Organizations seek to become learning, innovative and high performing organizations. Yet, implementation is elusive and is not often based on research about what constitutes a learning, innovative and high performing culture. However, organizations wanted a way to diagnose their current status and guide change, and to explore whether self-learning develops innovative, learning organizational culture and whether it leads to improved bottom line of the firm.
The study is an empirical study with primary data collected from employees of petrochemicals, fertilizer and engineering industries in central Gujarat. The researchers were able to extract three factors which are named as 1. reward and positive interpersonal relationships; 2. positive and directed/focused change; and 3. open discussion of mistakes. It is also found that the most important benefit of self-learning is that it improves the bottom line and operational profits of the organization. Analysis of Variance ANOVA reveals that there exists a relationship between the perception for self-learning statements (seven out of ten statements) and age.
Workplaces—their psychological contract and the demands they place on employees at all levels to learn and work faster—are changing at exponential rates. Organizations often expect that learning and knowledge creation will take place continuously for individuals and that they will share what they know in ways that promote learning in groups and throughout the organization.
The current research work is based on the premise that human resource developers must redefine their relationships to leaders if they wish to influence the conversation taking place among senior leaders about the need to cultivate strategic/informal learning to improve performance and reach strategic goals. Human resource development (HRD) has some opportunity to proactively influence the direction, pace and salience of learning in workplaces. To best play that role, we have argued for a model of change guided by organizational learning diagnostics that are used to assess gaps, guide interventions, and subsequently measure changes (Gephart, Marsick, Van Buren, & Spiro, 1996; Marsick & Watkins, 1999).