Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES
http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1069712
Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical designed based on Peter Senges model of learning
Sciences. organization and KM questionnaire that was
10) There is a significant relationship between the confirmed in its validity by a group of specialists.
use of systems thinking (a component of Learning organization questionnaire, developed by
learning organization) and knowledge Nyffe (2001), has been arranged to assess five
management in Ahvaz Jundishapur University aspects, namely personal mastery (6 questions),
of Medical Sciences. metnal model (6 questions), shared vision (4
11) There is a manifold relationship between the questions), systems thinking (4 questions) and
use of learning organizations five disciplines team learning (4 questions). The questionnaire
(personal mastery, mental model, shared contains 24 items that are scored based on Likerts
vision, team learning and systems thinking) five-point scale from completely disagree to
and knowledge management in Ahvaz completely agree (1-7). The questionnaire
Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences. reliability in the study performed by Nyffe (2001)
12) In the competitive environment governing the was obtained equal to 0.85 based on Cronbachs
universities and the efforts that are made by the alpha method. In the present study, as well, a
universities for the generation of science and reliability coefficient equal to 0.91 was obtained for
acquisition of better ranks in doing so, the questionnaire and the reliability coefficients of
knowledge management offers an appropriate the five components were 0.82, 0.75, 0.80, 0.60 and
strategy for making optimal use of the 0.87, respectively, which is suggestive of the
individuals knowledge and intellectual questionnaires high precision. The instrument used
faculties in the universities [15]. Since the herein to measure the KM was a questionnaire that
universities are struggling to preserve their was designed through taking advantage of the
position and acquire superior scientific ranks studies related to KM and investigation of other
amongst the national and international similar questionnaires [18]. To prepare the
universities, the current research paper deals questions inserted in the questionnaire based on the
with an investigation of the application status studied performed in this regard and evaluation of
of KM and its relationship with the learning the main concepts of the KM structure as well as
organization amongst the nonacademic staff study of the suggested patterns, first of all, any
members of Ahvaz Jundishapur University of component that was envisaged to be possibly of
Medical Sciences in southwest Iran. significance in KM was prepared and finally certain
choices were made based on the selected indicators
MATERIALS AND METHODS: and were eventually formed into questions. The
The present study is an applied research in terms of questionnaire contains 25 closed questions. The
its objective because it is seeking to evaluate the questionnaire components were knowledge creation
extent to which the learning organization (7 questions), knowledge sharing (6 questions),
components are applied and that how are they knowledge application (5 questions) and
correlated with the KM in Ahvaz Jundishapur knowledge storing (7 questions). The questionnaire
University of Medical Sciences in southwest Iran. was scored based on Likerts 5-point scale from
The present study is a descriptive research in terms completely disagree to completely agree (1-5). A
of the study method it has used and it has been reliability coefficient of 0.91 was reported by
conducted based on a correlation method because Khameda (2009) for the questionnaire [18]. In the
the researcher, besides studying the extent to which present study, as well, the questionnaires
the components of learning organization have been reliability coefficient was found equal to 0.96
utilized in Ahvaz Jundishapur University of which is reflective of the high precision of the
Medical Sciences, is looking for determining the questionnaire.
type and the intensity of the relationship between
learning organization components with knowledge After undergoing the necessary administrative
management. The study population included all of stages and determining the study sample volume,
the nonacademic staff members and managers of the researcher, considering the study objective and
Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences the necessity for selecting the nonacademic staff
that reaches in number to 800 individuals who have members and managers, attended the Ahvaz
been working in the university during 2014-2015 Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences and
academic years. According to the study population briefly interviewed the participants for their method
volume and based on the nature of the present of cooperation with the research. After selecting the
study, a sample volume of 200 individuals were study sample volume, a total of 200 individuals, the
selected. Simple randomized method was applied aforementioned questionnaires were administered
herein as a result of which a total of 180 staff to the study subjects and they were again collected
members answered to the questions posited in the after several days. The study subjects were asked to
questionnaires. The data collection instrument complete the questionnaire by giving them the
included the learning organization questionnaire necessary explanations and instruction in regard of
the questionnaire completion. In the end, 180 Medical Sciences and thus the hypothesis is
questionnaires were completed and returned to the rejected (t=-5.01 and P=0.001). As it is seen in the
researcher and these formed the basis of the study table, the mean value computed for the team
evaluations. To analyze the data, there was made learning is significantly lower than the estimated
use of descriptive statistics like frequency, mean (16). So, considering the Hypothesis Four, it
frequency percentage, mean and standard deviation, can be stated that the team learning has been
as well as the inferential statistics methods applied in a level lower than intermediate in Ahvaz
including the one-sample t-test, Pierson correlation Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences and
coefficient and multiple regression coefficients. the hypothesis is accordingly rejected (t=-2.99 and
The data were analyzed in SPSS software, ver. 21. P=0.003). As it is observed in the table below, the
The significance level was set to 0.05 for the mean value obtained for the systems thinking is
examination of the study hypotheses. significantly below the estimated mean (16). Thus,
considering the Hypothesis Five, it can be stated
FINDINGS: that the systems thinking has been applied in a
The mean and standard deviation of the learning level lower than intermediate in Ahvaz Jundishapur
organization were 82.55 and 21.32, respectively. University of Medical Sciences so the hypothesis is
Also, the mean and standard deviation of the subsequently rejected (t=-0.39 and P=0.17).
knowledge management were 61.52 and 19.87,
respectively. To test the study hypotheses, one- Table (2) presents the results pertaining to the
sample t-test was utilized the results of which are correlation coefficients of the relationship between
summarized in the following table. As it is seen in the learning organizations components and
the table, the mean value obtained for the personal criterion variable (knowledge management). The
mastery is significantly lower than the estimated figures given in table (2) indicate that there is a
mean (24). Therefore, considering Hypothesis One, positive and significant correlation between the
it can be stated that the personal mastery has been personal mastery component of the KM (r=0.341).
applied in a level below intermediate in Ahvaz Therefore, Hypothesis Six is confirmed in a
Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences and P<0.001 significance level. Also, there was found a
thus the hypothesis should be rejected (t=-8.85 and positive correlation between the components of
P=0.001). As it is observed in the table, the mean mental model and KM (r=0.609). Thus, Hypothesis
value obtained for the mental model is significantly Seven is confirmed in P<0.001 significance level;
lower than the estimated mean (24). So, furthermore, there was also figured out a positive
considering the Hypothesis Two, it can be stated correlation between shared vision and KM
that the mental model has been applied in a level (r=0.551). So, the Hypothesis Eight is confirmed in
lower than intermediate in Ahvaz Jundishapur P<0.001 significance level. Also, there was found a
University of Medical Sciences and thus the positive correlation between the team learning
hypothesis is rejected (t=-13.85 and P=0.001). As it component and KM (r=0.609). So, Hypothesis
is discernible from the table, the mean value Nine is confirmed in P<0.001 significance level;
obtained for the shared vision is significantly lower moreover, there was found a positive correlation
than the estimated mean (16). Thus, considering the between systems thinking and KM (r=0.551).
Hypothesis Three, it can be stated that the shared Thus, hypothesis 10 is confirmed in P<0.001
vision has been applied in a level lower than significance level.
intermediate in Ahvaz Jundishapur University of
Table 1: the results of one-sample t-test for comparing the mean values of the study sample volume
regarding the learning organization components with the populations estimated mean
Component Number of Estimated Sample Std. t-value Degree of Significance
items mean mean deviation freedom level
Personal 6 24 18.96 7.63 -8.85 179 0.001
mastery
Mental 6 24 18.59 5.23 -13.85 179 0.001
model
Shared 4 16 14.17 4.87 -5.01 179 0.001
vision
Team 4 16 14.99 4.49 -2.99 179 0.003
learning
Systems 4 16 15.82 5.85 -0.39 179 0.17
thinking
Table 2: correlation coefficients of the relationship between the learning organizations components and
criterion variable (knowledge management)
Criterion variable Knowledge management
r N P
Predictor variable
Personal mastery 0.341 180 0.001
Mental model 0.466 180 0.001
Shared vision 0.435 180 0.001
Team learning 0.364 180 0.001
Systems thinking 0.586 180 0.001
Table 3: the results of multiple regression analyses pertaining to the interaction of learning organization
components with knowledge management in Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences based on
simultaneous entering method
Model ss df MS FP RS MR
Regression 27366.27 5 4573.25 21.9 0.384 0.622
Residuals 43332.59 174 249.03 0.001
Variables B Beta t P
Personal mastery 0.112 0.04 0.60 0.54
Mental model 0.610 0.16 1.86 0.06
Shared vision 0.506 0.12 1.16 0.24
Team learning 0.545 0.12 1.21 0.22
Systems thinking 1.67 0.49 5.45 0.001
Fixed value 100.43 - - -
Table (3) summarizes the results of multiple collection from the strongest combination of the
regression analysis pertaining to the interaction predictor variable.
between the learning organization components Table (4) gives the results of multiple regression
(personal mastery, mental model, shared vision, analysis pertaining to the interaction of the learning
team learning and systems thinking) and organization components (personal mastery, mental
knowledge management in Ahvaz Jundishapur model, shared vision, team learning and systems
University of Medical Sciences based on the thinking) and KM in Ahvaz Jundishapur University
simultaneous entering method. Corresponding to of Medical Sciences based on a stepwise method.
the information inserted in table (3), the multiple As it is demonstrated in table (4), corresponding to
correlation coefficient for the linear combination of the results obtained from the stepwise regression
the predictor variables of the learning organization method, systems thinking and mental model are
components (personal mastery, mental model, respectively the predictors of the KM inter alia the
shared vision, team learning and systems thinking) learning organizations components (personal
and knowledge management in Ahvaz Jundishapur mastery, mental model, shared vision, team
University of Medical Sciences is MR=0.622 learning and systems thinking) as the predictors of
which is statistically significant in a P=0.001 the staff knowledge management and a prediction
significance level. Therefore, the predictor equation through only blending the two predictor
variables account for nearly 38% of the variance variables can be obtained based on which the
pertaining to KM. The beta coefficients pertaining multiple correlation coefficients for linearly
to the predictor variables and their significance combining the predictor variables were MR=0.616
levels are also seeable from the table. According to and RS=0.380 which are found statistically
t-statistics, it can be observed that the value of beta significant in P<0.001 level. Comparing the values
belonging to the relationship between the predictor obtained for the determination coefficients through
variable systems thinking orientation and KM is hierarchical regression method, RS=0.384, and
statistically significant but the relationships with through stepwise method, RS=0.380, it can be
the other components are not found statistically understood that the combination of the two
significant. Also, stepwise regression method was predictor variables, i.e. systems thinking and
utilized to determine an appropriate prediction mental model, produces the strongest combination
equation by the use of the smallest likelihood of predictor variables for the elaboration of staffs
knowledge management variance.
Table 4: the results of multiple regression analysis pertaining to the interaction between the learning
organizations components and knowledge management in Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical
Sciences based on stepwise method
t=9.66
P=0.001
t=6.8 t=3.18
P=0.001 P=0.002
indicators are applied in a lower than intermediate
Considering the non-standardized coefficients level in Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical
column (B) and the fixed value column based on a Sciences. In elucidating this finding, it can be
simultaneous entering method, the prediction of the stated that the method by which the organizations
knowledge management score (y') of the staff
members is possible from the scores of the are designed and managed, the way the individual
variables personal mastery, mental model, jobs are specified and described and, more
shared vision, team learning, and systems importantly, the style taught to the individual
thinking (X), respectively, according to the regarding how to think and how to communicate
following predictor equation: have all caused the emergence of fundamental
inabilities in terms of learning. Also, the findings of
y'=100/43 + 0.11 (X1) + 0.61 (X2) + 0.50 (X3) + the current research paper showed that there is a
0.54 (X4) + 1.67 (X5) positive correlation between the personal mastery,
mental model, shared vision, team learning and
According to the non-standardized coefficients (B) systems thinking with the knowledge
and fixed value columns based on stepwise method, management. Therefore, hypotheses 6-10 are
the knowledge management score prediction (y') of confirmed. This latter finding is consistent with the
the staff is respectively possible from the scores of results obtained in the studies by Yaghoubi et al
the systems thinking and mental model (X) (19). Hovland et al (20), Loermans (21) Hong (22),
through the following equation Zahbion (23), Nadi (24), Beigi (25), Bahramian
(26) and Bryant (27). In clarifying the results of
y'=102.47 + 1/6 (X1) + 0.83 (X2) this latter finding, it can be said that the real
learning organizations actively manage the learning
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: process based on principled designing and not
The materials mentioned in the findings section based on chance and in a haphazard manner. The
indicated that the mean values obtained for learning organization carries out learning process
personal mastery, mental model, shared vision, management through the following five substantial
team learning and systems thinking in the present activities: systematic problem-solving,
study are significantly lower than the estimated experimenting based on novel methods used by the
mean as a result of which the Hypotheses 1-5 are other organizations, and rapid and effective
rejected. It means that the learning organizations transferring of knowledge in the organizations
body via creating systems and processes supporting organizations can only learn via their members,
these activities and institutionalizing them in the although individual learning does not guarantee
organizations daily operation context. The organizational learning, no learning takes place
organizations can more effectively manage without it. Thus, the individuals ability and
learning. One component of the learning commitment for learning is the main factor. The
organization that was found having a positive individual learning opportunities include self-
relationship with knowledge management in the managerial learning, learning from peers and
present study was the use of systems thinking. computer-aided learning, daily work-related
This activity is the foremost and the most experiences, specialized duties in projects and
fundamental undertaking for managing the personal discretions. Personal mastery and
organizational learning process. Systems thinking competency incorporates a system in which the
includes a perceptional framework, a body of individual constantly clarifies and deepens his or
knowledge and tools that are developed during long her personal attitudes, concentrates his or her
years. Although instruments are new, the energy and power, expands his or her patience and
individuals are capable of rapid learning if the tolerance and finally perceives the realities in a just
individuals think based on a system. The and unbiased manner. Keeping this definition in
individuals apply the systems thinking in their mind, the personal mastery and competencies form
evaluation of the whole organizational forces. In the underlying premise of the learning organization.
systems thinking, the individuals, in lieu of Lastly, the shared vision in organizations can
exploring the details of a status, usually direct their improve the learning and the knowledge
thoughts from details towards dynamicity and this management via encouraging and promoting the
leads to the creation of some sort of ability for the individual discretion, establishment of
individuals so that they can discern the mutual communication and acquisition of support,
relationships in any situation. Systems thinking adoption of a discretion as a continuous process,
enables individuals to think in practice. Utilizing blending of endogenous and exogenous
the systems thinking approach to the process perspectives and distinguishing of positive and
improvement, the actions are less frequently negative vistas. Corresponding to the information
conducted in an uncoordinated and irregular given in the sections on findings, the multiple
manner the result of which is the maximization of correlation coefficient of the linear combination of
learning organizations privileges. Another the predictor variables in the relationship between
component having been found positively correlated the learning organizations components (Personal
with knowledge management is the use of team Mastery, Mental Model, shared vision, team
learning. In elaborating this finding, one should pay learning and systems thinking) and knowledge
attention to the point that team learning is management is statistically significant in Ahvaz
essentially different from group teaching. That is Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences. In
because this type of learning includes something clarifying this result and the importance of the
more than acquisition of group skills. Team systems thinking and mental models, it can be
learning underlines the self-managerial learning, stated that systems thinking offers a conceptual
creativity and free flowing of ideas. The successful framework making more vivid patterns enabling
team learning system insures that that the teams the individuals discern how to effectively change
will share their negative and positive experiences the system. Enji (2004) points out that systems
with the other groups in the organization; thinking moves along the mental path empowering
consequently, they seriously enhance the it to see the mutual relations, the causes and the
companies intellectual growth. When a team is chains of effect and giving it clearer vision of the
learning well, not only the group members gain change processes and instantaneous images.
remarkable results but also the individual members Lanham and Vineyard (2005) believe that systems
will have progresses more accelerated in pace than thinking is a key aspect of learning cycles
ever before. A perfectly task-oriented and coherent systematic process. Also, in regard of the
team is capable of accomplishing the assigned importance of mental models, it can be asserted that
duties a lot better than what is done individually many of the best ideas contain attitudes and propel
and solitarily. The team members can become innovations in the organizations and they will never
prominent figures through creating more solutions, have the chance to be posited and proposed due to
achievement of higher objectives and more eminent the inherent conflict with the dominant mental
innovations. Enji figured it out that when teams patterns. The learning organizations leaders should
really learn works together, they will be capable of learn the skills of revealing and testing the mental
yielding extraordinary results. The findings by models without instigating the defensive processes.
Murray and Musa (2005), as well, confirm this In line with this, Senge highlights that working
result. Also, the use of individual capabilities has a with mental models commences via investigating
significant effect on the advancement of knowledge the internal thoughts, learning how to unravel the
management. It is generally opined that the internal images of the world and, finally, by
surfacing and preserving them so as to be subjected University of Medical Sciences, Southwest of Iran.
to scrutinizing evaluation. Mental models Ann Trop Med Public Health 2017; 10(5): 1254-
encompass the ability to perform an informative 1259. doi: 10.4103/ATMPH.ATMPH_316_16.
conversation balancing the research, investigation 4. Gilavand A. The Comparison of Iranian and
and support and this is the situation in which the Foreign Students Motivations to Choose Dentistry
individuals offer their thoughts in an effective Field of Study. International Journal of Pediatrics.
manner and acquire an open thinking style in 2016; 4 (6):1993-2010. doi:
respect to the others influences. In compliance 10.22038/ijp.2016.6861
with the findings of the present study, it can be 5. Gilavand A, A Study of Ahvaz Jundishapur
stated that the systems thinking variables and University of Medical Sciences Dental Students
mental models are the best predictors of knowledge Interest to Pursuing a Specialty according to their
management. That is because the organizational Demographic Information. Indo Am. J. P. Sci,
learning and knowledge management scores were 2017; 4(06) 1593-1598.
not in an acceptable level and the todays world is doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.819543.
bearing witness to very rapid changes in the various 6. Gilavand A. Evaluating the Process of
areas of science and technology. The nonacademic Recruiting Faculty Members in Universities and
staff members of the universities are recommended Higher Education and Research Institutes Affiliated
to devise plans for learning as well as creating, to Ministry of Health and Medical Education in
distributing and transferring knowledge in their Iran. World Family Medicine. 2017; 15(8): 155-
organizations. The study population and the study 159. doi: 10.5742/MEWFM.2017.93070
sample volume limitations render it somewhat 7. Gilavand A. Calculation of Salaries and Benefts
difficult to generalize the results obtained herein. of Faculty Members in the Ministry of Health and
Also, according to the idea that the present study is Medical Education of Iran. World Family
a descriptive research, it is constrained in terms of Medicine. 2017; 15[9]:164-169. doi:
not having deduced a cause and effect relationship. 10.5742/MEWFM.2017.93119.
Based on the results of the present study, it is 8. Gilavand A. Pathology of Faculty Members
suggested that further future research is required to rank Promotion in Universities and Higher
identify the factors giving rise to the learning Education Institutions Affiliated to the Ministry of
organizations growth, particularly in regard of the Health and Medical Education of the Islamic
aforementioned university. Also, the current Republic of Iran. International Journal of Medical
research paper suggests comparing the learning Research & Health Sciences. 2016; 5(9S): 25-30.
organizations status in governmental and 9. Gilavand A., Espidkar F. Investigating the
nongovernmental institutions in another study. Barriers to Women's Promotion to Managerial
Positions in Iranian Universities and Higher
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: Education Institutions: A Review. Indo Am. J. P.
Ethical issues were completely observed by the Sci, 2017; 4[08] 2574-2582.
authors. doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.853173.
10. Barekat G, Gilavand A. Evaluating the
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Relationship between Social Capital and
None declared Organizational Justice form the Perspective of
Employees, Indo Am. J. P. Sci, 2017; 4(11) 3960-
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: 3966. doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1043519.
This research was adopted from a thesis written by 11. Gilavand A. Quality Assessment of Staff in-
Kiamars Hajizadeh, M.A student of Educational service training from View Points of Employees
Administration, Ahvaz Branch, Islamic Azad Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences.
University, Ahvaz, Iran. Future of Medical Education Journal. 2016; 6 (2):
42-46. doi: 10.22038/fmej.2016.7516
REFERENCES: 12. Hosseinpour M. Gilavand A. Analyzing
1. Gilavand A. A Study of the Growth and Research Productivity of Humanities Faculty
Flourish of Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Members in Universities of Ahvaz, southwest of
Medical Sciences; A Cultural History. International Iran. Indo Am. J. P. Sci, 2017; 4(09) 2949-2958.
Journal of Medical Research & Health Sciences. doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.892394.
2016; 5(11): 83-86. 13. Gilavand A, Fatahiasl J, MohamadiMajd R.
2. Gilavand A. Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Evaluating the Quality of Educational Services
Medical Sciences over Years; the History of from the Viewpoints of Radiology Students of
AJUMS. Jentashapir Journal of Health Research. Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences,
2016; 7 (5) DOI 10.17795/jjhr-42677 in Southwest of Iran World Family Medicine.
3. Gilavand A. The comparison of the tuition-paid 2017; 15(9):181-186. DOI:
and free tuition dental students' incentives in 10.5742/MEWFM.2017.93123
choosing their feld of study at Ahvaz Jundishapur