abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to contribute to greater conceptual clarity on the concept of higher-order learning, and enable its potential empirical measurement.It includes a framework to show how this ability is developed through engaging in specific learning behaviors, each of which constitutes its own level of learning.

Design/Methodology: Three criteria were used to develop the framework. Each learning behavior had to lead to a change in long-term memory, have empirical support that it led to a defined learning outcome, and apply to workplace learning.

Findings: The LABS framework presents three novel propositions: 1. Four key learning behaviors of taking on a challenge, attending to information, forming meaningful connections, and practice with feedback are required to engage in higher-order learning, 2. There is an optimal order to the learning behaviors, 3. Any one individual is unlikely to be motivated to engage in all four learning behaviors. 

Research Implications: The clear definitions and elaborated LABS framework provides a potential new means for empirical research. The learning behaviors provided are directly observable behaviors, each with its own measurable learning outcome.

Originality/Value: Historically, engaging in higher-order learning has been presented as a choice that is plagued by psychological forces of self-defense, ego, and image management. This paper extends that view by presenting higher-order learning as a domain-specific ability to derives fundamental principles and patterns through critical reflection. It also develops three novel propositions that lend insight into the barriers employees face as they engage in workplace learning. 

abstract

Research suggests that work-relevant learning occurs largely on the job. However, in many situations workers do not learn nearly as much as they might. The "three stances" model helps to explain why. When someone undertakes a task, the person may adopt a completion, performance, or development stance, reflecting a range of organizational and personal influences. The completion stance prioritizes speed and good-enough performance, with little learning. The performance stance invests in high-quality results this time around, with learning generally a strong side effect but not a deliberate agenda. The development stance reaches for high-quality results this time around, with the additional goal of improving later performance. Unfortunately, workers often opt for stances that generate less learning, due to organizational culture, personal attitudes, and the character of the tasks themselves. The stances model suggests ways to counter this tendency and enhance learning from work.

abstract

This chapter argues that the creative process is supported, at each stage, by certain learning behaviors and that both creative behaviors and learning behaviors depend on particular social-environmental conditions at each stage. Focusing on entrepreneurial creativity within startups and established organizations, the chapter describes four stages: problem identification; preparation; idea generation; idea evaluation and implementation. It explains how creativity-relevant and domain-relevant skills are distinct and how each skill set becomes more or less important depending on the uncertainty inherent in a given stage. The chapter also discusses the role of intrinsic motivation and the impact of various forces on the motivation for entrepreneurial creativity. With examples drawn from cases of entrepreneurial individuals and companies, links are made between creativity, learning, and the ways in which social-environmental factors influence the motivation for these behaviors differentially at different points in the creative process.