1

Chapter 3
The impact of learning organization dimensions on knowledge
sharing: The Case of Directorate of Education in the Northern Region
3.1 Introduction
In this review, we would seek to investigate the literature of the impacts of learning
organizations dimensions on knowledge sharing. Various articles and studies provide thorough
review of learning organization and impacts of its dimensions on knowledge sharing; a few
researches that explore the impacts of learning organization's dimensions on knowledge
sharing have been found. According to Senge a learning organization utilizes individuals to
boost their capabilities to achieve constantly the outcomes they desire and provides a place to
present models that can beat advanced and comprehensive thinking. (Senge, 1990)
This research has been placed to investigate and supply empirical evidence for the recognizing
the correlation between learning organization and knowledge sharing.
3.2 Learning Organization definitions
The analysis of learning organization literature provides some definitions. Some examples are
as follows:
The construct of learning organization was introduced almost fifty years ago (Cangelosi & Dill,
1965). This concept got high recognition after the publication of the famous book named The
Fifth Discipline by renowned author Peter Senge. The literature history of learning organization
shows three efforts to be regarded as landmarks in this respect. One is Organizational Learning:
A Theory of Action Perspective Reading (1978). Second is The Fifth Discipline: The Art &
Practice of the Learning Organization (1990). While third is "Sculpting the Learning
Organization: Lessons in the Art and Science of Systematic Change (1993). (Ji Hoon, et al., 2009).
The most famous definition was given by Senge in 1990. Senge proposed fifth principle and
changed the basic suppositions about the flourishing learning organization. It consisted of five
basic components of successful learning organization. These included: systems thinking;
personal mastery; mental models; shared vision; and team learning. He counted the qualities of
learning organization saying that it is a place where people can expand and enhance their
competencies and capabilities in order to get desired results, aims and ambitions. The
organization also assists and supports the pursuit of expensive and costly patterns of thought.
The organization which frees the collective aspirations as well as people is continuously and
consistently learning how to learn together. (Smith, 2011). The definition given by Senge will be
used in this research:
"Organizations where groups frequently develop their capability to
produce the results they actually wish, where innovative and liberal
patterns of views and thoughts are cultivated, where shared ambition is
2

set to freedom, and where employees are persistently learning to
discover collectively." (Senge, 1990)
Another important definition is given by Dixon; he defines learning organization as a company
who acts as an employer of its employees to generate processes that enhances improvements in
performance. (Dixon, 1994)
Pedler defines learning organization as a company that entertains the learning process of its
employees so that it may continue to transform into a higher degree corporation. (Pedler, et al.,
1991)
Another definition can be based on the studies carried out by Argyris and Schon. They put
forward the concepts of theories-in-use and loop learning with their basis on process of
reflective organizational learning. There are two types of loop learning. Single loop learning is
the name of a process of making things in improved way. Double loop learning means not only
refers to making old things in new ways but also making new things in better way. (Jose &
Julian, 2013). While talking about organizational learning, they put stress on continuity of
reflection process and collective learning supremacy in order to gain maximum performance in
a business. In this way, the foundation for the concept of the learning organization was laid by
focusing on collaborative and continuous learning practice. In short, the concept of process-
orientation was given emphasis and all the activities and learning practices that can occur in all
entities of an organization were underpinned by this process. (Ji Hoon, et al., 2009).
Garvin defines learning organization as one that is expert in creation, acquisition, and transfer
of knowledge and in changing its attitude to reveal new insights and knowledge. To attain this
position, five component actions are necessary. These actions include solving problems
systematically; experiments with new approaches; experience and history based learning;
learning from other's experiences; and information transmission. (Garvin, 1993)
Marsick and Watkins define the concept of learning organization as a body that transforms
continuously on the basis of learning. The process of learning is continuous. It is used
strategically. It is integrated with work in such a way that it runs along with business and both
business and learning process both become essential for each other. It also encourages and
maximizes the capacity of an organization for growth and innovation. In this way, innovative
systems are founded to detain shared learning. Their approach mainly focuses on the system
regarding environmental factors and applications of work place that enhance the persistency of
learning process. (Marsick & Watkins, 2003)
There are three main postulates that can be drawn out from the literature on the topic.
The procedure of organizational learning is the key and basis of learning organization.
The attributes like human competency, togetherness of people and collective thinking
are constructing constituents of a learning organization.
The connections with components of organizations ensure the systematic environment
for continuous learning. (Jose & Julian, 2013)
3

3.2.1 Organizational Learning definitions
Organizational learning is one of the most important characteristics of a successful organization.
Followings are some of the definitions found in the literature:
Both concepts have been used interchangeably as among the characteristics of learning
organization, organizational learning is an essential character. (Tsang & W., 1997)
Organizational learning consists of social process that supplies prospects to organizations so
that they may regain their previous achievements. Authors like Senge, Hong, and Aggestam are
dead sure about the death of an organization that progresses lower than its environment.
(Mehrabi, et al., April 2013). There are many examples of complex organizations which could
not keep themselves up to the requirements of the day and eventually they had to die like
dinosaurs with the harsh hands of natural process. The processes of continuous change and
adaptation according to situation are essential elements for an organization who want to
survive in today's competitive market. Now the question arises what are the factors that
distinguish a flourishing organization from an unsuccessful organization. The answer lies in the
ability of the organization to learn at high speed as compared to its competitors. (Akhtar &
Ahmad Khan, 2011)
Organizational learning is defined as the collective name for process of learning activities which
is influenced by institutionalized environment. Here two terms need to be explained. One is
learning activities which mean activities to promote shared actions and thoughts. The other
term is environment which is based upon the integrative analysis of literature of Weiss and
Duncan, and Argyris and Schon. (Ji Hoon, et al., 2009)
Organizational learning is a process of individual learning within a learning organization. It is up
to characteristics or nature of learning organization that how it permits the process of
organizational learning within its circumstances. Organizational learning basically evaluates the
process of learning without paying much attention to the environmental and external factors
and the results got from the learning process. (Chawla & Joshi, 2011)
Organizational learning deals with learning processes that are used to modify individual
knowledge into communal knowledge. The processes of organizational learning have close
relation with strategic relationship, empowerment, team learning, inquiry and dialogues.
(Tubagus, 2013)
3.2.2 Learning Organization and Organizational Learning
Both terms have largely been used interchangeably but a little analysis shows that there is sheer
difference between two concepts. Some authors also argue that there is continuously increasing
dichotomy between two concepts of research. One is learning organization based research while
the other type of research is organizational learning research. (Tubagus, 2013)
3.2.3 Dimensions of Learning Organization
Senge's classical book named "the fifth discipline: methods to create learning organization" was
published in 1990. This book consisted of those elements or dimensions that are necessary for
the conversion of an organization into learning organization. These five dimensions/ disciplines
are:
4

Personal mastery: this dimension is related to personal growth and mastery. In this
perspective, main focus of concentration is clarification of employee's personal
viewpoint. The full concentration is provided to the energies of employees. This
dimension also deals with development and mastery of vision that is realistic and
unbiased. The patience to wait till the last moment of decision is also part of personal
mastery. (Akhtar & Ahmad Khan, 2011). It is also the ability of a person to see the reality
without any diversions and biases. Developing a habit of analyzing the situations
according to circumstances without involving one's own perspectives is at the core of
personal mastery. Personal mastery makes the core of strategic elements of an
organization. Strategic elements develop the central part of development of
organizational abilities. (Akhtar & Ahmad Khan, 2011)
Mental Models: describes mental images that denote external world and its affect on
the personal life of a person. The personal life includes activities and decisions. After
analyzing developed models, theories, activities and campaigns of motivation are
developed. It is at the basis of all the learning and educational activities. In other words,
mental models influences the attitudes of employees in the business and decides about
decisions of people as what kinds of activities people do and what kinds of activities
people do not like to do. (Bui & Baruch, 2010)
Shared Vision: shared vision means the situation of a group of people who have same
and common anticipations about future along with that they have similar commitment
for achieving their future. If this kind of commitment is present in a business, it is called
shared vision. It creates bulks on energy inside a persons and employees when they
interact with each other continuously. Knowing that there are a lot of people with same
vision also create desire to learn more and more about achieving the goal. It also
encourages man to take risks and do experiments and endeavor to achieve it. (Akhtar &
Ahmad Khan, 2011)
Team Learning: is the name of process by which the junior members in a team are
encouraged and offered the occasions to learn and develop skills that are necessary to
get appreciating results collectively for organization. Team learning in modern
organizations is very important as in today's world only groups and teams are
responsible for results instead of individuals. In other worlds, it is team learning that
eventually leads to personal learning. (Bui & Baruch, 2010)
Systems thinking: it is the ability of an individual to think in a system instead of taking
into consideration its constituents. For example, just thinking about cloud is an instance
of thinking of constituents while on the other hand, thinking of compressions of clouds,
darkness spreading in the sky, and then falling drops from the sky is the example of
system thinking in which whole process of raining is taken into consideration at a single
moment of time. Indeed, it is one of the best disciplines that allow man to view relations
as a whole. Moreover, by this discipline, the relations can be scientifically considered as
variable models instead of static snapshots. This principle or dimension makes it
possible for an individual to observe all above mentioned four dimensions in a coherent
way and use these dimensions in the form of action and theory. (Akhtar & Ahmad Khan,
2011). Another important aspect of fifth principle is that it helps individuals to think of
other parts of the society and ponder over the outcomes their decisions regarding other
parts of the society. (Akhtar & Ahmad Khan, 2011)

5

3.3 Knowledge Definitions

Every organization tries its best to seek innovation, improvement and adaptation in order to
sustain from pressures of global competition. The speed, at which technological changes are
taking place, has also made these attributes essential for an organization. Even the rules of game
also keep changing among competitors and this has become most haunted threat for
organizations. Thus, if an organization tries to act like tradition methods, its very existence is
more likely in danger. (Mehrabi, et al., April 2013). Knowledge is one of the most important
resources of an organization as it provides organizations with the ability to perpetual
innovation and resultantly providing them with competitive advantage. Different definitions of
knowledge are as follows:
Knowledge can be defined in different ways. It is defined as skill or expertise attained through
experience and education. It is acquired by practical and theoretical perception of a subject.
(Heo & Yoo, 2002)
Another definition of knowledge declares it as a product of human thought gathered from
experiences and experiences come from incidents and circumstances in communities. (Camila &
Luiz, 2013)
Third perspective about definition of knowledge considers it as awareness and understanding
acquired with passage of time from experience, observation, investigation or study. (Bui &
Baruch, 2010)
Some also take knowledge as a combination of information and experience, reflection,
interpretation and context. (Chawla & Joshi, 2011)
There are two types of knowledge. One is tacit and other is explicit. Tacit knowledge rests in the
minds of individuals. Tacit knowledge rules over emotions, values, ideals, commitment,
routines, procedures, and actions of individuals. On the other hand, explicit knowledge is most
commonly known form of knowledge. It is systematic form of knowledge usually found in the
form of reports, documents or books. The explicit form of knowledge is easy to transfer, store
and codify in space and time. It is usually tacit knowledge that works as a resource for a
business. While working under knowledge share individuals use different means like internet,
telephone, mail, or chatting to transfer both types of knowledge from one end to another end for
the progress of business. However, because of differences in human behavior and psychology,
this is not a simple process to happen. A number of frameworks and models have been
identified to be helpful in digging out the knowledge share behavior. (Noorazah & Juhana, 2011)
3.3.1 Knowledge Management definitions

There is no fully agreed definition of the term knowledge management. (Abeer, 2011)The term
knowledge management first came into prominence in 1970s when computer, that were called
data processors at that time, made their entry into business world. Now a days, this term is used
to identify a business' ability to identify, manage and collaborate its knowledge and its
6

resources so that it may evolve definite skills and capacities that can be renovated to new
processes, products and systems of leadership management. (Camila & Luiz, 2013)
Chow defines knowledge management as a series of activities that make it possible for
organizations to create, store, distribute and apply knowledge. (Chow, 2005)
Knowledge management is also defined as a business process by which organizations and
corporations generate and use their communal knowledge. (Civi, 2000)
Knowledge management is a kind of mix fluid consisting of expert insight, contextual
information, and values and framed experience that offers a framework to evaluate and
incorporate new information and experiences. (Davenport & Prusak, 1998)
Knowledge management is the identification and control of the communal knowledge within
the organization to assist an organization in market competition. (Von & G., 1998)
Knowledge Management encircles all organizational processes that look for a synergistic
combination of information and data processing ability of modern technologies, with innovative
and creative capability of individuals. (Gunasekaran & NGAI, 2007)
Knowledge management is a tool that can create important results by using available
information. An organization using knowledge management gets significant results after a long
period of time. Today, companies focus on specific spheres of knowledge and skills instead of
consuming their efforts on some organizational areas or individuals to attain superior results.
(Camila & Luiz, 2013)
Similarly, there are two types of learning i.e. "learning that" and "learning how". The term
"Learning that" is memorization of facts while other is a process that undergoes changes
continuously. Learning as a process means using it to improve behavior of person, groups or
organizations. Learning is also considered as a process of improvement in action by utilizing
understanding and knowledge. Learning is an inevitable, continuous, and natural process whose
end result is change. The change resultantly shapes behavior in terms of values, attitude, skills,
and knowledge. (Chawla & Joshi, 2011)
The renewal cycle of knowledge has become short because of advanced technology and
increased competitiveness. Now companies try to distinguish themselves from their
competitors by their knowledge and their usage of that knowledge. (Honarpour, et al., 2012).
There are some principles that need to be observed in order to make knowledge management
effective and efficient:
Knowledge is created and stored in people's heads
Trust is key to knowledge share
Knowledge related behaviors are enabled by technology
Knowledge sharing must be rewarded and encouraged.
Support of resources and leadership
Pilot program should be launched to provide an initiative regarding knowledge
Evaluation of knowledge by qualitative and quantitative measures
Creative knowledge develops in unusual and unexpected ways. Thus both should be
encouraged. (Camila & Luiz, 2013)
7

In order to deploy knowledge management, most important thing for an organization is its
culture. The projects of knowledge management can only be successful for an organization if the
organization has favorable culture for implementation of cultural environment. It becomes
complex phenomenon as culture solely depends upon the individuals and employees that create
it. (Chawla & Joshi, 2011)
The discussion about knowledge management can be summed in words that industries differ
from each other in their need of innovation and knowledge. Therefore, there is vast difference in
pace of change and innovation when two industries are compared. Technology has a grand role
in enhancing the knowledge sharing productivity as its has created, stored and distributed the
knowledge in expeditious manner. Most important part of knowledge management is
knowledge sharing thus success or failure of knowledge sharing would ultimate result in
success or failure of knowledge management strategies. Motivators and de-motivators are
determining forces of knowledge sharing at workplace. Among many factors culture is most
important factor that affects knowledge management. Knowledge at its core depends upon
interpersonal exchange of knowledge among the individuals. Moreover, work experience and
knowledge acquisition affects individual's behavior towards knowledge management. (Oye, et
al., 2011)
3.3.2 Knowledge Sharing

One function that is most important of all organizational functions is knowledge sharing. (Abeer,
2011)
Knowledge sharing happens when one person is eager to gain knowledge of others and to
disperse related information from corner to corner of organization. (Yang, 2007)
Knowledge sharing can be defined in terms of culture that supports social interaction which
involves the exchange of skills, experience and knowledge of employees of whole organization
or department. (Azlyn, et al., 2011). It consists of a set of collective understanding that in an
organization make it possible to build and use the knowledge networks.
It can also be defined in terms of occurrence when pieces of knowledge or information are
shared by participants of a group and then these pieces are discussed and analyzed by
negotiation in natural interactions till it becomes a part of common sense of that group. There is
a difference between knowledge and information. Information is something unidirectional or
unrequested containing a message within while knowledge is a type of information interpreted
with reference to an individual's insights and experiences containing elements of reciprocity.
(Hajar, 2014)
There are two levels of knowledge sharing. One is organizational and the other is personal.
Knowledge sharing is all about conversation that occurs among employees by which they get
someone better doer and more efficient. In terms of organization, knowledge sharing means the
availability of knowledge to the business in order to improve the employees' performance. This
is usually done by sharing experiences of the seniors and top management to juniors or sub
ordinates. Knowledge sharing is essential in today's business world as it improves innovation
performance and saves business from outmoded efforts of learning. (Azlyn, et al., 2011)
8

Knowledge sharing is an essential function to be done in organizations so that they may get
competitive advantage over other organizations. (Lingling, et al., 2008). For this purpose, old
knowledge is combined, gaps between old pieces of information are discovered and united and
old knowledge is applied in new ways to make new knowledge. This ability of sharing
knowledge from one department of organization to another department becomes really fruitful
and results in better organizational performance (Heo & Yoo, 2002) as collective understanding
is provided by communal information and understanding of efficient employees of an
organization. Complex tasks can be carried out by shared leadership. (Heather & Roseanne,
2013)
No business can gain its goals without knowledge sharing and employees and businesses are
still indulged in the prisoner's dilemma. It is recommended that less efficient employees should
increase their value by learning from others at the same time, they should participate their
knowledge into the business. Similarly, businesses should use game strategy to retain
employees and get their goal achieved. Game process includes always maintaining high
expectations in the minds of employees for sharing knowledge with business and to restrict
employees from taking short term actions and thus maintaining steady benefits between
employees and organization. (Lingling, et al., 2008)
3.3.3Barriers in knowledge sharing
Today's economy is knowledge based economy. Organizations are working to utilize their
knowledge, at right time, at right place and in right direction, so that they may meet the
requirements of the day. Their purpose is to enhance their corporate efficiency, quality,
ambitions, and processes. (Lepa & Jelena, 2013). The purpose of this review is to elaborate
possibilities in order to make Directorate of Education in Northern Region a learning
organization and to provide the analytical study of impacts of dimensions of learning
organization on knowledge sharing. Thus by identifying the gaps in this field of research,
Directorate of Education would be able to produce effective knowledge which will result in
optimum success in its response to challenges of modern economy and it will be transformed
into knowledge based organization.
A study conducted in 2005 in Malaysia shows that there are only five universities out of 17
universities in Malaysia in which employees have awareness with knowledge sharing culture.
There is dire need of studying factors that work as barrier in knowledge sharing. These factors
are one of the most important steps to overcome in order to develop a knowledge sharing
culture within Jordan. (Azlyn, et al., 2011)
Basically, there are three types of factors that can affect knowledge sharing namely
organizational, personal and technical. Organizational factors include environmental or
unintentional interactions caused by another person in struggle for knowledge sharing attitude.
Personal factors are caused by individual driven forces. These forces include feeling, attitudes,
expectations, perceptions and beliefs. Technical factors in knowledge sharing include problems
of technology used in the process. This can be hardware or software.
Same is true for Riege(2005) who used the term triad of knowledge sharing barriers for above
mentioned three types of factors. He then recognizes some of personal barriers and gives their
details. These personal barriers include cultural differences, untrustworthy accuracy of
9

knowledge source, fear of not getting rightful recognition, not having confidence in people,
different education levels, lacking of social networking, gender differences, age differences, poor
interpersonal and verbal skills, lack of interaction and contact, experience level differences, over
usage of formal power, supremacy of explicit over tacit knowledge, unawareness of knowledge
sharing benefits, low job security, and unavailability of time for knowledge sharing. (Azlyn, et
al., 2011)
There are also some organizational factors that can be outlined here as barriers to knowledge
sharing. These comprise of lack of compatibility between organizational goals and knowledge
management, lack of managerial direction and leadership, lack of informal and formal spaces,
shortage of recognition system, shortage of transparent reward, lack of supportive
organizational culture, no efforts to retain experienced individuals in the organization,
inappropriate infrastructure, lack of company resources for practices of knowledge sharing,
restricted knowledge flow, communication, and work-environment, and business unit size.
(Azlyn, et al., 2011)
Technical factors that become barrier are as employee's awareness of system and its processes,
lack of compatibility between business needs and system configuration, and shortage of
technical support and maintenance.
Knowledge hoarding is one of the most important factors of barriers in knowledge sharing. It
usually prevails in institutions where intellectual property protection is not available to the
employees. Thus, an employee usually fears from bad reputation or stealing of the information
in case if he shares it with others. In other conditions, when knowledge becomes the tool of
ruling over others within the same organization, knowledge hoarding prevails in organization.
Promoting a culture of sharing and a sense of mutual benefit and success can help organization
to improve knowledge sharing within departments. The best way to do this is providing law
protection to intellectual property and developing a sense of security and safety within the
employees. Moreover, people with culture of knowledge sharing capabilities can also be
attracted to promote it in the organization. (Azlyn, et al., 2011)
3.4 Learning Organization Dimensions and Knowledge Sharing
Dimensions of learning organization consist of personal mastery; mental models; shared vision;
team learning and system thinking. Knowledge sharing is largely affected by dimensions of
learning organization. Being learning organization is the need of the modern day. Learning
organization principles are basis of a successful organization in knowledge sharing. Every
employee becomes an integral part of the organization and every employee becomes non
transferable resource of progress. Knowledge sharing can be improved in the organization by
deep analysis of impacts of the dimensions.
In 2008, Deborah Davis and Barbara J. Daley conducted a study to investigate the relationship
between the learning organization dimensions and firms' performance. (Deborah & Barbara,
2008)They gathered managerial reactions to the questionnaire learning organization along with
objective and perceptual calculation of financial performance of the firm. In order to analyze the
relationship between performance and learning organization variables, several regression
equations were used. The variables studied included new products' percentage in sales,
10

average net income of employees, per share earnings, return on equity, and return on
investment. The results of the study suggested that:
This study clarified the link between the learning organization elements and overall
performance of the firm.
This study paved the path for further research in the field.
This study enabled business to establish units to launch learning based initiatives and
also assessment of their impact on business objectives.
There is a need on the part of resource professionals to link the outcome of learning
organization measures with business performance measures.
This research expanded the scope by using a set of validated measurable constructs that
is dimension of the learning questionnaire.
This study also recognized the need for a standardized measure to investigate business
performance.
In 2011, Deepak Chawla and Himanshu Joshi, investigated the impact of knowledge
management on Learning Organization in Indian Organizations- A comparison. (Chawla & Joshi,
2011). They tried to investigate the connection between learning organization dimensions and
knowledge management dimensions. They also tried to investigate whether there is difference
among private or public organizations in terms of this relationship in India. The sample
consisted of 51 executives representing 16 different private or public organizations. The study
shows following results:
Private organizations perform better as compared to public organizations in all
dimensions of learning organization and knowledge management.
In private sector the effect of learning organization dimensions is clearly visible as
compared to the public sector organizations.
Knowledge management dimensions have positive effect on learning organization
dimensions namely structure of information flow, work practices, strategy and vision.
The knowledge management has a negative effect on development and training.
Both types of studies are unique with respect to challenges they face.
It is pertinent for public sector organizations to improve their processes in order to get
in competition with private sector organizations.
Focus on creation, capture and usage of knowledge is recommended for organizations.
In 2012, Hishamuddin bin Md.Son and others fellows conducted the study on the
implementation of learning organization elements and their effect on organizational
performance of Singapore NPOs. (Hishamuddin, et al., 2012). A study was carried out in 60
NPOs to investigate the performance regarding Learning organization elements. The findings
were as follows:
The elements like organizational learning practices, leadership empowerment and
commitment, intrinsic motivation, experimentation, clarity of vision and mission were
found essential to become learning organization.
This study established the tradition regarding knowledge management and some
indicators were recommended to be used for further research.
Managing organization employees into teams would allow organization to be effective in
decision making, problem solving and communication.
11

There is a direct relation between organization performance and learning organization
dimensions. Thus there is a need to organize, disseminate and acquire knowledge.
Ji hoon Song and Baek-Kyoo Joo, and Thomas J. Chermack conducted the study to know the
validation of dimensions of learning organizations in Korean Context. (Ji Hoon, et al., 2009).
They studied 1529 cases of 11 firms and reliable scores were produced from measures like
simple item internal consistency estimates, Korean version of direct learning organization
questionnaire, interrelation analysis of items, and factor analysis.
In 2013, Eray EGMIR and Sinan YORUK conducted the study on the topic of effectiveness level of
school administrators coaching characteristics on School's being learning organization. The
result was the important difference between school administrator coaching skills and the
schools becoming learning organization.


















12

Bibliography
Abeer, H. A.-F., 2011. Investigating the Relationship between Knowledge Sharing Strategies and
Organizational Excellence Pillars, Washington: IBIMA Publishing.
Akhtar, N. & Ahmad Khan, R., 2011. Exploring the Paradox of Organizational Learning and Learning
Organization. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 2(9), pp. 257-270.
Azlyn, A. Z., Zaherawati, Z. & Nazni, N., 2011. The Study of Barrier Factors in Knowledge Sharing: A
Case Study in Public University. MANAGEMENT SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, 5(1), pp. 59-70.
Bui, H. & Baruch, Y., 2010. Creating learning organizations: a systems perspective",. The Learning
Organization, 17(3), pp. 208-227.
Camila, L. F. & Luiz, A. P., 2013. Analysis of the Seven Dimensions of Knowledge Management in
Organizations. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 8(ALTEC), pp. 53-63.
Cangelosi, V. & Dill, W., 1965. Organizational learning: observation toward a theory. Administrative
Science Quarterly, Volume 10, pp. 175-203.
Chawla, D. & Joshi, H., 2011. Impact of Knowledge Management on Learning Organization in Indian
OrganizationsA Comparison. Knowledge and Process Management, 18(4), pp. 266-277.
Chow, H., 2005. Design of a knowledge-based logistics strategy system. Expert System Application,
Volume 29, pp. 272-290.
Civi, E., 2000. Knowledge management as a competitive asset: a review. Market Intelligence
Planning, 18(4), pp. 166-174.
Conkova, M., 2013. Analysis of Perceptions of Conventional and E-Learning Education in Corporate
Training. Journal of Competitiveness, 5(4), pp. 73-97.
Davenport, T. & Prusak, L., 1998. Working Knowledge. Bostan: Harvard Business School Press.
Deborah, D. & Barbara, J. D., 2008. The learning organization and its dimensions as key factors in
firms performance. Human Resource Development International, 11(1), pp. 51-66.
Dixon, N., 1994. The Organizational Learning Cycle: How We Can Learn Collectively. London:
McGraw-Hill.
Eray, E. & Sinan, Y., 2013. The Effectiveness Level of School Administrators Coaching Characteristic
on Schools Being Learning Organization. Mevlana International Journal of Education (MIJE), 3(1), pp.
120-133.
Garvin, D., 1993. Building a learning organization. Harvard Business Review, pp. 78-91.
Gunasekaran, A. & NGAI, E., 2007. Knowledge management in 21st century manufacturing.
International Journal of Production Research, 45(11), pp. 2391-2418.
Hajar, G., 2014. Knowledge Sharing Behaviour among Students in Learning Environments: A Review
of Literature. Asian Social Science, 10(4), pp. 38-45.
13

Heather, H. M. & Roseanne, J. F., 2013. The impact of shared leadership on teamwork mental
models and performance in self-directed teams. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 16(1),
pp. 46-57.
Heo, D. & Yoo, Y., 2002. Knowledge Sharing in Post Merger Integration. Sprouts: Working Papers on
Information Systems, 2(18), pp. 221-245.
Hishamuddin, B. M. et al., 2012. The Implementation of LearningOrganization Elements and Their
Impact towards Organizational Performance amongst NPOs inSingapore. International Journal of
Business and Management, 7(12), pp. 1-31.
Honarpour, A., Jusoh, A. & Nor, K. M., 2012. Knowledge Management, total quality management and
innovation: a new look. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 7(3), pp. 22-31.
Ji Hoon, S., Baek-Kyoo, J. & Thomas, J. C., 2009. The Dimensions of Learning Organization
Questionnaire (DLOQ): A Validation Study in a Korean Context. HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
QUARTERLY, 20(1), pp. 43-64.
Jose, M. A. & Julian, M. S., 2013. Information systems supported organizational learning as a
competitive advantage. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Managemen, 6(3), pp. 702-708.
Jose, M. A. & Julian, M. S., 2013. Information systems supported organizational learning as a
competitive advantage. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 6(3), pp. 702-708.
Lepa, B. & Jelena, D. B., 2013. CONTEMPORARY APPROACH TO EDUCATION IN ORGANIZATIONS.
SINGIDUNUM JOURNALOF APPLIED SCIENCES, 10(1), pp. 46-53.
Lingling, Z. et al., 2008. A Way to Improve Knowledge Sharing: from the Perspective of Knowledge
Potential. Scientific Research Publishing, Volume 1, pp. 226-232.
Marsick, V. J. & Watkins, K. E., 2003. Demonstrating the value of an organizations learning culture:
The dimensions of learning organizations questionnaire. Advances in Developing Human Resources,
5(2), pp. 132-151.
Mehrabi, D. J., Soltani, D. I. & Alemzadeh, M., April 2013. Explaining the Relationship between
Organizational Structure and Dimensions of Learning Organizations (Case study: Education
Organization in Boroojerd County and the Related Departments). International Journal of Academic
Research in Business and Social Sciences, 3(4), pp. 116-128.
Mtega, W. P., Dulle, F. & Benard, R., 2013. Understanding the knowledge sharing process among
rural communities in Tanzania: A review of selected studies.. Knowledge Management & E-Learning,
5(2), pp. 205-217.
Murni Zarina, M. R., Nurul, A. A. & Nor Diyana, M. S., November 2013. Learning Organization
Practices and Job Satisfaction among Academicians at Public University. International Journal of
Social Science and Humanity, 3(6), pp. 518-522.
14

Noorazah, M. N. & Juhana, S., 2011. Factors Influencing Employee Knowledge Sharing Capabilities in
Electronic Government Agencies in Malaysia. IJCSI International Journal of Computer Science Issues,
4(2), pp. 106-114.
Oye, N. D., Mazleena, S. & Noorminshah, A., 2011. Knowledge Sharing in Workplace: Motivators and
Demotivators. International Journal of Managing Information Technology, 3(4), pp. 71-84.
Pedler, M., Burgoyne, J. & Boydell, T., 1991. The Learning Company: A Strategy for Sustainable
Development. London: McGraw-Hill.
Senge, P. M., 1990. The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. New York:
Doubleday/Currency.
Smith, P., 2011. Guest Editorial Elements of organizational sustainability, The Learning Organization.
The Learning Organization, 18(1), pp. 5-9.
Tsang, E. & W., K., 1997. Organizational Learning and the Learning Organization: A Dichotomy
Between Descriptive and Prescriptive Research. Human Relations, 50(1), pp. 73-89.
Tubagus, I., 2013. Feed Forward Control System, Organizational Learning and Business Unit
Performance. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 3(4), pp. 349-353.
Von, K. & G., 1998. Care in Knowledge Creation. California Management Review, 40(3), pp. 133-153.
Worawit, J., 2013. The Students Workplace Learning Program as a Strategy to Enhance Knowledge
Worker Competency: An Alternative Way to Build Learning Organization. International Journal of e-
Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-Learning, 3(2), pp. 107-111.
Yang, J., 2007. The Impact of Knowledge Sharing on Organizational Learning and Effectiveness.
Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(2), pp. 83-90.