Organizational Learning (OL)

Despite the deliberate move by the Government of Kenya to expand university education through the creation of more universities and expansion of programmes offered to get industrialized by the year 2030 in line with the Kenya Vision 2030, Kenyan universities continue to be ranked low internationally as only University of Nairobi and Strathmore University were ranked among top 50 out of 12000 institutions in Africa in survey conducted by the Webometrics in 2011 and no Kenyan university was ranked among the top 1000 in a survey conducted by the Academic Ranking of World Universities in 2012 thus the competitiveness of Kenyan universities has become a point of concern following these low positions in ranking (Kaluyu, M’chebere, & Gichunge, 2014). Furthermore, literature increasingly considers OL as a basis for gaining a SCA and a key variable in the enhancing of organizational performance (Bontis et al., 2002; Brockmand & Morgan, 2003; Dimovski & Škerlavaj, 2005; Jashapara, 2003; Kamya et al., 2011; Njuguna, 2009). However, there is paucity of research examining the role of organizational learning in sustainable competitive advantage of universities especially in developing countries. The background provided indicates a research gap that can be addressed by answering the research question below: what is the role of organizational learning in sustainable competitive advantage of universities in Kenya?

The main purpose of this study to find out the relationship among transformational leadership (TL), organizational learning (OL), and organizational innovation (OI) in manufacturing food industry in east of Asia countries include China, Taiwan, and Malaysia. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test the research hypotheses from168 manufacturing food companies. Our research model contains three constructs, and the results showed there is positive impact between constructs. Also, Organizational learning is a mediator in the linkage between transformational leadership and organizational innovation.

Today organizational environments face increasing changes and organizations have to react properly to these continuous changes in this competitive arena. In the meantime, the development of human resources of organizations as their most important capital is inevitable, and job motivation is one of the most important factors influencing the organization’s performance. (Gharekhani et al., 2009). Motivation refers to the internal states of the organism that guides behavior to a particular purpose (Seyf, 2009). Job motivation indicates one’s willingness to do work, help them with their material, spiritual and social environments, overcome obstacles and compete with others through much effort to do things better (Beykzadeh, et al., 2010). Employees who have high motivation, help to improve working conditions, increase job satisfaction, achieve organizational goals, and increase organizational performance, creativity, and innovation (Hanifi & Rahimi, 2009). Today, in order to take advantage of the excellent opportunities provided by specific global conditions, we need organizational flexibility, and for this purpose, managers usually try to develop the organizational learning process in organizations (Beikzadeh et al., 2010). Organizational learning as a competitive a d v a n t a g e i s c o n s i d e r e d v i t a l f o r organizations, and organizations that do not keep pace with inclusive changes will quickly become obsolete; therefore, for survival and success, organizations must abandon traditional practices and find knowledge, skills and strategies to succeed them in the future. Empowerment is also one of the important strategies for adapting the organization to external changes, and if it is used, it will not only increase

Knowledge has become a significant asset both for individuals and organizations. Thus, successful knowledge management can be the chief determinant for the survival of an enterprise in a knowledge-based economy. Nevertheless, hurdles to efficient and effective knowledge management are many. One of these hurdles is knowledge inertia which may inhibit an organization’s capability to learn and solve problems. However, when facing problems, people generally resort to their prior knowledge and experience for solutions. Such routine problem-solving strategy is termed "knowledge inertia". This study aims to establish the constructs of knowledge inertia and examine the relationships between knowledge inertia, organizational learning and organizational innovation. Structural equation modeling is employed to discuss the degree of influence each construct has on others. A questionnaire survey was conducted to collect data from 3 different Universities. A total of 495 valid responses were collected. Our results reveal that when a firm’s members have either less learning inertia or experience inertia, the performance of the organizational learning and organizational innovation will be better.

The survey was not comprehensive to include all possible bank employees in Nigeria. Therefore, this research is limited to the banks and the results can take a broad view to banking sectors. This study inspects the relationship between organizational learning, career, and organizational commitment in Nigeria, a sub-Saharan African country in a sub-continent that has been disregarded and under-researched. This study draws management practitioners’ attention to the fact that they should adopt behavior that can help to improve employees’ performance. From an academic perspective, this study offer insight into the relationship between learning and performance, which should contribute to the future development of this line of research, particularly in developing countries like Nigeria.

In the current competitive environment characterized by a turbulent, rapidly changing, intense global competition and high uncertainty (Zahra & George, 2002) to have competitive advantages for improving and maintain the competitive position over time is critical for any organization. In this new situation knowledge has become one the most important intangible assets for the company since it is accumulated through organizational learning, and is difficult to imitate (Winter, 1987; Prahalad & Hamel, 1990; Leonard-Barton, 1992, 1995; Henderson & Cockburn, 1994; Nonaka, 1994; Kogut & Zander, 1996; Nonaka & Toyama, 2003; García et al., 2007). To maximize the value of knowledge is important for managers (Uziene, 2010) since knowledge management allows the firm to influence core competences and obtain competitive advantage in a long term, the creation of knowledge within organization being of particular importance for this process (Nonaka, 1994; Nonaka & Konno, 1998).

has a significant effect on knowledge sharing behavior. This finding was also supported by various studies such as Al-Zu'bi (2011); Ramasamy and Thamaraiselvan (2011); Teh and Yong (2011); Islam et al. (2012); Hsu and Lin (2008); and Susanti and Wimbarti (2012). The study showed that organizational learning culture had a significant effect in moderating of OCB on knowledge sharing behavior. Hypothesis (H2) stated that the organizational learning culture moderates OCB toward the correlation with knowledge sharing behavior could be accepted. Thus, organizational learning culture is a strongly significant moderator of OCB to growth of knowledge sharing behavior. Therefore, organizational learning culture has an important role to strengthen of organizational citizenship behavior toward correlation with knowledge sharing behavior. The more organizational learning culture, the higher strengthen of OCB to improve of knowledge sharing behavior. Empowering people was the main reason that strengthens of sportsmanship to knowledge sharing behavior. Inviting people to contribute to the organizations’s vision strengthened the adaption of employement to the work so they more provide to share their knowledge with their colleagues. This study is consistent with suggestions Teh and Sun (2012) suggested that is needed for other variable to moderate OCB in strengthening to correlation on knowledge sharing behavior.Theoretically, organizational learning culture was one of form of Behavioral Theory of the Firm applied by non-profit organizations. According to the Behavioral Theory of the Firm as proposed by March (1962) in Augier (2004) that the firm as an adaptive system between political coalition, cooperation between individuals and another groups within the firm who has the distinction of each destination so allowing conflicts of interest. Empirically, it was supported by findings research of DrachSomech-Zahavy, 2004; Issa and Haddad, 2008; Islam et al., 2011; 2012; Idris et al., 2015; Shahhosseini and Nadi, (2015).

In the current competitive environment characterized by a turbulent, rapidly changing, intense global competition and high uncertainty (Zahra & George, 2002) to have competitive advantages for improving and maintain the competitive position over time is critical for any organization. In this new situation knowledge has become one the most important intangible assets for the company since it is accumulated through organizational learning, and is difficult to imitate (Winter, 1987; Prahalad & Hamel, 1990; Leonard-Barton, 1992, 1995; Henderson & Cockburn, 1994; Nonaka, 1994; Kogut & Zander, 1996; Nonaka & Toyama, 2003; García et al., 2007). To maximize the value of knowledge is important for managers (Uziene, 2010) since knowledge management allows the firm to influence core competences and obtain competitive advantage in a long term, the creation of knowledge within organization being of particular importance for this process (Nonaka, 1994; Nonaka & Konno, 1998).

Recommendations are made only with regard to the major contributors to employee motivation through organizational learning. In order to strategically utilize organizational learning as a motivational tool for teachers, it is recommended that school heads introduce multi-discipline empowerment where staff are allowed to learn another relevant skill, employ mentoring and couching as a developmental tool for staff, create space and time for individuals and teams to be innovative and allow them to pursue goals that they believe will benefit them and ultimately the organization, and create exposure opportunities for individuals and teams to do special projects and attend workshops, and visit other competitive schools through benchmarking so that they can gain useful experiences to be shared in the schools. The school supervisors also need to consider creating opportunities where staff participate in decision-making processes. For example involving teachers in meetings, workshops, conferences wherever it is practically possible from conception to implementation of decisions. They also need to create space to talk to all staff on issues of concern to them and seek their input. Even if there are no immediate solutions to their concerns, the fact that you have created a platform for engagement goes a long way to creating a perception of personal and professional growth.

Demographic section comprised of gender, age, education and occupation of the respondents. Subjective section comprised of organizational change, organizational culture, organizational politics and organizational learning. Sample size for the study was 300 but 129 managers, 54 employees, 76 faculty members and 5 students wereincluded to get responses for analysis. 300 questionnaires were distributed and 264 out of 300 were received completed questionnaires at the response rate of 88%.A survey instrument in the form of close ended questionnaire was developed for the purpose of collection of data. Survey consisted of 40 items to gather responses from managers, employees, faculty members and students while 5 point Likert scale was used to measure these responses. Data was collected from educational, banking and industrial sectors with stratified random sampling technique. The target population of this research was University of the Punjab Gujranwala Campus, Gift University, Bank of Punjab, Habib Bank Limited, United Bank Limited, Bank Alfalah Limited, Coca Cola Company and Strategic Systems International Lahore. The participants were 17% female and 83% male.

Purpose of this study is to analyze the influence of transformational leadership on organizational performance through the dynamic capabilities of organizational learning in telecom sector of Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Structural equation modeling was used to test the research hypotheses. The data was collected through survey questionnaires which were distributed to the employees of telecom sector of KSA. A random sample of 70 employees was used to collect the data. The response rate was 80%. The results reveal that transformational leadership positively influences the organizational performance and learning. The study also confirms existence of positive association between organizational learning and performance. The study is useful for the managers in telecom sector to understand the impact of transformation leaders to enhance learning capabilities of the employees which ultimately increases the performance of the employees in telecom sector.

The concept of organizational learning, the piece we see connected to internationalization, is seen as instrumental to a business entity success and competitive advantage acquisition and this segment relies heavily on the work and research of [17] and an in-depth look would also be taken with regards to the types of organizational learning seen to affect firms. Four different perspectives of the idea of learning organization have been advanced, as well as a specific label for each of them, as a way of simplifying the communication for the underlying idea. First, the term learning organization is used synonymously with old organizational learning, the knowledge that the individuals have learned (often over a certain time period) as ―agents for the organization is stored in the organizational memory [17], [18]‖. Second, the term learning organization can mean an organization where the learning takes place at work and not on courses-learning at work. Third, the label can be used to describe an organization that facilitates the learning of all its employees-a learning climate. Fourth, a popular perspective today is to consider the ―learning organization as an organic structure with a high degree of flexibility, in order to satisfy the customers of the company [19], [20]‖. The aim of creating a flawless semantic framework for the idea of learning organization emerges through the prism of the above four labels. However, the existence of different perspectives of the learning organization in the literature probably not only gives a vague picture of the overall concept but it also creates opportunities for companies to choose a variant of the idea that fits their strategic interest [21], [22]. Simply put by definition a learning organization presumes the existence of certain operational flexibility and commitment to learning, without which the benefits of learning do not permeate a firm’s processes and decisions making activities.

applicable for Pakistani service sector, the researchers went through a number of studies conducted in different countries from developed to developing and also conducted in Pakistan and found a strong positive relationship between knowledge management, organizational learning and organizational performance. For instance, Mahesh and Suresh (2009) concluded that organizations operating in this modern business where the key factor of production is knowledge, they need to manage the exchange of knowledge to maintain organizational effectiveness for enhanced performance. Significantly, Pandey and Dutta (2013) in their research on a medium-sized, global IT solutions company in India found a positive relationship between organizational capabilities to manage knowledge through knowledge capability infrastructure on the knowledge management excellence. Similarly, another study conducted on banking sector in Pakistan by Hassan (2013) revealed a positive correlation between organizational learning and long-term success of banking sector. Furthermore, Danish (2012) in his research in Pakistani service industry, found the steering role of organizational learning along with organizational change and knowledge sharing on knowledge management, thus enabling knowledge management in resulting increased organizational performance.

Some researchers proclaim that there is an intuitive connection between organizational learning and information systems. At each stage of organizational life, there are processes that evoke the metaphor of learning and information system observe, stores, interprets and institutionalizes this new learning (Tofan, 2013; Hashmi, 2013; Al-Mamary, Shamsuddin, & Aziati, 2014; Mbam, 2016; Nwaocha, 2016). It is then well utilized with the help of information system applications and devices which manifold organizational efficiency and effectiveness (Moon, Ruona, & Valentine, 2017; Ahmad, Mahmood, Hussin, & Dahlan, 2016). The role of Information systems (IS) is like a heart in the body which plays the role of supplying pure blood to all the elements of the body including the brain (Alalwan, Dwivedi, Rana, & Williams, 2016). Different applications and system have been devised for memorizing and learning, which has minimized the load of the workers (Joseph, 2014; Belle, 2016). Information system and mobile technology have devised supporting tools for learning at individual and organizational level. Therefore, many researchers as also depicted in the research problem area have recommended that information system is expected to fulfil the needs of an individual, a group of individuals and the management functionaries for organizational learning (Joseph, 2014; Belle, 2016; Balasubramanian, 2011). Based on the gaps, literature review, research questions and objectives, the proposed model is given below

There are three possible pairs of learning relationships in organizations: 1) individual learning and team learning, 2) individual learning and organizational learning, and 3) team learning and organizational learning (Chan, 2003; Friedman, 2001; March, 1991; Yang et al., 2004). In schools, individual learning is a precursor to group and organizational learning. Both group learning and organizational learning are measurable and exist beyond individual teachers (Fauske & Raybould, 2005). For every point in an individual cycle of learning, there is an equivalent in team learning. For instance, when individuals personally reflect, teams publicly reflect or while team members coordinate their action, individuals implement their plan (Ross et al., 1994). Senge et al. (1994) defined team learning as transforming conversational and collective thinking skills so that groups of people could reliably develop a team intelligence and abilities greater than the sum of individual members’ talents. Senge (1990), an educator, used the metaphors of molecules transforming iron into a magnet or several musical instruments playing in harmony to create jazz music to illustrate his theory. Edmondson (2002) viewed team learning as a collective decision to change. She defined team learning as a process in which a team takes action, obtains and reflects upon feedback, and adapts by making changes. Two educators, Mitchell and Sackney (2000), suggested that in schools team learning happens in a collaborative process in which members distribute knowledge, become part of a collective discourse, and expand professional capacity. Team members clearly understand their tasks, share a sense of purpose, and do not avoid conflict in disagreement. Another educator, Leithwood (1998), pointed out that team members need to learn two things. First, they have to develop a shared understanding of the team and what collective action is required to accomplish its purposes. Second, as an individual teacher, a person must know what kind of contributions he can make for the collective learning of a team.

Over the past few years, Chinese enterprises have made tremendous progress in promoting organizational learning. Chinese managers are now more aware of the theories and practice of organizational learning and learning organizations. However, certain sub-capabilities (such as the building of organizational memory) of organizational learning need to be further improved. In addition, Chinese enterprises are supposed to adopt more advanced and effective means to promote the efficiency of knowledge acquisition from the external environment and experience sharing within organizations. Likewise, many enterprises also need to establish modern training and training performance evaluation mechanism to facilitate organizational learning and promote the establishment of learning organizations. We propose five suggestions on promoting organizational learning and establishing learning organizations in China: 1) Awareness. Chinese enterprises should be more aware of the changes in business environment both at home and abroad and maintain the foresightedness and strategic nature of their organizational learning activities; 2) Pragmatism. To give up any empty slogans and formalities and promote organizational learning in a down-to-earth way; 3) Holistic approaches. Chinese enterprises should promote organizational learning from all three levels and facilitate the complementariness of the three-level learning; 4) Continuous processes. Chinese enterprises need to systematize and routinize all kinds of organizational learning activities and help employees form learning habits. None of these can be achieved overnight; 5) Emphasis on communication. Chinese enterprises should pay more attention to communicating with peer enterprises home and abroad in order to learn from one another and to promote organizational learning in China.

Institutionalization is the process where an organization's code of conduct, mission, policies, vision, and strategy become incorporated into the daily activities of its officers and other Institutionalization occurs when the culture of an organization becomes so well established that it is understood by people inside and outside of the organization. It aims at integrating fundamental values and objectives into the organization's culture and structure. Organizational culture is a of shared meaning held by members that distinguishes the organization from other organizations. The origin of culture as affecting an employee’s attitude and behavior can be traced back to the notion of institutionalization. When an stitutionalized, it takes on a life of its own, apart from its founders, managers or employees. Sony, Gillette, McDonald’s and Disney are some examples of organizations that have become valued for themselves, not merely for the goods or services they produce. Institutionalization produces common understandings among members about what is appropriate and fundamentally meaningful behavior in an organization. When an organization becomes institutional, shared meanings become evident to its when a strong organizational culture is Crossan, Lane and White (1999) explain that “institutionalizing is the process of ensuring that routinized nstitutionalization is the process that distinguishes organizational learning from individual and group learning as it is through this process that ideas are transformed into institutions of the organization. This implies that there is a deliberate effort to root knowledge at the organizational level so that it may persist and be repeated in the future with regularity and become recognized as an Institutionalization shows the extent to which norms, decisions and beliefs are becoming incorporated into the normal, ongoing activities of the organization. In this has been introduced to understand organizational learning patterns under various degrees of institutional isomorphism. This is in no way saying that one learning method is superior to another, it just proposes a model to predict which learning procedure most likely occurs under what conditions.

In consequence, they have emerged many new concepts: tacit knowledge, explicit knowledge, human capital, structural capital, customer capital, relational capital, etc. All of them put the accent on the set of knowledge that generates intellectual capital, which is considered as the greatest source of knowledge possibility of organizations, since it is demonstrated that, both now and in the future, it is the most competitive value important. Organizations, in an attempt to optimize their process of recruitment, facilitation, creation and management of knowledge, have tried to make these nuclei of intelligibility (Gergen, 1996), the most adaptive possible (Krogh, Ichijo and Nonaka, 2001). Given all these changes, what concepts, categories and conceptual artifacts do we have to discover the internal functioning of organizations? What new social regularities, configurations and conflicts are emerging? Is there a theoretical body capable of capturing the fundamental characteristics of complex organizations? Is it necessary to state the evolution of existing theories? Is it possible to determine a nucleus of intelligibility that manages to decipher new emergencies in complex organizational systems? At the level of organizations, how the social organization of the members of an organization and its environment is transformed to generate different types of organizational learning over time (t1-t0)? And what are the social regulatory mechanisms of the multiple imbalances and successive rebalances generated by their interaction and by the variations of their environment?

765 financial performance). Data were collected with help of Dimensions of the learning organization questionnaire and results indicated the presence of positive and significant relationship between learning components and organizational performance in companies accepted in Tehran Stock Exchange. Considering the above-mentioned result, improvement of condition of learning components in organizations led to competitive advantage and achievement of better performance for organization. Asadi et al., (2009) studied relationship between organizational learning and performance in experts of Physical Education Organization. In this regard, Organizational Learning and Performance Questionnaire of Yang et al., (2004) has been used. Research showed that there was positive and significant relationship between continual learning in personal level and organizational performance of experts. There is also positive and significant relationship between other dimensions of learning (team learning, empowerment, communication in system and strategic leadership) and organizational performance of experts. The findings emphasize on importance of organizational learning and its levels (personal learning, team learning and organizational learning) as one of the factors affecting increase of performance level of experts of Physical Education Organization.

We acknowledge an important definition proposed by Andreu and Sieber (2000) that conceives organizational learning as “a knowledge change or accumulation that results in an increased collective problem-solving capacity” (p. 70). According to Lei et al. (1996), core competences are defined as “a central set of problem-defining and problem-solving insights that enable the firm to create potentially idiosyncratic strategic growth alternatives and to enact, at least partially, its environment” (p. 550). Hence, by combining these two definitions, we can view organizational learning as a process that may result in changes in a firm’s core competences. However, based on these descriptions thus far, how core competences are built within an organization is still not comprehensible. The “learning ladder model” suggested by Ciborra and Andreu (2001) can fill this gap. In the capability development process, Ciborra and Andreu differentiate three distinct types of learning loop, including (1) routinization learning loop, (2) capability learning loop, and (3) strategic learning loop. They describe the organizational learning process as climbing a learning ladder—from work practices/routines to capabilities and thereby to core capabilities (core competences). However, they only indicate feed-forward learning flows. If we want to get a full picture of organizational learning, both feed-forward learning and feedback learning flows should be taken into account. Feed-forward learning represents new knowledge introduced to or accumulated in the organization and feedback learning indicates existing knowledge is transferred or reinforced in the organization. The directions of these two learning flows are opposite and they cancel each other out when they influence the same object.