When are workload and workplace learning opportunities related in a curvilinear manner? The moderating role of autonomy

Abstract

Building on theoretical frameworks like the Job Demands Control model and Action Theory we tested whether the relationship between workload and employees' experiences of opportunities for workplace learning is of an inverted u-shaped nature and whether autonomy moderates this relationship. We predicted that-at moderate levels of autonomy-workload was positively associated with learning opportunities at low levels of workload, but negatively at high levels of workload. Also, we predicted that low autonomy prevents positive effects of moderate workload from materializing whereas high autonomy makes high workload less destructive to the learning process. Furthermore, we examined whether learning opportunities increase particularly as a function of higher matched levels of workload and autonomy and whether mismatch between workload and autonomy is particularly detrimental to the learning process. We found support for these ideas in two large and heterogeneous samples of working adults using moderated and polynomial regression analysis and subsequent response surface methodology. These results integrate conflicting prior findings and extend Karasek's (1979) active learning hypothesis. They also have clear implications for job redesign practices aiming to promote workplace learning opportunities.

Experience of work-related flow: Does high decision latitude enhance benefits gained from job resources?

“…The results further indicate that the benefit from job resources such as social capital and innovative learning climate on work-related flow is dependent on the degree of autonomy and skill discretion experienced at work. Too high demands, in relation to the degree of autonomy, have previously been found to frustrate learning opportunities (van Ruysseveldt & van Dijke, 2011), presumably by reducing the time for new thinking and reflection (Ellström, 2001).…”

“…A high degree of autonomy may in itself be a job resource, but it may also be crucial in order to promote other job resources, such as learning opportunities (Van Ruysseveldt & Van Dijke, 2011). Social capital and an innovative learning climate consider the individual as part of a collective activity in which knowledge and skills are shared.…”

Learning in the Twenty-First-Century Workplace

“…Preenen et al (2011) found that challenging assignments were negatively related to turnover intentions and job search behaviors and that these relationships were mediated by on-the-job learning. Van Ruysseveldt & Van Dijke (2011) found that the positive relationship between workload and workplace learning opportunities occurred only at moderate levels of autonomy, whereas at both low and high levels of autonomy, the relationship was negative. DeRue & Wellman (2009) found that the relationship between developmental challenge and leadership skill development exhibited a pattern of diminishing returns, which could be offset by access to feedback.…”

Lean production tools and decision latitude enable conditions for innovative learning in organizations: A multilevel analysis

“…Decision latitude is an important condition for learning and reflection (Karasek & Theorell, 1990;Ellström, 2001), especially when work pace and demands are intensified (van Ruysseveldt & van Dijke, 2011), and is important for innovation and initiative (Ohly et al, 2006). A high degree of decision latitude at work is a job resource that enables employees to take advantage of an innovative learning climate at work (Fagerlind, Gustavsson, Johansson & Ekberg, 2013).…”