Examining the relationship between learning organization characteristics and change adaptation, innovation, and organizational performance

By Constantine Kontoghiorghes, Susan M. Awbre, Pamela L. Feurig. 2005

257 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The main purpose of this exploratory study was to examine the relationship between certain learning organization characteristics and change adaptation, innovation, and bottom-line organizational performance. The following learning organization characteristics were found to be the strongest predictors of rapid change adaptation, quick product or service introduction, and bottomline organizational performance: open communications and information sharing; risk taking and new idea promotion; and information, facts, time, and resource availability to perform one's job in a professional manner.

Subfields: Communication, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/219232fde5d33488d622d7881f822d6198eae71c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Communication

1. A. Evers
2. Marjan Vermeulen
3. M. Alagaraja
4. Jen-te Yang

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

1. Marieke Thurlings
2. A. Evers
3. Beate Molter
4. Ralf Stegmaier
5. Katrin Noefer
6. Marjan Vermeulen
7. M. Alagaraja
8. Karlheinz Sonntag

In Strategy and Management

1. A. Evers
2. Ralf Stegmaier
3. Marjan Vermeulen
4. M. Alagaraja
5. Karlheinz Sonntag
6. Jen-te Yang

Citations in the corpus

• HRD and HRM Perspectives on Organizational Performance (2013, background): “In another study, Kontoghiorghes et al. (2005) examined the relationship between certain learning organization characteristics and change adaptation, innovation, and bottom-line OP.”
• The relationship between learning capability and organizational performance: A meta‐analytic examination (2012, background): “Another frequently mentioned outcome is organizational innovation or innovativeness (Aragon-Correa et al., 2007; Garcia-Morales and Llorens-Montes, 2006; Hurley and Hult, 1998; Jimenez-Jimenez et al., 2008; Kontoghiorghes et al., 2005; Lin et al., 2008; Llorens Montes et al., 2005; Mavondo et al., 2”
• A Great Many Things to Do and Not a Minute to Spare: Can Feedback From Supervisors Moderate the Relationship Between Skill Variety, Time Pressure, and Employees' Innovative Behavior? (2009, background): “To enable implementation of new ideas, time pressure may lead to increased employee motivation to limit discussion time and generate higher pressure to find consensus among different opinions (Kontoghiores, Awbrey, & Feurig, 2005 ).”
• Toward a Model of Explaining Teachers’ Innovative Behavior (2015, background): “Need for peer networking + i Mushayikwa and Lubben (2009) Networking + i, o Borasi and Finnigan (2010) Talking with colleagues + v Tomic and Brouwers (1999) Professional partnerships + i, o Mohammad and HarlechJones (2008) Inquiry group + i, o Eisenman et al.”