Organization learning modes in India’s firms – Results, Analysis and Discussion

Out the 50 questionnaires, 40 were returned indicating a response rate of 80%. The results presented are with respect to these.

Organizational Learning Approaches in Indian Firms

Dimension n Mean
Experimentation 40 3.35
Risk Taking 40 4.55
Interaction with external environment 40 4.53
Dialogue 40 3.30
Participative Decision Making 40 2.58


From the above results, the most prevalent organization learning mode identified by the respondents is risk taking. Such was evident with a mean score of 4.55 in the organization learning capability scale. Secondly, interaction with external environmental was also rated favourably by respondents with a 4.53 rating. Dialogue and experimentation were almost rated equally with a mean score of 3.35 and 3.30, with participative decision making being rated the lowest. Such indicates that organizational learning in India may be influenced by cultural perspectives such as respect for hierarchy in decision making processes.

5.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

5.10 Conclusion

The constant change in business environment has necessitated organizations to implement ways through which they can adapt to such dynamism to remain competitive and achieve excellence. On such suggested approach to sustain competitive advantage has been suggested to be organizational learning. The subject of this paper was thus to evaluate organizational learning modes prevalent in India.

The organization learning capability scale developed by Chiva, alegre and Lapiedra (2007), was used to identify the most prevalent modes of organizational learning. The study sample (n = 50) was drawn from 5 firms: 3 software companies 2 manufacturing entities. The response rate was 40, the figure that was used for analysis

Based on the results, the most prevalent learning mode was identified to be risk taking, followed by interaction with external environment. Experimentation and dialogue had comparable ratings lower than risk taking, whereas participative decision making was the least rated mode of organizational learning in India.

5.20 Recommendations

Following these findings, the following recommendations are critical to organizations that intend to expand to India:

  • Organizations need to consider whether a hierarchical structure would be supported by the existing organization structure to ensure transfer of knowledge from parent company.
  • Organization need to provide an environment that allows team members to evaluate new approaches towards performing business operations.
  • Organizations should create channels through which members disseminate information gathered from external sources.

 3.0  References

Bhatnagar, J. (2006). Measuring organizational learning capability in Indian managers and establishing firm performance linkage: an empirical analysis. Learning Organization, 13 (5), 416-433. Emerald, DOI 10.1108/09696470610679965.

Chiva, R, Alegre, J & Lapiedra, 2007, ‘Measuring organizational learning capability among the workforce’, International Journal of Manpower, vol. 28, no.3/4, pp. 224-242. Emerald, DOI 10.1108/01437720710755227

Enderwick, P 2009, ‘Large emerging markets (LEMs) and international strategy’, International Marketing Review, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 7-16. Emerald, DOI 10.1108/02651330910933177

Hassi, A & Storti, G 2011, ‘Organizational training across cultures: variations in practices and attitudes’, Journal of European Industrial Training, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 45-70. DOI 10.1108/03090591111095736

Huber, GP 1991, ‘Organizational learning: the contributing processes and the literatures’, Organization Science, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 88-115. JSTOR, viewed 29 March 2011, <>.

Jabar J, Soosay, C & Santa R 2010, ‘Organizational learning as an antecedent of technology transfer and new product development: a study of manufacturing firms in Malaysia’, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 22(1), 24-45. Emerald, DOI 10.1108/17410381111099798

Jamali, D, Sidani, Y & Zouein, C 2009, ‘The learning organization: tracking progress in a developing country’, The Learning Organization, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 103-121. Emerald, DOI 10.1108/09696470910939198

Khandekar, A & Sharma, A 2005, ‘Organizational learning in Indian organizations: a strategic HRM perspective’, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 211- 226. Emerald, DOI 10.1108/14626000510594610.

Khandekar, A & Sharma, A 2006, ‘Organizational learning and performance: understanding Indian scenario in present global context’, Education and Training, vol. 48, no. 8/9, pp. 682-692. Emerald, DOI 10.1108/00400910610710092.

Kim, Y & Gray, SJ 2005, ‘Strategic factors influencing international human resource management practices: an empirical study of Australian multinational corporations’, International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 809-830. EbscoHost, DOI 10.1080/09585190500083368.

Maier, GW, Prange, C & von Rosenstiel, L 2003, ‘Psychological perspectives of organizational learning’, in M Dierkes, AB Antal, J Child & I Nonaka (eds.), Handbook of Organizational Learning & Knowledge, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 14-34.

Mishra, B & Bhaskar, AU 2010, ‘Knowledge management process in two learning organisations. Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 344-359. Emerald, DOI 10.1108/13673271111119736.

Nonaka, I, Toyama, R & Byosiere, P 2003, ‘A theory of organizational knowledge creation: understanding the dynamic process of creating knowledge’, in M Dierkes, AB Antal, J Child & I Nonaka (eds.), Handbook of Organizational Learning & Knowledge, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 491-517.

Ortenblad, A 2001, ‘On differences between organizational learning and learning organization’, The Learning Organization, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 125-133. Emerald DOI 10.1108/09696470110391211.

Singh, AK & Sharma, V 2011, ‘Knowledge management antecedents and its impact on employee satisfaction: a study on Indian telecommunication industries’, The Learning Organization, vol. 18, no. 2. Pp. 115-130. Emerald, DOI 10.1108/09696471111103722

Sushil, BRB & Momaya, K 2011, ‘’, Journal of Management Development, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 187-205. Emerald, DOI 10.1108/02621711111105777.

Sushil, JSAB & Jain, PK 2011, ‘Innovation by harmonizing continuity and change’, Journal of Business Strategy, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 38-49. Emerald, DOI 10.1108/02756661111109761.

find the cost of your paper