Table 3. OLC structure Dimension... | Emerald Publishing

Table 3.

OLC structure

Dimension	Definition	The theoretical basis
Individual as an agent of OL	Learning agents are involved in self-development and undertake bottom-up initiatives to improve the organization The organization supports agents’ efforts in terms of both individual development initiatives and organizational improvement	Individual as an agent of ol (Friedman, 2001); personal mastery (Senge, 1990)
Collective learning	Collective learning requires intensive synergistic team-learning processes (of mutual knowledge verification and development) and synergistic collective-learning conditions (positive attitudes toward teamwork and relationships among employees oriented toward trust, openness, mutual respect, and cooperation)	Teams as learners (Kasl et al., 1997); team learning (Senge, 1990); hallways (Dixon, 1997); social perspective (Easterby-Smith and Araujo, 1999)
Inter-organizational learning	Inter-organizational learning requires a broad network of differentiated inter-organizational relations; these relations have to be intense, oriented toward different modes of learning, open and characterized by partnership, not by domination	Absorptive capacity (Lane and Lubatkin, 1998); networks of learning (Powell et al., 1996); social capital (Inkpen and tsang, 2005)
Information system mobilizing development	IS leads to the use of various methods of information transfer, their parallel use, the minimal standardization of communication methods and message forms. This is the vision referring to the concept of spontaneous communication, which implies the need to modify the knowledge about the different aspects of reality continuously and helps realize the wealth of perspectives and relativity of ratings. IS mobilizes for action, which may be implemented, inter alia through feedback systems, early warning systems, reporting focused on the development goals, high IS reliability	The ol processes (Huber, 1991); the knowing-doing gap (Pfeffer and Sutton, 2000); knowledge conversion models (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995); is reliability (Tworek et al., 2019)
System thinking	System thinking relates to coping with dynamic complexity. It requires the implementation of the practices and tools aimed at determining the systemic structures of organizational problems, identifying the interrelationships of decisions and actions in the short- and long-term perspective, locally and in the entire organization, the awareness of contribution to achieving organizational goals	Systems thinking (Senge, 1990)
Distributed leadership	Distributed leadership means that power in the organization depends more on the ongoing tasks and conditions of their implementation than on the hierarchical position. It requires managerial support for lower-level initiatives, the readiness of employees to take over power and responsibility for their own actions and relationships between superiors and employees – open, based on trust and partnership, more casual, informal and dominated by mutual respect	Distributed leadership (Spillane, 2006; Bennett et al., 2003)
Open organizational culture	Open culture means promoting and facilitating: the belief in the temporariness of knowledge (organizational reality and solutions must be continuously questioned), self-development, the initiatives of continuous organizational improvement, a sense of individual identity (which does not mean the abandonment of teamwork but expresses the cooperation of equal members of the organization despite the diversity of interests and views), openness to new ideas and risk-taking, errors are treated as learning opportunities	The concept of open and closed society by karl popper; closed-open organizational culture (Boerner and Gebert, 2005); culture for learning (Schein, 1992); mental models (senge; 1990)
Organic organizational structure	The more conducive to learning the organizational structure is, the smaller the limitations of the scope of organizational behavior freedom are, which means the low degree of standardization and formalization, the domination of horizontal interactions in communication, coordination, control and the domination of the hierarchy of objectives over the hierarchy of positions. Specialization and centralization are not relevant	Organic structure (Martínez-León and Martínez-García, 2011)
‘Future-oriented’ strategy	The strategy is focused on innovative solutions in the industry and building new activities, is “stretch and leverage” for the organization and not just oriented toward the improvement of the current activity. The strategy does not take the form of detailed plans imposed from above. It begins to be a learning process oriented toward seizing the opportunity, in which the processes of its formulation and implementation are open and new opportunities are constantly tested, in which all the participants are involved in the construction and implementation of the strategy	The resource-based view (Prahalad and Hamel, 1994); dynamic capabilities (Helfat et al., 2007)
Organizational continuity	The establishment of the core values is responsible for maintaining a permanent identity in an organization. The core values form the basis for developing a shared vision	Organizational continuity (Kolb, 2003); core ideology and envisioned future (Collins and Porras, 2005); shared vision (Senge, 1990)

Dimension	Definition	The theoretical basis
Individual as an agent of OL	Learning agents are involved in self-development and undertake bottom-up initiatives to improve the organizationThe organization supports agents’ efforts in terms of both individual development initiatives and organizational improvement	Individual as an agent of ol (Friedman, 2001); personal mastery (Senge, 1990)
Collective learning	Collective learning requires intensive synergistic team-learning processes (of mutual knowledge verification and development) and synergistic collective-learning conditions (positive attitudes toward teamwork and relationships among employees oriented toward trust, openness, mutual respect, and cooperation)	Teams as learners (Kasl et al., 1997); team learning (Senge, 1990); hallways (Dixon, 1997); social perspective (Easterby-Smith and Araujo, 1999)
Inter-organizational learning	Inter-organizational learning requires a broad network of differentiated inter-organizational relations; these relations have to be intense, oriented toward different modes of learning, open and characterized by partnership, not by domination	Absorptive capacity (Lane and Lubatkin, 1998); networks of learning (Powell et al., 1996); social capital (Inkpen and tsang, 2005)
Information system mobilizing development	IS leads to the use of various methods of information transfer, their parallel use, the minimal standardization of communication methods and message forms. This is the vision referring to the concept of spontaneous communication, which implies the need to modify the knowledge about the different aspects of reality continuously and helps realize the wealth of perspectives and relativity of ratings. IS mobilizes for action, which may be implemented, inter alia through feedback systems, early warning systems, reporting focused on the development goals, high IS reliability	The ol processes (Huber, 1991); the knowing-doing gap (Pfeffer and Sutton, 2000); knowledge conversion models (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995); is reliability (Tworek et al., 2019)
System thinking	System thinking relates to coping with dynamic complexity. It requires the implementation of the practices and tools aimed at determining the systemic structures of organizational problems, identifying the interrelationships of decisions and actions in the short- and long-term perspective, locally and in the entire organization, the awareness of contribution to achieving organizational goals	Systems thinking (Senge, 1990)
Distributed leadership	Distributed leadership means that power in the organization depends more on the ongoing tasks and conditions of their implementation than on the hierarchical position. It requires managerial support for lower-level initiatives, the readiness of employees to take over power and responsibility for their own actions and relationships between superiors and employees – open, based on trust and partnership, more casual, informal and dominated by mutual respect	Distributed leadership (Spillane, 2006; Bennett et al., 2003)
Open organizational culture	Open culture means promoting and facilitating: the belief in the temporariness of knowledge (organizational reality and solutions must be continuously questioned), self-development, the initiatives of continuous organizational improvement, a sense of individual identity (which does not mean the abandonment of teamwork but expresses the cooperation of equal members of the organization despite the diversity of interests and views), openness to new ideas and risk-taking, errors are treated as learning opportunities	The concept of open and closed society by karl popper; closed-open organizational culture (Boerner and Gebert, 2005); culture for learning (Schein, 1992); mental models (senge; 1990)
Organic organizational structure	The more conducive to learning the organizational structure is, the smaller the limitations of the scope of organizational behavior freedom are, which means the low degree of standardization and formalization, the domination of horizontal interactions in communication, coordination, control and the domination of the hierarchy of objectives over the hierarchy of positions. Specialization and centralization are not relevant	Organic structure (Martínez-León and Martínez-García, 2011)
‘Future-oriented’ strategy	The strategy is focused on innovative solutions in the industry and building new activities, is “stretch and leverage” for the organization and not just oriented toward the improvement of the current activity. The strategy does not take the form of detailed plans imposed from above. It begins to be a learning process oriented toward seizing the opportunity, in which the processes of its formulation and implementation are open and new opportunities are constantly tested, in which all the participants are involved in the construction and implementation of the strategy	The resource-based view (Prahalad and Hamel, 1994); dynamic capabilities (Helfat et al., 2007)
Organizational continuity	The establishment of the core values is responsible for maintaining a permanent identity in an organization. The core values form the basis for developing a shared vision	Organizational continuity (Kolb, 2003); core ideology and envisioned future (Collins and Porras, 2005); shared vision (Senge, 1990)

Source: Based on Zgrzywa-Ziemak (2019a)