Examining the Mediating Role of Employee Career Development in the Relationship Between Learning Organization and Organizational Perform-libre

International Journal of Business and Behavioral Sciences Vol. 4, No.6; June 2014

55

Examining the Mediating Role of Employee Career Development in the

Relationship between Learning Organization and Organizational Performance

Sahrish Saba Zafar1, Mohsin Bashir2,*Muhammad Abrar 3, Faheem Ghazanfar 4 1

MS Scholar, Department of Business Administration, Govt. College University, Faisalabad, Pakistan, 2Assistant Professor Department of Business Administration, Govt. College University, Faisalabad

Pakistan, 3Assistant Professor Department of Business Administration, National Textile University,

Faisalabad, Pakistan, 4Assistant Professor, Department of Public Administration, University of

Management Sciences and Information Technology, Kotli, Azad Kashmir.

*[email protected]

ABSTRACT

The purpose of the study is to study the mediating role of employee career development in the

relationship between learning organization and organizational performance. For this study, 350

questionnaires had been circulated to the employees who were judiciously selected on random bases

from listed corporations of food and personal care products in Lahore Stock Exchange (LSE 25) of

Pakistan. The model in this exploration, anticipated a three-variable classification, following two

contributory paths that provide for reliant variable, first path encompasses of direct influence of

dimensions of learning organization on organizational performance, and second, the impact of mediator

on causal relationship of both variables. Based on results drawn from regression analysis, reconnoitered

that dimensions of learning organization had worth mentioning impact on organizational performance,

and employee career development had frolicked weighty role between both variables. Cream of the crop

is that the organizations should concentrate on the connotation of employee career development into

orgaﾐizatioﾐ’s Husiﾐess de┗elopﾏeﾐt plaﾐ. It guides the orgaﾐizatioﾐs to espouse the Ihaﾐge that Iaﾐ help to attain their defined goals and improve the enactment through employee involvement and

enthusiasm toward the responsibilities. A learning organization through stride and volume of up-to-date

┗iIissitudes Iaﾐ ha┗e a Ioﾏpassioﾐate role iﾐ path┘ay of the iﾐdi┗iduals’ Iareer de┗elopﾏeﾐt that contributes in the organizational performance.

Keywords: Dimensions of Learning Organization, Organizational Performance, Employee Career

Development, Competitive Advantage

Introduction:

In the economy of the twenty-first epoch, it is better understood that human resource is a foremost

faIet of eIoﾐoﾏiI aﾐd soIial ┘ellHeiﾐg. Aﾐ oヴgaﾐizatioﾐげs aIIoﾏplishﾏeﾐt is determined as much by the

dexterity and impetus of its associates as by almost any other factor. While this has always been true,

the stride and volume of up-to-the-minute change is focusing considerations on ways that the human

resources development actions can be rummage-sale to safeguard organizational adherents what it

takes to efficaciously come across their challenges.

Organizational development commencing HR perspective, as the OD progression, determined on

accomplishing development through its Humanoid Capital. Iﾐ this study, leaヴﾐiﾐg oヴgaﾐizatioﾐげs perspective has been allocated to study organizational performance by causative in the career

development of personnel. The conception of learning organization, instigated by Senge (1991), is

relatively ┘idely held iﾐ the disseヴtatioﾐs IoﾐIeded iﾐ the field of ﾏaﾐageﾏeﾐt. “eﾐgeげs ﾏodulus as


56

specified in his book, さThe Fifth DisIipliﾐeざ has been presented as criterion in this disquisition to

categorize organizations that possibly will be liable for the perspective of the learning organization but

the dimensions of learning organization (DLO) described by Watkins and Mersick, (1993) were base for

subsequent investigation dissertation.

The model of this study focuses on longstanding strategy of organizational performance (OP) that could

He aIhie┗ed o┗eヴ aﾐd doﾐe ┘ith the de┗elopﾏeﾐt of the iﾐdi┗idualsげ Iaヴeeヴs. Iﾐ this ヴe┗eヴeﾐIe foヴeﾏost stratagems of OP have been well thought-out to be fundamental chunk of the progressions going on in

organizations that prerogative to make the grade as learning organizations. Based on this datum, this

study assumes that committed to such tactics causes the development of their workforce and they can

in due course contribute in the development of organization.

This investigation analyzed the compassionate role of Learning Organization in the direction of

iﾐdi┗idualsげ Iaヴeeヴs ┘hile itself ﾏo┗iﾐg to┘aヴds the fiﾐal stage to oヴgaﾐizatioﾐal peヴfoヴﾏaﾐIe. Foヴ this purpose, continuous learning, inquiry and dialogue, team learning, embedded system, empowerment,

system connection and strategic leadership have been a selection in the context of learning organization

as independent variables. The relationship of these variables with the dependent variable i.e.

organizational performance is well thought-out to be mediated by employee career development.

Figure 1: Portrayal Map of Hypothetical Model

MV: Mediating Variable

DV: Organizational Performance

MV: Employee

Career Development

IV: Learning Organization

Continuous Learning

Inquiry and Dialogue

Team Learning

Embedded System

Empowerment

System Connection

Strategic Leadership Key for Variables:

IV: Independent Variable; DV: Dependent Variable


57

Literature Review:

According to Mabey and Thomson (2012), Learning Organization (LO) is notorious to be solitary which

unceasingly learns and attune itself to altering environs. The concept of LO is a newsworthy one

ﾐe┗eヴtheless it appliIaHility to todayげs happeﾐstaﾐIes Ioﾐfヴoﾐted Hy oヴgaﾐizatioﾐs has specified

connotation in business world. Due to involvedness of environs, organizations have apprehended that

attainment and sustaining competitive edge is not probable without resorting to the LO strategies.

Argote (2013) stated that organizational front-runners and theoreticians progressively stance erudition

as a crucial component in emerging and upholding competitive advantage. Even though learning

organization has been considered for epochs, a new-fangled highlighting on erudition has ascended due

to prompt fluctuations in business macroclimate, as well as indeterminate flea market state of affairs,

snowballing involvedness, altering demographics, and world-wide rivalry, this is also supported by other

studies (Akgün et al 2013;Argyris & Schön, 1999; Chan, 2003; Chiva & Alegre, 2009; Lopez et al., 2004;

Matlay, 2000; Örtenblad, 2001; Marsick &Watkins, 2003; Pantouvakis, & Bouranta, N. 2013).

Distinguishing Between Organizational Learning and Learning Organizations:

According to Örtenblad (2001), the lingos organizational learning and learning organization have been

rummage-sale interchangeably in bygone. As an end result, slip-up has appeared the convention of

these mumbo jumbo (Easterby-Smith et al., 1999; Örtenblad, 2002). Nevertheless, challenges have been

prepared to elucidate and make a distinction between dualistic notions (Davis & Daley, 2008; Yang et al.,

2004). Three normative peculiarities amongst organizational learning & learning organization have been

notorious in the literature (Ortenblad, 2001). Primarily, organizational learning is beheld as a

progression or set of doings, and yet learning organization is realized as a form of business (Tsang,

1997). Succeeding, several essayists hold the opinion that erudition takes place logically in organizations,

despite the fact it necessitates determination to cultivate a learning organization (Dodgson, 1993).

Thirdly, belles-lettres on organizational learning ascended from hypothetical investigation, while the

belles-lettres on the learning organization developed predominantly from practice (Easterby-Smith,

1997). In organizational learning, knowledge is professed as to be inherent in individuals, while it is

observed as to be vested in personages and in organizational reminiscence in learning organizations.

Dimensions of Learning Organization (DLO):

Continuous Learning (CL): A member of personnel erudition and progression alignment is anticipated,

that comprises of reasoning, affecting, and interactive paradigms that together designate a propensity

toward engrossment in continuous learning. This positioning is postulated to be located as a

motivational stage that can be contingent on indentation to which erudition and progression are

pertinent to self. Chances for enduring edification and evolvement are on condition that erudition is

premeditated and hooked on to work, consequently personages can acquire on job (Maurer, 2002; lin,

2010).

According to Weinberg & McDermott (2002), in the meantime uninterruptedly fluctuating surroundings,

personages have to be lifelong learners. Innumerable categories of ability enlargement stratagems are

apply through learning organizations, which consist of long term career development plans, coaching,

mentoring, job enrichment, formal training and job rotation etc. Ability improvement in a learning

organization is an everlasting impact of totally its tactics and procedures, for example it is obviously

unstated that environmental alterations reason variations in ability necessities. Ability enrichment


58

increases production of organizations and gets self-fulfillment such as gratifying comportment. Thus, it is

proposed that:

H1: The continuous learning has a positive impact on organizational performance.

Inquiry and Dialogue (ID): Inquiry aﾐd dialogue aヴe pヴeliﾏiﾐaヴy to oﾐeげs leaヴﾐiﾐg pヴoIeduヴe as they aヴe captivated in determining responses to personally related queries. Action investigation is a technique of

learning that encompasses subject furthermore object, self moreover system or edifice scrutinized. As a

technique, it upsurges percentage of learning and efficiency (Gergen at al., 2004; Linder, 2001). Action

investigation stimulates personages to be constantly inquiring of their determinations, stratagems, and

activities whereas regulating these on bases of response about their effect in world. At personal phase,

action investigation stresses great levels of inquisitiveness, consciousness, and inclination to research

and study from skill and response. When clusters of personages involve collected action investigation

(collaborative inquiry), quick and unfathomable learning can happen. Continuing rehearsal supports and

emphasizes findings and acclimatizes and strengthens newfangled performances. Continuous, self-

guided, collective action investigations are assurance of a learning organization (LO). Therefore, dialogue

interchange tedious with more exposed, alert, and cognizant behavior. It does through enduring

pヴaItiIe, uﾐdeヴstaﾐdiﾐg ヴespoﾐse, ﾏoヴeo┗eヴヴeIipヴoIated suppoヴt foヴ Heaヴiﾐg ┗agueﾐess aﾐd さﾐot-

kﾐo┘iﾐgざ that Ioﾏmitment in deep-seated ingenuousness unavoidably involves (Black & Hunter, 2007,

2009;). Thus, it is proposed that:

H2: The inquiry and dialogue influence positively toward organizational performance.

Team Learning (TL): In a learning organization personages are assumed self-determined but their

struggles to accomplish are perceived as synchronized portion of collaboration. The responsibilities are

generally consigned to personages in form of teams where their performance is connected with team

performance and because team-learning is endorsed in a learning organization (Argyris & Schön, 1999;

Marsick & Watkins, 2003). The idea behindhand team building is that competences of team associates

eﾐhaﾐIes, pヴoduIiﾐg syﾐeヴgetiI touIh aﾐd ヴisiﾐg peヴfoヴﾏaﾐIe ﾏultifaヴious iﾐ Ioﾐtヴast ┘ith peヴsoﾐageげs performance, makes no odds how very skilful he may be. To endorse this spirit, personages are assessed

and remunerated in teams, thus to keep them interested for team work. Work is planned to usage of

teams to access dissimilar styles of thinking; association is appreciated by culture and remunerating;

teams are likely to acquire by working organized. Thus, it is proposed that:

H3: The team learning has positive impact on organizational performance.

Embedded System (ES): In present varying milieu it is compulsory for business to modernize their

systems and technology to manage with environmental reservations. The man power must be efficient

to recognize how technology should be used. The edifice should have essential systems to produced

share, sustained, and combined learning with work; staffs have right to use high and low-slung

technology systems.

H4: The embedded system has a positive effect on organizational performance.

Empowerment (EMP): Employee empowerment is a term used to define a staff mind set of

accountability, culpability, competence, and autonomy. In terms of business, empowerment is

contradictory to micromanagement. Employee empowerment is a stratagem and philosophy that

qualifies staff to make deductions for their jobs (Friedmann, 1992). It assistances staff own their work

and take accountability for their upshots and to assist clienteles on level of organization where clienteles


59

interface occurs. Empowerment is procedure of qualifying or permitting an individual to consider,

performs, control work, decision making and take action in autonomous ways. It is segment of feeling

self-empowered to take control of one's own purpose (Collins, 2000). Empowerment principle is a

development stratagem. In learning organization, a leader give responsibilities clearly and briefly, it

guarantees that there are no grey areas when it arises to assigning particular obligations to particular

employees. That way, employees will identify accurately what is predictable for them and there will be

no room for transitory buck. Moreover, employees contemplate that leader is trusting them to complete

accountability for a charge, it progresses their self-confidence and improvements in their work

(Fetterman & Wandersman, 2005).

H5: The empowerment positively influence toward organizational performance.

System Connection (SC): The knowledge economy functions on complications of connections. All

individuals, societies, systems, and other business possessions are immensely interrelated in progressing

economic ecosystem. In linked economy, every network performer (individual, team, or organization) is

entrenched in a superior economic network that have emotional impact all contributors and, in return,

is prejudiced by that contributor.

H6: The system connection has a positive influence on organizational performance.

Strategic Leadership (SL): A learning organization has need of a different type of leadership in contrast

with conventional leadership in a non-learning organization. Chaisiri (1998) describes this part of a

leader in producing an environment of learning for example さIﾐ oヴdeヴ to stiﾏulate ┘oヴkfoヴIes to consecrate their hands, heads and hearts for edifice, an environment of learning organization

requirements to be industrialized. Leadership usages learning tactically for business consequences;

leadership archetypal, champion, and reassure learning (Bass, 2000; Vera & Crossan, 2004).

H7: The strategic leadership has a positive relationship with organizational performance.

Employee Career Development (ECD): According to (Jones, 2007) career is definite as design of work

liﾐked IapaHilities that spaﾐげs Iouヴse of iﾐdi┗idual lifeざ. Such as recognized by (Greenhaus et al., 2009)

career has two foremost features, first one is objective events and second one is a subjective feelings

connected to those events. Objective events consist of work connected positions, responsibilities,

activities and results. While subjective feelings are how individual take to mean those events in light of

his particular work correlated values.

This conception career management would mean to operate all objective events such as to remain in

contour with those unambiguous work correlated values in a manner suitable to employer i.e. if

individual values have superiority in work then greatest part of his work interrelated efforts would

congregate into aptitude for enhancement and proficiency. In this, any objective event that would

assistance him realize this value would mean career development to him. (Simonsen, 1997) connotes

fact that if staff are predictable to perform such as owner of procedure whereas applying enlargement

actions in organization then a great level of commitment must be inculcated amongst employees. In

order to produce commitment in true spirit would subsidize to organizational success their great level

stimulus must occur between employees. Such stimulus could be inspired between employees by

serving them to line up their own career goalmouths with direction and requirements of organization.

H8: The employees career development process mediate the relationship between learning

organization and organizational performance


60

Organization Performance (OP): It is a deliberately planned effort to increase an organization's

relevance and viability, (Schein, 1990; Shrivastava, 2007) that referred to OP as, future readiness to

meet objectives, a systemic learning and development strategy intended to change the basics of beliefs,

attitudes and relevance of values, and structure of the current organization to better absorb disruptive

technologies, shrinking or exploding market opportunities and ensuing challenges and chaos. OP is the

framework for a change process designed to lead to desirable positive consequences by considering

every unit of organization to exist, sustain in dynamic environment. The learning organization can

effectively contribute in the organizational performance through a transformational change model that

can provide a competitive edge over the rivals.

The current study reviews the collection of previous studies that helped to determine valuable direction

in further research. The primary objectives of this exposition are to analyze the relationship between

learning organization and organizational performance and role of employee career development as a

mediator. The following research questions frame the intent of the study:

Research Inquiry 1 (RI1): What is the relationship between a learning organization and

organizational performance?

Research Inquiry 2 (RI2): How much the dimensions of learning organization influence organizational

performance?

Research Inquiry 3 (RI3): How employee career development play a stimulating role between

learning organization and organizational performance?

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY:

Target Population and Sample: The target population of this study encompassed permanent and long-

standing permanent personnel; employed in the food and personal care products manufacturing sector

of Pakistan. The motive why such personnel were seleIted ┘as that さtheiヴ IoﾐﾐeItioﾐ peヴiod with the

oヴgaﾐizatioﾐざ. This Ioﾐﾐotatioﾐ peヴiod was mandatory to remain elongated enough to estimate the

iﾐflueﾐIe of leaヴﾐiﾐg oヴgaﾐizatioﾐげs iﾐ┗ol┗eﾏeﾐt iﾐ the diヴeItioﾐ of oヴgaﾐizatioﾐal peヴfoヴﾏaﾐIe aﾐd testing mediating part of employee career development. A sampling frame comprising of the

corporations listed in Lahore Stock Exchange (LSE 25) commencing food and personal care products

manufacturing sector of Pakistan. Amongst 18 companies, the final sample size computed to be the

enterprises that are functioning in Lahore constituency. The postal addresses of these Ioヴpoヴatioﾐsげ were moreover attained from their website. For primary data assemblage, a total of 350 specialists of 10

corporations from food and personal care products industry, seleIted Hy follo┘iﾐg けsiﾏple ヴaﾐdoﾏ saﾏpliﾐgげ teIhﾐiケue, were communicated. The defendants contained inside demonstration from

employee level (excluding all intermediate and high-ranking executives).

Instrument Development: The primary data had been congregated through structured questionnaires.

All multi-item measures used in present study has been amended from authenticated and published

instruments. To ration the proportions of learning organization (as continuous learning measured by 7

items, whereas inquiry and dialogue, team learning, embedded system, empowerment, system

connection and strategic leadership had 6 items respectively) and organizational performance (12

items), the questionnaire was centered on instrument formerly intended and used by (Watkins and

Mersick; Yang et al., 2004). Although, the enquiries on the subject of employee career development (9

items) were founded by the questionnaire practiced by ( Amin et al. 2014Qureshi et al., 2006;


61

Shamsudin et al . 2012;) and (Singh, 2004). For quantifying responses, each element requisite a

response on a 5-point Likert-type scale oscillating from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Each

possibility has been consigned a measure; 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, and

5 = strongly agree. Returned questionnaires were coded and data entered into IBM SPSS (Version 20.0).

Reliability of Scale: CヴoﾐHaIhげs alpha ┘as IalIulated to deteヴﾏiﾐe the iﾐteヴﾐal ヴeliaHility of the tool. According to Creswell & Miller (2000) Klontz et al.(2011 and faizo et al 2013), whereas using Likert-type

measures, it has been well-thought-out to estiﾏate aﾐd use CヴoﾐHaIhげs alpha IoeffiIieﾐt foヴ iﾐteヴﾐal consistency reliability on behalf of any measures or subscales. CヴoﾐHaIhげs alpha ヴeliaHility IoeffiIieﾐt generally ranges amongst 0 and 1. Based oﾐ Geoヴge aﾐd Malleヴy PヴiﾐIiple ふヲヰヱヱぶ, the ﾐeaヴeヴ CヴoﾐHaIhげs alpha coefficient is to 1.0, superior the internal consistency of objects in scale. CヴoﾐHaIhげs alpha reliability coefficients of one dependent, one mediating and seven independent variables were

oHtaiﾐed, they all ┘eヴe aHo┗e ふα = .Αヰぶ. As the IoeffiIieﾐts get Iloseヴ to ふα = ヱ.ヰぶ the Hetteヴ is ヴeliaHilities aﾐd IoeffiIieﾐts, aﾐd less thaﾐふα = .ヶヰぶ aヴe Ioﾐsideヴed uﾐsatisfaItoヴy. The internal consistency of the

instrument is represented in Table 2.

Data Analysis: The primary approach to analyze data for the quantitative responses of the questionnaire

was through descriptive statistics and inferential statistics. The IBM SPSS 20.0 package was used to

perform required calculations. Inferential statistical technique of multiple regression analysis was used.

Regression classifies how much each independent variable has an influence on dependent variable.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS:

Demographic Idiosyncrasies:

Frequencies of occurrence of certain variables are determined, from which the percentage and

cumulative percentage are calculated. The idiosyncrasies of respondents are shown in Table 1.

Table 1: The Idiosyncrasies of Respondents (N = 350)

Measures Items Frequency Percentage

(%)

Cumulative

Percentage

Gender Male 297 84.9 84.9

Female 53 15.1 100

Age < 30 years 99 28.3 28.3

30 – 39 years 136 38.9 67.1

40 – 49 years 102 29.1 96.3

50 and above 13 3.7 100

Highest Level of

Education

Masteヴげs Degヴee 194 55.4 55.4

Two Year College Degree 134 38.3 93.7

Senior High School 22 6.3 100

No. of Employees in

Org.

301 – 600 35 10.0 10.0

601 – 900 35 10.0 20.0

901 – 1200 105 30.0 50.0

Above 1200 175 50.0 100

Type of Business Manufacturing

Others

349

1

99.0

100.0

99.0

100


62

Primary

responsibility in

Org.

General Management 4 1.1 1.1

Operations/Production 100 28.6 29.7

Administration/Logistics 57 16.3 46.0

Financial/Accounting 51 14.6 60.6

Human Resources 34 9.7 70.3

Marketing/Sales 43 12.3 82.6

Technical/R&D 31 8.9 91.4

Other 30 8.6 100

Descriptive Statistics and Pearson Product Movement Correlation (PPMC) Matrix of Variables:

Table 2 contains descriptive statistics comprising upon values of standard deviation, mean, and

correlations for all variables. The continuous learning has mean and standard deviation value of (Mean =

4.57, S.D = 0.19), inquiry and dialogue (Mean = 4.08, S.D = 0.49), for team learning (Mean = 4.37, S.D =

0.29), embedded system (Mean = 3.84, S.D = 0.63), empowerment (Mean = 3.89, S.D = 0.57), system

connection (Mean = 4.05, S.D = 0.43), strategic leadership (Mean = 3.85, S.D = 0.55), employee career

development (Mean = 3.87, S.D = 0.56) and for organizational performance (Mean = 3.86, S.D = 0.42). All

these values are demonstrating that there is a metamorphosis amongst responses specified by

defendants. A general squabble can be recognized on groundwork of minor value of standard deviation

and great value of mean are symptomatic of defendants, covenant with the choices for all questions

enquired from defendants.

There is positive correlation amongst variables. Correlation of continuous learning with organizational

performance is indicating that there is positive and significant but moderate correlation between these

two variables (r = 0.436, p < 0.05), proving that standardized and transparent learning system is part of

organizational performance indicators. Furthermore, inquiry and dialogue has positive and significant

but low degree of correlation (r = 0.395, p < 0.05) with organizational performance. Team learning (r =

0.611, p < 0.05) has significant and marked degree of correlation with organizational performance.

Embedded system (r = 0.521, p < 0.05) with moderate degree of correlation indicates that it will be

beneficial for individuals and organizations when steered after trainings. While, empowerment (r =

0.444, p < 0.05) has positive and significant but low degree of correlation with organizational

performance. System connection (r = 0.478, p < 0.05) has positive and significant but moderate degree

of correlation with organizational performance while, strategic leadership (r = 0.554, p < 0.05) has

positive and marked degree of correlation, last but not least employee career development (r = 0.794, p

< 0.05) has disenable correlation with organizational performance. Thus, from the above results in Table

2 has been concluded that the learning organization and employee career development had positive but

significant relationship with organizational performance. Therefore, H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, H6, H7 are

accepted.


63

Iﾐseヴt TaHle ヲ aHout けMean, Standard Deviation, Reliability and Pearson Product Movement Correlation

ふPPMCぶ Het┘eeﾐ VaヴiaHlesげ SrNo Variables No.

of

Items

N Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. Continuous

Learning

7 350 4.57 0.19

1.00 0.78

2. Inquiry and

Dialogue

6 350 4.08 0.49

.57 1.00 0.75

3. Team Learning 6 350 4.37 0.29 .70 .61 1.00 0.83

4. Embedded

System

6 350 3.84 0.63

.61 .52 .67 1.00 0.82

5. Empowerment 6 350 3.89 0.57 .48 .36 .49 .59 1.00 0.74

6. System

Connection

6 350 4.05 0.43

.50 .61 .63 .45 .37 1.00 0.77

7. Strategic

Leadership

6 350 3.85 0.55

.56 .52 .59 .55 .50 .54 1.00 0.81

8. Employee

Career

Development

9 350 3.87 0.56 .20 .00 .37 .62 .95 .79 .22 1.00 0.73

9. Organizational

Performance

12 350 3.86 0.42 .43 .39 .61 .52 .44 .47 .55 .79 1.00 0.79

Regression Analysis of Constructs and Interpretations:

In model 1, continuous learning, inquiry and dialogue, team learning, embedded system, empowerment,

system connection and strategic leadership has been regressed with organization performance while in

Model 2, employee career development is included to test the mediation effect. In model 1 of Table 3, R

square value (0.926) is near to 1 that is standard value for R square so it illustrate that these

independent variables are causing impact on dependent variable. In model 2, R square value (0.955) is

greater than the value of model 1 which shows that the model 2 have much stronger relationship with

the dependent variable, organizational performance than model 1. The adjusted R square in the

outcome shows that the dependent variable is impacted by all variables by 92.5% in model 1 and 95. 4%

in model 2

Table 3: Model Summary to Test Mediation of ECD between LO and OP

Model R R Square Adjusted R

Square

∆R2 Std. Error of

the Estimate

1 .962a .926 .925 0.926 .11686

2 .977b .955 .954 0.029 .09118

a. Predictors: (Constant), CL, ID, TL, ES, EMP, SC, SL

b. Predictors: (Constant), CL, ID, TL, ES, EMP, SC, SL, ECD


64

Mediation is a hypothesized causal chain in which one variable affects a second variable that, in turn,

affeIts a thiヴd ┗aヴiaHle. It さﾏediatesざ the ヴelatioﾐship Het┘eeﾐ a pヴediItoヴ aﾐd aﾐ outIoﾏe. Judd aﾐd Kenny (1990) suggested computing the difference between two regression coefficients. To do this, two

regressions are required (Baron & Kenny, 1986; Preacher & Hayes, 2008).

The result of ANOVA table shows the significance of model and also F test of hypothesis about

population mean. If p value is less than 0.05 then it is significant. Table 4 showed that p value is less than

0.05 (0.00 < 0.05), so the model 1 (i.e. F = 612.506) and model 2 (F = 908.098) are statistically significant.

This means that all the IVs of model are statistically in relationship with dependent variable of study and

best fit for the data.

Table 4: ANOVAa

to Test Mediation of ECD between LO and OP

Model Sum of

Squares

Df Mean Square F Sig.

1

Regression 58.557 7 8.365 612.506 .000b

Residual 4.671 342 .014

Total 63.227 349

2

Regression 60.393 8 7.549 908.098 .000c

Residual 2.835 341 .008

Total 63.227 349

a. Dependent Variable: OP

b. Predictors: (Constant), SL, ID, TL, ES, CL, SC, EMP

c. Predictors: (Constant), SL, ID, TL, ES, CL, SC, EMP, ECD

Table 5 shows the results of regression analysis, Model 1 describe that all tested dimensions of learning

organization (LO) has contributed significantly in organizational performance (OP) because p value of

each variable is less than 0.05 (p < 0.05); continuous leaヴﾐiﾐg ふβ = ヰ.ヰΓヰ, p = ヰ.ヰヰΑぶ, inquiry and dialogue

ふβ = ヰ.ヰヴン, p = ヰ.ヰヰヱぶ, team learning ふβ = ヰ.ヰヴΒ, p = ヰ.ヰヴヲぶ embedded systeﾏふβ = ヰ.ヱヲヲ, p = ヰ.ヰヰヰぶ, eﾏpo┘eヴﾏeﾐt ふβ = ヰ.ヲΓヵ, p = ヰ.ヰヰヰぶ, systeﾏ IoﾐﾐeItioﾐふβ = ヰ.ヱンΑ, p = ヰ.ヰヰヰぶ aﾐd strategic leadership

ふβ = ヰ.ヴンΒ, p = ヰ.ヰヰヰぶ etc. The uﾐstaﾐdaヴdized IoeffiIieﾐt ふβぶ sho┘s that iﾐ oﾐe uﾐit iﾐIヴease iﾐ eaIh of the independent variable, will cause one unit change in organization performance.


65

Table 5: Coefficientsa

to Test Mediation of ECD between LO and OP

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

Mo

de

l 1

(Constant) .794 .168 4.741 .000

CL .090 .033 .042 2.690 .007

ID .043 .013 .050 3.368 .001

TL .048 .024 .034 2.038 .042

ES .122 .012 .182 10.563 .000

EMP .295 .018 .400 16.535 .000

SC .137 .023 .139 5.834 .000

SL .438 .012 .574 37.785 .000

Mo

de

l 2

(Constant) .185 .137 1.352 .177

CL .041 .026 .019 1.545 .009

ID .010 .010 .012 .978 .004

TL .038 .019 .027 2.048 .045

ES .020 .011 .030 1.776 .002

EMP .129 .032 .175 4.066 .000

SC .038 .019 .039 1.960 .045

SL .430 .009 .577 48.618 .000

ECD .578 .039 .768 14.862 .000

a. Dependent Variable: OP

Employee career development mediates between continuous learning and organizational performance,

the ﾏaiﾐ effeIt ┘as ヴeduIed fヴoﾏふβ = ヰ.ヰΓヰ, p = ヰ.ヰヰΑ to β = ヰ.ヰヴヱ, p = .ヱヲン, ∆β = ヰ.ヰヴΓぶ, inquiry &

dialogue aﾐd oヴgaﾐizatioﾐal peヴfoヴﾏaﾐIe ふβ = ヰ.ヰヴン, p = ヰ.ヰヰヱ to β = ヰ.ヰヱヰ, p = .ヰヰヴ, ∆β = ヰ.ヰンンぶ, teaﾏ leaヴﾐiﾐg aﾐd oヴgaﾐizatioﾐal peヴfoヴﾏaﾐIe ふβ = ヰ.ヰヴΒ, p = ヰ.ヰヰヱ to β = ヰ.ヰンΒ, p = .ヰヴヵ, ∆β = ヰ.ヰヱヰぶ, eﾏHedded systeﾏ aﾐd oヴgaﾐizatioﾐal peヴfoヴﾏaﾐIe ふβ = ヰ.ヱヲヲ, p = ヰ.ヰヰヰ to β = ヰ.ヰヲヰ, p = .ヰヰヲ, ∆β = 0.102), eﾏpo┘eヴﾏeﾐt aﾐd oヴgaﾐizatioﾐal peヴfoヴﾏaﾐIe ふβ = ヰ.ヲΓヵ, p = ヰ.ヰヰヰ to β = ヰ.ヱヲΓ, p = .ヰヰヰ, ∆β =

ヰ.ヱヶヶぶ, systeﾏ IoﾐﾐeItioﾐ aﾐd oヴgaﾐizatioﾐal peヴfoヴﾏaﾐIe ふβ = ヰ.ヱンΑ, p = ヰ.ヰヰヰ to β = ヰ.ヰンΒ, p = .ヰヴヵ, ∆β = ヰ.ヰΓΓぶ aﾐd fiﾐally, stヴategiI leadeヴship aﾐd oヴgaﾐizatioﾐal peヴfoヴﾏaﾐIe ふβ = ヰ.ヴンΒ, p = ヰ.ヰヰヰ to β = ヰ.ヴンヰ, p = .ヰヰヰ, ∆β = ヰ.ヰヰΒぶ. Altogether, the results proved that the hypothesis H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, H6, H7

and H8 are fully accepted. The ﾏagﾐitude of β of eaIh iﾐdepeﾐdeﾐt ┗aヴiaHle is shown in the following

models:

Model 1:

OP = β0 + β1 ふCLぶ + β2 ふIDぶ + β3 ふTLぶ + β4 ふE“ぶ + β5 ふEMPぶ + β6 ふ“Cぶ + β7 (SL)


66

OP = 0.794 + 0.090(CL) + 0.043(ID) + 0.048(TL) + 0.122(ES) + 0.295(EMP) +

0.137(SC) + 0.438(SL)

Model 2:

OP = β0 + β1 ふCLぶ + β2 ふIDぶ + β3 ふTLぶ + β4 ふE“ぶ + β5 ふEMPぶ + β6 ふ“Cぶ + β7 ふ“Lぶ + β8 (ECD)

OP = 0.185 + 0.041 (CL) + 0.010 (ID) + 0.038 (TL) + 0.020 (ES) + 0.129 (EMP) + 0.038 (SC) + 0.430 (SL) +

0.578 (ECD)

The above multiple regression models shows that one unit increase in the magnitude of coefficient (beta

coefficient) of each IV (CL, ID, TL, ES, EMP, SC, SL and ECD), it will cause one unit change in the

ﾏagﾐitude of OP. The β0 is the intercept that has the magnitude of 0.794 in Model 1 and 0.185 in Model

2 respectively.

In Model 1, standardized coefficient of strategic leadership is the first factor that contributed

significantly in organizational performance with the value of standardized coefficient of 0.574,

empowerment with the second highest value of standardize coefficient; Beta (0.400), the second factor

that has significance contribution whereas embedded system (Beta = 0.182), system connection (Beta =

0.139), inquiry and dialogue (Beta = 0.50), continuous learning (Beta = 0.42) and team learning (Beta =

0.34) is the third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh factor that had contributed in organizational

performance respectively.

In Model 2, standardized coefficient of employee career development is the first factor that contributed

significantly in organizational performance with the value of standardized coefficient of 0.768, strategic

leadership with the second highest value of standardize coefficient; beta (0.577), the second factor that

has significance contribution in organizational performance. Empowerment (Beta = 0.175), system

connection (Beta = 0.039), embedded system (Beta = 0.030), team learning (Beta = 0.027), continuous

learning (Beta = 0.019) and inquiry and dialogue (Beta = 0.012) is the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh

and eighth factor that had contributed in OP respectively. Thus, H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, H6, H7, and H8 are fully

accepted. H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, H6 and H7 shows that all the tested variables had significant influence on

dependent variable; organizational performance. While H8 shows that employee career development is

mediating the relationship between learning organization and organizational performance.

CONCLUSION:

The present study supports to comprehend the relationship among learning organization and

organizational performance; whereas employee career development played mediating role among both

variables in food and personal care products manufacturing sector of Pakistan. It also progresses the

pragmatic results to find evidences for the hypothetical model defined in this study. By arguing that the

seven dimensions of learning organization; continuous learning, inquiry and dialogue, team learning,

embedded system, empowerment, system connection and strategic leadership, have positive and

significant impact on organizational performance. This illustrates that the learning organization

paradigm is necessary approach for the organizations that seek to keep into dynamic competitive

environment. For the reason that due to speedy changes in surroundings, the businesses has become

more complex, vibrant and globally competitive. Thus, excelling in this continually fluctuating

environment for continuous improvement requires more knowledge through constant learning,


67

understanding logics behind procedures, taking expertise from skilled workforce to share their

experience through mentoring and coaching, empowering workforce to feel them ownership for taking

decisions. So, organizations that are compatible with learning organization strategies for improvement

can cause promotion of organizational outcomes.

The findings also demonstrate that the employee career development mediates the relationship among

learning organization and organizational performance. This illustrates that the employees and

oヴgaﾐizatioﾐs ┘oヴkiﾐg togetheヴ aヴe ﾐeIessaヴy to guaヴaﾐtee Iaヴeeヴ de┗elopﾏeﾐtげs suIIess. Although, employees are responsible for their own career success, function as career planner and enhancers. They

are auditors for their own set of skills, determining gaps in performance proficiency and identifying

areas of strength upon which career development actions can be based. The organizations are obliged

to help employees in becoming aware of opportunities, constraints, choices and consequences,

identifying career related goals, programming their work, and direction regarding sequence of steps to

attaiﾐ a speIified Iaヴeeヴ goal. Oヴgaﾐizatioﾐsげ leadeヴs geﾐeヴate Iaヴeeヴ de┗elopﾏeﾐt pヴogヴaﾏ poliIies,

allocate financial resource, and provide collaboration and integration.

Cream of the crop is that the organizations should ponder the inference of employee career

de┗elopﾏeﾐt iﾐto oヴgaﾐizatioﾐげs Husiﾐess de┗elopﾏeﾐt plaﾐ. It guides the oヴgaﾐizatioﾐs to adopt the

change that can help to attain their defined goals and improve the performance through employee

involvement and enthusiasm toward their job responsibilities. A learning organization through

development and capacity of up-to-date changes can have an empathetic role in alleyway of the

iﾐdi┗idualsげ Iaヴeeヴ de┗elopﾏeﾐt that IoﾐtヴiHutes iﾐ the oヴgaﾐizatioﾐal peヴfoヴﾏaﾐIe.

References

Argote, L. (2013). Organizational learning: Creating, retaining and transferring knowledge: Springer.

Akgün, A. E., Ince, H., Iﾏaﾏoglu, “. )., Keskiﾐ, H., & KoIoglu, İ. ふヲヰヱンぶ. The ﾏediatoヴヴole of leaヴﾐiﾐg capability and business innovativeness between total quality management and financial

performance. International Journal of Production Research, (ahead-of-print), 1-14.

Amin, M., Ismail, W. K. W., Rasid, S. Z. A., & Andrew, R. D. (2014). The Impact of Human Resource

Management Practices on Performance: Evidence from a Public University. The TQM Journal,

26(2), 3-3.

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1999). On organizational learning.

Bass, B. M. (2000). The future of leadership in learning organizations. Journal of Leadership &

Organizational Studies, 7(3), 18-40.

Black, E., & Hunter, A. (2007). A generative inquiry dialogue system. Paper presented at the Proceedings

of the 6th international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems.

Black, E., & Hunter, A. (2009). An inquiry dialogue system. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent

Systems, 19(2), 173-209.

Chaisiri, K. (1998). Human resource development through continuous improvement: a case study of

Yasothon hospital, Thailand (1994-1997). HRDJ, 2, 142-151.

Chan, C. C. (2003). Examining the relationships between individual, team and organizational learning in

an Australian hospital. Learning in Health and Social Care, 2(4), 223-235.


68

Chiva, R., & Alegre, J. (2009). Organizational Learning Capability and Job Satisfaction: an Empirical

Assessment in the Ceramic Tile Industry*. British Journal of Management, 20(3), 323-340.

Collins, P. H. (2000). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of

empowerment: Psychology Press.

Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into practice,

39(3), 124-130.

Davis, D., & Daley, B. J. (2008). The learning organization and its dimensions as key factors in firms'

performance. Human Resource Development International, 11(1), 51-66.

Dodgsoﾐ, M. ふヱΓΓンぶ. さTechnological collaboration in industry: strategy, policy, and internationalization in

innovationざ, ‘outledge LoﾐdoﾐNew York.

Easterby-Smith, M., Araujo, L., & Burgoyne, J. (1999). Organizational learning and the learning

organization: Developments in theory and practice: Sage.

Fazio, R., Dunham, K. J., Griswold, S., & Denney, R. L. (2013). An improved measure of handedness: the

Fazio laterality inventory. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 20(3), 197-202.

Fetterman, D. M., & Wandersman, A. (2005). Empowerment evaluation principles in practice: Guilford

Press.

Friedmann, J. (1992). Empowerment: the politics of alternative development: Blackwell.

Gergen, M. M., Gergen, K. J., & Barrett, F. (2004). Appreciative inquiry as dialogue: Generative and

transformative. Advances in appreciative inquiry, 1, 3-27.

Greenhaus, J. H., Callanan, G. A., & Godshalk, V. M. (2009). Career management: Sage Publications,

Incorporated.

Klontz, B., Britt, S. L., Mentzer, J., & Klontz, T. (2011). Money beliefs and financial behaviors:

Development of the Klontz Money Script Inventory. Journal of Financial Therapy, 2(1).

Lin, W. B. (2010). Antecedents of employee involvement with the comparative model. Quality &

Quantity, 44(3), 459-482.

Linder, S. H. (2001). An inquiry into dialogue, its challenges and justification. International Journal of

Public Administration, 24(7-8), 651-678.

Lopez, S. P., Peón, J. M. M., & Ordás, C. J. V. (2004). Managing knowledge: the link between culture and

organizational learning. Journal of knowledge management, 8(6), 93-104.

Mabey, C., & Thomson, R. (2012). Developing human resources: Routledge.

Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (2003). Demonstrating the value of an organization's learning culture: the

dimensions of the learning organization questionnaire. Advances in Developing Human

Resources, 5(2), 132-151.

Matlay, H. (2000). Organisational learning in small learning organisations: an empirical overview.

Education+ Training, 42(4/5), 202-211.

Maurer, T. J. (2002). Employee learning and development orientation: Toward an integrative model of

involvement in continuous learning. Human Resource Development Review, 1(1), 9-44.

Örtenblad, A. (2001). On differences between organizational learning and learning organization.

Learning Organization, The, 8(3), 125-133.


69

Örtenblad, A. (2002). Organizational learning: A radical perspective. International Journal of

Management Reviews, 4(1), 71-85.

Pantouvakis, A., & Bouranta, N. (2013). The link between organizational learning culture and customer

satisfaction: Confirming relationship and exploring moderating effect. Learning Organization,

The, 20(1), 48-64.

Qureshi, T., Ramay, M., & Marwat, Z. (2006). Impact of human resource management practices on

organizational performance in Pakistan: Muhammad Ali Jinnah University Islamabad.

Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational culture. American psychologist, 45(2), 109.

Shamsudin, F. M., Subramaniam, C., & Alshuaibi, A. S. (2012). The Effect of HR Practices, Leadership

Style on Cyberdeviance: The Mediating Role of Organizational Commitment. Journal of

Marketing & Management, 3(1).

Shrivastava, P. (2007). A typology of organizational learning systems. Journal of management studies,

20(1), 7-28.

Simonsen, P. (1997). Promoting a Development Culture in Your Organization: Using Career Development

as a Change Agent: ERIC.

Singh, K. (2004). Impact of HR practices on perceived firm performance in India. Asia Pacific Journal

of Human Resources, 42(3), 301-317.

Senge, P. M. (1991). The fifth discipline, the art and practice of the learning organization.

Performance+ Instruction, 30(5), 37-37.

Senge, P. M. (1991). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization: Century

Business.

Tsang, E. W. (1997). "Organizational learning and the learning organization: a dichotomy between

descriptive and prescriptive research." Human relations 50 (1): 73-89.

Vera, D., & Crossan, M. (2004). Strategic leadership and organizational learning. Academy of

management review, 29(2), 222-240.

Weinberg, R., & McDermott, M. (2002). A comparative analysis of sport and business organizations:

Factors perceived critical for organizational success. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14(4),

282-298.

Yang, B., Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J. (2004). The construct of the learning organization: Dimensions,

measurement, and validation. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 15(1), 31-55.

Documents

Examining the Mediating Role of Employee Career Development in the Relationship Between Learning Organization and Organizational Perform-libre