Kululanga, G K; Price, A D F and McCaffer, R (2002) Empirical investigation of construction contractors' organizational learning. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 128(5), pp. 385-391. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Conceptual frameworks dominate organizational learning literature with limited empirical assessments. This raises several questions about the validity and applicability of the various conceptual frameworks for how managers can build organizational learning capabilities. As such, lessons from the conceptual frameworks of organizational learning for addressing performance improvement that might have been used by construction contractors have been limited. This paper presents a quantitative analysis of organizational learning by construction contractors. The principles that underlie organizational learning and the factors that promote double-loop learning as a strategy for improving construction contractors' business processes are presented. The paper has also established the learning orientations and focus of the surveyed construction contractors to determine their organizational learning dimensions as well as the factors that induced their double-loop learning, as rich lessons for organizations in the construction industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contractors; learning; quantitative analysis |
| Index terms: | validity, performance improvement, investigation, construction industry, dimension, manager, organizational learning, strategy, quantitative analysis, conceptual framework, construction contractor |
| Subjects: | professional development, theoretical framing, management, performance measurement, industry analysis, practitioner, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, data analysis and analytics, health monitoring assessment and metrics |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here