IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/nbripp/nbri-04-2020-0015.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing a measurement scale for organizational learning capabilities in China

Author

Listed:
  • Wanwen Dai
  • Jan Ketil K. Arnulf
  • Laileng Iao
  • Meng Liang
  • Haojin Dai

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this study was to develop a measurement instrument for organizational learning capability (OLC) in a Chinese management context. Previous research has indicated a need for measurement instruments with proven ecological validity in China, because the learning capability of organizations is influenced by the organization’s external environment. Design/methodology/approach - The authors followed a consequent inductive procedure from item sampling through exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and nomological validation. The initial part sampled relevant descriptors from a diverse sample of 159 employees from heterogeneous backgrounds in China. After sorting by an expert panel, EFA of data from a sample of 161 executive students yielded a three-dimensional construct comprising knowledge acquisition, knowledge sharing and knowledge utilization. These three constructs were again tested in CFA using a sample of 357 employees from five companies. Findings - The findings across the three samples resulted in a three-dimensional measurement scale that is called as the organizational learning capability questionnaire (OLCQ). The OLCQ displayed high internal consistency, reliability and nomological validity. Research limitations/implications - This focus of this study has only been to establish a measurement instrument that allows indigenous research on organizational learning in China. The approach was statistically driven grounded approach, not a theoretical assumption of learning mechanisms special to the Chinese culture. Further research is needed to estimate how this approach yields results that are different from other cultures or the extent to which our findings can be explained by features of the Chinese culture or business environment. Practical implications - This study offers a practical measurement instrument to assess practical and scientific problems of organizational learning in China. Social implications - The work here emphasizes the necessity of a knowledge sharing community for organizational learning to appear. It addresses a call for more indigenous Chinese management research. Originality/value - The authors provide a measurement instrument for OLC with proven ecological validity and with promising consequences for research and practice in China. The instrument is empirically grounded in the practices and behaviors of Chinese managers, avoiding biases that stem from previously identified shortcomings in cross-cultural management research. To the knowledge, it is the first of its kind and a contribution to a call for indigenous management theories with contextual validity.

Suggested Citation

  • Wanwen Dai & Jan Ketil K. Arnulf & Laileng Iao & Meng Liang & Haojin Dai, 2021. "Developing a measurement scale for organizational learning capabilities in China," Nankai Business Review International, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 12(3), pages 434-457, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:nbripp:nbri-04-2020-0015
    DOI: 10.1108/NBRI-04-2020-0015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/NBRI-04-2020-0015/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/NBRI-04-2020-0015/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/NBRI-04-2020-0015?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:nbripp:nbri-04-2020-0015. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.