The mediating role of social informal learning in the relationship between learning climate and employability

Samantha Crans (Educational Research and Development, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands)
Maike Gerken (Universität Witten∕Herdecke, Witten, Germany)
Simon Beausaert (Educational Research and Development, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands)
Mien Segers (Educational Research and Development, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands)

Career Development International

ISSN: 1362-0436

Article publication date: 13 July 2021

Issue publication date: 8 October 2021

2770

Abstract

Purpose

This study examines whether learning climate relates to employability competences through social informal learning (i.e. feedback, help and information seeking).

Design/methodology/approach

Multiple regression analyses and structural equation modeling were used to test direct and indirect effects in a sample of 372 employees working in two Dutch governmental institutes.

Findings

The analyses confirmed that learning climate has an indirect effect on employability competences through feedback, help and information seeking. More specifically, the findings suggest that learning climate is important for employees' engagement in proactive social informal learning activities. Engaging in these learning activities, in turn, relates to a higher level of employability.

Originality/value

This study employs an integrative approach to understanding employability by including the organization's learning climate and employees' social informal learning behavior. It contributes to the extant literature on professional development by unraveling how proactive social informal learning relates to employability competences. It also provides new insights on learning climate as a determinant for social informal learning and employability.

Keywords

Citation

Crans, S., Gerken, M., Beausaert, S. and Segers, M. (2021), "The mediating role of social informal learning in the relationship between learning climate and employability", Career Development International, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 678-696. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-09-2020-0234

Publisher

:

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2021, Samantha Crans, Maike Gerken, Simon Beausaert and Mien Segers

License

Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode


Introduction

In present times, many organizations face the challenge to answer to changing market demands due to innovations in their field, increased competition and internalization, technological advancements, aging workforces and new ways of working (Nauta et al., 2010; Mc Kee and Eraut, 2012; Scully-Russ and Torraco, 2020; Valverde et al., 2000; Van der Heijden et al., 2016, 2018). Consequently, organizations recognize the need to be flexible and able to adapt to these challenges to remain competitive (Collet et al., 2015). A firm's performance and competitiveness highly depend on the capabilities and transformative potential of its workforce. Employees who possess up-to-date knowledge, skills and abilities are valuable assets for organizations and a source of competitive advantage (Crooke et al., 2011; Delery and Roumpi, 2017; Mahsud et al., 2011). Therefore, organizations want their employees to continuously update their knowledge and develop skills needed to thrive and adapt to changes in their work. These skills and knowledge are also referred to as employability competences and are crucial for an organization's performance and adaptability.

As such the notion of lifelong employability has replaced the traditional view on lifelong employment (Froehlich et al., 2018). Job functions within organizations have changed and careers have become boundaryless and cross-organizational (Brown et al., 2003). Traditional hierarchical career paths no longer meet the demands of the contemporary dynamic labor market and are being replaced by a degree of flexibility in functions (DeFillipi and Arthur, 1996). As a result, employees should possess sufficient domain-specific knowledge. Yet, building and expanding expertise is insufficient. Being able to move flexibly within complex, nontraditional career paths and organizations requires employees to develop complementary skills (Van der Heijden et al., 2009).

These social and adaptive skills enable employees to anticipate work-related changes and developments, to balance their employer's needs as well as their own, and move flexibly within their function. In this respect, Van der Heijde and Van der Heijden (2006) use the concept of employability, defined as “the continuous fulfilling, acquiring or creating of work through the optimal use of competences” (p. 435). In addition to possessing occupational expertise, generic competences such as anticipation and optimization, personal flexibility, corporate sense and balance are relevant to one's employability. These competences enable employees to identify, create and act upon career opportunities (Froehlich et al., 2014a, b; Fugate et al., 2004; Thijssen et al., 2008; Van der Heijde and Van der Heijden, 2006). Employability can be attained and enhanced by employees through learning activities at work (Froehlich et al., 2014a, b; Fryczynska and Ciecierski, 2020; Gerken et al., 2016; Van der Klink et al., 2014; Van der Heijden et al., 2009). It not only broadens one's expertise, it also enables competence development. Informal learning, as a type of workplace learning, is deemed particularly relevant as it not only accounts for the majority of learning at work (Bear et al., 2008; Conlon, 2004; Eraut, 2004; Manuti et al., 2015) but also positively relates to the development of employees' employability (Froehlich et al., 2014a, b; Froehlich et al., 2014a, b; Gerken et al., 2016; Van der Heijden et al., 2009).

If the workplace is essential for learning, it is important to develop an understanding of how employees learn, how they acquire knowledge and how the work setting fosters workplace learning. Eraut (2000) emphasized that social interactions at work contribute to employees' learning. Work-related encounters, relationships and opportunities for receiving feedback are important factors for workplace learning (Eraut, 2007). In other words, learning is embedded in work. Building on this view, social informal learning is characterized by interaction with peers, colleagues and superiors (Boud and Middleton, 2003; Mulder, 2013; Noe et al., 2013; Kyndt et al., 2009). In particular, the way employees seek feedback on the job, search for help and inquire for relevant information has been shown to contribute to outcomes such as employees' employability, innovative work behavior and performance (Bamberger, 2009; Cersaoli et al., 2018; Froehlich et al., 2014a, b; Gerken et al., 2016; Van der Heijden et al., 2009). All of these activities display the social nature of learning. In this respect, the organizational context in which social informal learning takes place can influence whether employees actually engage in learning.

While the organization provides opportunities to learn, it depends on the individual whether he or she chooses to use these opportunities (Billett, 2004). In other words, learning is determined by an interaction between the individual and the context (Tynjälä, 2008). Learning climate is an organizational factor that impacts employees' learning behavior (Marsick and Watkins, 2003; Nikolova et al., 2014) and is defined by Nikolova et al. (2014, p. 259) as “employees' perceptions of organizational policies, and practices aimed at facilitating, rewarding and supporting employee learning behavior”. Building on this view, the current study also explores the role of contextual factors that support learning.

The present study addresses employability from both an organizational and individual perspective, thereby answering the call by Guilbert et al. (2016) for a more integrative approach to understanding employability. From an organizational perspective, organizations are required to adapt to changing market demands. From an individual perspective, employees contribute to their firms' performance as well as their own employability by continuously broadening their skills set, knowledge and abilities. As such, we focus on ways through which organizations can increase their adaptability by facilitating their employees in being employable (i.e. learning climate) and individuals can increase their employability (through social informal learning). Scholars do refer to a potential relation between contextual factors, workplace learning and employability or competence development (Gerken et al., 2016; Nauta et al., 2010; Scully-Ross and Torraco, 2020; Van der Heijden et al., 2009; Williams et al., 2016), yet empirical research is largely missing. Prior researchers have investigated the importance of informal learning for employability. However, only few have focused on the relationship between social informal learning and employability (e.g., Froehlich et al., 2014a, b; Gerken et al., 2016; Van der Heijden et al., 2016). This research provides a promising direction for further exploration of how employability can be attained and enhanced. In addition, since learning climate is a contextual factor that facilitates forms of workplace learning (Cerasoli et al., 2018; Eldor and Harpaz, 2019; Tharenou, 1997), we include it in our research to form an integrative understanding.

In conclusion, the present research aims to contribute to the extant literature by using an integrative approach to employability. We propose a mediation model with social informal learning (individual level) as a mediator between learning climate (organizational level) and employability. To our knowledge, this research is one of the few that empirically investigates the proposed mediating relationship. We explore this relationship by using a quantitative cross-sectional survey study.

Theoretical framework

Employability

The concept of employability has evolved over the last decades corresponding with organizational developments caused by the transition from an industrial to a postindustrial society (Thijssen and Van der Heijden, 2003). For workers, being employable shifted from the notion of merely being employed to also having the responsibility to develop and maintain work-related skills (Hall, 2004). In this respect, definitions of employability emphasized the need for domain-specific knowledge and skills. This is congruent to the current competence-based approach to employability (Fugate et al., 2004; Guilbert et al., 2016; Römgens et al., 2020; Valverde et al., 2000; Van der Heijden et al., 2018). Currently, employability implies continuously broadening one's expertise, flexibility and proactivity (Van der Heijden et al., 2018). This adaptability on part of the employee is needed to perform in a diversity of workplace settings. As such, there is a shift in perspectives on employability from an exclusive focus on skills toward the ability to move flexibly in a diverse range of work contexts (Collet et al., 2015). Competences that are deemed important for this flexibility are social and adaptive by nature (Batistic and Tymon, 2017; Fryczynska and Ciecierski, 2020; Haynie et al., 2020; Rodriquez et al., 2002; Van der Heijden et al., 2009).

Following the current competence-based approach to employability, Van der Heijde and Van der Heijden (2006) conceptualized employability as having domain-specific knowledge and four generic competences. First, occupational expertise refers to the required knowledge and skills to perform current job tasks. Anticipation and optimization entails taking an active role in reflecting on current developments and preparing for future work changes in order to strive for positive career outcomes. Personal flexibility refers to an employee's capacity to passively adapt to work-related changes. Corporate sense refers to the identification with corporate goals and acceptation of collective responsibilities. The final generic competence is balance, referring to the compromise between different elements of employability that are sometimes unequal, such as balancing employees' needs versus the employer's interests, and one's private life versus their career trajectory. Anticipation and optimization, and personal flexibility are flexibility competences emphasizing the current shift in our understanding of employability.

As has become clear, multiple interpretations of employability exist. As several scholars posit, employability can be interpreted from various perspectives ranging from an economic–social perspective, to an individual perspective and ultimately to an organizational perspective (Guilbert et al., 2016; Nauta et al., 2010). The economic–social perspective refers to the more traditional meaning of employability (being employable or unemployable). The individual perspective stresses the shift in employees' competences needed to be able to continuously meet the changing work environment. Finally, the organizational perspective concerns the organizations' ability to continuously adapt to the changing labor market demands. One way to do so is by building an organizational culture that cultivates employability. As Guilbert et al. (2016) posit, there is a need for an integrative understanding of employability. In this regard, the present study addresses employability both from an organizational and individual perspective.

Social informal learning

Workplace learning is increasingly recognized as a means for employees to develop skills needed for employability competences (OECD, 2010; Bartram and Roe, 2008; Van der Heijden et al., 2016). In this respect, Kyndt and Baert (2013, p. 275) define workplace learning as “the engagement in formal and informal learning activities both on and off the job, whereby employees and groups of employees acquire and/or improve competences that change individuals' present and future professional achievement and organizational performance”. Informal learning, as a form of workplace learning, is learner initiated, requires a need or intent to develop, and involves action and reflection (Noe et al., 2013). Informal learning is intertwined with daily work. Employees often learn by engaging in problem-solving and decision-making, by filling a gap in their knowledge or simply by collaborating with others.

Past research on social informal learning identified specific learning activities (Ashford, 1986; Bamberger, 2009; Froehlich et al., 2014a, b; Kyndt et al., 2009). According to review studies by Kyndt et al. (2016) and Meirink et al. (2007), informal learning from others can take place with and without interaction. Proactive activities such as discussing, asking questions and exchanging information are referred to as learning from others with interaction. Passive social informal learning activities such as listening to presentations and observing colleagues can trigger a change in behavior as well, leading to new working methods, perspectives and practices (Eraut, 2004; Meirink et al., 2007). However, since learning at the workplace is by definition socially oriented, previous research has focused more on informal learning activities involving clear interaction with peers and supervisors.

Kyndt et al. (2009) believe that when employees learn proactively from others, they share knowledge and information, seek advice from others and engage in feedback seeking. In a similar vein, Froehlich et al. (2014a, b) have operationalized social informal learning as feedback, help and information seeking. Feedback seeking is a proactive process to identify factors influencing effective or ineffective performance (Salas and Rosen, 2010). Its evaluative component distinguishes feedback seeking from other proactive ways of acquiring information. Help seeking, for example, is defined as “an interpersonal process involving the solicitation of the emotional or instrumental assistance of a work-based colleague” (Bamberger, 2009, p. 51). It is by definition problem-oriented, whereas feedback seeking relates to performance monitoring. Information seeking generally refers to a professional's proactive behavior to obtain general work-related knowledge to compensate for missing information (Morrison, 1993).

Social informal learning and employability

From an individual perspective, employees can increase their employability by engaging in social informal learning. Social informal learning is favored over other types of workplace learning for several reasons. First, social interactions and relationships are inherent to the design of modern job roles. Frequent meetings with clients, colleagues and supervisors as well as open plan offices are examples of how socialization is embedded in daily work practices. Second, social informal learning is considered to be one of the most effective types of workplace learning. Prior research comparing the effects of formal and informal learning on a variety of learning outcomes consistently demonstrate that informal learning positively impacts outcomes such as job performance (Park and Choi, 2016; Wolfson et al., 2018), innovative work behavior (Gerken, 2016) and employability (Froehlich et al., 2014a, b) to a greater extent. Finally, several empirical studies have demonstrated that social aspects of learning led to an increase in competence development and employability (Froehlich et al., 2014a, b). Several studies (e.g., Batistic and Tymon, 2017; Fryczysnka and Ciecierski, 2020; Van der Heijden et al., 2009) demonstrate that networking and network resources reinforce employees' employability. Networking yields not only professional relationships but also access to resources and information useful for one's development. Knowing who one can approach for relevant information, support or guidance increases the likelihood that employees learn from these professional relationships and resources. Similarly, exchanging feedback and information relates to competence development of employees in higher education (Colognesi et al., 2020).

Most research on the relationship between social informal learning and employability focused on feedback seeking. In their review study Ashford et al. (2003) showed that feedback seeking is related to obtaining a more accurate view of one's skills and abilities and to improve performance by increasing goal setting and maintaining or enhancing one's image. Employees gain more knowledge and clarity about how to perform work-related tasks (Anseel et al., 2015), thereby increasing one's level of occupational expertise. Furthermore, employees who seek feedback may not only use this information to evaluate their performance but also to anticipate future and latent changes within one's job. These individuals use feedback to adapt to organizational processes and anticipate work-related changes (Ashford et al., 2003). Research by Froehlich et al. (2014a, b) in different organizations indicated that feedback seeking from colleagues in particular positively relates to anticipation and optimization. Gerken et al. (2016) confirmed this finding in their research among faculty staff in higher education. Additionally, these authors found that feedback seeking also positively relates to occupational expertise and personal flexibility.

The concept of help seeking has received attention from an educational, social psychological and clinical psychological perspective (e.g., Bamberger, 2009; Chan, 2013; Hess and Tracey, 2013; Van der Rijt et al., 2012). It is related to performance as it can reduce uncertainty and clarify one's understanding of his or her work context (Bamberger, 2009; Morrison, 1993). Froehlich et al. (2014a, b) showed that help seeking positively relates to occupational expertise, anticipation and optimization, and personal flexibility. Similar findings were found by Gerken et al. (2016) and Gerken (2016).

Information seeking is important in learning as it clarifies work activities and promotes understanding of the organizational culture (Bamberger, 2009; Cross et al., 2001; Cross and Sproull, 2004). In other words, information seeking is a proactive process that may clarify domain-specific tasks and expectations within a work environment. In this respect, Froehlich et al. (2014a, b) found a positive relationship between information seeking and anticipation and optimization and personal flexibility. Similarly, Gerken et al. (2016) found that information seeking positively relates to anticipation and optimization.

Feedback, help and information seeking are proactive social informal learning activities. Given the emphasis on a proactive role of employees in becoming employable, the current study assumes that these three proactive social informal learning activities will be beneficial for employees' employability. Based on previous research, we formulate the following hypotheses:

H1.

Social informal learning activities positively relate to employability competences (i.e. occupational expertise, anticipation and optimization, balance, personal flexibility and corporate sense), with the strongest effect for feedback seeking.

Learning climate

The organizational context in which learning occurs has been referred to as the learning organization, (supportive) learning environment and learning climate (e.g., Marsick and Watkins, 2003; Nikolova et al., 2014; Ortenblad, 2002). Especially, the concept of learning climate is gaining interest in the workplace learning literature and Human Resource Development (HRD) practices. Nikolova et al. (2014) define it from the professional's perspective and perceive it as a climate that facilitates and rewards learning. Other scholars also emphasize the need for support and opportunities to learn (Eldor and Harpaz, 2016; Marsick and Watkins, 2003; Ortenblad, 2002), as well as feeling safe to make mistakes and learn (Garvin et al., 2008).

Although these authors demonstrate communalities in their conceptualization of learning climate, they operationalize learning climate slightly differently. Based on their work, we identify four main elements. The first element is individuals' perceptions of feeling enabled to learn. Garvin et al. (2008) argue that opposing views, new ideas and reflection should be appreciated. Similarly, Emonds (2018) emphasizes that experimentation and mistakes should be allowed. Second, employees should have opportunities to learn. This can be interpreted as having time to learn or being able to engage in discussions and share different viewpoints (Garvin et al., 2008; Singer et al., 2012). Third, processes and structures that support learning are another key component of learning climate. This entails technology and infrastructure that capture and share learning, such as an online system (Emonds, 2018; Garvin et al., 2008; Marsick and Watkins, 2003; Singer et al., 2012). Finally, leadership that supports and reinforces learning can strengthen the aforementioned factors. Leaders can promote knowledge sharing by actively questioning and listening to different views and new ideas (Garvin et al., 2008), providing space and opportunities to engage in discussions (Garvin et al., 2008; Singer et al., 2012), and acting as strategic leaders who link organizational goals to learning (Marsick and Watkins, 2003). We conclude that a climate that encourages employees to learn and make mistakes, provides ample learning opportunities, offers an appropriate infrastructure and pairs this with encouraging leaders will allow employees to truly learn from their successes and failures.

Learning climate and social informal learning

Learning climate inevitably aims to facilitate and support learning behavior among employees (Cerasoli et al., 2018; Jeong et al., 2018). It does not only provide opportunities to engage in workplace learning but also encourages employees to actively seek solutions to find different ways through which they can expand their knowledge and to take ownership of one's own development (Eldor and Harpaz, 2019). This is particularly relevant for feedback, help and information seeking as proactive learning activities. Given that seeking feedback, help or information may signal a gap in knowledge and potentially involve risks and costs to lose face, a supportive learning climate is key to engage in such behaviors.

In line with the key characteristics of a positive learning climate mentioned above, previous research found that these factors indeed influence employees' learning behavior (Skule, 2004). A study by Van der Rijt et al. (2012) showed that employees' perceptions of a learning climate enable them to engage in proactive behavior, such as help seeking. A learning climate in which employees feel psychologically safe to express their opinions and learn from their errors promotes social informal learning activities. This leads to the following hypothesis:

H2.

Learning climate positively relates to employee engagement in all three social informal learning activities (i.e. feedback, help and information seeking).

Learning climate and employability: the mediating role of social informal learning

Some scholars suggest that contextual factors such as a supportive learning environment might indirectly influence employability (Osagie et al., 2018; Van der Klink et al., 2014; Van der Heijden et al., 2009). Others refer to a potential relationship between such organizational factors, workplace learning and employability (Gerken et al., 2016; Nauta et al., 2010; Scully-Ross and Torraco, 2020; Van der Heijden et al., 2018; Williams et al., 2016). While prior research has shown that learning climate plays a significant role for employees' learning behavior, research on the relationship between social informal learning and employability is in its early stages. However, to our knowledge very little empirical research exists on the potential effects of learning climate on social informal learning and, in turn, on employability. Prior research does suggest that such a relationship could exist. Therefore, the present study assumes that learning climate influences the extent to which employees engage in learning activities, which in turn supports employees to become (more) employable. This results in the final hypothesis:

H3.

Social informal learning mediates the relationship between learning climate and employability.

Method

Participants and procedure

We collected the data in two Dutch governmental institutes. Governmental institute 1 was a municipality. Governmental institute 2 served as a Learning and Development (L&D) center for several other governmental departments. The total sample consisted of N = 372 employees of which 144 participants worked at institute 1 and 228 participants at institute 2. In total, 155 males (41.7%) and 217 females (58.3%) participated in this study. The average age was 48.69 years (Standard Deviation (SD) = 9.96). The professional work experience ranged from less than 1 year (0.3% of the participants) to 47 years (0.5% of the participants). The majority of participants (61.1%) worked between 1 and 5 years in the current position. The sample derived from governmental institute 1 consisted of 70 males (48.6%) and 74 females (51.4 %). The average age of these participants was 48.56 years (SD = 9.80). Participants' professional work experience varied between 1 year (0.7 %) and 45 years (2.9%). A total of 41.1 % of the participants worked between 1 and 5 years in the current position. The sample from institute 2 was similar to the sample from institute 1.

Measures

Employability

We used a shortened version of the employability questionnaire of (Van der Heijde and Van der Heijden, 2006; Froehlich et al., 2015a, b) consisting of 22 items that measure occupational expertise (five items, e.g. “I consider myself competent to engage in in-depth, specialist discussion in my job domain”), anticipation and optimization (four items, e.g. “I take responsibility for maintaining my labor market value”), personal flexibility (five items, e.g. “I adapt to developments within my organization”), corporate sense (four items, e.g. “I am involved in achieving my organization's mission), and balance (four items, e.g. “I suffer from work-related stress”). All items were rated on a six-point Likert scale. The internal consistency of all five scales was satisfactory with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.86 for occupational expertise, 0.86 for anticipation and optimization, 0.82 for balance, 0.85 for personal flexibility and 0.79 for corporate sense.

Social informal learning

We measured social informal learning with a scale developed by Froehlich et al. (2017) consisting of 12 items and rated on a five-point Likert scale (1 = completely disagree; 5 = completely agree). This scale measures four activities, namely feedback seeking from supervisors (three items, e.g. “feedback from my supervisor makes me reflect”), feedback seeking from colleagues (three items, e.g. “feedback from colleagues motivates me to act”), help seeking (two items, e.g. “Getting help would be one of the first things I would do if I were having trouble at work”), and information seeking (four items, e.g. “I participate in project groups to discuss work-related problems”). The Cronbach's alphas were 0.92 and 0.86 for feedback seeking from supervisors and colleagues, respectively, 0.46 for help seeking and 0.75 for information seeking.

Learning climate

We used the “Supportive Learning Environment” Scale of the Short-Form Learning Organization Survey (LOS-27) by Singer et al. (2012). The seven items emphasize the social character of learning climate, which was in line with our focus on the social component of learning, and were measured on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree). An example item was “If you make a mistake in this unit, it is often held against you”. The Cronbach's alpha was 0.75.

Control variables

We selected age, gender, level of education and years of (current) job experience as control variables (Froehlich et al., 2014a, b).

Analyses

First, we applied correlational analyses to explore the relationship between learning climate, social informal learning and employability. Next, we performed multiple regression analyses to investigate the predictive strength of the variables. To test the (indirect) effects of the multiple mediators on the relationship between learning climate and employability, we performed structural equation modeling using AMOS. The path model was simplified by including the significant relationships between variables, as found in the multiple regression analyses. Testing the path model enabled us to investigate to what extent the proposed model including multiple mediators and dependent variables would fit the data. This is in line with Kline's (2010) approach to model fit estimation. The model fit was assessed using the ratio of chi squared to the degrees of freedom (acceptable between 2.00 and 5.00; Marsh and Hocevar, 1985), comparative fit index (CFI, acceptable if ≥ 0.90; Hu and Bentler, 1999) and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA, acceptable if ≤ 0.08; Hu and Bentler, 1999). Before running the analyses, we tested for common method bias to check whether the variation in responses was due to differences within respondents as opposed to instrumental characteristics (Podsakoff et al., 2003).

Results

The descriptive statistics and correlations are reported in Table 1. Employees most often engaged in feedback seeking, followed by help and information seeking.

Hypothesis 1 predicted that all social informal learning activities would positively relate to all employability competences, with the strongest effect for feedback seeking. The results showed that feedback seeking from supervisors significantly positively related to personal flexibility and corporate sense. Help seeking significantly positively related to occupational expertise, balance, personal flexibility and corporate sense. Finally, information seeking significantly positively related to anticipation and optimization, balance, personal flexibility and corporate sense. The results in Table 2 illustrate that indeed all social informal learning activities positively relate to the employability competences. Contrary to our expectations, the effect of feedback seeking is smallest, whereas the effect of information seeking is largest. This provides partial support for Hypothesis 1.

Hypothesis 2 predicted that learning climate would positively affect employees' social informal learning. The results indeed confirm that learning climate positively relates to feedback, help and information seeking (Table 3). This provides full support for Hypothesis 2.

We used structural equations modeling analyses to answer Hypothesis 3. The model included significant relationships from the multiple regression analyses (see Table 4 and Figure 1). The results showed acceptable model fit: CFI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.09 and X2/df = 4.25. We found significant indirect results of learning climate on occupational expertise [B = 0.04, 95 % CI (0.02, 0.08)], anticipation and optimization [B = 0.11, 95 % Confidence Interval (CI) (0.06, 0.17)], balance [B = 0.06, 95 % CI (0.03, 0.11)], personal flexibility [B = 0.13, 95% CI (0.07, 0.18)], and corporate sense [B = 0.13, 95 % CI (0.08, 0.19)]. These results indicate that learning climate has an indirect effect on the employability competences via social informal learning. This provides support for the final hypothesis.

Discussion

The current study aims to create an integrative understanding of employability by focusing on learning climate as an organizational factor and social informal learning as an individual factor. It does so by testing a mediation model, including social informal learning as a mediator in the relationship between learning climate and employability.

Our findings confirmed that learning climate indeed led to engagement in social informal learning and, in turn, higher levels of employability. Proactively learning from others seems a helpful vehicle for employees to build their knowledge, anticipate changes in their work, identify with their organization and find balance between various needs and interests. Furthermore, organizations can create the conditions for proactive social informal learning by adopting a supportive learning environment. The results support the notion that engaging in social informal learning leads to higher levels of employability, thereby confirming and extending previous research on this relationship (Froehlich et al., 2014a, b; Gerken et al., 2016). Proactive information, help and feedback seeking is associated with having domain-specific knowledge, being able to anticipate latent and future work-related changes, finding balance at work and feeling a sense of belonging to the organization. More specifically, employees who engaged in information seeking were better able to anticipate and adapt to work-related developments. These individuals were also able to find a work-life balance and were more engaged to the organization.

Based on prior research, we assumed that feedback seeking would be most important for employees' employability. Given that feedback seeking is characterized by an evaluation of one's behavior, work and performance, we believed that feedback in particular would have a greater effect on employees' learning and development, and thus competence development. Our results, however, showed the opposite. This can possibly be explained by individual differences such as age, motivation and learning preferences. The employees in our sample were fairly experienced, given the relatively high mean scores for work experience, tenure and age. This, combined with the findings that information seeking and help seeking were associated with higher scores on employability, might indicate that patterns of learning differ for this group of employees. Individual factors such as chronical age, motivation, goal orientation and future time perspective (Froehlich et al., 2014a, b; 2015a, b; 2016) can affect one's learning behavior and, in turn, one's employability. For example, the perceived opportunities for growth and development decrease with age. This consequently affects employees' motivation to learn and perform (Raemdonck et al., 2015). However, Froehlich et al. (2015a, b) found that employees with an opportunity focus (i.e. the perception of how many opportunities are to be expected) engaged in learning behaviors that positively affected their employability. Additionally, the feedback literature (e.g., Anseel et al., 2015) demonstrates that engagement in feedback seeking deceased with age. This possibly explains that older or more experienced employees are more likely to engage in information or help seeking as opposed to feedback seeking, and that this learning behavior still is positively related to employability. Future research could further unravel the role of antecedents on an individual level for employees' learning and competence development.

Furthermore, differences between sectors might be expected. For example, in the current study conducted within governmental institutes, feedback seeking is related to personal flexibility and corporate sense, whereas in studies by Froehlich et al. (2014a, b) and Gerken et al. (2016), conducted in an Austrian federal chamber, an Austrian information technology (IT) company and a Dutch educational institution, it was found to relate to anticipation and optimization only. The different findings might be partially attributed to the specific sector and type of organization.

Our findings also demonstrate that social informal learning takes place when employees feel their work environment supports and facilitates learning. Such an environment was most important for feedback seeking, followed by help and information seeking. These findings are in line with previous studies on the role of the organizational environment. A supportive learning environment indeed encourages social exchange of information and knowledge (Garvin et al., 2008; Marsick and Watkins, 2003). Furthermore, it supports the assumption that feedback seeking contains more risks compared to help and information seeking. It entails searching for specific directions on how to improve one's own performance and behavior instead of navigating through the organization's way of working. Feedback, thus, addresses the gap between current understanding of the self, task or performance and desired understanding (Hattie and Timperly, 2007).

Limitations and suggestions for future research

The current research presents several limitations. We offer directions for future research while addressing these limitations. First, we aimed to integrate multiple perspectives in our research by including learning climate and social informal learning. However, we focused primarily on proactive social informal learning, while the extant research has explored many different forms or dimensions of workplace learning (Kyndt and Beausaert, 2017; Messmann et al., 2018) and learning activities (Eraut, 2004, 2007, 2007; Noe et al., 2013). The challenge lies within the wide variety of conceptualizations and measures of informal learning, leading to less consistency and different interpretations across studies (Cerasoli et al., 2018). We encourage future research to take a broader perspective on social informal learning by also taking into account passive and collaborative learning activities next to proactive learning. Additionally, this research confirmed that a learning climate is essential for employees to engage in social informal learning. Learning climate was interpreted as feeling enabled, supported and safe to learn. To further advance our understanding of learning climate, we encourage future research to focus on other elements of learning climate, such as opportunities to learn (Batistic and Tymon, 2017; Fryczynska and Ciecierski, 2020; Garvin et al., 2008), processes, structures and systems (Emonds, 2018; Garvin et al., 2008), and leadership (Emonds, 2018; Jeon et al., 2018).

Second, the current research took place in a governmental setting, which may have led to sector-specific results. Learning climate in particular may differ across departments in the very same organization. Furthermore, depending on participants' work tasks and responsibilities, they may engage in proactive social informal learning in various ways. Knowledge workers, for example, who create and transfer knowledge, work with complex tasks and hold knowledge about which individual to approach for a certain need, might differ from teachers in higher education (Fryczynska and Ciecierski, 2020; Gerken et al., 2016). We therefore suggest that future studies consider different sectors, organizational structures and procedures, and occupations.

Third, the present study is cross-sectional and the findings are self-reported. Given that employability competences and the perception of a learning climate can develop over time, we propose future research to consider temporal changes in competence development as well as objective measures of the variables of interest. We argue for the mediation model as investigated in the current study, not a reversed relationship as it is unlikely that employability could lead to social informal learning and, in turn, to learning climate. Future research could include a longitudinal research design with multiple measurement moments as well as self-report and supervisor-report measures.

Practical implications

Our findings illustrate that social informal learning can act as a lever for increasing one's employability. From a strategic or managerial perspective, organizations can potentially establish a climate that facilitates learning and increases employability by implementing human resources (HR) policies on employability and highlighting the importance of continuous learning and development. Taking into account the social side of learning as well as socially-oriented work practices that might be already in place, we suggest that these learning activities should be integrated more explicitly in daily work. Organizations can realize this by establishing learning communities or implementing collaborative work activities. By providing the opportunity to collaborate, employees are likely to engage in proactive learning activities such as feedback, help and information seeking. By promoting collaboration, employees are able to expand their knowledge that is applicable in a large variety of tasks (occupational expertise) and learn to anticipate changes in one's job and flexibly move between challenges they face (flexibility competences). Furthermore, the ability to actively participate in learning communities and different work groups may increase the feeling of belonging to the organization and its mission (corporate sense). Organizations and professionals alike hold the potential to enhance employees' employability as well as firms' capacity to adapt.

Conclusion

The current research provides initial evidence on the relationship between learning climate, social informal learning and employability. The more employees experience a positive learning climate, the more likely they engage in social informal learning, and thus, the more employability competences are developed. By establishing a significantly positive relationship between these concepts, our findings contribute to and advance the literature on workplace learning (Eraut, 2000, 2007; Kyndt et al., 2016; Mulder, 2013), learning climate (Marsick and Watkins, 2003; Nikolova et al., 2014) and employability (Van der Heijden et al., 2009, 2018). Furthermore, by integrating an individual and organizational perspective to understanding employability, we disentangled how employability can be enhanced by employees as well as organizations (Guilbert et al., 2016). This enables us to provide directions for future research and HRD policies.

Figures

Final model tested

Figure 1

Final model tested

Descriptive statistics and correlations

VariableMSD123456789101112131415161718
1. Sample1.390.49X
2. Gender1.580.49−0.11*X
3. Age48.699.96−0.01−0.13*X
4. Formal education4.771.36−0.29**−0.03−0.23**X
5. Tenure6.427.410.37**−0.040.30**−0.24**X
6. Contract type1.330.68−0.17**0.06−0.040.08−0.18**X
7. Employers4.714.00−0.05−0.020.15**0.01−0.090.04X
8. Professional work experience25.4110.960.07−0.080.89**−0.32**0.33**−0.070.64**X
9. Help seeking4.040.690.010.19**−0.08−0.060.020.01−0.01−0.07X
10. Information seeking3.640.88−0.28**0.00−0.090.34**−0. −0.22**0.10*0.08−0.11*0.12*X
11. Feedback seeking (supervisors)3.870.91−0.090.08−0.16**0.12*−0.19**0.12*0.04−0.13*0.29**0.40**X
12. Feedback seeking (colleagues)4.090.64−0.070.17**−0.17**0.15**−0.15**0.070.04−0.14**0.39**0.37**0.59**X
13. Learning climate4.901.08−0.06−0.05−0.030.04−0.090.010.020.020.20**0.21**0.40**0.30**X
14. Occupational expertise4.870.650.13*−0.03−0.03−0.010.14*−0.010.010.020.20**0.060.19**0.17**0.18**X
15. Anticipation andoptimization4.130.99−0.02−0.03−0.080.22**−0.17**0.090.07−0. −0.11*0.100.53**0.31**0.29**0.23**0.32**X
16. Balance4.210.910.12*−0.070.08−0.070.13*−0.04−0.060.11*0.22**0.15**0.18**0.15**0.40**0.38**0.24**X
17. Personal flexibility4.800.610.01−0.04−0.090.05−0.15**0.090.09−0.080.20**0.36**0.32*0.26**0.26**0.43**0.48**0.26**X
18. Corporate sense4.110.790.32**−0.14**−0.010.100.04−0.030.02−0.010.20**0.32**0.33**0.30**0.24**0.33**0.50**0.29**0.47**X

Note(s): n = 372. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01

Regression results for the effects of social informal learning on employability

Occupational expertiseAnticipation and optimizationBalancePersonal flexibilityCorporate sense
Predictorβββββ
Sample0.110.17*0.13*0.100.45**
Gender−0.09−0.02−0.12*−0.10−0.14**
Age−0.180.100.10−0.020.11
Formal education0.040.05−0.06−0.070.12*
Tenure0.13*−0.080.08−0.09−0.03
Contract type0.030.04−0.020.06−0.01
Employers0.01−0.02−0.070.06−0.01
Professional work experience0.17−0.10−0.02−0.01−0.03
Feedback seeking (S)0.110.080.100.13*0.17**
Feedback seeking (C)0.040.050.040.030.09
Help seeking0.15*−0.010.17**0.12*0.10*
Information seeking0.010.47**0.16**0.29**0.30**
R20.100.310.140.190.36
ΔR20.070.290.110.160.34

Note(s): n = 372. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01

Regression results for the effects of learning climate on social informal learning

Feedback seeking (supervisors)Feedback seeking (colleagues)Help seekingInformation seeking
Predictorββββ
Sample0.010.050.01−0.19
Gender0.080.16**0.19**−0.02**
Age−0.13−0.210.010.07
Formal education0.060.13*−0.090.26**
Tenure−0.100.070.07−0.05
Contract type0.10*0.050.020.05
Employers0.020.040.010.04
Professional work experience0.050.12−0.13−0.07
Learning climate0.38**0.30**0.21**0.16**
R20.210.170.090.20
ΔR20.180.150.060.18

Note(s): n = 372. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01

Path estimates of the structural equation model

Estimated path
From ToStandardized coefficientsConfidence interval
Lower boundUpper bound
Learning climateFeedback seeking (S)0.399**0.3010.487
Learning climateFeedback seeking (C)0.305**0.2170.393
Learning climateHelp seeking0.204**0.0960.298
Learning climateInformation seeking0.212**0.1100.298
Feedback seeking (S)Personal flexibility0.097−0.0110.217
Feedback seeking (S)Corporate sense0.138*0.0340.242
Help seekingOccupational expertise0.188**0.0830.295
Help seekingBalance0.198**0.0770.301
Help seekingPersonal flexibility0.126*0.0340.238
Help seekingCorporate sense0.112*0.0040.211
Information seekingAnticipation and optimization0.517**0.4340.593
Information seekingBalance0.111*0.0130.203
Information seekingPersonal flexibility0.293**0.1830.413
Information seekingCorporate sense0.249**0.1340.358

Note(s): n = 372. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01

References

Anseel, F., Beatty, A.S., Shen, W., Lievens, F. and Sackett, P.R. (2015), “How are we doing after 30 years? A meta-analytic review of the antecedents and outcomes of feedback-seeking behavior”, Journal of Management, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 318-348, doi: 10.1177/0149206313484521.

Ashford, S.J., Blatt, R. and VandeWalle, D. (2003), “Reflections on the looking glass: a review of research on feedback-seeking behavior in organizations”, Journal of Management, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 773-799, doi: 10.1016/S0149-2063_03_00079-5.

Ashford, S.J. (1986), “Feedback-seeking in individual adaptation: a resource perspective”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 29, pp. 465-487, available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/256219.

Bamberger, P. (2009), “Employee help-seeking: antecedents, consequences and new insights for future research”, Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Vol. 28, pp. 49-98, doi: 10.1108/S0742-7301(2009)0000028005.

Bartram, D. and Roe, R.A. (2008), “Individual and organizational factors in competence acquisition”, in Nijhijs, W.J., Simons, R.J. and Nieuwenhuis, A.F. (Eds), The Learning Potential of the Workplace, Sense Publishers, Rotterdam.

Batistic, S. and Tymon, A. (2017), “Networking behavior, graduate employability: a social capital perspective”, Education + Training, Vol. 59 No. 4, pp. 374-388, doi: 10.1108/ET-06-2016-0100.

Bear, D.J., Tompson, H.B., Morrison, C.L., Vickers, M., Paradise, A., Czarnowsky, M., Soyars, M. and King, K. (2008), Tapping the Potential of Informal Learning. An ASTD Research Study, American Society for Training and Development, Alexandria, VA, pp. 71-96.

Billett, S. (2004), “Workplace participatory practices: conceptualising workplaces as learning environments”, Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 312-324, doi: 10.1108/13665620410550295.

Boud, D. and Middleton, H. (2003), “Learning from others at work: communities of practice and informal learning”, Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 15, pp. 194-202, doi: 10.1108/13665620310483895.

Brown, P., Hesketh, A. and Williams, S. (2003), “Employability in a knowledge-driven economy”, Journal of Education and Work, Vol. 16, pp. 107-126, doi: 10.1080/1363908032000070648.

Cerasoli, C.P., Alliger, G.M., Donsboach, J.S., Mathieu, J.E., Tannenbaum, S.I. and Orvis, K.A. (2018), “Antecedents and outcomes of informal learning behaviors: a meta-analysis”, Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 33, pp. 203-230, doi: 10.1007/s10869-017-9492-y.

Chan, M.E. (2013), “Antecedents of instrumental interpersonal help-seeking: an integrative review”, Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 62 No. 4, pp. 571-596, doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2012.00496.x.

Collet, C., Hine, D. and du Plessis, K. (2015), “Employability skills: perspectives from a knowledge-intensive industry”, Education + Training, Vol. 57 No. 5, pp. 532-559, doi: 10.1108/ET-07-2014-0076.

Colognesi, S., Van Nieuwenhoven, C. and Beausaert, S. (2020), “Supporting newly-qualified teachers' professional development and perseverance in secondary education: on the role of informal learning”, European Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 258-276, doi: 10.1080/02619768.2019.1681963.

Conlon, T.J. (2004), “A review of informal learning literature, theory and implications for practice in developing global professional competence”, Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 28, pp. 283-295, doi: 10.1108/03090590410527663.

Crooke, T.R., Todd, S.Y., Combs, J.G., Woehr, D.J. and Ketchen, D.J. Jr (2011), “Does human capital matter? A meta-analysis of the relationship between human capital and firm performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 96 No. 96, pp. 443-456, doi: 10.1037/a0022147.

Cross, R. and Sproull, L. (2004), “More than an answer: information relationships for actionable knowledge”, Organization Science, Vol. 15, pp. 446-462.

Cross, R., Rice, R.E. and Parker, A. (2001), “Information seeking in social context: structural influences and receipt of information benefits”, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, C (Applications and Reviews), Vol. 31, pp. 438-448.

DeFillipi, R.J. and Arthur, M.B. (1996), “Boundaryless contexts and careers: a competence-based perspective”, in Arthur, M.B. and Rousseau, D.M. (Eds), The Boundaryless Career: A New Employment Principle for a New Organizational Era, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 116-131.

Delery, J.E. and Roumpi, D. (2017), “Strategic human resource management, human capital and competitive advantage: is the field going in circles?”, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 1-21, doi: 10.1111/1748-8583.12137.

Eldor, L. and Harpaz, I. (2016), “A process model of employee engagement: the learning climate and its relationship with extra-role performance behavior”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 37, pp. 213-235, doi: 10.1002/job.2037.

Eldor, L. and Harpaz, I. (2019), “The nature of learning climate in public administration: a cross-sectorial examination of its relationship with employee job involvement, proactivity, and creativity”, American Review of Public Administration, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 425-440, doi: 10.1177/0275074018804667.

Emonds, A. (2018), “A climate for learning. Six dimensions to target when changing your corporate learning climate [Webinar]”, Retrieved from available at: https://www.crossknowledge.com/webinar/a-climate-for-learning-six-dimensions-to-target.

Eraut, M. (2000), “Non-formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work”, British Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 70, pp. 113-136, doi: 10.1348/000709900158001.

Eraut, M. (2004), “Informal learning in the workplace”, Studies in Continuing Education, Vol. 26, pp. 247-273, doi: 10.1080/158037042000225245.

Eraut, M. (2007), “Learning from other people in the workplace”, Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 33, pp. 403-422, doi: 10.1080/03054980701425706.

Froehlich, D.E., Beausaert, S.A.J. and Segers, M.S.R. (2014a), “Age, employability and the role of learning activities and their motivational antecedents: a conceptual model”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 26, pp. 2087-2101, doi: 10.1080/09585192.2014.971846.

Froehlich, D.E., Beausaert, S., Segers, M. and Gerken, M. (2014b), “Learning to stay employable”, Career Development International, Vol. 19, pp. 508-525, doi: 10.1108/CDI-11-2013-0139.

Froehlich, D.E., Beausaert, S.A.J. and Segers, M.S.R. (2015a), “Great expectations: the relationship between future time perspective, learning form others, and employability”, Vocations and Learning, Vol. 8, pp. 213-227, doi: 10.1007/s12186-015-9131-6.

Froehlich, D.E., Liu, M. and Van der Heijden, B.I.J.M. (2015b), “Competence-based employability: a Rasch analysis”, Paper Presented at the 16th Biennial EARLI Conference for Research on Learning and Instruction, Limassol.

Froehlich, D.E., Beausaert, S. and Segers, M. (2016), “Aging and the motivation to stay employable”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 756-770, doi: 10.1108/JMP-08-2014-0224.

Froehlich, D.E., Beausaert, S.A.J. and Segers, M.S.R. (2017), “Development and validation of a scale measuring approaches to work-related informal learning”, International Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 130-144, doi: 10.1111/ijtd.12099.

Froehlich, D.E., Liu, M. and Van der Heijden, B.I.J.M. (2018), “Work in progress: the progression of competence-based employability”, Career Development International, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 230-244, doi: 10.1108/CDI-06-2017-0098.

Fryczynska, M. and Ciecierski, C. (2020), “Networking competence and its impact on the employability of knowledge workers”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 349-365, doi: 10.1108/JOCM-09-2019-0284.

Fugate, M., Kinicki, A.J. and Ashforth, B.E. (2004), “Employability: a psycho-social construct, its dimensions, and applications”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 65, pp. 14-38, doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2003.10.005.

Garvin, D.A., Edmondson, A.C. and Gino, F. (2008), “Is yours a learning organization?”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 86 No. 3, pp. 1-10.

Gerken, M., Beausaert, S. and Segers, M. (2016), “Working on professional development of faculty staff in higher education: investigating the relationship between social informal learning activities and employability”, Human Resource Development International, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 135-151, doi: 10.1080/13678868.2015.1116241.

Gerken, M. (2016), How Do Employees Learn at Work? Understanding Informal Learning from Others in Different Workplaces, Universitaire Pers Maastricht, Maastricht.

Guilbert, L., Bernaud, J.L., Gouvernet, B. and Rossier, J. (2016), “Employability: review and research prospects”, International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, Vol. 16, pp. 69-89, doi: 10.1007/s10775-015-9288-4.

Hall, D.T. (2004), “The protean career: a quarter-century journey”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 65, pp. 1-13, doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2003.10.006.

Hattie, J. and Timperley, H. (2007), “The power of feedback”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 77 No. 1, pp. 81-112, doi: 10.3102/003465430298487.

Haynie, J., Flynn, C.B. and Herda, D. (2020), “Linking career adaptability to supervisor-rated tasks performance: a serial mediation model”, Career Development International, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 429-442, doi: 10.1108/CDI-08-2019-0207.

Hess, T.R. and Tracey, T.J.G. (2013), “Psychological help-seeking intention among college students across three problem areas”, Journal of Counseling and Development, Vol. 91, pp. 321-330, doi: 10.1002/j.1556-6676.2013.00100.x.

Hu, L. and Bentler, P.M. (1999), “Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives”, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1-55, doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118.

Jeong, S., Han, S.J., Lee, J., Sunalai, S. and Yoon, S.W. (2018), “Integrative literature review on informal learning: antecedents, conceptualizations, and future directions”, Human Resource Development Review, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 128-152, doi: 10.1177/1534484318772242.

Kline, R.B. (2010), Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modelling, Guilford Press, New York, NY.

Kyndt, E. and Baert, H. (2013), “Antecedents of employees' involvement in work-related learning: a systematic review”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 83 No. 2, pp. 273-313, doi: 10.3102/0034654313478021.

Kyndt, E. and Beausaert, S. (2017), “How do conditions known to foster learning in the workplace across occupations”, in Ellingson, J.E. and Noe, R.A. (Eds), Autonomous Learning in the Workplace, Routledge, pp. 201-218.

Kyndt, E., Dochy, F. and Nijs, H. (2009), “Learning conditions for non-formal and informal workplace learning”, Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 21 No. 5, pp. 369-383, doi: 10.1108/13665620910966785.

Kyndt, E., Gijbels, D., Grosemans, I. and Donche, V. (2016), “Teacher's everyday professional development; mapping informal learning activities, antecedents and learning outcomes”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 86 No. 4, pp. 1111-1150, doi: 10.3102/0034654315627864.

Mahsud, R., Yukl, G. and Prussia, G.E. (2011), “Human capital, efficiency, and innovative adaptation as strategic determinants of firm performance”, Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 229-246, doi: 10.1177/1548051811400750.

Manuti, A., Pastore, S., Scardigno, A.F., Giancaspro, M.L. and Morciano, D. (2015), “Formal and informal learning in the workplace: a research review”, International Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 19, pp. 1-17, doi: 10.1111/ijtd.12044.

Marsh, H.W. and Hocevar, D. (1985), “Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept: first- and higher order factor model sans their invariance across groups”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 97 No. 3, pp. 562-582.

Marsick, V.J. and Watkins, K.E. (2003), “Demonstrating the value of an organization's learning culture: the dimensions of the learning organization questionnaire”, Advances in Developing Human Resources, Vol. 5, pp. 132-151, doi: 10.1177/1523422303005002002.

Mc Kee, A. and Eraut, M. (2012), Learning Trajectories, Innovation, and Identity for Professional Development, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht.

Meirink, J.A., Meijer, P.C. and Verloop, N. (2007), “A closer look at teachers' individual learning and collaborative settings”, Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 145-164, doi: 10.1080/13540600601152496.

Messmann, G., Segers, M. and Dochy, F. (2018), Informal Learning at Work: Triggers, Antecedents, and Consequences, Routledge, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, doi: 10.4324/9781315441962.

Morrison, E.W. (1993), “Newcomer information seeking: exploring types, modes, sources, and outcomes”, Academy of Management of Journal, Vol. 36, pp. 557-589, available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/256592.

Mulder, R.H. (2013), “Exploring feedback incidents, their characteristics and the informal learning activities that emanate from them”, European Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 37, pp. 49-71, doi: 10.1108/03090591311293284.

Nauta, A., van Vianen, A., van der Heijden, B., van Dam, K. and Willemsen, M. (2010), “Understanding the factors that promote employability orientation: the impact of employability culture, career satisfaction, and role breadth self-efficacy”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 82, pp. 233-251, doi: 10.1348/096317908X320147.

Nikolova, J., Van Ruysseveldt, J., De Witte, H. and Van Dam, K. (2014), “Learning climate scale: construction, reliability and initial validity evidence”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 85, pp. 258-265, doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2014.07.007.

Noe, R.A., Tews, M.J. and Marand, A.D. (2013), “Individual differences and informal learning in the workplace”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 83, pp. 327-335.

OECD (2010), “Learning for jobs: synthesis report of the OECD reviews of vocational education and training”, Retrieved from available at: http://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/LearningforJobsbook.pdf.

Ortenblad, A. (2002), “A typology of the idea of learning organization”, Management Learning, Vol. 33, pp. 213-230, doi: 10.1177/1350507602332004.

Osagie, E.R., Wesselink, R., Runhaar, P. and Mulder, M. (2018), “Unraveling the competence development of corporate social responsibility leaders: the importance of peer learning, learning goal orientation, and learning climate”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 151, pp. 891-906, doi: 10.1007/s10551-017-3638-8.

Park, Y. and Choi, W. (2016), “The effects of formal and informal learning on job performance: the mediating role of the value of learning at work”, Asia Pacific Education Review, Vol. 17, pp. 279-287, doi: 10.1007/s12564-016-9429-6.

Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903, doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.

Raemdonck, I., Beausaert, S.A.J., Froehlich, D.E., Kochoian, N. and Meurant, C. (2015), “Age related changes in learning and employability”, in Rosseau, D., Kooij, D.T.A.M. and Bal, P.M. (Eds), Aging Workers and the Employee-Employer Relationship, Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 163-184.

Römgens, I., Scoupe, R. and Beausaert, S. (2020), “Unraveling the concept of employability, bringing together research on employability in higher education and the workplace”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 45 No. 12, pp. 2588-2603, doi: 10.1080/03075079.2019.1623770.

Rodriquez, D.A., Patel, R., Bright, A., Gregory, D. and Gowing, M.K. (2002), “Developing competency models to promote integrated human resource practices”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 41, pp. 309-324, doi: 10.1002/hrm.10043.

Salas, E. and Rosen, M.A. (2010), “Experts at work: principles for developing expertise in organizations”, in Kozlowski, S.W.J. and Salas, E. (Eds), Learning, Training, and Development in Organizations, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, New York, pp. 99-134.

Scully-Russ, E. and Torraco, R. (2020), “The changing nature and organization of work: an integrative review of the literature”, Human Resource Development Review, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 66-93, doi: 10.1177/1534484319886394.

Singer, S.J., Moore, S.C., Meterko, M. and Williams, S. (2012), “Development of a short-form learning organization survey: the LOS-27”, Medical Care Research and Review, Vol. 69 No. 4, pp. 432-459, doi: 10.1177/1077558712448135.

Skule, S. (2004), “Learning conditions at work: a framework to understand and assess informal learning in the workplace”, International Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 8, pp. 8-20, doi: 10.1111/j.1360-3736.2004.00192.x.

Tharenou, P. (1997), “Organisational, job and personal predictors of employee participation in training and development”, Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 46, pp. 111-134, doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.1997.tb01220.x.

Thijssen, J.G.L. and Van der Heijden, B.I.J.M. (2003), “Employability in the focus of attention”, in Morley, M.J., Gunnigle, P., Heraty, N., Pearson, J., Shiekh, H. and Tiernan, S. (Eds), Exploring the Mosaic: Developing the Discipline, Interesource Group Limited, Dublin, pp. 229-239.

Thijssen, J.G.L., Van der Heijden, B.I.J.M. and Rocco, T.S. (2008), “Toward employability-link model: current employment transition to future employment perspectives”, Human Resource Development Review, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 65-183, doi: 10.1177/1534484308314955.

Tynjälä, P. (2008), “Perspectives into learning at the workplace”, Educational Research Review, Vol. 3, pp. 130-154, doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2007.12.001.

Valverde, M., Tregaskis, O. and Brewster, C. (2000), “Labor flexibility and firm performance”, International Advances in Economic Research, Vol. 6, pp. 649-661, doi: 10.1007/BF02295375.

Van der Heijde, C.M. and Van der Heijden, B.I.J.M. (2006), “A competence-based and multidimensional operationalization and measurement of employability”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 45, pp. 449-476, doi: 10.1002/hrm.20119.

Van der Heijden, B.I.J.M., Boon, J., Van der Klink, M.R. and Meijs, E. (2009), “Employability enhancement through formal and informal learning: an empirical study among Dutch non-academic university staff members”, International Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 13, pp. 19-37, doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2419.2008.00313.x.

Van der Heijden, B.I.J.M., Gorgievski, M.J. and De Lange, A.H. (2016), “Learning at the workplace and sustainable employability: a multi-source model moderated by age”, European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 13-30, doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2015.1007130.

Van der Heijden, B.I.J.M., Notelaers, G., Peters, P., Stoffels, J.M.M., De Lange, A.H., Froehlich, D.E. and Van der Heijde, C.M. (2018), “Development and validation of the short-form employability five-factor instrument”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 106, pp. 236-248, doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2018.02.003.

Van der Klink, M., Van der Heijden, B.I.J.M., Boon, J. and Williams van Rooij, S. (2014), “Exploring the contribution of formal and informal learning to academic staff member employability: a Dutch perspective”, Career Development International, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 337-356, doi: 10.1108/CDI-03-2013-0030.

Van der Rijt, J., Van den Bossche, P. and Segers, M.S.R. (2012), “Understanding informal feedback seeking in the workplace: the impact of the position in the organizational hierarchy”, European Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 37, pp. 72-85, doi: 10.1108/03090591311293293.

William, S., Dodd, L.J., Steele, C. and Randall, R. (2016), “A systematic review of current understandings of employability”, Journal of Education and Work, Vol. 29 No. 8, pp. 877-901, doi: 10.1080/13639080.2015.1102210.

Wolfson, M.A., Tannenbaum, S.I., Mathie, J.E. and Maynard, M.T. (2018), “A cross-level investigation of informal field-based learning and performance improvements”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 103, pp. 14-36, doi: 10.1037/apl0000267.

Corresponding author

Samantha Crans can be contacted at: s.crans@maastrichtuniversity.nl

Related articles