Figure 1.
The framework has 3 levels: first-order concepts, second-order themes and aggregate dimensions. Using A I for drafting and learning by testing prompts, and gradual confidence through repeated everyday use, connect to learning through experimentation with A I tools in daily H R work. A I as support, not replacement for professional judgement, and interpreting A I outputs within professional H R knowledge, connect to development of interpretive professional judgement. Peer learning and observation as a primary learning source connects to practice-based and peer-driven learning. These 3 themes connect to practice-based learning in A I-enabled H R work. Lack of time to explore A I outside daily responsibilities connects to limited time and competing H R responsibilities. Absence of structured organisational training and difficulty identifying useful learning pathways connect to lack of structured training and institutional guidance. A I learning as personal initiative, not institutionally supported, connects to uncertainty about how to learn A I effectively. These themes connect to structural barriers to A I-related capability development. Preference for contextual, practice-based training connects to valuing applied, contextual learning over technical training. Need for time and space to experiment with A I, and importance of leadership support and strategic clarity on A I, connect to organisational support and recognition for learning. Need for institutional recognition of A I-related learning activities connects to need for strategic direction and sensegiving about A I. These themes connect to organisational conditions enabling or constraining professional learning.Data structure of learning readiness for AI in HR work
Source: Authors’ own elaboration based on Gioia et al. (2013)Â