The relationship among organisational learning, continuous improvement and performance improvement: An evolutionary perspective

Abstract

This paper records the research on the relationship between organisational learning (OL), continuous improvement (CI) and performance improvement from an evolutionary perspective. The research may contribute to the literature by providing new explanations to the questions such as whether OL and CI are equal and how OL and CI influence each other. The research is based on the survey data from about 500 companies in 15 countries/regions. Data analysis is based on structural equation modelling (SEM). OL is treated as an evolutionary process and measured separately by previous learning and current learning. The results can be summarised as follows. First, CI directly contributes to performance, while OL does not contribute directly. Second, CI and OL do enhance each other, but there is a time lag. Well-established learning capability contributes to CI, and CI in return supports current OL. The relationship is evolutionary like rolling a snowball. The result suggests that companies have to be patient when implementing OL and also incorporate OL with CI or other problem-oriented programmes.

Capability contingent: the impact of organisational learning styles on innovation performance

“…Organisational learning has been widely regarded as an important approach by which organisations can survive and grow in this dynamic and turbulent competitive environment (Ni & Sun, 2009). According to March (1991), the goals of organisational learning should be as follows.…”

A Theoretical Model to Solve Cost Shifting Problem

“…Cost shifting also drives staff productivity improvements and reduces costs over time (Terziovski and Sohal 2000). Here, new technologies (Theodorakopoulos et al 2012), services technological systems improvements (Badescu and Garcés-Ayerbe 2009), research and development (Coccia 2012), and employee training/skills building (Terziovski andSohal 2000, Ni andSun 2009) can reduce costs, improve competitiveness, and build user perceptions regarding the services provided (Hu and Hsu 2008, Mansury and Love 2008, Hsieh et al 2012. Literature adds this improvement is not always sustainable, but both internal efficiencies and effectiveness improvements often arise (Hu and Hsu 2008).…”

“…This study adopts organization learning concepts (Hamilton and Tee, 2010) through an employer sponsored training program (Ni and Sun, 2009) and develops a theoretical utility sector organization approach capturing cost shifting and possible solutions. This hypothetical utility sector organization operates within budgetary constraints, and offers products through two opposing units -a monopoly unit, and a competitive unit.…”

Theory of reasoned action for continuous improvement capabilities: a behavioral approach

“…This attitude according to Ni & Sun (2009), Anand and others (2009) and Bessant and others (2001), is indispensable for the CI capability as well for the organizational performance (Ahmad and Schroeder, 2003). In this company, knowledge sharing was greatly encouraged and widely practiced through the idea suggestion system.…”

“…The CI intention can be influenced by attitudes toward the learning process (ANAND, and others, 2009;NI and SUN, 2009), leadership commitment and the involvement of employees in the quality processes (PENG, and others, 2008). From a normative perspective, factors such as the charges imposed by customers, legislation, competitive forces, and market demand (ADLER and others, 2009;BENNER and TUSHMAN, 2003), represent the obligations that result from the intention of the company to make improvements (see Figure 1).…”