IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS: Organizational learning beyond original goals: building a learning platform that values human dignity and well-being

This issue of The Learning Organization includes four feature articles on gig worker learning and training and five other papers.

The concept of gig work is not yet a settled consensus among researchers (Daba-Buzoianu et al., 2025). Among several views, Cortellazzo & Vaska (2025, p. 193) define gig work as “a type of nonstandard work arrangement in which people sell labor services in the form of short-term flexible gigs or assets on a platform firm that acts as a digital intermediary between independent contractors, requesters and partner companies.” Gig work has become common recently, particularly in food delivery and rideshare domains. Gig work is not limited to simple tasks. Some may be a part of the management position, such as a chief financial officer or a chief operating officer, as in the case of an interim manager (Rubin, 2025).

Other papers address ambidexterity (Kandoth & Shekhar, 2025), organizational learning culture (Biswakarma & Subedi, 2025), transformational leadership (Ahsan, 2025; Hoang & Le, 2025) and well-being (Rath & Jena, 2025). The following sections present the implications drawn from the claims of the individual papers and, finally, the integrative implications.

Zhang (2025) conducted a systematic review of studies on training provided by platform provider organizations (platformers) to gig workers, regarding three aspects of training. First, training aims at skill enhancement. That is, organizations provide training to improve their employees’ skills. The second aspect concerns the cost–benefit valuation perspective. Studies concerned with this aspect focus on evaluating and improving the financial benefits of employee training. The third aspect is the employment relationship nurturance perspective. This perspective assumes that organizations use training to foster long-term mutually beneficial relationships, creating an environment conducive to loyalty, engagement and growth.

Zhang (2025) found that previous studies were based on either a skill enhancement or cost-benefit valuation perspective and that none focused on employment relationship nurturance. However, I do not believe this tendency means there is no value in the relationship between gig workers and platformers. Establishing a sound worker–platformer relationship is vital in the gig economy as will be discussed later.

In the employment relationship nurturance perspective, training is regarded as “a tool for nurturing a long-term, mutually advantageous relationship, thereby engendering a milieu of loyalty, engagement and mutual growth” (Zhang, 2025; Table 1). Gig workers have a contractual relationship with the platform even without an employment contract. They may be fully engaged in a task for a certain period. Despite this, prior studies have not paid sufficient attention to the long-term relationship between gig workers and platformers. This may be because previous research has focused on relatively short-term outcomes (Zhang, 2025) and has not paid sufficient attention to attributes related to longer-term values such as relationships.

Zhang (2025) also raises academic and practical issues that require further consideration, including algorithmic management. In algorithmic management, gig workers are automatically monitored by dehumanized surveillance. Such an environment will affect the nature of training (Zhang, 2025) and the relationship between gig workers and platformers.

Furthermore, I believe it is important to examine and support gig workers’ learning in terms of their participation in the community. The concept of legitimate peripheral participation (Lave & Wenger, 1991) regards learning as the process by which individuals move from the periphery to the center of a community. Some may claim that no community exists for gig workers. However, truly important information flows informally (Powell, 1990). For example, in the hotel industry, hotels with managers who personally communicate with competing hotel managers perform better (Ingram & Roberts, 2000). Similarly, interactions among gig workers will impact their learning. Platformers should note the value of such informal learning or communities of gig workers (Wenger et al., 2002).

Zhang (2025), citing Crossan et al. (1999), suggests the importance of feedforward/feedback mechanisms between gig workers and platformers. Nevertheless, Crossan et al. (1999) claim something more than that. Organizational learning is an interaction between individual, group and organizational levels. Interpersonal exchange between workers is essential for such interactions, especially between individual and group levels.

Many gig workers have limited opportunities for communication and interaction (Zhang, 2025). However, gig workers’ tasks are diversifying, from simple ones (e.g. rideshare drivers and food deliverers) to more knowledge-based jobs (e.g. programming and graphic design) (Zhang, 2025). Accordingly, gig worker communities and the relationships among workers are becoming more important. Waldkirch et al. (2021) found that gig workers tend to seek learning and training opportunities through interaction with more experienced peers. Indeed, Cortellazzo & Vaska’s (2025) study, as discussed below, shows that food deliverers take advantage of opportunities to receive mentoring from senior drivers. In addition, deliverers confess that when they need help, they count on peer support rather than platform assistance (Cortellazzo & Vaska, 2025).

Hence, platformers should recognize the importance of establishing mechanisms to facilitate interactions among gig workers to facilitate their learning.

Rubin (2025) examined the knowledge transfer mechanism from the outside to the firm by an interim manager, which is “a consultant who assumes a management role for about six months to a year” (p. 169). Interim managers’ tasks are not limited to fixed-term ones like project/program managers. They may play a firm’s core role such as a chief financial officer or a chief operating officer (Institute of Interim Management, 2023).

Interim managers’ job is characterized by liminality, where they perceive “themselves as partly outsider, partly insider” (Rubin, 2025, p. 170). Influenced by liminality, knowledge transfer by interim managers has the following characteristics. The first aspect is the task orientation of interim managers, who focus on their mission and adopt a “business-like” attitude. The second is time limitation, in which interim managers are oriented toward short-term, efficient planning and execution. The third aspect is political detachment; interim managers can distance themselves from internal politics. Finally, there is cultural distance; interim managers have limited knowledge of organizational members, norms and history.

These characteristics associated with liminality may be an obstacle to interim managers’ performance. However, Rubin (2025) also noted their positive effects on knowledge transfer. In particular, the seemingly paradoxical effects of cultural distance and political detachment are worth noting. Cultural distance leads to discovering organizational flaws (Rubin, 2025). Because of the political detachment, interim managers can point out problems without fear of subsequent disadvantages such as sanctions (Rubin, 2025). Meanwhile, organizational members can be open-minded without feeling threatened by the interim manager (Rubin, 2025). Thus, interim managers contribute to organizational unlearning (Hedberg, 1981), that is, abandoning knowledge and practices that are no longer valid. In addition, interim managers can use their characteristics to serve as gatekeepers between the inside and the outside of the organization (Allen & Cohen, 1969). Management should not only expect interim managers to play a surrogate role for the full-time members but also make effective use of these inherent effects.

Besides these benefits, interim managers may also take advantage of their legitimacy in knowledge transfer. Legitimacy is “a generalized perception or assumption that the actions of an entity are desirable, proper, or appropriate within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions” (Suchman, 1995, p. 574). A company dares to use a consultant to introduce a new practice even when it has the knowledge to do so because it is sometimes easier for the members to accept a consultant’s recommendation than to be ordered by the management. This is because of the consultant’s legitimacy, which also legitimates the recommended practice (Nakanishi, 2023). As a result, members take it for granted that they will accept the practice.

Resources for fostering organizational learning do not necessarily exist only within the company. Interim managers can be a valuable resource for learning. Management should use all available resources.

Cortellazzo & Vaska (2025) examined the training and feedback received by food deliverers, who are a type of gig workers engaged in app work (app-based gig work), where the digital platform assigns tasks to gig workers as an intermediate medium.

In platform businesses such as food delivery and rideshare services, feedback from customers to gig workers (deliverers, drivers, etc.) is essential for not only improving service quality but also evaluating and motivating gig workers as a part of human resource management. However, Cortellazzo & Vaska (2025) warn that feedback systems (and lack of training) in app work may cause negative emotional responses in workers. First, it is difficult to obtain positive feedback for good service compared to negative feedback. Second, there is an information asymmetry in feedback systems. That is, workers have no access to raw feedback from customers. In addition, while the platformers use an algorithm for performance score calculation, its mechanism is invisible to workers.

As background to these problems, Cortellazzo & Vaska (2025) point to platformers’ insufficient attention to the human aspect of gig workers, which weakens the relationship between gig workers and a platformer, leading to increased turnover. Hence, gig workers attempt to fill this void with connections among workers.

Such insufficient attention to the human aspect is particularly salient in global apps than in local apps. Local apps tend to conduct more interaction-based training (e.g. face-to-face meetings with managers and mentors). In contrast, global apps rely more on standardized video-based training (Cortellazzo & Vaska, 2025).

Platformers should focus on not only operational efficiency but also the human aspect of gig workers. Indeed, gig workers seek opportunities for mentoring by senior peers, meeting with platform managers and real feedback from customers (Cortellazzo & Vaska, 2025). Some local apps offer opportunities to ask questions and resolve other concerns through face-to-face meetings. Networking among workers should also be supported to compensate for the weak relationship between the platformer and workers.

The importance of the human aspect in a situation where face-to-face opportunities are scarce applies to not only gig work but also other remote working environments. In other words, in such environments, opportunities for face-to-face feedback should be provided. Feedback is not only for providing information on performance. Appropriate feedback can also contribute to increasing motivation and even fostering psychological safety (Edmondson, 2018).

According to Cortellazzo & Vaska (2025), in case of troubles, workers rely more on peer support than on formal support from platformers. To facilitate such mutual peer support, platformers should promote networking among workers and establish a peer support system.

Daba-Buzoianu et al. (2025) explored how Romanian gig workers perceived their work in three categories:

1. online creative and multimedia work;

2. online sales marketing support; and

3. online software development and technology work.

They found that gig workers perceive freedom and flexibility as the advantages of gig work. On the other hand, they feel insufficient opportunities for communication and social interactions and isolation and loneliness. These points are in common with the findings of Zhang (2025) and Cortellazzo & Vaska (2025). Moreover, Daba-Buzoianu et al. (2025) stress that the platformers are not failing in their effort to provide opportunities for communication but rather intentionally limit this. For example, platformers control or restrict direct communication between gig workers and clients. At the same time, gig workers are concerned about low and unstable incomes and the unpredictability of the future.

Notably, interviewed gig workers are reluctant to use terms such as gig economy or gig worker, preferring to call themselves freelancers. If the gig workers cannot call themselves that with pride, then such a situation should be resolved. One measure might be to use another designation. More essential, however, is to improve their work process.

In other words, we should respect gig workers as human beings and build a work process that will enhance their self-esteem. For example, face-to-face meetings (or at least face-to-face online meetings) between platform managers and gig workers will contribute to improving workers’ self-esteem (Cortellazzo & Vaska, 2025). Otherwise improving interactions among workers will lead to a greater sense of security and fulfillment of the need for approval. We must ensure that gig workers can speak of their jobs with pride.

The generation of innovations by an organization is attributed, at least in part, to individual members’ innovative behavior “aimed at generating, developing and implementing new ideas, processes, products or services” (Kandoth & Shekhar, 2025, p. 238). Among the types of behavior that lead to innovation, exploring new knowledge is essential. However, a trade-off exists between the exploration of new knowledge and the exploitation of existing knowledge in organizational learning (March, 1991). If the organization is myopic, being biased toward exploitation, then exploration will be limited, hindering innovation.

As a key to preventing this myopia of organizational learning, organizational ambidexterity (Tushman & O’Reilly, 1996) has attracted academic attention. Ambidexterity refers to “an organization’s ability to balance and integrate explorative activities with exploitative activities” (Kandoth & Shekhar, 2025, p. 238). Kandoth & Shekhar (2025) examined organizational members’ perceived ambidextrous organizational culture (PAOC). They analyzed the influence of intrinsic motivation on the mechanism by which PAOC encourages members’ innovation behavior. Here, intrinsic motivation means that behavior is motivated based on the pleasure and satisfaction of working on a task itself. With intrinsic motivation, when a person finds some work enjoyable, he/she will be motivated to do the work even with insufficient external rewards.

Kandoth & Shekhar (2025) found that intrinsic motivation mediates between PAOC and innovative behavior. That is, the more ambidexterity is perceived, the more members feel rewarded in their work itself, increasing innovative behavior.

Importantly, going back to Tushman & O’Reilly (1996) original argument, ambidexterity refers to the compatibility of short-term adaptation (incremental change) and long-term destruction (revolutionary change). Considering the essence of this “original” concept, PAOC is a culture in which destructing itself is allowed. Alternatively, it is a culture that encourages critical self-reflection, which is essential in learning. Hence, Kandoth & Shekhar (2025) finding can be interpreted as follows: a culture that encourages reflection improves intrinsic motivation and innovative behavior. This point deserves attention. Namely, management should create an ambidextrous culture that encourages reflection to improve members’ intrinsic motivation and encourage innovative behavior.

Biswakarma & Subedi (2025) examined the impact of organizational learning culture on employee performance, focusing on the mediating effect of employee engagement. Here, personal engagement refers to “the simultaneous employment and expression of a person’s ‘preferred self’ in task behaviors that promote connections to work and to others, personal presence (physical, cognitive, and emotional), and active, full role performances” (Kahn, 1990, p. 700). Notably, according to the questionnaire items, employee performance measured by Biswakarma & Subedi (2025) can be regarded as self-efficacy – the perception of the degree of autonomous control over one’s work and its outcomes – rather than the work outcomes. Thus, Biswakarma & Subedi (2025) found that employee engagement mediates the relationship between organizational learning culture and employees’ self-efficacy.

Learning is not mere knowledge acquisition. It is a process of participating in a community – legitimate peripheral participation (Lave & Wenger, 1991). In this view, learning is the process by which members come to be seen as essential to the organization. Thus, a learning culture may increase employee engagement by fostering relationships with others during learning. Furthermore, increased engagement would lead to intrinsic motivation. Such a mechanism is consistent with the concept of the “learning organization” (Senge, 1990).

Thus, a culture that values learning increases employee engagement, self-efficacy and organizational vitality.

Ahsan (2025) explored leadership roles in creating an organizational learning culture, by bibliometric and content analysis of the literature. His analysis shows that many studies have examined the influence of organizational culture and technology integration on learning in addition to leadership. He also states that many studies address the relationship between leadership, employee engagement and motivation; employees who perceive engagement tend to participate more in learning activities, share knowledge and contribute to innovation.

In particular, previous studies frequently examined transformational leadership, which indicates that transformational leadership is widely recognized as playing an important role in organizational and individual learning. Furthermore, Ahsan (2025) stresses that many previous studies claim that transformational leadership influences organizational learning and innovation.

Based on the results of his analysis, Ahsan (2025) presents several practical implications (principles). The first principle is fostering a growth mindset among organizational leaders. For growth, it is important to foster a culture that emphasizes learning, experimentation and innovation, in which transformational leaders are expected to play a role. The second principle is promoting knowledge sharing and collaboration. Again, leaders are expected to contribute to creating a supportive environment that encourages knowledge sharing and collaboration. The third principle is encouraging learning agility, which refers to “the ability to quickly learn and adapt to new situations, concepts and environments” (Ahsan, 2025, p. 295). Here, transformational leaders are expected to create an environment and culture that encourages experimentation, risk-taking and lifelong learning. Finally, as a fourth principle, leveraging technology (e.g. using e-learning platforms) to support learning is suggested. In realizing any of these principles, the role of transformational leaders is important. In addition, as Cardona-Cano et al. (2024) claim, transformational leadership leads to creating ambidexterity, which is a key factor for intrinsic motivation and innovative behavior (Kandoth & Shekhar, 2025).

However, organizations should not rely too much on individual leaders. Even with excellent leadership, an environment in which leaders can demonstrate their abilities is essential. In other words, it is necessary to establish formal systems that facilitate leaders’ actions toward organizational learning (Nakanishi, 2024). For example, organizations should establish rules that allow leaders’ autonomous resource allocation. In addition, establishing a system that positively evaluates leaders’ actions toward organizational learning will enhance leaders’ transformational behaviors.

Rath & Jena (2025) reviewed previous studies to explore the relationship between knowledge management and well-being. To capture the characteristics of well-being, they used positive emotions, engagement, relationship, meaning and accomplishment (PERMA) framework, where meaning refers to a “conviction that one’s life has value and serves a purpose bigger than oneself” (Rath & Jena, 2025, p. 315). Rath & Jena (2025) examined the relationship between knowledge management and each element of PERMA.

According to the results of their review, through effective knowledge management and employee well-being promotion, organizations can overcome the competency trap – insisting on routines reinforced by past success even after they have lost their effectiveness (Levitt & March, 1988) – which hinders organizational learning.

In addition, knowledge management and each element of PERMA are interrelated. First, concerning employee positive emotion, effective knowledge management leads to higher employee engagement. Conversely, in organizations with a culture that values positive emotions, employees are more willing to engage in collaborative tasks and knowledge sharing. Second, engagement encourages knowledge exploration, sharing and use. Third, in terms of relationship building, knowledge management has a function that transcends its original purpose; effective knowledge management encourages interaction and collaboration among employees and fosters a positive and active workplace atmosphere. In addition, knowledge management builds relationships in which employees respect each other. This allows smoother information flow, contributing to knowledge management. Fourth, meaning is also tightly related to knowledge management. That is, knowledge management encourages employees to find meaning in their work. Fifth, experiencing accomplishment, like the perception of meaning, encourages commitment to knowledge management.

In summary, effective knowledge management can improve employee well-being in various ways. Simultaneously, well-being can further invigorate organizational knowledge management. Hence, organizations should maximize the value of “knowledge management beyond managing knowledge” to improve employee work satisfaction and well-being.

Hoang & Le (2025) examined the impact of transformational leadership on faculty members’ knowledge-sharing behavior in higher education institutions. Their study incorporated a knowledge-centered culture and organizational support. Knowledge-centered culture means “a set of core beliefs and values, norms and social rules serving as a common vision and orient for every member of school to create, share and apply knowledge resource in their research, learning, teaching and working environments” (Hoang & Le, 2025, p. 333). Hoang & Le (2025) hypothesized that organizational support enhances the relationship between transformational leadership and knowledge-sharing behavior and found the following facts. First, transformational (supervisors’) leadership encourages faculty members’ knowledge-sharing behavior. Second, a knowledge-centered culture mediates the effect of transformational leadership on faculty’s knowledge-sharing behavior. Third, organizational support reinforces the effect of transformational leadership on faculty knowledge-sharing behaviors.

Again, Hoang & Le (2025) emphasize the role of transformational leadership as well as Ahsan (2025). Earlier, we noted that organizational efforts to support the actions of leaders and members are important (Nakanishi, 2024). This claim is seconded by Ahsan’s (2025) finding that organizational support strengthens the relationship between leadership and members’ knowledge-sharing behaviors. Leaders should not be isolated.

As the papers published in this issue cover a wide range of topics, each paper’s implications are diverse. Among them, this concluding section focuses on implications related to gig workers’ dignity and the ultimate value of organizational learning.

First, we must ensure that gig workers feel dignity and pleasure in their work. Gig workers seek human connection, such as mentoring and peer support (Cortellazzo & Vaska, 2025). They desire to have a sense of pride (Daba-Buzoianu et al., 2025). They also hope to listen to real feedback, particularly positive feedback, from their customers and management (Cortellazzo & Vaska, 2025). Papers in this issue (Ahsan, 2025; Biswakarma & Subedi, 2025; Rath & Jena, 2025) emphasize employee engagement. The importance of engagement should also apply to gig workers. The abovementioned papers provide valuable implications for improving the dignity and pleasure of gig workers with increased engagement.

Second, the functions and value of organizational learning (including knowledge management) beyond its direct purpose (e.g. knowledge acquisition and skill improvement) should be recognized and effectively used. Several papers show that organizational learning and knowledge management have the potential to provide value beyond its direct purpose. For example, organizational learning cultures increase employee engagement (Biswakarma & Subedi, 2025). Knowledge management also encourages interaction and collaboration among employees, fosters a positive and active workplace atmosphere and builds relationships in which employees respect each other (Rath & Jena, 2025). Thus, knowledge management has the potential to improve employee well-being.

The disciplines of learning organizations (Senge, 1990) do not see labor merely as a means to achieve organizational goals. They emphasize organizational members’ intrinsic “satisfaction” and well-being. Satisfaction and well-being should be provided to all workers, managers, executives and gig workers. Implications for building learning organizations (or we may call them “learning platforms” in the gig economy) are provided in the papers in this issue.