Measuring learning agility: a review and critique of learning agility measures

IF 3.3 3区 管理学 Q1 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR Personnel Review Pub Date : 2024-04-11 DOI:10.1108/pr-10-2023-0886
Brandon A. Smith, Karen E. Watkins
{"title":"Measuring learning agility: a review and critique of learning agility measures","authors":"Brandon A. Smith, Karen E. Watkins","doi":"10.1108/pr-10-2023-0886","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The purpose of this review is to evaluate existing learning agility measures and offer recommendations for their use in organizational and scholarly contexts.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>This is a general review paper assessing the psychometric qualities of prevalent learning agility measures. Measures were selected based on their predominance and use in the learning agility literature and organizational settings.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>Learning agility measurement is an area requiring further research. Multiple conceptualizations of learning agility exist, making the true structure of learning agility unclear. The learning agility measures in the academic literature deviate from learning agility’s traditional conceptualization and require further validation and convergent validity studies. Commercial measures of learning agility exist, but their development procedures are not subjected to peer review and are not widely used in academic research, given the cost associated with their use.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\n<p>Learning agility is prevalently used in organizational settings and is receiving increased scholarly attention. Various conceptualizations and measurement tools exist, and it is unclear how these theories and measures relate and differ. This paper contributes to practice by providing practical guidelines and limitations for measuring learning agility.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>Learning agility was initially conceived as a multidimensional construct comprising people agility, results agility, change agility and mental agility. As the construct has evolved, the dimension structure of the measure has evolved as well. This study addresses a gap in our current understanding of how to conceptualize and measure learning agility.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":48148,"journal":{"name":"Personnel Review","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personnel Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/pr-10-2023-0886","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this review is to evaluate existing learning agility measures and offer recommendations for their use in organizational and scholarly contexts.

Design/methodology/approach

This is a general review paper assessing the psychometric qualities of prevalent learning agility measures. Measures were selected based on their predominance and use in the learning agility literature and organizational settings.

Findings

Learning agility measurement is an area requiring further research. Multiple conceptualizations of learning agility exist, making the true structure of learning agility unclear. The learning agility measures in the academic literature deviate from learning agility’s traditional conceptualization and require further validation and convergent validity studies. Commercial measures of learning agility exist, but their development procedures are not subjected to peer review and are not widely used in academic research, given the cost associated with their use.

Practical implications

Learning agility is prevalently used in organizational settings and is receiving increased scholarly attention. Various conceptualizations and measurement tools exist, and it is unclear how these theories and measures relate and differ. This paper contributes to practice by providing practical guidelines and limitations for measuring learning agility.

Originality/value

Learning agility was initially conceived as a multidimensional construct comprising people agility, results agility, change agility and mental agility. As the construct has evolved, the dimension structure of the measure has evolved as well. This study addresses a gap in our current understanding of how to conceptualize and measure learning agility.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
衡量学习敏捷性:对学习敏捷性衡量标准的回顾与批判
目的本综述旨在评估现有的学习敏捷度测量方法,并为其在组织和学术环境中的应用提供建议。研究结果学习敏捷度测量是一个需要进一步研究的领域。学习敏捷存在多种概念,因此学习敏捷的真正结构并不清晰。学术文献中的学习敏捷度量方法偏离了学习敏捷度的传统概念,需要进一步验证和进行收敛有效性研究。学习敏捷性的商业测量方法是存在的,但它们的开发过程没有经过同行评审,而且由于使用成本较高,在学术研究中没有得到广泛应用。目前存在各种概念和测量工具,这些理论和测量方法之间的关系和区别尚不清楚。本文提供了测量学习敏捷度的实用指南和局限性,为实践做出了贡献。原创性/价值学习敏捷度最初被认为是一个多维度的概念,包括人员敏捷度、结果敏捷度、变革敏捷度和心智敏捷度。随着这一概念的发展,测量的维度结构也在不断变化。本研究弥补了我们目前在如何概念化和测量学习敏捷性方面的空白。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Personnel Review
Personnel Review Multiple-
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
133
期刊介绍: Personnel Review (PR) publishes rigorous, well written articles from a range of theoretical and methodological traditions. We value articles that have high originality and that engage with contemporary challenges to human resource management theory, policy and practice development. Research that highlights innovation and emerging issues in the field, and the medium- to long-term impact of HRM policy and practice, is especially welcome.
期刊最新文献
Mentoring global talent: an integrative review Fighting fear: the buffering of well-being-HRM on the effects of nurses’ fear of COVID-19 on job stress and patient care A temporal evolution of human resource management and technology research: a retrospective bibliometric analysis Effects of performance appraisal on employees’ extra-role behaviors and turnover intentions – A parallel mediation model Artificial intelligence-based virtual assistant and employee engagement: an empirical investigation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1