Search results

This chapter defines a learning culture and discusses the relationship between knowledge and learning. The authors explain why learning is essential to bringing knowledge to life and incentivizing knowledge flows and use. The chapter addresses the interplay between knowledge and learning cultures. A key point in the chapter is the value of mistakes as learning opportunities. The authors explain how mistakes are viewed in the industrial economy and how this perspective impedes critical organizational learning. Specifically, we define mistakes, explain the double cognitive bias of mistakes, explain the tendency and impact of hiding mistakes, the side effects of double mistake bias, learn to learn from mistakes, and take on the challenge of reconciling mistake acceptance and avoidance. Finally, the chapter addresses the importance of cultivating a learning climate to realize your learning culture.

This paper aims to investigate the nature of what is referred to as the Knowledge Management Engineering & Maintenance Program, which is based on practices that influence the dissemination of knowledge in a structured and sustained manner within a small-sized airport. The air transport system has undergone important changes, particularly in the development of new knowledge management (KM) approaches. In practice, however, results have been mixed. Some programs have been successful, but implementation failures are common and the intended users are frequently reluctant to use such management structures. A possible explanation for efficiency and effectiveness gaps of services provided by these knowledge structures may relate to the advantages and disadvantages of the knowledge processes that airports highlight as a result of their differential structural properties.

Using data collected from the Engineering & Maintenance Department at a Spanish Airport, this work has examined how the existence of some knowledge structures is linked to knowledge transfer and how this component is linked to customer service (external users, e.g. passengers; and internal users, including any airport staff).

This paper reports a KM program, which is customized and based on four knowledge structures: technical infrastructure; people to facilitate and drive the process; a system that supports and rewards sharing; and the team leader.

Conducting this type of single case study (an interview-based case study approach) is to be understood foremost as a prelude to further quantitative studies including common measures for passengers and users, staff, managers and board members.

In an applied sense, the model provides engineering and maintenance practitioners with identifiable factors, which enable the four frameworks and address the relevant issues by changing strategies at both the individual and the organizational levels. Without a KM program, practitioners may lose the ability to see the market signals stemming from the transport system members and they may decide to go solely by their own ways of doing and interpreting things.

To what extent can resiliency reduce negative work outcomes to help employees recover from failure? This study investigates how the interaction of trait resiliency and mistake tolerance play key roles in reducing turnover intention in organizations. Specifically, trait resiliency is hypothesized to be negatively related to managerial turnover intentions. Moreover, the author investigates the interactive role of perceived mistake tolerance as a situational factor that may impact the extent to which resiliency decreases turnover intentions. In a sample of 209 working managers and executives, moderated path modeling reveals that resiliency reduces turnover intentions. Additionally, results suggest a more nuanced view that takes into consideration the interaction of trait resiliency and perceptions of mistake tolerance in reducing turnover intentions.

Although the innovative behaviour of public employees is critical for the creation of public value and meeting of public interests, the authors are uncertain about the role of the human resource (HR) system in affecting individual behaviour as past studies tended to discuss innovation at the organisational level of analysis. Based on corporate human resource management (HRM) literature, the authors draw from the ability-motivation-opportunity (AMO) model to examine the influence of innovation-based HR practices on work-related risk propensity and innovative behaviour and the moderating role of perceived error tolerance of public sector organisations.

Dyadic data were collected from supervisors and their subordinates in various public sector organisations in the UAE. The authors collected valid responses from 100 managers and 200 employees.

This study's findings demonstrate that the HR system in the public sector shapes employees' behaviour at the individual level of analysis, consistent with the corporate HRM literature. The authors reveal that innovation-based HR practices significantly promote employees' innovative work behaviour because they trigger their inclination and disposition to take risks. Furthermore, the authors provide evidence that such risk-taking propensity at work is heightened under the conditions of a high level of error tolerance by the organisational management.

This study's findings point out the importance of implementing innovation-based HR practices, such as recruitment, reward and training, to drive public sector employees' innovative work behaviour as they could galvanise their risk-taking propensity and, subsequently, innovative behaviour. Public sector managers also need to develop an innovation culture tolerant toward employees' mistakes to further foster employees' work innovativeness. Policy wise, this study's findings could be integrated into the national innovation strategy to drive the national growth in the UAE.

This study sheds light on the drivers behind innovative behaviour among public employees, which is a less researched area, especially in a non-Western context.

To highlight an unconventional way out of the “innovation dilemma,” relevant to many business organizations, innovative management and risk friendliness are necessary, but the way in which failure is handled and the resulting fear of making mistakes block the (innovative) efforts of specialists and managers.

The paper draws on theoretical as well as empirical work: first, the seemingly crystal‐clear concept of “error” is elaborated and the rare category of “creative errors” is introduced. Second, illustrative findings from a case study in the automotive sector are reported.

Suggests that a culturally exacerbated antipathy towards errors leads ultimately to a situation of pronounced innovational incompetence in which creative behavior is avoided. Points out, that not an “absolution of mistakes” is required, but a tolerance for legitimate errors which should only occur under exceptional circumstances. Underlines, that fairness in dealing with errors is considerably more important than a misguided attempt to create or maintain harmony. In addition to the philosophy and potential of this unusual incentive system, possible practical implementation problems are considered.

Generalization is limited because the findings are based on only one case study. However, because of the vital importance of the so‐called “innovation dilemma,,” the exploratory findings of the study may trigger further empirical research on “creative errors.”

An initiative like the “Creative Error of the Month” may help to bring about cultural change towards a climate of trust and confidence in which innovative commitment is treated fairly even if it does not in fact succeed.

Common approaches to enhance organizational innovativeness reward “success stories” or praise “zero‐based cultures.” This case study suggests that a sophisticated initiative revolving around the “hidden” innovative potential of “creative errors” and “tragic failures” might prove to be a successful off‐beat attempt at stimulating creativity and innovative behavior in enterprises.

This study aims to examine the micromechanisms of how knowledge culture fosters human capital development.

An empirical model was developed by using the structural equation modeling method based on a sample of 321 Polish knowledge workers employed in different industries.

This study provides direct empirical evidence that tacit knowledge sharing supports human capital, whereas tacit knowledge hiding does not, and this hiding is considered a waste of knowledge. If tacit knowledge does not circulate within an organization, it is a severe waste of an organization. The findings indicate that shame from making mistakes might impede the sharing of knowledge gained from making those mistakes, and in such cases, the knowledge remains hidden.

Leaders aiming to ensure human capital growth should implement an authentic learning culture composed of a learning climate and mistakes acceptance components that enable open discussion about mistakes on each organizational level.

The knowledge culture is found to be an essential element of building human capital but, at the same time, not sufficient without a learning culture, and its mistakes acceptance component. A permanent organizational learning mode that supports a continuous organizational shared mental model reframing is an antidote to tacit knowledge hiding.

Part IV provides readers with the extant requirements for the application of materiality to recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure in the financial statements. This part also includes a detailed critical review of the recent Practice Statement on materiality, the FASB’s proposed ASU on the notes and the amendments to the Conceptual Framework proposed by the IASB and the FASB.

The part expands to issues that are typical of Management Commentary, including the SEC guidance on materiality in Management Discussion and Analysis.

It informs about the complexities and subtle differences between financial statements and bookkeeping and the different standards of reasonableness versus materiality.

A section moves from materiality to material misstatements and covers the application of materiality in auditing.

Another section goes in depth on internal control over financial reporting, showing the linkages between materiality and risk appetite and risk tolerance and the related application guidance.

Hospitality work setting is error-prone, rendering error handling critical for effective organizational operation and quality of service delivery. An organization’s attitude toward errors can be traced back to one fundamental question: should errors be tolerated/accepted or not? This study aims to examine the relationships between error tolerance and hospitality employees’ three critical work behaviors, namely, learning behavior, error reporting and service recovery performance. Psychological safety and self-efficacy are hypothesized to be the underlying attitudinal mechanisms that link error tolerance with these behavioral outcomes.

This study relied on a survey methodology, collecting data from 304 frontline restaurant employees in Turkey and their direct supervisors. SPSS 25.0 and Amos 25.0 were used for analysis.

The results revealed that error tolerance had direct positive relationships with employees’ psychological safety and self-efficacy, both of which had positive impacts on learning behavior and error reporting. In addition, learning behavior positively influenced employees’ service recovery performance, as rated by the employees’ supervisors.

This study identifies error tolerance as an organizational distal factor that influences employees’ learning behavior, error reporting and service recovery performance; and identifies self-efficacy and psychological safety as mediators of the relationship between error tolerance and behavioral outcomes. The findings help clarify the longstanding debate over the relationship between an organization’s attitude toward errors and its employees’ learning behavior. The findings also shed light on the advantages of tolerating error occurrence for organizations, which is especially important as most hospitality organizations pursue perfection with aversive attitudes toward errors.

Drawing on social information processing theory (SIP), this paper examines whether and how humble leadership affects employees' service improvisation (ESI) in the hospitality industry. Further, the study investigates the mediating role of psychological safety and the moderating role of creative self-efficacy (CSE).

To test the proposed relationships, the study adopts a cross-sectional design, administering questionnaires to 456 frontline staff in Egypt’s hospitality industry across three main sectors: restaurants, hotels and travel agencies. SPSS 27 and AMOS 22 were used for statistical analysis.

The study reveals a positive relationship between humble leadership and ESI, partially mediated by psychological safety. Furthermore, CSE not only strengthens the relationship between psychological safety and ESI but also enhances the indirect effect of humble leadership on ESI via psychological safety.

The study offers valuable insights for practitioners in the hospitality industry. To boost ESI, organizations can incorporate humble leadership attributes into their leadership development programs. Fostering a psychologically safe workplace would facilitate the positive impact of humble leadership on ESI. Recognizing CSE as a pivotal moderator underscores the importance of strategically selecting and developing employees with high CSE. These insights aim to cultivate a more service-oriented and effective workforce in the hospitality industry.

This study significantly contributes to leadership research in the hospitality industry by uncovering a previously unexplored link between humble leadership and ESI. Exploring psychological safety as a mediator and CSE as a moderator enhances our comprehension of how and when humble leadership influences ESI.

This study aims to understand and compare how the mechanism of innovative processes in the information technology (IT) industry – the most innovative industry worldwide – is shaped in Poland and the USA in terms of tacit knowledge awareness and sharing driven by a culture of knowledge and learning, composed of a learning climate and mistake acceptance.

Study samples were drawn from the IT industry in Poland (n = 350) and the USA (n = 370) and analyzed using the structural equation modeling method.

True learning derives from mistake acceptance. As a result of a risk-taking attitude and critical thinking, the IT industry in the USA is consistently innovation-oriented. Specifically, external innovations are highly correlated with internal innovations. Moreover, a knowledge culture supports a learning culture via a learning climate. A learning climate is an important facilitator for learning from mistakes.

This study revealed that a high level of mistake acceptance stimulates a risk-taking attitude that offers a high level of tacit knowledge awareness as a result of critical thinking, but critical thinking without readiness to take a risk is useless for tacit knowledge capturing.