Search results

The social climate of psychiatric institutions correlates with multiple outcomes related to staff and patients. Research into social climate in Learning Disability services is limited. Staff and patients in Learning Disability services have documented both positive and negative experiences. No research has directly compared the social climate of Learning Disability and non-Learning Disability psychiatric services. The purpose of this paper is to understand how these compare. The study will also compare staff and patient views of social climate and the impact of security on social climate in Learning Disability services.

A total of 64 patients and 73 staff, from Learning Disability and non-Learning Disability psychiatric hospitals completed the Essen Climate Evaluation Schema (EssenCES) measure of social climate.

Patients in Learning Disability and non-Learning Disability services did not differ in their perceptions of social climate. Staff in non-Learning Disability services had a more positive perception of social climate than staff in Learning Disability services. Patients and staff did not differ in their views on climate. Security was negatively related to patients’ Experienced Safety.

The findings suggest that staff perceive that the deficits associated with Learning Disabilities may limit patients’ therapeutic experience and relationships with their peers. Despite this, patients with Learning Disabilities feel supported by their peers, have positive views of the treatment process and feel as safe as non-Learning Disabled psychiatric patients.

This study aims to discuss science governance in Europe and the network of associated nonprofit institutions. The authors posit that this network, which comprises both (partial) learning organizations and non-learning organizations, has been observed to postpone taking up “responsibility” as an issue in science governance and funding decisions.

This paper discusses the challenge of learning and policy implementation within the European science governance system. By exploring how learning on responsible innovation (RI) in this governance system can be provoked, it addresses the question how Senge’s insights in organizational learning can clarify discourses on and practices of RI and responsibility in research. This study explores the potential of a new organizational form, that of Social Labs, to support learning on Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) in standing governance organizations.

This study concludes that Social Labs are a suitable format for enacting the five disciplines as identified by Senge, and a Social Lab may turn into a learning organization, be it a temporary one. Responsibility in research and innovation is conducive for learning in the setting of a Social Lab, and Social Labs act as intermediary organizations, which not merely pass on information among actors but also actively give substantive shape to what they convey from a practice-informed, normative orientation.

This empirical work on RRI-oriented Social Labs therefore suggests that Social Lab–oriented temporary, intermediary learning organizations present a promising form for implementing complex normative policies in a networked, nonhierarchical governance setting.

Based on this research funding and governance organizations in research, policy-makers in other domains may take up and create such intermediary organizations to aid learning in (science) governance.

This research suggests that RRI-oriented Social Labs present a promising form for implementing complex normative policies, thus integrate learning on and by responsible practices in various governance settings.

European science governance is characterized by a network of partial Learning Organization (LOs) and Non-Learning Organization (nLOs) who postpone decision-making on topics around “responsibility” and “solving societal challenges” or delegate authority to reviewers and individual actors, filtering possibilities for collaborative transformation toward RRI. social lab (SLs) are spaces that can address social problems or social challenges in an open, action-oriented and creative manner. As such, they may function as temporary, intermediary LOs bringing together diverse actors from a specific context to work on and learn about issues of science and society where standing organizations avoid doing so. Taken together, SLs may offer temporary organizational structures and spaces to move beyond top-down exercise of power or lack of real change to more open, deliberative and creative forms of sociopolitical coordination between multiple actors cutting across realms of state, practitioners of research and innovation and civil society. By taking the role of temporary LOs, they may support existing research and innovation organizations and research governance to become more flexible and adaptive.

This study aims to examine the relationship between self-perceived talent status (SPTS) and positive employee outcomes (work engagement and organisational commitment), mediated by organisational justice (distributive and procedural justice). The authors define SPTS as employees’ self-conceptualisation of talent, formed by inferring the organisation’s initiatives regarding training and development opportunities and through informal recognition by others.

The authors measured SPTS using eight items on a five-point scale. Through an internet survey company, the authors initially surveyed 1,207 full-time employees from 300 Japanese companies with ≥ 300 employees. In the second round of the survey, conducted after approximately two weeks, 876 (82.9%) responses were collected from the initial 1,207 respondents, which were used for the final analysis.

SPTS was directly and positively related to work engagement, organisational commitment, distributive justice and procedural justice. In learning organisations, SPTS was positively but indirectly related to work engagement and organisational commitment, mediated by distributive justice. In non-learning organisations, SPTS was positively but indirectly related to work engagement and organisational commitment, mediated by procedural justice.

Given SPTS’s positive impact on employee outcomes, to eliminate the information asymmetry between organisations and talent due to strategic ambiguity, organisations should increase SPTS by helping talents perceive the plethora of development opportunities in the talent pool.

The results demonstrate the utility of SPTS for improving employee outcomes based on strategic talent management (TM) mechanisms including talent rewards, talent development opportunities and promotions. Furthermore, the results demonstrate that distributive justice plays an important role in the build-based TM context of learning organisations.

In this paper it is held that a transformational learning organisation could be clearly distinguished from non‐learning organisations. This paper seeks to establish whether or not this is actually the case.

Case studies were developed for two organisations considering themselves to be learning organisations (Company 2 and Company 4) and two that did not (Company 1 and Company 3). To establish the balance of the learning behaviours within the firms according to Shivistrava's typology, a questionnaire was used to elicit information about learning behaviours and activities, and general understanding about what such terms as knowledge, information and learning meant to individuals within the firms.

The results of applying the Shrivastava model showed that most knowledge is action‐oriented and incrementally developed, in that it is developed in order to achieve a certain goal. Certain events will lead to a perceived need for certain behaviours and the organisational procedures and policies will encourage actions.

Shrivastava's typology outlines four perspectives of organisational learning: adaptation, developing knowledge of action‐outcome relationships, assumption sharing, and institutionalised experience. These definitions imply that they will reflect different knowledge bases.

This study aims to explore how health-care organisations learn from failures, challenging the common view in management science that learning is a continuous cycle. It focuses on understanding how the context of a health-care organisation and the characteristics of failure interact.

Systematically collected empirical studies that examine how health-care organisations react to failures, both in terms of learning and non-learning, were reviewed and analysed. The key characteristics of failures and contextual factors are categorised at the individual, team, organisational and global level.

Several factors across four distinct levels are identified as being susceptible to the situational impact of failure. In addition, these factors can be used in the design and development of innovations. Taking these factors into account is expected to stimulate learning responses when an innovation does not succeed. This enhances the understanding of how health-care organisations learn from failure, showing that learning behaviour is not solely dependent on whether a health-care organisation possesses the traits of a learning organisation or not.

This review offers a new perspective on organisational learning, emphasising the situational impact of failure and how learning occurs across different levels. It distinguishes between good and bad failures and their effects on a health-care organisation’s ability to learn. Future research could use these findings to study how failures influence organisational performance over time, using longitudinal data to track changes in learning capacity.

The purpose of this paper is to argue that how HRD is undertaken needs careful consideration, since some HRD implementation schemes may actually prevent the acquisition of new knowledge, thereby developing stagnation.

The paper uses qualitative data derived from learning and non‐learning organisations. The data were collected from four companies via open‐ended questionnaires and structured interviews.

The paper demonstrates how strongly shared mental models may affect organisational HRD processes in such a way as to trigger closure to new knowledge and learning. The types of learning and knowledge present in the organisations are found to limit the possibility of radical change.

HRD implementation systems themselves may strengthen mental models, thereby allowing the difficulties to emerge because the learning and knowledge being developed will only support incremental change if any. The potential reversion of the direction of organisational learning is mooted, indicating that new ideas may either not enter the system or be rejected once they are perceived. HRD systems need to be designed to develop and maintain organisational openness.

The danger of HRD exacerbating organisational closure is explained. An alternative role for HRD professionals is outlined, with the new focus being on developing ongoing challenge at all times. The paper concludes that, although properly structured and thoughtfully implemented HRD can be a positive driver for organisational learning, HRD developments need to focus on the type of knowledge being developed as well as the level of learning.

This paper aims to describe a method of teaching that is based on Novak's concept‐mapping technique.

The paper shows how concept mapping can be used to measure prior knowledge and how simple mapping exercises can promote the integration of teachers' and students' understandings in ways that are meaningful.

The concept‐mapping method facilitates quick and easy measures of student knowledge‐change so that teachers can identify the parts of the curriculum that are being understood and those that are not. This is possible even among very large student groups in the 50‐minute slots that are allocated to so much teaching in higher education.

Concept mapping is discussed in the wider context of student learning style. The styles literature has been criticised because it tends to encourage undue labelling of people or behaviours. The approach described here also uses “labels” to typify learning (using the terms non‐learning and rote or meaningful learning to identify different qualities of change).

The difference in this approach is that terms are attached to empirical measures of learning outcome, not to personal or psychological styles. Concept mapping makes learning visible so that the actual quality of the learning that has occurred can be seen and explored. Using concept mapping in the course of teaching means that learning is no longer a complex and intractable process, measurable only by proxy, but an observable phenomenon.

Learning systems are characterized by distinctive properties of complementarities between variables and their relations in reference to the epistemology of unity of knowledge. Such learning systems are in contrast to the methods of optimization and steady‐state equilibrium as opposed to simulation methods. The distinctive analytical properties of learning systems relate to evolutionary general equilibrium states. Here disequilibrium systems are also considered. In all the cases, the essential goal of explaining and using the properties of evolutionary general equilibrium systems with pervasive complementarities within and across systems are shown to establish these distinctive conceptual and applied implications of analysis.

The visualisation of knowledge structures through concept mapping can be employed to reveal critical links between theory and practice. This allows consideration of particular disciplinary knowledge structures and the active role of the student in manipulating these structures to gain understanding, in a manner that can encourage students to contribute to the evolution of practice. The focus on knowledge structures can highlight the relationship between the curriculum and the discipline, and provides a tool to facilitate the integration of contemporary educational theories that may underpin teaching and curriculum development, such as learning styles, threshold concepts, conceptual stasis and semantic gravity. Visualisation invites original connections to be made between ideas and re-orientated to reveal new ways of conceptualising teaching at university: to include the structural transformation of knowledge as a potential threshold concept in higher education.

If building and nurturing a learning organization is not a random chance, the question of where organizations should start is patent. Because learning culture is one of the core components of learning organizations, it is wondered how individuals and organizations contribute to this phenomenon. Under an interactional perspective, the authors explore the cross-dynamics between learning resources, structure and support (organizational level), and self-directed learning (individual level).

The authors conducted qualitative and exploratory research in Spring 2021 in France. They used semi-structured interviews with HRMs and a Delphi panel as the main instruments. This dual approach brings a reflexive and complementary dialogue to the research question.

The results show that non-learning organizations took advantage of the Covid-19 period. They created a learning biotope and fostered learning dynamics. Although this biotope acted as a learning marketplace and lacked guidance, individuals interacted with this learning biotope. They took learning initiatives and developed their self-directed learning. This understanding argues for constant interaction and co-influence between organizations and individuals to build and nurture a learning culture.

There is little discussion on how individuals and organizations contribute to building and nurturing a learning culture from an interactional perspective. Furthermore, literature on learning organizations considers self-directedness as a whole, considering self-directed learning as a characteristic and a process sharpens thinking. On methodological concerns, the authors used a dual qualitative approach with interviews and Delphi for the first time in research on learning organizations.