In the Pursuit of Understanding How to Balance Lower and Higher Order Learning in Organizations

Espedal, Bjarne

doi:10.1177/0021886308319717

Cited by 21 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 62 publications

(74 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Without goals, a person cannot act because action is defined as goal‐oriented behavior (Frese & Zapf, ). It is also hypothesized that reflective activities involving reviewing objectives or work processes enable the identification of beliefs or routines that should be stopped (Espedal, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Goal orientation, critical reflection, and unlearning: An individual‐level study

Matsuo

2017

Human Resource Dev Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although individual unlearning is significant for personal growth and development, few studies have investigated this process quantitatively. The main goal of this study was to examine the antecedents of individual unlearning in terms of goal orientations and reflective activities using survey data from 271 employees of Japanese organizations (including municipal government employees, human resource development [HRD] trainers from a consulting firm, and hospital nurses). The results indicated that learning goal orientation had an indirect effect on unlearning through reflection and critical reflection as well as through critical reflection only. Performance goal orientation also had an indirect effect on unlearning through reflection and, subsequently, through critical reflection. The findings suggest that critical reflection plays a key role in linking goal orientations with individual unlearning. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Goal orientation, critical reflection, and unlearning: An individual‐level study

Matsuo

2017

Human Resource Dev Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, the leadership's ability to influence an organization's capacity to become more dynamic requires that the leadership devotes time to learn from one's own experience and the experience of others (Levitt and March, 1988;March, 1999). Through such learning, the leadership might discover both a need to change organizational practice and premises for new practice (Espedal, 2008).…”

Section: Why Might Discretion Be Beneficial For Adaptiveness?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Is managerial discretion good or bad for organizational adaptiveness?

Espedal

2013

Leadership

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Managerial discretion is generally seen as a leadership capacity that affects organizations' ability to adapt to new and changing demands and circumstances. The aim of this article is to examine this traditional view. Based on a review of the literature, I will argue: Both too little and too much managerial discretion might be disadvantageous to appropriate organizational adaptiveness. Based on findings from a pilot study of top leaders as ''change agents,'' I will make the argument: It is difficult for top leaders as change agents to have both discretion and power.

show abstract

“…Individuals, groups, and organizations modify their beliefs and behaviours by observing their own and others' experiences, possibly making inferences about the causes of those experiences (Levitt and March, 1988). This kind of learning is an organizational capability which shapes (a) the capacity to create value from knowledge by exploiting what they have learned from the past and from exploring new possibilities for the future (Espedal, 2006(Espedal, , 2008bMarch, 1991), (b) the conditions for detecting and correcting errors (Argyris, 1999), (c) the ability to improve collective understanding of a situation or discover unexpected consequences of previous actions (Edmondson, 1999) and (d) the absorptive capacity (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990). Within these contexts, CEO cooperative behaviour may enhance trust-building, willingness to speak up, and motivation to be mutually helpful.…”

Section: Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

When Cooperation is the Norm of Appropriateness: How Does CEO Cooperative Behaviour Affect Organizational Performance?

Espedal

Kvitastein

Grønhaug

2011

British J of Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study has tested the prediction that CEO cooperative behaviour has an impact upon organizational performance. This is a fundamental organizational issue that is in clear need of illumination through studies of practice. We pursued the issue through a study of leadership in organizations located in the Norwegian socio-cultural context in which cooperation has been, and still is, a norm of appropriateness. The study provided empirical evidence of a positive relationship between CEO cooperative behaviour and organizational performance. This relationship appeared to be stronger in organizational contexts in which CEOs are perceived to have legitimacy and managerial discretion, and it appeared to be weaker in organizations in which individual performance pay is the rule. Since some organizational characteristics have the potential to enhance the impact of CEO cooperative behaviour while other characteristics might inhibit this impact, leaders have to consider carefully how to develop and maintain individual and organizational capabilities that are needed to act appropriately.

show abstract

In the Pursuit of Understanding How to Balance Lower and Higher Order Learning in Organizations

Cited by 21 publications

References 62 publications

Goal orientation, critical reflection, and unlearning: An individual‐level study

Goal orientation, critical reflection, and unlearning: An individual‐level study

Is managerial discretion good or bad for organizational adaptiveness?

When Cooperation is the Norm of Appropriateness: How Does CEO Cooperative Behaviour Affect Organizational Performance?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About