The Learning Organization

Organizational learning culture and workplace spirituality: Is knowledge-sharing

behaviour a missing link?
Sorakraikitikul Monthon Siengthai Sununta
Article information:
To cite this document:
Sorakraikitikul Monthon Siengthai Sununta , (2014),"Organizational learning culture and workplace
spirituality", The Learning Organization, Vol. 21 Iss 3 pp. 175 - 192
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/TLO-08-2011-0046
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

Downloaded on: 17 August 2014, At: 07:20 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 58 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 40 times since 2014*

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 325738 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0969-6474.htm

Organizational learning culture Learning culture

and workplace
and workplace spirituality spirituality
Is knowledge-sharing behaviour
a missing link? 175
Monthon Sorakraikitikul
School of Management, Asian Institute of Technology, Klong Luang, Received 3 August 2011
Revised 24 April 2012
Pathumthani, Thailand and Thammasat Business School, 5 November 2012
Thammasat University, Phra Nakhon, Bangkok, Thailand, and 31 May 2013
5 October 2013
Sununta Siengthai
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

12 December 2013
School of Management, Asian Institute of Technology, Klong Luang, 27 February 2014
Accepted 13 March 2014
Pathumthani, Thailand

Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate the role of organizational learning culture as an
enabler of knowledge-sharing behaviours and workplace spirituality. A model is proposed to examine
the mediating role of knowledge-sharing behaviours between organizational learning culture and
workplace spirituality.
Design/methodology/approach Employees from various Thai industries participated in the
study, and structural equation modelling was used to test hypothesized relationships.
Findings Results suggest a positive relationship between organizational learning culture and
workplace spirituality, partially mediated by knowledge-sharing behaviours.
Research limitations/implications The study was limited to Thailand, and is a cross-sectional
design. Further investigation into the causality of relationships and cultural disparities is needed.
Practical implications Friendly learning environments enable both knowledge sharing and
change organization members views regarding learning and performance improvements for
organizational sustainability.
Originality/value This paper bridges a gap between theory and practice concerning the outcomes
of organizational learning and factors that lead to workplace spirituality.
Keywords Learning organizations, Workplace spirituality, Thailand, Knowledge-sharing behaviour,
Organizational learning culture
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Globalization ushered many new challenges for businesses, and firms must now
especially focus on speed, innovation and rapid responses to customer demands (Ruona
and Gibson, 2004). Workplace structures changed from individual- to family-owned
businesses, factories and large organizations that focus on controlling the workplace
and maximizing work outputs (Word, 2012). New technologies also improved human The Learning Organization
Vol. 21 No. 3, 2014
pp. 175-192
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
The authors are grateful to the referees for their valuable comments and observations for further 0969-6474
clarity and quality improvement of this paper. DOI 10.1108/TLO-08-2011-0046
 TLO productivity, especially information and communications technologies, which
transformed both business landscapes and competitive environments. With these
21,3 changes, the literature has paid much less attention to their potential effects on
employees, particularly regarding whether social, psychological and personal values
are less important at work, leading to alienation of employees, as they no longer perceive
personal connections (Word, 2012).
176 Word (2012) suggests that integrating and aligning human values with
organizational goals helps employees engage more with their jobs. Several studies
explore workplace spirituality, finding relationships between workplace spirituality
and employee commitment (Milliman et al., 2003; Crawford et al., 2009), intention to quit,
intrinsic work satisfaction (Crawford et al., 2009), job involvement (Crawford et al., 2009;
Word, 2012) and work-unit performance (Duchon and Plowman, 2005; Petchsawang and
Duchon, 2012). By cultivating employee spirituality, organizations transform
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

(Petchsawang and Duchon, 2012). However, to date, little attention has been paid to
workplace spirituality antecedents. This study investigates the role of organizational
learning cultures in nourishing employee spirituality.
Organizational learning drives performance and sustains competitive advantage in
rapidly changing, dynamic environments (Yeo, 2005). A culture that supports
organizational learning provides many benefits, including creating knowledge that
translates to innovation (Kontoghiorghes et al., 2005; Nonaka et al., 2008). Learning
involves the interaction of mental, spiritual and physical energies, and learning
outcomes are not limited to new knowledge, but include new mental, spiritual, emotional
and behavioural structures at the individual level (Gallagher et al., 2007). Learning
transforms an individual in many ways, from intellectual perspectives of themselves
and others to behaviours and relationships (Gallagher et al., 2007; Nonaka et al., 2008).
At the organizational level, learning shapes organizational and social structures
(Gallagher et al., 2007). Many studies suggest that a learning culture leads to improved
financial outcomes and employee attitudes towards work (Ellinger et al., 2002; Egan
et al., 2004; Kontoghiorghes et al., 2005), but learning initiatives take time to yield
positive results, and existing performance measures often lag their indicators. Extant
studies examine the role of organizational learning cultures in changing employee
attitudes regarding job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Egan et al., 2004;
Wang, 2007), but little is known about how the culture influences employee knowledge
sharing and nourishes individual spirits. This study investigates the role of
organizational learning culture as an enabler of knowledge-sharing behaviours and
workplace spirituality. It also examines the mediation of knowledge-sharing behaviours
between organizational learning culture and workplace spirituality.

Literature review
Organizational learning culture and knowledge-sharing behaviours
Organizational learning emphasizes learning and changes in an organization (Nevis
et al., 1995; Aggestam, 2006), particularly regarding processes requiring the experiences
and actions of its members. Integrated structures, strategies and processes are needed to
provide an adaptive learning environment (Marsick and Watkins, 2003; Garvin et al.,
2008), and organizational cultures encompass values, beliefs and assumptions (Sveiby
and Simons, 2002). In this study, a learning culture emphasizes the values, beliefs and
assumptions towards creating collective learning in an organization, and
 organizational learning culture refers to both contexts and implemented activities Learning culture
that enable an organization to learn. An organizational learning culture is a tool that
creates a supportive environment; it enables and influences learning and knowledge
and workplace
sharing at individual, group and organizational levels (Marsick and Watkins, 2003; spirituality
Kontoghiorghes et al., 2005).
Many studies identify a positive association between organizational learning culture
and various aspects of organizational performance both financial and non-financial 177
(Ellinger et al., 2002) and use of knowledge (Marsick and Watkins, 2003). Some
researchers focus on employee behaviours and attitudes, suggesting that the
organizational learning culture influences attitudes towards work regarding job
satisfaction (Egan et al., 2004; Wang, 2007), motivation to transfer knowledge to others,
intention to leave the company (Egan et al., 2004), innovation, adaptation to change
(Kontoghiorghes et al., 2005) and organizational commitment (Wang, 2007; Joo and Lim,
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

2009; Song et al., 2011). Social interactions create new knowledge as collective
intelligence (Nonaka et al., 2008); learning is not an individual human activity (Yang,
2004). Knowledge sharing refers to behaviours that involve exchanging individual
experiences and work-related knowledge both explicit and tacit with other members
(Ryu et al., 2003; van den Hooff and De Ridder, 2004). Knowledge sharing begins with an
individual and spreads to the team, group and organizational levels (Ipe, 2003) by
aligning an organizations shared vision with its employees abilities to work together
(Marsick and Watkins, 2003). Organizational knowledge is a two-part central, collective
asset created by cooperative sharing among members. The first part is explicit
knowledge stored in a central database to which employees contribute and use. The
second and larger part is tacit knowledge embedded in employees minds (Suppiah and
Sandhu, 2011). Knowledge sharing helps create organizational knowledge that can
further leverage and ultimately create organizational competitive value.
Knowledge sharing depends on willingness and decision to share (Riege, 2005), and
organizations cannot force people to share knowledge. Extrinsic rewards cannot create
a positive attitude towards knowledge sharing (Tohidinia and Mosakhani, 2010; Jeon
et al., 2011), and they ineffectively motivate knowledge sharing in the long term (Riege,
2005). Trust and collaboration are essential factors when creating a willingness to share
knowledge (Sveiby and Simons, 2002), and intention to share knowledge is a key factor
that determines whether knowledge is shared (Bock et al., 2005; Chatzoglou and
Vraimaki, 2009). Attitudes and subjective norms towards knowledge sharing, perceived
self-efficacy and trust determine intention to share (Ajzen, 1991; Tohidinia and
Mosakhani, 2010), and sharing behaviours depend on assistance from others and an
ability to learn from others (Yang, 2007).
Both knowledge donation and collection are rationales behind knowledge-sharing
behaviours (van den Hooff and De Ridder, 2004; Lin, 2007). Knowledge donation refers
to a willingness to communicate knowledge and intellectual capital to others.
Knowledge collection refers to a willingness to consult with others, learn and encourage
others to share knowledge and intellectual capital (van den Hooff and De Ridder, 2004;
Lin, 2007). Both are found in working units (van den Hooff and De Ridder, 2004).
Recent studies suggest knowledge-sharing behaviours relate to individual and
organizational innovation capabilities and organizational effectiveness (Lin, 2007;
Yang, 2007). To be competitive, organizations should encourage members to engage in
knowledge sharing and make it as routine as daily conversation (Riege, 2005). Thus,
 TLO knowledge-sharing behaviours are essential for learning in organizations. People with
useful knowledge are an organizations most valued assets. Empirical evidence
21,3 suggests that an organizational learning culture influences learning at the individual,
group and organizational levels and affects employee attitudes towards work (Egan
et al., 2004; Joo and Lim, 2009; Song et al., 2011). Knowledge-sharing behaviours are
critical and take place commonly in congenial environments. They represent an
178 interactive process during which team members share task-relevant ideas, information
and suggestions (Srivastava et al., 2006), and new collective knowledge is built from this
cooperation. Organizational culture in terms of friendliness; teamwork; and flat, open
communication structures facilitates knowledge sharing (Riege, 2005, Suppiah and
Sandhu, 2011). Some studies suggest that organizational learning culture influences
knowledge conversion at the individual level (Song and Kolb, 2009). Based on a review
of the literature, there is limited information regarding the influence of organizational
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

learning cultures on knowledge-sharing behaviours. Therefore, we hypothesize that:

H1. Organizational learning culture is positively related to knowledge-sharing
behaviours.

Workplace spirituality
Employees represent not only inputs and costs but also valuable knowledge assets. To
develop deep understanding of this notion, workplace spirituality helps shape a new
paradigm for understanding human nature. This concept is concerned with employees
who understand and express themselves in terms of the meanings and purposes in their
lives that connect them to others and to their work communities (Ashmos and Duchon,
2000; Milliman et al., 2003). Spirituality appears subjective and intangible, and many
scholars attempt to define it and its boundaries. Extant studies suggest that spirituality
differs from religion (Bandsuch and Cavanagh, 2005; Fry et al., 2011) because religion
relates to beliefs, rituals and formal ceremonies (Fry et al., 2011), while spirituality is a
personal experience (Tombaugh et al., 2011). Spirituality is a basic human dimension
that looks deeply into the stage of being that transforms or enables each individual to
reach an ultimate power or transcendental being (Cash and Gray, 2000; Twigg and
Parayitam, 2006). However, both religion and spirituality share the same sense of
searching for personal aspects of the sacred (Tombaugh et al., 2011) such as
transcendence, relationships or connectedness with higher power, and for the meanings
and purposes of life.
Ashmos and Duchon (2000) define workplace spirituality as the recognition that
employees have an inner life that nourishes and is nourished by meaningful work that takes
place in the context of community (p. 137). Three components emerge from this definition:
(1) inner life;
(2) need for meaning at work; and
(3) sense of connection or community (Ashmos and Duchon, 2000).
Milliman et al. (2003) build on this definition by considering a variation on the three
dimensions:
(1) meaningful work;
(2) sense of community; and
(3) alignment with organizational values.
 Rego and Cunha (2008) stress the role of inner life as an evitable part of workplace Learning culture
spirituality. Crawford et al. (2009) further define this concept as:
and workplace
[] having meaning for our existence, having a connection to everything that everyone shares spirituality
and knowing a greater power that can be defined in many ways, which are unstructured and
unique to each individual (p. 66).
Tombaugh et al. (2011) stress the active voice of personal spirituality in an organization 179
by emphasizing personal spiritual values, behaviours and interactions in a work
environment.
In this study, four dimensions comprise workplace spirituality:
(1) inner life;
(2) meaningful work;
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

(3) sense of community; and

(2) self-work integration.

Inner life represents an understanding of ones divine power and respect for oneself
(Ashmos and Duchon, 2000). Meaningful work is the degree to which one has a deep
understanding of the meanings and purposes of work (Ashmos and Duchon, 2000;
Milliman et al., 2003). Sense of community refers to how people see themselves and
connect with each other, including support, freedom of expression and genuine caring
(Ashmos and Duchon, 2000; Milliman et al., 2003). Self-work integration is a strong sense
of alignment of personal values with work and organizational values (Milliman et al.,
2003; Rego and Cunha, 2008; Altaf and Awan, 2011).

Workplace spirituality in an organizational learning culture

Many studies suggest that workplace spirituality is beneficial to organizational
operations because it enhances employee job satisfaction and commitment to the
organization (Milliman et al., 2003; Rego and Cunha, 2008; Crawford et al., 2009),
encourages involvement with a current job, facilitates strong organization-based
self-esteem (Crawford et al., 2009) and contributes to work-unit performance
(Duchon and Plowman, 2005). Workplace spirituality also provides productive
values in terms of greater retention and loyalty, rectifies social alienation and
realizes the power of individual productivity and creativity (Bandsuch and
Cavanagh, 2005).
Some authors suggest that leadership is an essential mechanism that helps
employees understand workplace spirituality and self-discovery to reach their
potential (Duchon and Plowman, 2005; Fry et al., 2011). Kinjerski and Skrypnek
(2008) argue that workplace spirituality arises primarily from interactions among
personality traits, personal actions and organizational features, focusing attention
on organizational contexts and cultures that act as spirituality-friendly and
fostering environments. They also influence the extent to which an organization
enables employees to integrate their whole selves and values into everyday work.
The workplace plays a critical role in human spiritual development (Bandsuch and
Cavanagh, 2005). In a supportive learning environment, individual spirituality is
respected, recognized, nurtured and consistent with organizational values
 TLO (Tombaugh et al., 2011). The higher the perceived organizational learning culture,
the higher the workplace spirituality. Hence, it is hypothesized that:
21,3
H2. Organizational learning culture is positively related to workplace spirituality.
Because knowledge sharing involves social interactions, some transformation occurs in
the minds and hearts of people regarding beliefs and values (Nonaka et al., 2008), and
180 organizational members involved in sharing knowledge realize valuable benefits (Ipe,
2003) such as a sense of connectedness and greater mutual understanding. Participants
see themselves as related to others in terms of values, perceptions and synthesis of
subjective viewpoints (Nonaka et al., 2008). Perceptions of connectedness and being part
of something bigger than themselves also emerge (Senge, 1990), arising from personal
feelings towards work that are nourished by performing valuable jobs in a work-related
context. This links an individuals spiritual well-being to work conditions (Altaf and
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

Awan, 2011). When sharing knowledge, deep thoughts and emotions combine with
shared information and are passed onto others (Nonaka et al., 2008), strengthening
emotional bonds between individuals and their organizations. As a result, the extent of
human feelings and perceived value of work is stronger. Knowledge-sharing behaviours
influence workplace spirituality. It is therefore hypothesized that:
H3. Knowledge-sharing behaviours are positively related to workplace spirituality.
A workplace that instils a learning-oriented culture facilitates knowledge sharing (Ipe,
2003; Riege, 2005; Suppiah and Sandhu, 2011) and ignites deep human values and
spirituality (Ashmos and Duchon, 2000; Kinjerski and Skrypnek, 2008). However,
knowledge-sharing behaviours are the pre-eminent factor in creating both new knowledge
and bonds among people. Few studies explore mediation of knowledge-sharing behaviours
on the relationship between organizational learning culture and workplace spirituality.
Therefore:
H4. Knowledge-sharing behaviour partially mediates the relationship between
organizational learning culture and workplace spirituality.
Figure 1 illustrated the conceptual model of this study and the hypothesized
relationships of variables.

Methodology
Instruments
We used existing instruments to measure the three primary constructs:
(1) organizational learning culture;
(2) knowledge-sharing behaviours; and
(3) workplace spirituality.

Translations from English to Thai and back-translation from Thai to English were
performed to ensure conceptual equivalence with the original English versions. A
pretest of the questionnaire was performed prior to the full-scale survey to ensure
usability and allow fine-tuning for clarity.
Organizational learning culture. We used the Dimensions of Learning Organization
Questionnaire to measure organization learning culture, an instrument that
demonstrates strong validity and reliability across countries (Wang, 2007; Song and
 Learning culture
and workplace
spirituality

181
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

Figure 1.
Conceptual framework

Kolb, 2009). A short version of the questionnaire containing 21 items has been shown to
be as reliable as the full version (Yang et al., 2004). We measured learning culture as a
multi-dimensional construct, naming it OLC, which covers seven dimensions:
(1) continuous learning (OLCL);
(2) inquiry and dialogue (OLDI);
(3) team learning (OLTL);
(4) shared learning system (OLSL);
(5) empowerment (OLEM);
(6) external connection (OLCE); and
(7) supportive leadership (OLLL).

Each sub-dimension was measured using three items:

(1) In my organization, people spend time building trust with each other;
(2) In my organization, team/groups revise their thinking as a result of group
discussions or information collected; and
(3) My organization recognizes people for taking initiative.

The Cronbachs alpha coefficient for this construct was 0.95.

Knowledge-sharing behaviours. Van den Hooff and De Ridder (2004) conceptualized
knowledge-sharing behaviours in reference to two sub-dimensions: knowledge donation
and knowledge collection. We measured knowledge-sharing behaviours across four
dimensions:
(1) knowledge donation within departments (KSDO1);
(2) knowledge donation to other departments (KSDO2);
(3) knowledge collection within departments (KSCO1); and
(4) knowledge collection from other departments (KSCO2).
 TLO Each dimension of knowledge donation was measured using three items, and each for
knowledge collection with four items, resulting in 14 items, all of which were used to
21,3 estimate a knowledge-sharing behaviours construct. These items included:
Knowledge sharing with my colleagues within my department is considered a
normal thing;
When I have learned something new, I tell my colleagues outside my department
182 about it; and
Colleagues outside my department tell me what they know, when I ask them
about it.

The Cronbachs alpha coefficient for this construct was 0.94.

Workplace spirituality. Ashmos and Duchons (2000) 23 items of workplace
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

spirituality include three sub-dimensions:

(1) inner life (WPINL);
(2) meaningful work (WPMFW); and
(3) sense of community (WPSOC) (Ashmos and Duchon, 2000; Duchon and
Plowman, 2005).

Incorporating findings from previous studies, another five items were added to measure
self-work integration (WPSWI) (Rego and Cunha, 2008). Twenty-eight items across four
dimensions were included in the survey. Items included:
My spiritual values influence the choice I make;
The work I do is connected to what I think is important in life;
I feel that the members of my team/group support each other; and
My organization helps me to live in peace/harmony with myself.

The Cronbachs alpha coefficient for this construct was 0.96.

All items for the three primary constructs were measured using a Likert-type scale
ranging from 1 (almost never) to 6 (almost always) for organizational learning culture
and knowledge-sharing behaviours and from 1 (completely false) to 6 (completely true)
for workplace spirituality.

Data collection and sample characteristics

We used the non-probability convenience sampling method, with a self-administered
questionnaire. This method allowed us to reach the maximum number of sample
respondents within a time limit, and ensured the minimum sample-to-parameter ratio
for structural equation modelling of 15:1 (Kline, 2005; Hair et al., 2006). The human
resource manager or the head person at each organization was approached for
permission to conduct the study and request their collaboration in distributing
questionnaires to employees who consented to participate. The feasibility and sufficient
variation of the sample to test the hypotheses were considered, and 2,900 questionnaires
were distributed within several industries such as health care, banking/finance,
transportation, consumer goods and hospitality. In total, 20,634 questionnaires were
returned, of which 2,419 were usable, a response rate of 83.4 per cent.
 The majority of respondents were female (65.5 per cent), with an average age of 33.4 Learning culture
years. Over half held a bachelors degree (57.7 per cent), and nearly all respondents had
a permanent employment contract (93.5 per cent). Among these, the majority worked in
and workplace
non-management positions (i.e. officer or professional staff) at for-profit organizations spirituality
(74.6 per cent). Respondents also worked in various functions include:
18.6 per cent in marketing and sales;
15.3 per cent in administration and support staff; 183
13.3 per cent in finance and accounting; and
10.2 per cent in operations and production.

Participants came from 146 organizations. Organizations with fewer than 201
employees accounted for 37.87 per cent of the sample; those with 201 to 1,000 for 38.69
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

per cent; and 1,000 employees for 23.44 per cent.

Common method bias might have influenced relationships among the constructs
(Podsakoff et al., 2003), as respondents answered all questionnaire items. To offset this
potential problem, a Harmans one-factor test using principal component analysis with an
un-rotated factor solution was performed to analyze the items. Eight factors with
eigenvalues greater than one were extracted. The cumulative percentage of variance was
62.2 per cent, and the first factor accounted for 38.6 per cent of the variance. These results
suggest no single factor, so common method bias was not considered an issue in the data.

Data analysis and results

Data analysis and measurement model fit
An arithmetic mean was calculated to obtain corresponding composite variables for each
dimension and for each construct. Descriptive statistics, intercorrelations and reliabilities are
shown in Table I. Reliability was assessed using Cronbachs alpha coefficient, with a critical
value of 0.7 (Hair et al., 2006). Fifteen variables had a coefficient greater than 0.7, but
continuous learning (OLCL) had a value of 0.68. All the variables were therefore deemed
reliable. Table I shows that all correlation coefficients were significant (p 0.001) and in the
predicted direction, according to the supporting theories.
Structural equation modelling was used to assess the measurement model and
hypothesized relationships in the structural model. Results of a KolmogorovSmirnov
normal distribution analysis suggested no variable was normally distributed (p 0.00);
skewness ranged from 0.35 to 0.09 and kurtosis from 0.44 to 0.05. Mardias
normalized multivariate kurtosis estimation had a value of 169.94, which is greater than
the critical value of 3, confirming a non-normal distribution (Bentler, 2006). We therefore
used the elliptical re-weighted least square estimation method (Bentler, 2006). This
estimation method yielded the same results as the maximum likelihood estimation
method for a normal distribution (Sharma et al., 1989; Sharma, 2000). Multiple fit indices
were used to evaluate overall model fitness:
chi-square (2);
root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA);
root mean residual (RMR);
goodness-of-fit index (GFI);
adjusted GFI (AGFI);
 Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

21,3

184
TLO

Table I.

reliabilities
correlations and
Descriptive statistics,
Constructs Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Organizational Continuous learning (OLCL) (0.68)

learning Inquiry and dialogue (OLDI) 0.67 (0.78)
culture (OLC) Team learning (OLTL) 0.65 0.71 (0.76)
Shared learning system (OLSL) 0.62 0.61 0.64 (0.80)
Empowerment (OLEM) 0.60 0.61 0.67 0.69 (0.78)
External connection (OLCE) 0.60 0.62 0.65 0.64 0.71 (0.80)
Supportive leadership (OLLL) 0.54 0.54 0.59 0.58 0.61 0.69 (0.89)
Knowledge-sharing Knowledge donation 1 (KSDO1) 0.46 0.51 0.52 0.52 0.46 0.51 0.48 (0.86)
behaviours (KSB) Knowledge donation 2 (KSDO2) 0.44 0.45 0.49 0.49 0.47 0.46 0.44 0.60 (0.88)
Knowledge collection 1 (KSCO1) 0.39 0.42 0.42 0.39 0.39 0.44 0.40 0.61 0.38 (0.90)
Knowledge collection 2 (KSCO2) 0.40 0.40 0.44 0.42 0.42 0.45 0.41 0.50 0.55 0.67 (0.92)
Workplace Inner life (WPINL) 0.44 0.42 0.45 0.43 0.41 0.48 0.45 0.50 0.42 0.54 0.50 (0.84)
spirituality Meaningful work (WPMFW) 0.47 0.46 0.47 0.46 0.48 0.53 0.51 0.49 0.47 0.44 0.44 0.72 (0.91)
(WPS) Sense of community (WPSPC) 0.53 0.56 0.57 0.50 0.53 0.570 0.54 0.58 0.46 0.54 0.47 0.65 0.73 (0.90)
Self-work integration (WPSWI) 0.55 0.54 0.59 0.53 0.59 0.63 0.61 0.49 0.47 0.43 0.44 0.58 0.72 0.77 (0.90)
Means 3.99 3.82 3.79 3.80 3.72 3.93 3.87 4.17 3.62 4.45 4.14 4.38 4.20 4.14 4.03
Standard deviations 1.01 1.06 1.01 1.10 1.10 1.09 1.20 1.07 1.20 1.00 1.10 0.86 1.00 0.96 1.08
Number of items 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 7 8 8 5

Notes: n 2,419; all correlations are significant at p 0.01 (two-tailed); Cronbachs alpha shown on the diagonal
 normed fit index (NFI); Learning culture
non-normed fit index (NNFI); and and workplace
comparative fit index (CFI). spirituality
Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to assess the measurement model for
convergent and construct reliabilities and discriminant validity. Fit indices of the
overall measurement model suggested an acceptable fit: 2 (84; n 2,419) 1,321.6, p 185
0.001; RMSEA 0.078; RMR 0.05; GFI 0.90; AGFI 0.90; NFI 0.97; NNFI 0.97;
and CFI 0.97. For all constructs, standardized factor loadings were greater than 0.70
and significant (p 0.01), with t-values greater than 3. Hence, convergent validity was
admissible (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988; Hair et al., 2006). To ensure the constructs
reliabilities, composite reliabilities were calculated. Results for organizational learning
culture, knowledge-sharing behaviour and workplace spirituality were 0.88, 0.77 and
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

0.84, respectively, all greater than 0.7 (Hair et al., 2006). The variance extracted results
for the three constructs conveyed similar results at 0.63, 0.55 and 0.7, all above 0.5 (Hair
et al., 2006). These results confirm that the three constructs were reliable. Discriminant
validity was assessed to ensure that the three constructs were distinct. The chi-square
values of the pairwise construct correlation models between unconstrained and
constrained models (with correlation set to one) were compared. Each model provided a
chi-square value with varying degrees of freedom at one. A variant of the chi-square
value between the two models surpassed 6.64 (p 0.01), which was considered
significant. The unconstrained model fit the data better, and verified that the two
constructs were unique (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988). Results in Table II show that all
three variants of chi-square were significant (p 0.01), and statistical results suggest
the three variables were reliable and independent constructs.

Structural model and hypothesis testing

We examined the direct effect of the relationship between organizational learning
culture and workplace spirituality, and the partial-mediation of knowledge-sharing
behaviours between organizational learning culture and workplace spirituality (Singh
et al., 1994). Partial mediation was supported by the following four conditions.
(1) The partial-mediation model explained more variance (R2) of workplace
spirituality than the direct-effect model.
(2) A significant relationship was found between organizational learning culture
and knowledge-sharing behaviours.

Constructs Unconstrained model 2 Constrained model 2 2

Organizational learning culture with

Knowledge-sharing behaviours 726.2 (43) 750.2 (44) 24.0**
Workplace spirituality 726.2 (43) 750.2 (44) 24.0**
Knowledge-sharing behaviours with
Workplace spirituality 658.5 (19) 735.0 (20) 76.5** Table II.
Results of discriminant
Note: ** Significant at p 0.01 validity test
 TLO (3) A significant relationship was found between knowledge-sharing behaviours
and workplace spirituality.
21,3
(4) The relationship between organizational learning culture and workplace
spirituality diminished or was eliminated in the partial-mediation model.

Standardized path coefficients (SPCs) were calculated to assess the magnitude of the
186 relationships among constructs (Song et al., 2011).
Results from both models suggest acceptable overall fit, although 2 was significant
due to the large sample (Table III), suggesting both structural models had good fit and
the four conditions of the partial mediation could be examined further. More variance
was explained by workplace spirituality in the partial-mediation model than in the
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

Parameterc Direct effect modela Partial mediation modelb

Hypothesised paths
OLC WPS (H2) 0.78 (24.71) 0.46 (12.83)
OLC KSB (H1) 0.75 (24.60)
KSB WPS (H3) 0.42 (11.56)
Measurement coefficients
OLC OLCL 0.77d 0.77d
OLC OLDI 0.79 (32.28) 0.79 (32.36)
OLC OLTL 0.82 (34.06) 0.82 (32.15)
OLC OLSL 0.79 (32.27) 0.79 (32.39)
OLC OLEM 0.82 (33.80) 0.81 (33.68)
OLC OLCE 0.82 (34.38) 0.83 (34.33)
OLC OLLL 0.75 (30.58) 0.75 (30.54)
KSB KSDO1 0.80d
KSB KSDO2 0.70 (26.93)
KSB KSCO1 0.75 (29.15)
KSB KSCO2 0.74 (28.90)
WPS WPINL 0.74d 0.75d
WPS WPMFW 0.84 (32.92) 0.84 (33.74)
WPS WPSOC 0.88 (34.48) 0.89 (35.59)
WPS WPSWI 0.86 (33.80) 0.85 (34.25)
R2 for KSB 0.57
R2 for WPS 0.60 0.67
Goodness-of-fit statistics
2 672.0 (p .001) 1321.40 (p .001)
df 43 87
RMSEA 0.08 0.08
RMR 0.04 0.05
GFI 0.93 0.90
AGFI 0.89 0.86
NFI 0.98 0.97
NNFI 0.97 0.97
CFI 0.98 0.97
Table III. Notes: a Only the direct effect of OLC on WPS; b Only the direct effect of OLC on WPS, and the KSB
Results of partial- mediation between OLC and WPS; c Standardized estimation; t-values in parentheses; d Unstandardized
mediation test coefficient fixed to 1 to set the scale
 direct model (0.67 vs 0.60). Positive relationships existed between organizational Learning culture
learning culture and knowledge-sharing behaviours (H1: SPC 0.75, t 24.60, p 0.01)
and between knowledge-sharing behaviours and workplace spirituality (H3: SPC
and workplace
0.42, t 11.56, p 0.01). Therefore, the first three conditions were met, supporting H1 spirituality
and H3.
The significant relationship between organizational learning culture and workplace
spirituality was lower in the partial-mediation model (H2: SPC 0.46, t 12.83, p 0.01) 187
than in the direct model (SPC 0.78, t 24.71, p 0.01), supporting H2. Organizational
learning culture is positively related to workplace spirituality, and knowledge-sharing
behaviours partially mediated the relationship between organizational learning culture and
workplace spirituality. To confirm partial mediation, a full-mediation model was assessed
by removing the direct path from organizational learning culture to workplace spirituality.
This model had acceptable fit indices [2 (88,n 2,419) 1,457.55 (p 0.001); RMSEA
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

0.08; RMR 0.06; GFI 0.89; AGFI 0.84; NFI 0.97; NNFI 0.96; CFI 0.97]. Values
of all factor loadings for each construct were greater than 0.7 (p 0.01). Results of the
significance test suggest the partial-mediation model had better fit (Germain and Spears,
1999; Prajogo and Sohal, 2006). Chi-square values between the full- and partial-mediation
models were significant (2 136.15; p 0.01; df 1). Removing the direct path from
organizational learning culture to workplace spirituality did not yield better fit. Thus, partial
mediation was confirmed, and H4 was supported. To confirm knowledge-sharing
behaviours as a mediator further, the Sobel test was performed to assess the indirect effect of
organizational learning culture on workplace spirituality (Baron and Kenny, 1986). Results
confirm the indirect effect (z 10.34, p 0.001). In summary, the tests indicate that
knowledge-sharing behaviours partially mediate a sense of workplace spirituality in a
learning culture.

Discussion
This study emphasizes the impact of the interaction of organizational learning culture
and knowledge-sharing behaviours on workplace spirituality. It reveals a context that
enriches the human spirit in the workplace. Three variables were found to be valid
constructs for Thailand, which in combination with extant research, suggest that they
are valid in both Western and Eastern contexts. Results of structural equation analysis
show that all path coefficients of influential relationships among the three hypothesized
constructs were significant. An organizational learning culture has a more powerful
direct influence on knowledge-sharing behaviours and strong associations with
workplace spirituality. This result highlights the essential role of a supportive learning
environment on knowledge-sharing behaviours, knowledge creation and learning (Song
and Kolb, 2009; Song et al., 2011). Organizational learning culture shapes the contextual
environment for knowledge sharing and, at the same time, stimulates employees
perceptions that their work and lives have meaning. This enables members to integrate
their lives and energy into the workplace. The strong, positive influence of
knowledge-sharing behaviours on workplace spirituality indicates that participating in
knowledge sharing enhances the sense of human value and purpose and connectedness
with others. Integrating all results, knowledge-sharing behaviours partially mediate the
relationship between organizational learning culture and workplace spirituality. Thus,
knowledge sharing is an essential factor in a learning culture. New knowledge is
co-created by sharing experiences and individual knowledge among organizational
 TLO members. In sharing, members perceive a profound sense of purpose or value, which
intensifies the extent to which they bond. Emphasizing knowledge-sharing
21,3 programmes, new knowledge not only facilitates co-creation but also enriches and fulfils
the human spirit. Findings highlight the critical role of organizational learning culture
and knowledge-sharing behaviours as indispensable mechanisms for human resources
development and contribute theoretically to new knowledge. These results support the
188 purpose of such development in terms of enhancing human potential and personal
growth (Hamlin and Stewart, 2011). From a learning-culture perspective, workplace
spirituality emerges as a lead performance indicator, which thus far the literature has
largely overlooked. A new, theoretical antecedent context for workplace spirituality has
been identified; a learning culture fosters the ultimate human need, enabling new
meaning for work and life that integrates into the employing organization.
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

Implications
Findings from this study have both managerial and theoretical implications.
Organization leaders and human resources development practitioners must recognize
the importance of both an organizational learning culture and knowledge-sharing
behaviours as a portion of managerial strategy. Practitioners should develop or employ
an organizational learning culture and knowledge-sharing behaviours with more
confidence, as these are based on a sound theory from an academic standpoint and
supported by empirical data. To facilitate knowledge sharing, a suitable environment
for learning is essential. When providing integral knowledge-sharing initiatives as a
normal part of work, the learning culture should be assessed first. Human resources
development practitioners should use the theoretical organizational learning culture as
a guide to create a friendly, supportive environment and encourage knowledge sharing.
The knowledge-sharing behaviours dimension outlines practical actions for organizational
members. Human resources development might need to provide physical spaces and allow
employees to get to know each other to facilitate information sharing. From this, sharing
behaviours develop naturally, especially in the context of a learning environment.
Workplace spirituality is a practical solution and a learning outcome for an
organization. Human resources development literature focuses primarily on improving
organizational effectiveness and individual performance regarding knowledge and
skills, and little attention is paid to measuring performance concerning human potential
and personal growth. Results from this study demonstrate the contribution of
workplace spirituality. We argue that learning supports growth of human potential, a
milestone for retaining competent and committed people in an organization. Thus,
workplace spirituality is an indicator requiring periodic assessment.
An organizational learning culture is a critical concept in human resources
development. This study highlights the crucial role of an organizational learning culture
and knowledge-sharing behaviours as mechanisms for developing human values.
Although knowledge-sharing behaviours influence workplace spirituality positively, a
friendly learning culture is a necessary condition to encourage sharing behaviours. Such
a learning culture overcomes organizational barriers and enables effective implementation
of knowledge sharing. Organizational learning cultures and knowledge-sharing behaviours
are direct sources of creating new knowledge that links employees personal values and
empowers self-transformations. Executives should focus on establishing friendly learning
environments and knowledge-sharing programmes to maximize potential.
 Limitations and future research Learning culture
We used existing scales developed in Western cultures and applied these to a Thai
sample. Although respondents varied, they were all Thai, so generalizations require
and workplace
caution. Cultural sensitivity may have influenced results in spite of the translation spirituality
protocols and valid scale results obtained. Future studies should be cross-national to
explore whether cultural disparities lead to variations in workplace spirituality. Future
studies should also incorporate national culture as a construct. Because this study used 189
self-reports, common method variance remains a concern, and although a one-factor test
did not suggest a problem, the effect from such an issue cannot be ignored. Future
research should use longitudinal designs to verify the causality of relationships.
Qualitative research using case studies might verify causal effects this study suggests.
Future research should also incorporate other variables from human resources
development such as training interventions and absorptive capacity. It would also be
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

interesting to investigate trust, team collaboration and self-team awareness.

References
Aggestam, L. (2006), Learning organization or knowledge managementwhich came first, the
chicken or the egg?, Information Technology and Control, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 295-302.
Ajzen, I. (1991), The theory of planned behaviour, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211.
Altaf, A. and Awan, M.A. (2011), Moderating affect of workplace spirituality on the relationship
of job overload and job satisfaction, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 104 No. 1, pp. 93-99.
Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988), Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and
recommended two-step approach, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 3, pp. 411-423.
Ashmos, D.P. and Duchon, D. (2000), Spirituality at work, Journal of Management Inquiry, Vol. 9
No. 2, pp. 134-145.
Bandsuch, M.R. and Cavanagh, G.F. (2005), Integrating spirituality into the workplace: theory
and practice, Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 221-254.
Baron, R.M. and Kenny, D.A. (1986), The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 51 No. 6, pp. 1173-1182.
Bentler, P.M. (2006), EQS 6 Structural Equation Program Manual, Multivariate Software,
Encino, CA.
Bock, G.W., Zmud, R.W., Kim, Y.G. and Lee, J.N. (2005), Behavioral intention formation in
knowledge sharing: examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological
forces, and organizational climate, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 87-111.
Cash, K.C. and Gray, G.R. (2000), A framework for accommodating religion and spirituality in the
workplace, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 124-133.
Chatzoglou, P.D. and Vraimaki, E. (2009), Knowledge-sharing behavior of bank employees in
Greece, Business Process Management, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 245-266.
Crawford, A., Hubbard, S.S. and Lonis-Shumate, S.R. (2009), Workplace spirituality and
employee attitudes within the lodging environment, Journal of Human Resources in
Hospitality and Tourism, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 64-81.
Duchon, D. and Plowman, D.A. (2005), Nurturing the spirit at work: impact on work unit
performance, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 807-833.
 TLO Egan, T.M., Yang, B. and Bartlett, K.R. (2004), The effects of organizational learning culture and
job satisfaction on motivation to transfer learning and turnover intention, Human
21,3 Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 279-301.
Ellinger, A.D., Ellinger, A.E., Yang, B. and Howton, S.W. (2002), The relationship between the
learning organization concept and firms financial performance: an empirical assessment,
Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 5-21.
190 Fry, L.W., Hannah, S.T., Noel, M. and Walumbwa, F.O. (2011), Impact of spiritual leadership on
unit performance, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 259-270.
Gallagher, S.J., Rocco, T.S. and Landorf, H. (2007), A phenomenological study of spirituality and
learning processes at work: exploring the holistic theory of knowledge and learning,
Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 457-480.
Garvin, D.A., Edmondson, A.C. and Gino, F. (2008), Is yours a learning organization?, Harvard
Business Review, Vol. 86 No. 3, pp. 109-116.
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

Germain, R. and Spears, N. (1999), Quality management and its relationship with organizational
context and design, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 16
No. 4, pp. 371-392.
Hair, J.E., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R.L. (2006), Multivariate Data
Analysis, Pearson/Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Hamlin, B. and Stewart, J. (2011), What is HRD? a definitional review and synthesis of the HRD
domain, Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 199-220.
Ipe, M. (2003), Knowledge sharing in organizations: a conceptual framework, Human Resource
Development Review, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 337-359.
Jeon, S.H., Kim, Y.G. and Koh, J. (2011), An integrative model for knowledge sharing in
communities-of-practice, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 251-269.
Joo, B.K. and Lim, T. (2009), The effects of organizational learning culture, perceived job
complexity, and proactive personality on organizational commitment and intrinsic
motivation, Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 48-60.
Kinjerski, V. and Skrypnek, B.J. (2008), Four paths to spirit at work: journeys of personal
meaning, fulfillment, well-being, and transcendence through work, Career Development
Quarterly, Vol. 56 No. 4, pp. 319-328.
Kline, R.B. (2005), Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, Guilford Press, New
York, NY.
Kontoghiorghes, C., Awbre, S.M. and Feurig, P.L. (2005), Examining the relationship between
learning organization characteristics and change adaptation, innovation, and organizational
performance, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 185-212.
Lin, H.F. (2007), Knowledge sharing and firm innovation capability: an empirical study,
International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 28 No. 3/4, pp. 315-332.
Marsick, V.J. and Watkins, K.E. (2003), Demonstrating the value of an organizations learning
culture: the dimensions of the learning organization questionnaire, Advances in Developing
Human Resources, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 132-151.
Milliman, J., Czaplewski, A. and Ferguson, J. (2003), Workplace spirituality and employee work
attitude: an exploratory empirical assessment, Journal of Organizational Change
Management, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 426-447.
Nevis, E.C., Dibella, A.J. and Gould, J.M. (1995), Understanding organizations as learning
system, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 73-85.
 Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., Hirata, T. and Ebrary, I. (2008), Managing Flow: A Process Theory of the Learning culture
Knowledge-based Firm, Palgrave Macmillan, NY.
Petchsawang, P. and Duchon, D. (2012), Workplace spirituality, meditation, and work
and workplace
performance, Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 189-208. spirituality
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies, Journal
of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903. 191
Prajogo, D.I. and Sohal, A.S. (2006), The relationship between organization strategy, total quality
management (TQM), and organization performanceThe mediating role of TQM,
European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 168 No. 1, pp. 35-50.
Rego, A. and Cunha, M.P. (2008), Workplace spirituality and organizational commitment: an
empirical study, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 53-75.
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

Riege, A. (2005), Three dozen knowledge-sharing barriers managers must consider, Journal of
Knowledge Management, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 18-35.
Ruona, W.E. and Gibson, S.K. (2004), The making of twenty-first-century HR: an analysis of the
convergence of HRM, HRD, and OD, Human Resource Management, Vol. 43 No. 1,
pp. 49-66.
Ryu, S., Ho, S.H. and Han, I. (2003), Knowledge sharing behavior of physicians in hospitals,
Expert Systems with Application, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 113-122.
Senge, P.M. (1990), The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization,
Doubleday/Currency, NY.
Sharma, S. (2000), Managerial interpretations and organizational context as predictors of
corporate choice of environmental strategy, The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43
No. 4, pp. 681-697.
Sharma, S., Durvasula, S. and Dillon, W.R. (1989), Some results on the behavior of alternate
covariance structure estimation procedures in the presence of non-normal data, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 214-221.
Singh, J., Goolsby, J.R. and Rhoads, G.K. (1994), Behavioral and psychological consequences of
boundary spanning burnout for customer service representatives, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 558-569.
Song, J.H. and Kolb, J.A. (2009), The influence of learning culture on perceived knowledge
conversion: an empirical approach using structural equation modelling, Human Resource
Development International, Vol. 12 No. 5, pp. 529-550.
Song, J.H., Jeung, C.W. and Cho, S.H. (2011), The impact of the learning organization environment
on the organizational learning process in the Korean business context, The Learning
Organization, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 468-485.
Srivastava, A., Bartol, K.M. and Locke, E.A. (2006), Empowering leadership in management
teams: effects on knowledge sharing, efficacy, and performance, Academy of Management
Journal, Vol. 49 No. 6, pp. 1239-1251.
Suppiah, M.V. and Sandhu, M.S. (2011), Organizational cultures influence on tacit knowledge
sharing behaviour, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 462-477.
Sveiby, K.E. and Simons, R. (2002), Collaborative climate and effectiveness of knowledge
work-An empirical study, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 6 No. 5, pp. 420-433.
Tohidinia, Z. and Mosakhani, M. (2010), Knowledge sharing behavior and its predictors,
Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 110 No. 4, pp. 611-631.
 TLO Tombaugh, J.R., Mayfield, C. and Durand, R. (2011), Spiritual expression at work: exploring the
active voice of workplace spirituality, International Journal of Organizational Analysis,
21,3 Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 146-170.
Twigg, N.W. and Parayitam, S. (2006), Spirit at work: spiritual typologies as theory builders,
Journal of Organizational Culture, Communication and Conflict, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 117-133.
van den Hooff, B. and De Ridder, J.A. (2004), Knowledge sharing in context: the influence of
192 organizational commitment, communication climate and CMC use on knowledge sharing,
Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 8 No. 6, pp. 117-130.
Wang, X. (2007), Learning, job satisfaction and commitment: an empirical study of organizations
in China, Chinese Management Studies, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 167-179.
Word, J. (2012), Engaging work as a calling: examining the link between spirituality and job
involvement, Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 147-166.
Yang, B. (2004), Holistic learning theory and implications for human resource development,
Downloaded by CURTIN UNIVERSITY At 07:20 17 August 2014 (PT)

Advances in Developing Human Resources, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 241-262.

Yang, J. (2007), The impact of knowledge sharing on organizational learning and effectiveness,
Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 83-90.
Yang, B., Watkins, K.E. and Marsick, V.J. (2004), The construct of the learning organization:
dimensions, measurement, and validation, Human Resource Development Quarterly,
Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 31-55.
Yeo, R.K. (2005), Revisiting the roots of learning organization: a synthesis of the learning
organization literature, The Learning Organization, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 368-382.

About the authors

Monthon Sorakraikitikul is a Faculty Member at Thammasat Business School, Thammasat
University, Thailand and a PhD candidate at the School of Management, Asian Institute of
Technology, Thailand. His research interest areas are learning organization, knowledge
management and human resource development. Monthon Sorakraikitikul is the corresponding
author and can be contacted at: monthon.sor@gmail.com
Sununta Siengthai is an Associate Professor and Visiting Faculty in Human Resource
Management at the School of Management, Asian Institute of Technology. She obtained her AM
and PhD degrees in labour and industrial relations from the University of Illinois at Urbana
Champaign. Her research interests are human resource management, industrial relations,
performance management and measurement and international human resource management.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints