The Dimensions of Learning Organization Questionnaire (DLOQ): A cross-cultural validation in an Iranian context
Purpose – The purpose of this research is to assess the validity and reliability of the measurement scores related to the learning organization culture, the Dimensions of Learning Organization Questionnaire (DLOQ), in an Iranian context. This research can contribute to the growing literature of learning in organizations. Design/ methodology/approach – The data were collected through distributing questionnaires to 54 service firms and manufacturing companies in ten major cities of Iran during the third quarter of 2010. Rigorous translation procedures, including both forward and backward processes, have been used to guarantee the relevance of this instrumentation in different cultural contexts. Confirmatory factor analysis, simple item-internal consistency estimates, and item inter-correlation analysis were performed to test the validity of DLOQ. Research limitations/implications – There are five positional limitations. First, this study relies on self-report and different perceptions of questions can bring about percept-percept bias. Second, the nature of this research is cross-sectional which may cause causality among variables. Third, the various organizational levels in the questionnaire can render some misinterpretations while answering the questions. Furthermore, the length of the original questionnaire (43 questions) could cause lack of concentration and boredom, which in turn, can impact the results. Last, two constructs related to performance (knowledge and financial performance) in the questionnaire were omitted. Originality/value – This study confirms, according to some statistical results, that the Iranian version of DLOQ has produced reliable measurement scores with the construct validity sufficient to measure the learning organization culture in the Iranian context.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 32 (2011)
Issue (Month): 5/6 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.emeraldinsight.com|
|Order Information:|| Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK|
Web: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ijm.htm Email:
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:ijmpps:v:32:y:2011:i:5/6:p:661-676. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Virginia Chapman)
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.