any market and there are almost no exceptions. Therefore, organizations that are not learning

organizations whether belong to public or private sector cannot compete in the market. Learning is an

ongoing process and there is no end to it. In nutshell, today`s benchmark cannot be sustained for a longer

time.

Conclusion and Recommendations

As numerous writers believe that focus on the LO can help organizations to face the problems and prepare

organizations for the future or upcoming developments in the global business environment. It has become

really difficult for organizations to change with the fastest changes occurring in their environment. The

further work is needed to encourage the TL just to develop the skills in ST. The development in these two

attributes help employees to make an even greater and better contribution in LO and also in the future

actions of the organizations and give directions for the improvement. Therefore, moving from a non-

learning organization to a learning organization is inevitable.

These are the recommendations:

i. The bureaucratic organizations need to learn to improve its efficiency and effectiveness.

Therefore, not only the processes but also the results are equally important. With minimum input

try to get the maximum output to achieve desired results. Hence, both efficiency and effectiveness

are required otherwise organizations cannot compete in the market.

ii. Learning existing and future job skills requirements are mandatory for learning organizations. It is

possible through on-the-job and off-the-job training and development programs and workshops for

employees for their capacity building, acquiring new skills, strengthening existing skills, and so

on.

iii. Based on the findings of the present research, it is found that public and private sectors are less

effective at encouraging and supporting teams and individuals towards TL. So, it is recommended

that the private and public sectors should focus on TL in organizations to enhance skills of their

employees. As it is an established fact that teams are important for achieving sustainable

competitive advantage and these teams can be creative if there is TL. There are certain

prerequisites to TL hence organizations from public and private sectors should focus on these

aspects.


11

I



R S S

Limitations

Although the current study suggests some remarkable findings and makes a significant contribution

regarding the relationship of LO with JP and Creativity but there are certain limitations. Firstly, the

researchers have used questionnaire as our instrument for the study which is limited in scope for this

research but it has been found that respondents have some reservations about the written survey which is

one of the issues to get the right responses from the employees. Secondly, the researchers focused only on

two response variables that is JP and Creativity, there are many other variables which contributes and

motivate bureaucratic organizations to move towards LO e.g. TL, Job Satisfaction, Innovation and so on.

Thirdly, there are less explanatory studies available on LO which was another limitation of this present

research.

References

Andriopoulos, C. (2001), “Determinants of organizational creativity: a literature review”, Management

Decision, Vol. 39, pp. 834-40.

Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1978). Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Reading, MA:

Addison- Wesley.

Boyatzis, R.E. and Kolb, D.A. (1995), “From learning styles to learning skills: the executive skills profile”,

Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 3-17.

Career History Affects Job Performance, Organization Science Vol. 20, No. 1, January February 2009, pp.

51–68.

Daniel Belet, (2007),"Are “high potential” executives capable of building learning-oriented Organizations?

Reflections on the French case", Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 19 Iss: 7 pp. 465 – 475.

Davis, D., & Daley, B. J. (2008). The learning organization and its dimensions as key factors in firms'

performance. Human Resource Development International, 51-66.

Dodgson, M. (1993) „Organizational learning: a review of some literatures‟, Organization Studies 14 (3):

375–94.

Drazin, R., Glynn, M. and Kazajian R. (1999) `Multilevel theorizing about creativity in organizations: A

sense making perspective', Academy of Management Review, Vol. 24, No. 2, April, p. 287.

Garratt, B. (1987) The Learning Organization, London: Fontana.

Garvin, D.A., “Building a Learning Organization,” Harvard Business Review, 71(4), 1993, 78-91.

Gina Dokko, Steffanie L. Wilk, Nancy P. Rothbard (2009,) Unpacking Prior Experience: How

Handy, C. (1989) The Age of Unreason, London: Arrow.

Hoyle, E. (1995) the school as a learning organization.san Francisco, paper presented at the AERA

conference.

Jaime Ortega Job Rotation as a Learning Mechanism Management Science © 2001 INFORMS Vol.47,

No.10, October 2001 pp.1361–1370.

Jonathan H. Westover, Andrew R. Westover, L. Alan Westover, (2010),"Enhancing long-term worker

productivity and performance: The connection of key work domains to job satisfaction and

organizational commitment”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,

Vol. 59 Issue: 4 pp. 372 – 387.

José R. Goris, (2007),"Effects of satisfaction with communication on the relationship between Individual-

job congruence and job performance/satisfaction", Journal of Management Development, Vol. 26

Iss: 8 pp. 737 – 752.

Khan, A. (2005) Performance Appraisal‟s Relation with Productivity and Job Satisfaction. Journal of

Managerial Sciences.

King, W. R. (2001). Strategies for Creating A Learning Organization. Information Systems Management, 1-

9.

Kippenberger, T, (1997),"Business creativity: an art with discipline", The Antidote, Vol. 2 Iss: 2 pp. 12 –

13.


12

I



R S S

Levine, L. (2001). Integrating Knowledge and Processes in a Learning Organization. Information Systems

Management, 1-13.

Love, P. E., Li, H., Faniran, Z. I., & Olusegun. (2000). Total quality management and the learning

organization: a dialogue for change in construction. Construction Management and Economics, 321-

331.

Mark Loon, Gian Casimir, (2008),"Job-demand for learning and job-related learning: The moderating

effect of need for achievement", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 23 Iss: 1 pp. 89 – 102.

Marleen Huysman (2000): An organizational learning Approach to the learning organization, European

Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 9:2, 133-145.

Maughan, D. G., & Anderson, M. T. (2005). Linking TQM Culture to Traditional Learning Theories.

Industrial Technology, 21.

Mavrinac, M. A. (2005). Transformational Leadership: Peer Mentoring as a Values-Based Learning

Process. Libraries and the Academy, 391-404.

Millissa F.Y. Cheung, Chi-Sum Wong, (2011),"Transformational leadership, leader support, and employee

creativity", Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 32 Iss: 7 pp. 656 –672.

Nonaka, I. (1996) The knowledge-creating company; in K. Sarkey (ed.) How Organizations Learn, London:

Thompson, pp. 18–23.

Pedler, M., Boydell, T. and Burgoyne, J. (1989), “Towards the learning company”, Management Education

and Development, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 1-8.

Pooja Garg, Renu Rastogi, (2006),"New model of job design: motivating employees'

performance", Journal of Management Development, Vol. 25 Iss: 6 pp. 572 – 587.

Ruth Belling, Kim James, Donna Ladkin, (2004),"Back to the workplace: How organizations can improve

their support for management learning and development”, Journal of Management Development, Vol.

23 Iss: 3 pp. 234 – 255.

Scott, S.G. and Bruce, R.A. (1994), “Determinants of innovative behavior: a path model of individual

innovation in the workplace”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37, pp. 580-607.

Senge, P. (1990) The Fifth Discipline, New York: Doubleday.

Senge, P. (1994) The fifth discipline field book: strategies and tools for building a learning organization

(London, Nicholas Brealey).

Senge, P.M., “The Leader‟s New Work: Building Learning Organizations,” Sloan Management Review,

32(1), 1990, 7–23.

Shalley, C. E., J. Zhou, G. R. Oldham. 2004. The effects of personal and contextual characteristics on

creativity: Where should we go from here? J. Management 30 933–958.

Stephen King, (1995),"Managing creativity and learning", Management Development Review, Vol. 8 Iss: 5

pp. 32 – 34.

Shieh, C.-J. (2011). Study on the relations among the customer knowledge management, learning

organization, and organizational performance. The Service Industries Journal, 791-807.

Soloman, C. (1994) HR facilitates the learning organization concept, Personal Journal, 73(11), 56- 66.

Sun, H.-C. (2003). Conceptual clarifications for „organizational learning‟, „learning organization‟ and „a

learning organization‟. Human Resource Development International, 153-166.

Symon, G. (2000). The learning organization and Social Capital: an unlikely alliance? Human Resource

Development International, 235-240.

Tierney, P., Farmer, S.M. and Graen, G.B. (1999), “An examination of leadership and employee creativity:

the relevance of traits and relationships”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 52, pp. 591-620.

Tsang, E. W. K. (1997) „Organizational learning and the learning organization: A Dichotomy between

descriptive and prescriptive research‟, Human Relations 50(1).

Unsworth, K.L. (2001), “Unpacking creativity”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 26, pp. 289-97.

Workplace Learning and Flexible Delivery Author(s): Peter J. Smith Reviewed work(s): Source: Review of

Educational Research, Vol. 73, No. 1 (Spring, 2003), pp. 53-88, Published by: American Educational

Research Association.

Transforming Bureaucratic Organization into Learning ...

Documents

Transcript of Transforming Bureaucratic Organization into Learning ...