Review of empirical research on leadership and organizational learning

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to investigate how the relationships between different leadership approaches and organizational learning have been examined in the literature, from which future research areas can be recommended. Design/methodology/approach This systematic literature review applies matrix method to examine major literature in leadership and organizational learning. A total of 57 peer-reviewed English publications from 45 journals were selected and analyzed. Findings The synthesis of these empirical studies revealed as follows: the relationship between leadership and organizational learning has been mostly quantitatively investigated in many countries and sectors; multiple leadership styles have been identified to ameliorate processes, levels and capabilities of organizational learning and transformational leadership still remains the most commonly used style; there are mediating mechanism and boundary conditions in the relationship between leadership and organizational learning. Research limitations/implications The literature search in this study was mainly focused on English articles only; therefore, some papers in other languages may have not been included. Practical implications This review offers an overall picture of the existing knowledge of organizational learning and leadership that will be fruitful for practitioners to understand and replicate these concepts. Originality/value There are little systematic literature reviews on the relationship between leadership and organizational learning. This paper is among the first systematic reviews to analyze how leadership has been associated with organizational learning and provide potential research directions.

In search for the missing link: studying the interrelationship between organizational learning and organizational culture change

“…We find this stance reflected in recent literature reviews investigating the relationship between leadership and OL, in which scholars identify OC as mediating this relationship (e.g. Flores et al, 2012;Mueller, 2012;Eisend et al, 2016;Xie, 2019;Do and Mai, 2020). They highlight the importance of creating an OC that favors OL (e.g.…”

“…Weick, 1991;Lemon and Sahota, 2004;O'Cass and Sok, 2014). Organizational learning is "commonly defined as processes of gaining new insights from experiences that consequently impact individual behaviors and organizational dynamics" (Do andMai, 2020, p. 1202;based on Argyris and Sch€ on, 1978;Fiol and Lyles, 1985;Huber, 1991). From their recent literature review, Flores et al (2012, p. 661) find organizational learning (OL) as consisting of five distinct sub-processes, namely "information acquisition, distribution, interpretation, integration and organizational memory."…”

“…From their recent literature review, Flores et al (2012, p. 661) find organizational learning (OL) as consisting of five distinct sub-processes, namely "information acquisition, distribution, interpretation, integration and organizational memory." The interest of the scientific community in antecedents of OL resulted in an impressive body of literature (Lyles and Easterby-Smith, 2003;Flores et al, 2012;Park and Kim, 2018;Do and Mai, 2020).…”

The Digitization of European business

“…The study deals with six critical elements of digital leadership: impact, media, design-oriented research, integration, digital areas, and leadership itself (Zupancic et al, 2016). Digital transformation in firms is closely connected to organizational learning and transformational leadership (Do & Mai, 2020). The study of (Pham & Hoang, 2019) examines the detailed dimensions of organizational learning capacity in terms of business performance and finds management's commitment to learning as the most critical factor in business performance.…”

Aprendizaje organizacional

“…A este respecto, varios estudios reconocen la necesidad de tener en cuenta la multidimensionalidad del constructo del ao (Chiva et al, 2007;Goh y Richards, 1997;Jerez-Gómez, Céspedes-Lorente y Valle-Cabrera, 2005;Do y Mai, 2020). En este contexto, Crossan, Lane, White y Djurfeldt (1995) recomiendan a los investigadores en ao no "dejarse absorber" por la complejidad del fenómeno, y buscar cerrar la brecha entre la teoría y la práctica, así como evitar las aplicaciones superficiales de ao que disminuyan su valor a los ojos de los gerentes.…”