Economics and Management

Economics and Management

The relationship between organizational learning capability

and business performance The case of Vietnam firms

Lien Thi Pham Department of Social Sciences, Economics and Management, International School,

Vietnam National University, Hanoi, Vietnam, and Ha Viet Hoang

Swinburne Vietnam, FPT Education, Hanoi, Vietnam

Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between organizational learning capability and business performance of Vietnamese firms. Design/methodology/approach – Based on the literature review, the authors proposed five hypotheses covering the relationships between different dimensions of organizational learning capability and business performance. Data collected from a survey of 160 Master of Business Administration students working in different firms in Vietnam were analyzed to test the proposed hypotheses. Findings – The results confirmed that organizational learning capability has positive effect on business performance. Moreover, two out of four dimensions of organizational learning capability are having positive relationship with business performance (management commitment to learning and “knowledge transfer and integration”). Practical implications – The paper gives some suggestions for firms to improve their business performance through enhancing organizational learning capability. Originality/value – This study provides important insights into the recognized yet under-researched relationship between organizational learning capability and business performance and confirms that organizational learning capability has a positive impact on business performance in Vietnam context. Keywords Business performance, Organizational learning capability, Management commitment to learning, System perspective Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction Organizational learning is not only the notion of one of the biggest breakthroughs in business and management thinking, but also is one of the few management ideas which is sustainable (Mintzberg et al., 1998; Garratt, 1999):

As our world becomes more complex and uncertain it is crucial that the capability of both individuals and organizations to learn regularly and rigorously from their work is encouraged so that they may adapt rapidly and continuously to their changing environments. (Garratt, 1999, p. 203)

It is argued that “the ability to learn faster than your competitors may be the only sustainable competitive advantage” (De Geus, 1988, p. 71). Previous research found out that organizational learning capability plays an important role and has positive impacts on

Journal of Economics and Development

Vol. 21 No. 2, 2019 pp. 259-269

Emerald Publishing Limited e-ISSN: 2632-5330 p-ISSN: 1859-0020

DOI 10.1108/JED-10-2019-0041

Received 13 April 2019 Revised 3 August 2019

Accepted 17 September 2019

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/1859-0020.htm

© Lien Thi Pham and Ha Viet Hoang. Published in Journal of Economics and Development. 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://creative commons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

259

Organizational learning

capability

http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
firms’ business performance (Nguyen and Barrett, 2007; Huili et al., 2014; Pham, 2016). In Vietnam, organizational learning capability issue has been under researched.

This study focuses on measuring the impacts of organizational learning capability on business performance in the context of Vietnam – a developing country. The next section presents a literature review on organizational learning and its relationship with business performance. Research methods are covered in the subsequent section, followed by research results and discussion section. Conclusion of the research is the last section of the paper.

1. Literature review and research hypotheses 2.1 Organizational learning The concept of organizational learning is currently enjoying considerable attention among both academics and practitioners seeking to improve organizations. It is a dynamic concept with its use in theory emphasizing the continually changing nature of the organization. It is also an integrative concept that can unify various levels of analysis such as individual, group, corporate, etc. (Dodgson, 1993). Reviewing the literature, there is little agreement as to what learning is; and therefore, there are different definitions and perspectives on this topic. The term organizational learning was originally introduced by Argyris and Schon (1978), involving the detection and correction of error in organizations. It was later defined as the process of improving actions through better knowledge and understanding by Fiol and Lyles (1985). Huber (1991) assumed that an entity learns if, through its processing of information, the range of its potential behaviors is changed. Nevis et al. (1995) defined organizational learning as “the capacity or processes within an organization to maintain or improve performance based on experience” while Dodgson (1993) described organizational learning as the ways organizations build, supplement and organize knowledge and routines around their activities, and adapt or develop organizational efficiency through improving the use of their workforce’s broad skills.

In this study, the Jerez Gomez et al.’s (2005) definition of organizational learning is used. Organizational learning is:

[…] the capability of an organization to process knowledge – in other words, to create, acquire, transfer, and integrate knowledge, and to modify its behavior to reflect the new cognitive situation, with a view to improving its performance. ( Jerez Gomez et al., 2005, p. 716)

The terms organizational learning and learning organization are used interchangeably in the literature but are not functional equivalents (Thomas and Allen, 2006). Organizations that purposefully construct structures and strategies in order to enhance and maximize organizational learning have been called “learning organizations” (Dodgson, 1993). A learning organization refers to building a capacity for creating learning and knowledge in individuals and of enabling the effective dissemination of this knowledge throughout the organization. It is the product or result of a critical combination of internal change mechanisms intended to maintain or improve performance. Organizational learning might be described simply as the capacity or processes to get the above product or result (DiBella, 2001).

Also concerning the organizational learning capacity, other researchers use “organizational learning capability” term to refer to it in their research. Organizational learning capability is considered as the organizational and managerial characteristics or factors that facilitate the organizational learning process or allow an organization to learn (Goh and Richards, 1997; Chiva et al., 2007). With the viewpoint that organizational learning is the product of individual and group learning applied to the accomplishment of the organization’s vision and performance goals and that certain management practices and internal conditions can either help or hinder this process, Goh and Richards (1997) argued that if we can identify and assess the impact of a set of internal organizational conditions and management practices that lead to learning, we could assess an

260

JED 21,2

organization’s learning capability. They developed a model called organizational learning survey to measure the managerial practices that facilitate organizational learning or the conditions and enablers that can help an organization to become a learning organization. Because organizational learning occurs in different ways and in different forms as organizations continually need to learn how to survive and adapt to changing condition, it is challenging to measure learning. Goh and Richards (1997) model tried to measure the capability of the organization to add to its knowledge base in an effective manner and then to utilize it to modify its behavior over time.

2.2 Organizational learning and business performance Organizational learning is considered as one of the fundamental sources of competitive advantage in the context of strategic management (Lopez et al., 2005). It is argued that “the ability to learn faster than your competitors may be the only sustainable competitive advantage” (De Geus, 1988, p. 71). It is not so dissimilar to the argument of Stata (1989) that the rate at which individuals and organizations learn may become the only sustainable competitive advantage, especially in knowledge-intensive industries.

Theoretically, the relationship between organizational learning and business performance is embedded in organizational learning definitions themselves. A variety of definitions exist concerning organizational learning which imply the existence of a relationship between organizational learning and company’s performance. For example, organizational learning is:

• the process of improving actions through better knowledge and understanding (Fiol and Lyles, 1985);

• the capacity or processes within an organization to maintain or improve performance based on experience (Nevis et al., 1995);

• organizational learning occurs with an organization skilled at creating, acquiring and transferring knowledge, and at modifying its behavior to reflect new knowledge and insights (Garvin, 1993); and

• learning facilitates behavior change that leads to improved performance (Slater and Narver, 1995).

All of these definitions include a direct or indirect organizational performance contribution from organizational learning. Some of these studies are briefly discussed in this section.

Bontis et al. (2002) studied the relationship between the flows of learning across levels in an overall organizational learning system. With 489 respondents in their survey, their findings support the idea that there is a positive relationship between learning at all levels (individual, group and organizational) and business performance.

Jashapara (2003) used a survey with a sample of 180 UK construction firms. It showed that organizational learning in the form of double-loop learning and cooperative cultures has a positive effect on organizational performance; and that organizational learning focused on efficiency and proficiency leads to competitive advantage in the UK construction industry.

Lopez et al. (2005) studied the degree to which organizational learning influence business performance using a survey of 195 Spanish firms. They found that organizational learning contributes positively both to innovation and competitiveness and to economic/financial results of firms. Similarly, Montes et al. (2005) used empirical data gathered from 202 Chief Executive Officers in Spanish firms and found that organizational performance is improved through teamwork cohesion and organizational learning in firms. Further, one of Real et al.’s (2006) findings in their study is that organizational learning acts as a moderating variable from information technology to the business performance construct. It has a statistically significant positive effect on business performance.

261

Organizational learning

capability

Garcia-Morales and Llorens-Montes (2006), using a sample of 408 Spanish organizations, demonstrated that organizational learning and innovation are positively related to organizational performance. Prieto and Revilla (2006) used data from 111 Spanish firms to examine the paths between learning capability, financial performance and non-financial performance using structural equation model (SEM) technique. Their analysis showed learning capability has a positive link to both financial performance and non-financial performance.

Jimenez-Jimenez and Cegarra-Navarro (2007) used survey results from 451 firms and found that organizational learning has a positive effect on performance; and also it is a mediating variable on the association from market orientation to performance. In other research, Skerlavaj et al. (2007) proposed and tested a model of organizational performance improvement with the impact of organizational learning culture which was measured using organizational learning process measures. Using 203 Slovenian firms’ data, they found that organizational learning has a positive direct effect on non-financial performance while it has a positive indirect impact on financial performance. Organizational learning is also found to have an indirect positive relationship with business performance in other research (Akgun et al., 2007; Panayides, 2007). Pham (2016) researched on organizational learning capability and business performance also found the positive relationship between these two variables.

These empirical studies have used different ways of operationalising organizational learning constructs: followed organizational learning process like Huber’s (1991) model or followed other organizational attributes such as single and double-loop learning; learning from experience; individual, group and organizational learning; etc. or followed Senge’s (1990) model. They also measured business performance with either financial indicators or non-financial indicators. However, the common thing among them is that the results generally support the idea that organizational learning positively affects business performance in operational and/or financial terms.

With the above review of literature, hypothesis is proposed as follows:

H1. There is a positive relationship between organizational learning capability and business performance.

Organizational learning capability was operationalized by different factors in the literature. In general, it could be categorized into four major organization characteristics and management practices that are key conditions essential for learning to take place in an organization. These factors are system thinking; management commitment to learning; openness and experiment culture; and knowledge transfer and integration. Some contributing literature for building organizational learning capability construct is mentioned in Table I.

Each of the factors has its own contribution to improve firms’ business performance. So, four hypothesizes are proposed as follows:

H2. System thinking (system perspective) has positive effect on business performance.

Systems perspective: this is also called system thinking, the fifth and the most important discipline in Senge’s (1990) learning organization model. It entails bringing the organization’s members together around a common identity and recognizes the interconnection between different units that make up the whole organization. Every individual, department and area of the organization should have a clear view of the organization’s objectives and understand how they can help in their development (Hult and Ferrell, 1997; Jerez Gomez et al., 2005). Systems perspective here refers to the promoting joint actions, developing organization’s member relationship based on the exchange of information, common identity and a shared vision:

H3. Management commitment to learning has positive effect on business performance.

Managerial commitment: refers to promoting personal efficacy and learning of organization’s members and the ability for an organization to adapt to the environmental

262

JED 21,2

conditions. By recognizing the relevance of learning, management should develop a culture that promotes the acquisition, creation and transfer of knowledge as fundamental value. They should articulate strategic view of learning, ensure that organization’s members understand the important of learning and become involved in its achievement, considering it an active part in the organization’s success (Senge, 1990; Ulrich et al., 1993; Nevis et al., 1995; Slater and Narver, 1995):

H4. Openness and experiment culture has a positive relationship with business performance.

Openness and experimentation culture: refers to a climate of accepting new ideas and viewpoints, both internally and externally, allowing individual knowledge to be constantly reviewed and improved (Senge, 1990; Leonard-Barton, 1992; Sinkula, 1994). To create the culture of openness, there needs to be a previous commitment to culture and functional diversity and a readiness to accept all types of opinions and experiences and to learn from them (McGill et al., 1992; Nevis et al., 1995; Jerez Gomez et al., 2005):

H5. Knowledge transfer and integration has a positive relationship with business performance.

Knowledge transfer and integration: refers to two closely linked and simultaneously occurred processes: internal transfer and integration of knowledge. The first process means the internal spreading of knowledge acquired at an individual level through communications and interaction among organization’s members which is reinforced by an agile information system that guarantee the accuracy and availability of the information (McGill and Slocum, 1993) and team works (Stata, 1989; Nonaka, 1994; Lei et al., 1999). Team learning places the group above individuals, allowing the organizational learning process – the transfer, interpretation and integration of the knowledge – to happen. This process leads to the creation of collective knowledge which is rooted in organizational culture, work processes, etc. that form the organizational memory (Huber, 1991; Jerez Gomez et al., 2005).

1. Research methodology A questionnaire was developed based on research from literature review with some small modifications for the questionnaire to be suitable with Vietnamese context. The structure of

Organizational learning capability dimensions Some references

Management commitment to learning

Jerez Gomez et al. (2005), Akgun et al. (2007), Panayides (2007), Garvin (1993), Ulrich et al. (1993), Morgan and Turnell (2003), Stata (1989), McGill and Slocum (1993), Goh and Richards (1997), Nevis et al. (1995), Slater and Narver (1995), McGill et al. (1992), Farrell (2000), Slocum et al. (1994), Pham (2016)

Openness and experimentation culture

Morgan and Turnell (2003), Panayides (2007), Jerez Gomez et al. (2005), Akgun et al. (2007), Ulrich et al. (1993), Hult and Ferrell (1997), Leonard-Barton (1992), McGill and Slocum (1993), Garvin (1993), Slocum et al. (1994), Nevis et al. (1995), Goh and Richards (1997), Stata (1989), McGill et al. (1992), Pham (2016)

Systems perspective McGill and Slocum (1993), Akgun et al. (2007), Jerez Gomez et al. (2005), Nevis et al. (1995), Stata (1989), McGill et al. (1992), Senge (1990), Morgan and Turnell (2003), Panayides (2007), Goh and Richards (1997), Hult and Ferrell (1997), Pham (2016)

Knowledge transfer and integration

Jerez Gomez et al. (2005), Akgun et al. (2007), Leonard-Barton (1992), Panayides (2007), Garvin (1993), Goh and Richards (1997), Hult and Ferrell (1997), Stata (1989), Nonaka (1994), Senge (1990), Pham (2016)

Source: Developed by the authors for this research

Table I. Some contributing

literature for construct definition of

organizational learning capability

263

Organizational learning

capability

the questionnaire survey includes three parts: Part 1 with demographic