نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار گروه مدیریت آموزشی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه بیرجند، بیرجند،

2 دانش‌آموخته کارشناسی ارشد مدیریت آموزشی، گروه مدیریت آموزشی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه بیرجند، بیرجند

چکیده

یادگیری سازمانی از ملزومات سازمان­های مدرن برای رویارویی با تغییرات فزاینده و پاسخگویی سریع به تغییرات محیطی است. تحقق معنادار یادگیری سازمانی وابسته به حضور برخی متغیرها در جهت تسهیل و گسترش آن است؛ بنابراین پژوهش حاضر با هدف تحلیل رابطه بین هم­آفرینی و یادگیری سازمانی در بین اعضای هیأت‌علمی دانشگاه بیرجند انجام‌گرفته است. روش پژوهش از نوع همبستگی است. جامعه آماری پژوهش شامل کلیه اعضای هیأت‌علمی دانشگاه بیرجند در سال تحصیلی 1400-1399 به تعداد 341 نفر بود که با استفاده از روش نمونه­گیری طبقه­ای نسبتی، تعداد 210 پرسشنامه به‌صورت تصادفی ساده بین طبقات مختلف توزیع شد که از مجموع آن‌ها، 186 پرسشنامه مورد تحلیل قرار گرفته است. برای گردآوری داده­ها از پرسشنامه هم­آفرینی طاهرپور (1400) و پرسشنامه یادگیری سازمانی فام و اسوایزسزک (2006) استفاده شد. پایایی پرسشنامه­ها با استفاده از ضریب آلفای کرونباخ بررسی شد و برای پرسشنامه هم­آفرینی 91/0 و برای یادگیری سازمانی 94/0 برآورد شد. نتایج تحلیل نشان داد تغییرات مؤلفه‌های گفتگو، خطرپذیری و شفافیت پیش­بینی­کننده تغییرات در میزان یادگیری سازمانی می­شود. یافته­ها نشان داد مؤلفه گفت­وگو، یادگیری سازمانی را افزایش خواهد داد؛ اما مؤلفه دسترسی، قابلیت پیش­بینی تغییرات مربوط به یادگیری سازمانی را نداشت. همچنین هم­آفرینی با ضریب مسیر استاندارد (81/0) و آماره t (08/9) با یادگیری سازمانی در سطح 001/0 رابطه مثبت و معنی‌داری دارد و الگوی مفهومی پژوهش از برازش لازم برخوردار بود. بر این اساس می­توان نتیجه گرفت هم­آفرینی با ایجاد گفتمان، تسهیل جریان انتشارات اطلاعات، ایجاد تدابیری برای شفافیت و انعطاف‌پذیری بین اعضای هیأت‌علمی دانشگاه، زمینه‌های ارتقای یادگیری سازمانی را فراهم می­کند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Role of Co-Creation in The Organizational Learning of Academic Staff Members of University of Birjand

نویسندگان [English]

  • Fateme Taherpour 1
  • fateme naseri 2

1 Assistant professor of educational management, Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, University of Birjand, Iran (Corresponding Author)

2 MA in Educational Management, Department of Educational Management, Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, University of Birjand, Iran

چکیده [English]

Introduction
Universities can implement the desired model of organizational learning if employees establish close, deep, interactive and cooperation with each other and adopt co-creation approaches (Zhang et al., 2011, p. 52). Co-creation supports the processes of change and group formation and enhances organizational learning by stimulating intellectual, collaborative and discursive, creative and innovative activities among employees and achieving a learning organization. In academic and university environments, faculty members with a co-creative approach can share the necessary information through mutual dialogue in a transparent environment, interact with each other, and improve their skills from organizational learning. Such learning is not only dependent on tools and techniques; rather, it is attained with support, insight and collective and meaningful participation (Mastio Chew & Dovey, 2019, p. 296). However, most of the studies related to organizational learning have not considered the factor that strengthens and even creates it, that is, co-creation. Therefore, in the present study, the researcher aimed to analyze the role of co-creation components on organizational learning among the faculty members of Birjand University and examined four sub-objectives. Therefore, the present study aims at:

investigating the predictive role of dialogue on organizational learning among faculty members of University of Birjand.
examining the predictive role of access on organizational learning among faculty members of University of Birjand.
analyzing the predictive role of flexibility on organizational learning among faculty members of University of Birjand.

scrutinizing the predictive role of transparency on organizational learning among faculty members of University of Birjand.
 
 
 
 
Methods
The current research is applied and descriptive in terms of purpose and method, and survey in terms of data collection. The statistical population of the study consisted of all 341 faculty members of University of Birjand. The population included five groups of humanities, basic sciences, engineering, agriculture and art, and each group was considered as a separate stratum by using a proportional stratified sampling method. The percentage of faculty members in each group was calculated about the total faculty members of Birjand University. In the final stage, the questionnaires were distributed among a proportion of faculty members in each group, which was estimated in relation to the total faculty members, and distributed randomly. Considering the size of the statistical population in the study (341 people) and considering that the minimum sample size is 200 in structural equation modeling, 210 questionnaires were distributed among the population and finally, 186 valid questionnaires were collected and analyzed. To measure the research variables, two questionnaires were used: a co-creation questionnaire (Taherpour, 2021) with a reliability coefficient of 0.91 and organizational learning questionnaire (Pham & Swireszek, 2006) with a reliability coefficient of 0.94. Data analysis was done by descriptive statistics and inferential statistics using SPSS software (version 23) and structural equation modeling was used to determine the relationship between co-creation and organizational learning.
 
Findings
First, Pearson’s correlation was used to examine the relationship between co-creation components and organizational learning. The results showed that all variables had a significant correlation with each other at the 0.01 level. The results also showed that co-creation predicted organizational learning. Co-creation had a positive and significant relationship with organizational learning at the 0.0001 level, with a standard coefficient of 0.78 and a t-statistic of 9.08. This means that on average, a one-unit increase or decrease in co-creation would lead to a 0.81-unit increase or decrease in organizational learning, respectively. Also, the fit of the research model was assessed by using the main absolute, parsimonious and comparative indices, which were all in an acceptable range. The normed fit index and the goodness of fit index (GFI) were both 0.94, the comparative fit index (CFI) was 0.94, and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.09, which is close to zero. Therefore, the proposed model had a good fit.
 
Discussion
The results indicated that there was a positive and significant relationship between co-creation and organizational learning of faculty members. Co-creation, by facilitating dialogue among faculty members, provided opportunities for sharing ideas and work experiences. Co-creation enabled employees to talk about their work experiences with colleagues, and thus, to share knowledge, information, plans and new ideas. This created a path to enhance and improve the organization and led to the generation of new knowledge and better and more learning in the organization. Co-creation also provided access to scientific information for faculty members, and thus, professors communicated with each other and created a field of knowledge and information sharing, which resulted in organizational learning. Co-creation ensured that faculty members provided information in an authentic, accurate, complete and clear manner to other colleagues, which increased organizational learning. Co-creation, by using the flexibility component, provided the field of constructive communication for faculty members to achieve organizational goals and to cooperate to learn more in their specialized field. In general, it can be concluded that co-creation created and improved organizational learning by providing the necessary conditions and factors such as access, transparency, dialogue and flexibility.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • co-creation
  • organizational learning
  • faculty members
  • Birjand University
- طاهرپور، فاطمه. (1396). رابطه بین سایش اجتماعی و هم­آفرینی با نقش میانجی عزت‌نفس سازمانی در میان اعضای هیأت علمی دانشگاه‌های برتر ایران. چشم‌انداز مدیریت دولتی، 9 (1)، 109-128.
- ــــــــــ (1400). طراحی و اعتباریابی سنجه اندازه‌گیری هم­آفرینی در دانشگاه. چشم‌انداز مدیریت دولتی، 12 (1)، 135-155.
- قاسمی، وحید. (1389). مدل­سازی معادله ساختاری در پژوهش­های اجتماعی با کاربرد آموس. تهران: جامعه­شناسان.
- قلتاش، عباس، صالحی، مسلم، جاودانی، مریم، و سینا، حمید. (1390). رابطه فرهنگ سازمانی و یادگیری سازمانی با مدیریت دانش اعضاء هیات علمی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی. نوآوری‌های مدیریت آموزشی (اندیشه‌های تازه در علوم تربیتی)، 7 (1)، 69-85.
- کرمانی، ناهید، توکلی، معصومه، فردی، معصومه، فریدون­نژاد، مژگان، بنی هاشم، کاظم. (1399). نقش خلاقیت در یادگیری سازمانی و اضطراب اجتماعی معلمان. مجله علوم روانشناختی، ۱۹ (۹۲)، ۱۰۴۸-۱۰۴۱.
- مقتدایی، لیلا، و جمشیدیان، عبدالرسول. (1399). مدل‌سازی معادلات ساختاری در بررسی رابطه هم­آفرینی و سرمایه اجتماعی (مورد مطالعه: اعضای هیأت ‌علمی دانشگاه اصفهان). نامه آموزش عالی، 13 (50)، 67-89.
- میرکمالی، سیدمحمد. (1388). روابط انسانی در آموزشگاه. تهران: یسطرون.
 
- Algera, J., & Chiva, R. (2013). Assessing the impact of organizational learning capability on product innovation performance: An empirical test. Technovation, 28(2), 315-326.
- Alkatheeri, Y., Ameen, A., Isaac, O., Nusari, M., Duraisamy, B., & Khalifa, G. S. (2020). The effect of big data on the quality of decision-making in Abu Dhabi government organizations. In Data Management, Analytics, and Innovation: Proceedings of ICDMAI 2019 (Vol. 2, pp. 231-248). Springer Singapore.
- Alves, H., Fernandes, C., & Raposo, R. F. (2015). Value co-creation: Concept and contexts of application and study. Journal of Business Research, 96(1), 1626-1633.
- Ballantyne, D. (2004). Dialogue and its role in the development of relationship-specific knowledge. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 19(2), 114-123.
- Bernstein, E. (2012). The transparency paradox: A role for privacy in organizational learning and operational control. Administrative Science Quarterly, 57(2), 181-216.
- Bushman, R., Piotroski, J., & Smith, A. (2004). What determines corporate transparency? Journal of Accounting Research, 2(42), 207-252.
- Chiva, R., Allegra, J., & Lapiedra, R. (2007). Measuring organizational learning capability among the workforce. International Journal of Manpower, 28(3-4), 224-242.
- Diaz-Mendez, M., & Gummesson, E. (2012). Value co-creation and university teaching quality: Consequences for the European higher education area (EHEA). Journal of Service Management, 4(23), 571-592.
- Fitzpatrick, M., Varey, R. J., Grónroos, C., & Davey, J. (2015). Relationality in the service logic of value creation. Journal of Services Marketing, 29(6/7), 463-471.
- Forsström, B. (2005). Value co-creation in industrial buyer-seller partnerships – creating and exploiting interdependencies: An empirical case study. Turku, Finland: Åbo Akademi University Press.
- Granados, N., Gupta, A., & Kauffman, R. (2006). The impact of IT on market information and transparency: A unified framework. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 3 (7), 148-178.
- Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. (2010). Toward a theory of brand co-creation with implications for brand governance. Journal of Brand Management, 17, 590-604.
- Hill, L. A., Brandeau, G., Truelove, E., & Lineback, K. (2014). Collective genius. Harvard Business Review, 92(6), 94-102.
- Jaakkola, E., & Alexander, M. (2014). The role of customer engagement behavior in value co-creation: A service system perspective. Journal of Service Research, 17 (3), 247-261.
- Kohtamaki, M., & Rajala, R. (2016). Theory and practice of value co-creation in B2B systems. Industrial Marketing Management, 56, 4-13.
- Kristensson, P., Matthing, J., & Johansson, N. (2008). Key strategies for the successful involvement of customers in the co-creation of new technology-based services. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 4(19), 474-491.
- Lusch, R. F., Vargo, S. L., & O’Brien, M. (2007). Competing through service: insights from service-dominant logic. Journal of Retailing, 83(1), 5-18.
- Mastio, E., Chew, E., & Dovey, A. (2019). The learning organization as a context for value co-creation. The Learning Organization, 27 (4), 291-303.
- Maurer, M. (2008). Dialogue as an organizational learning intervention: taking a closer look at psychological barriers. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
- Mazur, J., & Zaborek, P. (2014). Validating DART model. International Journal of Management & Economics, 44(3), 106-125.
- Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: critical perspectives on a theory in progress. The Jossey-Bass higher and adult education series. Jossey-Bass publishers, 350 Sansome way, San Francisco, ca 94104.
- Oswick, C., Anthony, P., Keenoy, T., Mangham, I. L., & Grant, D. (2000). A dialogic analysis of organizational learning. Journal of Management Studies, 37(6), 887-902.
- Payne, A., Storbacka, K., & Frow, P. (2008). Managing the co-creation of value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 1(36), 83-96.
- Pham, T., & Swierczek, W. F. (2006). Facilitators of organizational learning in design. The Learning Organization, 13(2), 186-201.
- Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creating unique value with customers. Strategy & Leadership, 3(32), 4-9.
- Rodriguez, S., Perez, J., & Del Val, M. (2015). An empirical study about the effect of cultural problematic on organizational learning in alliances. Journal of The Learning Organization, 10(3), 138-148.
- Sanchez, F., & Sobolev, K. (2010). Nanotechnology in concrete - A review. Construction and Building Materials, 24(11), 2060-2071.
- Sanders, E. B. N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4(1), 5-18.
- Santos-Vijande, L. M., Lopez-Sanchez, J. A., & Trespalacios, J. A. (2012). How organizational learning affects a firm's flexibility, competitive strategy, and performance. Journal of Business Research, 65(8), 1079-1089.
- Stubberup, P. (2010). Co-creation in Danish retail banking. Master's thesis, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Marketing. Retrieved from http://studenttheses.cbs.dk/xmlui/handle/10417/1326.
- Tanev, S., Bailetti, T., Allen, S., Milyakov, H., Durchev, P., & Ruskov, P. (2011). How do value co-creation activities relate to the perception of firms' innovativeness? Journal of Innovation Economics, 1(1), 131-159.
- Tempelton Gary, F., Brucer, R. L., & Snuder Charles, A. (2014). Development of a organization learning construct. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2(19), 170-189.
- Torfing, J., Sørensen, E., & Røiseland, A. (2016). Transforming the public sector into an arena for co-creation: Barriers, drivers, benefits, and ways forward. Administration & Society, 51(5), 3-31.
- Van Breda-Verduijn, H., & Heijboer, M. (2016). Learning culture, continuous learning, organizational learning anthropologist. Industrial and Commercial Training, 48(3), 123-128.
- Varey, R. J., & Ballantyne, D. (2006). Relationship marketing and the challenge of dialogical interaction. Journal of Relationship Marketing, 4(3-4), 11-28.
- Vargo, S., & Lusch, R. (2016). Institutions and axioms: An extension and update of service-dominant logic. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(1), 5-23.
- Zhang, H., Gupta, S., Sun, W., & Zou, Y. (2020). How social media-enabled co-creation between customers and the firm drives business value? The perspective of organizational learning and social capital. Information & Management, 57(3), 103200.
- Zhang, X., Ye, C., Chen, R., & Wang, Z. (2011). Multi-focused strategy in value co-creation with customers: Examining cumulative development pattern with new capabilities. International Journal of Production Economics, 132(1), 122-130.
- Zhang, X., & Chen, R. Q. (2006). Customer participative chain: Linking customers and firm to co-create competitive advantages (in Chinese). Management Review, 18(1), 51-56.