Informal workplace learning: Development and validation of a measure

Abstract

Informal workplace learning (IWL) is an important part of workrelated continuing education, especially in the case of bluecollar workers. The current article presents a new measure of IWL, which we developed based on the already existing Dynamic Model of Informal Learning by Tannenbaum et al. (2010). We extended the model to eight components by theoretical considerations, introducing a second-order structure. Each component is represented on the IWL scale with three items, the subscales have sound internal consistencies (α range between .76 and .92). The article also presents a short version of the scale comprising eight items (α = .79). Study 1 describes the process of item selection, while Study 2 deals with different theoretically conceivable models comparing their model fits. The predicted model with eight factors in a second-order structure achieves the best model fit. In addition, convergent, discriminant, and criterion validity are demonstrated. Mediumsized relationships of IWL components to conscientiousness and learning outcomes confirm the nomological network we developed previously in our study. The discussion provides limitations and possible scientific and practical applications of the IWL scale, for example, the transfer of the measure to other contexts and target groups. K E Y W O R D S blue-collar workers, informal workplace learning, scale development

Work Characteristics or Workers’ Characteristics? An Input-Process-Output Perspective on Informal Workplace Learning of Blue-Collar Workers

“…The authors themselves indicated that the components may be subdivided even more in detail. Therefore, Decius et al (2019) extended the dynamic model from four to eight components by separating each component into two sub-factors. In their octagon model, experience/action was divided into trying/ applying own ideas and model learning; feedback into direct feedback and vicarious feedback; reflection into anticipatory reflection and subsequent reflection; intent to learn into intrinsic intent to learn and extrinsic intent to learn.…”

“…The octagon model is a multilevel model with a core factor IWL, four components at the first level, and eight components at the second level. Building on the conceptual basis of the octagon model, Decius et al (2019) provided a measure for the operationalization of IWL. We decided to use this measure because it was developed for the target group of blue-collar workers and has a theoretical foundation with the octagon model, unlike other measures being developed in rather exploratory processes (e.g., Choi and Jacobs 2011;Froehlich et al 2017;Grosemans et al 2020;Noe et al 2013;Wolfson et al 2018).…”

“…One could expect that for bluecollar jobs IWL would play a minor role because they are largely prescribed and line driven, but the opposite is the case: IWL is less affected by the mentioned learning barriers than formal learning and takes place in an authentic setting which facilitates learning transfer (Billett 1995). IWL therefore is an important supplement to formal training among blue-collar workers (Decius et al 2019).…”

“…Although the meta-analysis of Cerasoli et al represents an important milestone in IWL research, it inevitably has relied on initial studies that operationalized IWL in an inconsistent manner and in most cases without conceptual basis. Acknowledging this shortcoming, we rely on the Octagon Model of IWL by Decius et al (2019) for IWL conceptualization. In addition to the meta-analysis of Cerasoli et al we include further cross-sectional studies that do not contain predictors for learning behavior but for learning intentions of blue-collar workers (e.g., Kyndt et al 2011Kyndt et al , 2013a.…”

„Kompetenzen und ihre Entwicklung in der Arbeitswelt von Morgen: branchenunabhängig, individualisiert, verbunden, digitalisiert?“

“… 2019 ; Decius et al. 2019 ). Merkmale des Trainingsteilnehmenden wie beispielsweise die Motivation zum Transfer, die Transfervolition, aber auch Umgebungsfaktoren wie die Unterstützung von Kollegen und Vorgesetzten, die Möglichkeit von Belohnung oder Sanktion bei der Umsetzung des Gelernten wurden hierbei als entscheidende Faktoren für den Transfer, die über die Transfermotivation und die Transfervolition wirken, empirisch bestätigt (vgl.…”