Contextual Dynamics of Workplace Learning: A Systematic Review of Recent International Research

Contextual Dynamics of Workplace Learning: A Systematic Review of Recent International Research

Asnake Mulushewa Getachew, Professor Tian Liguo

School of Automation and Electrical Engineering, Tianjin University of Technology and Education, Tianjin, P.R.China.

Professor Zhao Wenping

School of Vocational Education, Tianjin University of Technology and Education, Tianjin, P.R.China.

Abstract – While workplace learning has evolved into a field of research and practice in its own right, it is still often dismissed for its potential to be a significant driver of transformational change. Because knowledge and technology keep advancing at an unprecedented pace, the connection between work and learning is growing stronger every day; hence it becomes necessary to find ways of reiterating the significance of workplace learning, as well as to detail what operating principles stand behind it. This study identifies significant international theoretical trends in workplace learning since 2010 and indicates that empirical and contemporary research show growing diversification of theory formation and expansion, particularly at the micro-level. Workplace learning and human resource development are slowly merging toward an integration that captures the best of both worlds. Research progress has been made on the individual level determinants of learning (e.g., cognitive styles, motivation, self- efficacy), which received increasing scholarly attention. Concurrently, more focus has been given to the multidimensional and multilevel interactions of individuals, organizational sociocultural contexts, work tasks, and personal life histories. Additionally, research trends suggest a movement from emphasizing only the development of overt skills toward examining implicit, informal and non-structured learning processes embedded in daily work activity. Future studies should seek to close and transcend longstanding gaps between formal and informal learning, people with organizations, access/participation and diffusion/transformation of knowledge, thus providing clearer perspectives on the workplace learning processes.

Keywords: workplace learning; human resource development; international trends; knowledge mapping; theoretical review

1. INTRODUCTION

   Under conventional perspectives, a traditional view of "learning" is one that relates to academic and formal education out in the school world; Workplace Learning instead represents an emergent area of research therefore, workplace learning is an integrative practice that interrelates work and learning in relations to specific occupations with the purpose of elucidating how individuals learn about their occupations, how organizations manage their learning, and gaining deeper insights into the processes of both individuals and organizations learning at work along with discovering ways on how to improve learners outcomes as well as organizational nearest future context. Workplace learning encompasses several levelsindividual, group, organization, community, network and region. These modalities include non-formal and informal learning methods, including training, mentoring, workshops, self-directed learning and knowledge sharing. Grounded in the reality of vocational context, learner's performance and learning are seamlessly integrated with tasks at work, as opposed to formal study; workplace learning is characterized by a greater degree of flexibility and practicality.

   Originally in the United States in the 1970s, research about workplace learning developed into a major influence on European understanding during the 1990s. There are presently two major paradigms the Human Resource Development (HRD) paradigm modeled on USA, and the workplace learning paradigm practiced in Europe and Commonwealth.

   HRD paradigm postulates learning as a vehicle for enhancing performance and comprises research on individual training and development, performance management, career development & planning, organizational learning & knowledge management. This line of inquiry states that the focus of learning should be to help employees in their abilities, contributions and performance at

   work, aiming for a win-win between the organization and its staff through tightly linking learning with performance enhancement (Ruona, 2000; Swanson, 2001).

   Unlike that of the Apprenticeship paradigm, insight with regard to individual and organizational learning is more pronounced in the Workplace Learning approach. It seeks to break down the classification narrative of individual development versus organizational development, hence aligning the separate developmental desires and prospective dissonance between both parties (Simmonds & Pedersen, 2006) . For example, research directions in this paradigm focus on learning motivation, learning momentum, organizational process of learning as well as leadership.

   While their philosophical assumptions and value orientations differ as paradigms, they both focus on "work-related issues of learning." They aspire for their end goal to build people's intellectual capital, human resources, and performance (Jian, 2011(2)).

   Some perspectives available from the literature are especially representative. The Fifth Discipline Senge (2006) was the one who not only coined the phrase but also introduced the unique idea of organizations as learning entities and what is now widely a core area for management consultations in terms of developing systems thinking, personal mastery, shared vision here employees teams and mental models to create an atmosphere of development. Marsick and Watkins have explored organizational learning extensively in the psychometric literature Marsick and Watkins (2003), suggesting a single type of framework that can be employed to evaluate learning for integrating both practice within the organization and into broader service systems. Argyris (1977) introduced double-loop learning and single-loop learning to study the challenge of how individuals or organizations learn from experience after adjust their behaviors Schön (2017) introduced the idea of the reflective practitioner defining that most learning experiences and career enhancement involve (known as) reflections on practical steps performed by individuals. Lave and Wenger (1991) supposed that in work based settings people belong to "Communities of Practice" where team members address common issues, resulting in organizational learning and shared knowledge by developing meaning together within this community: one starts with "peripheral participation" and through other contacts contribute to a process of "full participation." (Kolb, 2014) defined the concept of an experiential learning cycle, and suggested that concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization and active experimentation facilitate individual learning and growth. Engeström (2014) extending cultural-historical activity theory emphasizing the social participation and collaborative learning taking place in workplace contexts with the model of expansive learning. Illeris (2016) presented a comprehensive learning model with cognitive, emotional, and social dimensions and their impact in the workplace setting. According to Billett (2020), learning occurs as workers solve genuine challenges and receives guidance from the experts around them; structured curricula have their importance too but within work environment.

2. THE CONCEPTION OF WORKPLACE LEARNING: EVOLVING THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES

   Grounded in differing epistemologies and ideas ofknowledge, scholars have long debated what constitutes workplace learning. These theories were rooted in behaviorism and cognitivism, which largely viewed learning as the acquisition of knowledge or skills. This perspective suggests a metaphor of viewing the human mind as "a container for storing knowledge: Knowledge is relatively stable and replicable, and learning is an act of acquisition–and a resultant state" (Sfard, 1998). Moreover, studies exemplifying this paradigm came to address the notion of "reflection," claiming that learning in workplace is frequently obscure and hard for description in dynamic situations, it demanded practitioners beguile with an improvisational sort of "reflection-in- action" (Schön, 2017). On the other hand, socio-cultural views highlight the significance of social construction while suggesting learning as a process of interaction and sense-making between social circumstances and learners. This perspective implies three fundamental aspects of learning: that learning is a participatory process that learning is constructive, and that learning is an enduring experience (Lave & Wenger, 1991).

   Emerging theories and perspectives have greatly enhanced the understanding of workplace learning since 2010. A more traditional practice-based perspective describes learning in the workplace as the "solving of authentic problems at work" (Billett, 2020). Kemmis (2010) challenges this, asserting that transformations of both people and practices embody an ontological shift in the workplace. He argues that learning is neither just knowledge acquisition, nor simply participation in practice, nor the actual practice activity itself. Rather learning takes place within the reproduction and transformation of practices, and in the production of new practices. According to Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (CHAT), learning is an outcome of social development through the process of internalization of socially and historically developed practices; it cannot be solved as a problem where single human being constructs himself/herself only (Engeström, 2014). Six interrelated elements constitute an individual activity in working environment; subject, object, community, tools, rules and division of labor. Warsaw is not a very distinctive. this paper draws lessons on social relations from research in learning, as intertwined with the actors and contexts involved to make for more direct use of theoretical approaches to re-conceptualize culture & economics and vice versa learning takes place across systems

   of production, consumption, exchange and distribution and adjusting even one keyword causes qualitative transformation throughout the entire structure of learning (Engeström, 2014). Engeström et al. (2022) tasks confirmed the theory of expansive learning through multi-cycle interventions, indicating that in practical applications considerable undertaking of expansive learning is rooted from within qualitatively non-expansive learning activities. They observe that expanded learning is not simply the duplication or enforcement of an interveners agenda; this process often leads to departure and innovation (p.229).

   In contrast, the perspective of Actor-Network Theory (ANT), views learning as a network effect and not an individual psychological-cognitive process. From this perspective, workplace learning is best understood as "a constant negotiation between technologies, objects and evolving knowledge that occur through the work network" (Fenwick, 2010).

   Yeo and Marquardt (2015) argue that workplace learning occurs on different levels and in various contexts, characterized by a cognitivebehavioral process of engagement. As the knowledge-tracing process taking place only through action, perception is seen as a cognitive act of awareness and understanding of the physical environment. These external stimuli are often a problem or an experience that pushes someone to use their tools, tasks, and actors available for integrating the patterns of action. In this context, doing different things to learn uses action and experience as an antidote. When people and their social groups acknowledge and seek to repress such experiences, the ensuing tension between the cognitive level of awareness and behavioral change results in an intentional turning point where "knowing" is interchanged with budding new adaptive behavior (Yeo & Marquardt, 2015).

   As a step toward creating a unified theoretical analytical structure on work-place learning, Tynjälä (2013) made use of Biggs 3-P learning model and incorporated concepts from Marsick et al. (2011) and Illeris (2018) to develop the Workplace 3-P Model of Learning. The model consists of three key components: Presage, Process, and Product (Figure 1). The Presage element specifies the context and factors impacting learning – learner characteristics and study environment. The Process element consists mainly of learning activities, which encompass incidental/informal as well as purposeful/non-formal/formal learning. Aspects of interpretation, those relating to a learner's specific concepts about work and what is necessary in order to learn within the process can also be found here. Tynjälä (2013) describes that learning outcomes and outputs, as a product, are of varied nature including not only individual development but also organizational development.

3. THE PROCESS AND MECHANISM OF WORKPLACE LEARNING

   The Workplace 3-P learning model indicates that learning attributes in the learning environment and learner factors, occur simultaneously and influence with one another leading to a myriad of dependent variables such as work-based learning activities which causes various outcomes through workplace learning systems. Learning activities, the rather normal type of workplace learning, falls into three types: non-formal learning, informal learning and organizational learning. The most relevant end results refer to the development of work capabilities (see Figure 2).

   The literature was classified six major research themes were identified within the sample: learner factors; learning environment; non-formal learning; informal learning; organizational learning; work capability development. A total of 215 core publications were selected based on these themes. Supplementary literature was extracted that led to the synthesis of new findings on workplace learning and its internal processes.

   Figure 1. Workplace 3-P Learning Model (Tynjälä, 2013)

   Figure 2. The process and mechanism of workplace learning

   Presage (learning environment + learner factors) influences learning activities, which in turn affects outcomes. Worker learning activities, the building blocks of workplace learning, can be categorized as non-formal learning (on-the-job training), informal learning (learning by doing) and organizational learning (wisdom). Work competencies are the main learning goals (Picture 2).

   The sample literature in this study was classified and coded, resulting in the identification of six dominant research themes: learner factors; learning environment; non-formal learning; informal learning; organizational learning and work capability development. 215 core publications were identified based on these themes. This process included an extraction of key references from the emerging literature which guided a further synthesis of new learning outcomes that illuminate internal proceedings and mechanics driving workplace learning.

   1. The Impact of Individual Factors on Workplace Learning

      Learning in the workplace is a highly context dependent phenomenon and while driven by the context, it is heavily dependent on how the learner interprets the context, with the learner being central to learning. In previous research, individual factors were rarely discussed. Personality and cognitive style, learning motivation, age and work experience, job satisfaction and organizational commitment, self-efficacy and learning goal orientation are the factors that have seen a high research interest in recent years regarding their effect on workplace learning. These research results shed light on the function and mechanism of individual-

      impacting elements in workplace learning, providing more precise directions for constructing and executing personalized learning projects that meet different people.

      It has been extensively studied empirically in the last years and it turns out each personality trait activates different psychological dispositions to learn that may or may not facilitate learning. Traits and abilities, like proactivity, agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, and openness are found to provide beneficial effects on learning for example, proactive personality is associated with a higher tendency to participate in activities (Van Daal et al., 2014), set higher goals, and take action to attain these goals. Individuals high in conscientiousness show higher levels of achievement needs have stronger knowledge transfer intentions and exhibit a greater ambition to finalize many training and learning processes (Van Daal et al., 2014). Learning motivation, which represents the desire of learning and developing oneself, is another important factor; an employee with a high level of such motivation would be more willing to take up opportunities and resources for learning as well as achieve positive attitudes towards their own work (Kyoung Park et al., 2013).

      In addition, age and work experience play an important role in motivation and learning attitudes. Longer-tenured employees are more likely to share professional knowledge with their peers and act as informal mentors, thus building up the collaborative culture of knowledge sharing at an organization. As employees grow older, they may view their time in the workforce as limited and opportunities for development as few (Kochoian et al., 2017), possibly resulting in a reduced enthusiasm towards learning activities and lower chances of actively pursuing training and development methods.

      The relationship between job satisfaction, organizational commitment and employees self-development with a job performance has also been studied by researchers. Employees who are satisfied with their jobs also learn informally to a higher degree, and transfer learning more successfully (Lee & Lee, 2018). Organizational commitment, or the degree to which an employee identifies with, trusts, belongs to and is loyal towards an organization as well as their willingness to engage in organizational tasks, consists of affective (emotional), continuance (cost-based) and normative components. Of all these dimensions, affective commitment is the most representative of organizational commitment and significantly correlates positively with supervisor ratings, self-agency and performance. According to Lee et al. (2019), employees displaying considerable affective attachment are more willing to share intellectual capital, learn new knowledge and go the extra mile in fulfilling organizational objectives.

      Moreover, the level of self-efficacy is an important predictor for measuring performance. Previous studies show that self-efficacy has a positive association with the motivation to learn, learning engagement, organizational commitment and job performance. High employee self-efficacy increases the likelihood that employees will take initiative at work, put forth effort to get things done and continue searching for solutions after failure (Noe et al., 2013). This construct measures the level of employee motivation and self-regulation levels in their workplace environment. Those who have a high learning goal orientation still needs more in learning and seek growth, thus it can be expected that at higher levels, the positive influence of performance mastery, a variable interconnected to knowledge acquisition and self-improvement becomes stronger (Liu, 2018). In summary, the influence of individual factors on workplace learning is multifaceted. When implementing workplace learning initiatives, it is essential to fully consider these individual.

   2. Impact of Environmental Factors on Workplace Learning

      The constructivist perspective on learning assumes that learning is an outcome of a subjective production process emerging from the interactions between the individual and its environment; socio-cultural and techno-organizational contexts collaborate in framing work practices. Empirical evidence generated in the past two decades has built upon and challenged this traditional view of constructivism; showing that besides personal characteristics, workplace environment has a dynamic effect on how employees learn. It is how the socio-cultural environment affects employees indirectly through political systems, social norms and cultural conditions, while the effect of techno-organizational environment on its own was dictated mainly via market forces, organizational changes and technological innovations (Martin, 2010).

      The techno-organizational environment addresses four dimensions: Division of labour and job content, autonomy and skill use application, social interactions, resources, and constraints. In the work environment, some eco-factors positively affect employee learning. Things like adaptive work roles, diverse and complex tasks that are challenging but controllable, employee opportunities to participate in solving problems and developing products, learning and coaching resources, alongside social support, feedback and rewards; a trustful working environment along with positive social interactions all facilitate workplace learning. In contrast, divisive environmental factors (e.g., health risks, noise pollution, interpersonal tensions for social and organizational politics in the workplace, under-resourced environments, workfamily imbalance for personal wealth balance conflictmental or financial limitations/psychological burdens of stressors & role conflict) as well as psychological workload overload can detract from an

      employee's learning (Kyndt & Beausaert, 2017). It also gives autonomy over work tasks, which helps make employees good problem-solvers. Accordingly, considerable autonomy related to work methods and planning, decision-making and task scheduling should be granted by organizations in order for employees to achieve their full potential (Fischer et al., 2018).

      In addition, a safe and secure working environment can increase motivation to learn. When it is safe to report mistakes, ask questions, request feedback and suggest new ideas employees are more likely to share information and ideas with others. Negative work climates can be buffered by social support from both managers and colleagues. When managers are willing to provide organizational content resources, employees show more intention to learn. Ensure employees have support from experienced colleagues and managers to help them optimize their action strategy when dealing with work problems (Schürmann & Beausaert, 2016).

      Additionally, evolving social and mobile technologies have made it easier for people to access resources, share knowledge, provide peer support and receive instantaneous feedback, thus making learning more flexible. Nonetheless, information overload and technostress due to digital technology may exert additional pressure on employees' work control (Wallin et al., 2020). Hence, organizations need to offer customized technical training and support services within a rationally designed work context and activities so as to better facilitate workplace learning.

   3. Non-formal learning in the workplace

      Professional practice in most careers follows prescribed forms, structures and cycles requiring appropriate expert guidance and training for meaning to be drawn (Billett, 2011). In the scope of workplace learning, non-formal learning refers to a more organized style with specific goals, plans and strategies in place with trainers or educators. An industry-prescried curriculum of skills, training and certifications; this kind of learning is generally in-line with business functions or regional/regulatory guidelines. Common research topics of interest within workplace non-formal learning are training methods, transfer of training, and trainings based on online and Virtual Reality (VR) instruments.

      The resurgence of interest in gamified, immersive, and experiential learning methods has refreshed a slowly stagnating learning paradigm as emerging advances in the training industry have prompted traditional lecture-focused seminars to develop into experiences. Currently practices training methods include case studies, game based training, job rotation, spousal and apprenticeships, role modeling, role playing applications the correct method depends on the audience and content type (Martin et al., 2014). This can be found, for example, in the case-based approaches in law, medicine and consulting. The functionality of the above games make them appropriate for learners with previous knowledge and helps in building decision making skills, while improving communication and interpersonal abilities (Shivakumar, 2012). Simulation training gains particular relevance in dangerous or expensive scenariosmedical, aviation, military and other high risks technical training (e.g., nuclear power) people are given opportunities within a non-risky environment to practice/safely experiment over time (Noe & Peacock, 2008).

      In spite of substantial investment by organizations in training, studies show that fewer than 15% of the knowledge and skills learnt transfer to the workplace (Martin, 2010). The occurrence of training transfer, or the use of learnt skills in on-the-job scenarios is determined by three main components: individual differences (ability/skill, readiness for learning, motivation and personality), work environment (supervisor/peer support and incentives) and training design (objectives, methods and content) (Ford et al., 2018). In addition, the type of skills (hardtechnical skills or softpersonal and interpersonal capabilities) also plays a role in determining the effectiveness of training transfer (Laker & Powell, 2011). Hence, trainers need to determine the employee training needs and readiness level, identify hard and soft skills, set clear training objectives and plans, choose suitable content and methods by considering factors that facilitate the degree of training transfer (Kim et al., 2019).

      Advances in technology have increased both the amount of training available to staff and its affordability, prompting many organizations to move significant elements of employee training onto online delivery. Research shows that online training is just as effective if the same instructional conditions are controlled for, and for the same content, online training can even be slightly more effective than face-to-face (Beinicke & Kyndt, 2020).

      As technology has continued to progress, VR also became widely used in many different fields. Orientation training that utilizes VR offers deliberately structured visual cues to enable translation amongst students of various cultural backgrounds, industries and ages. Its vivid presentations have been found to be much more engaging and stimulating in learners as compared to static text or images, whereas dynamic details help in enhancing the readers knowledge about the subject (Akdere et al., 2023). VR training combines different tools such as interactive 3D objects, interactive maps, and embedded quizzes to enhance learning interactivity creating immersive environments and experiential learning methods for individuals. It has been arisen as one of

      the hot trends, especially in such high-risk, high-stakes and highly complex skills training areas that traditional training method cannot avoid the limitations at all but VR is capable for optimizing the trainings efficiency and reducing potential risks.

   4. Informal Learning in the Workplace

      The only method that is embedded or integrated with the daily work activities. It is tacit in nature, and does not lead to grades or certifications. Informal learning accounts for 70%90% of knowledge and skills in the workplace (Yoon et al., 2018). Informal learning in the workplace can be classified into two types based on activity type: individual activities, and interactive activities. Individual activities also consist of the usual practice, trial and error, reflection on our actions, and resource scanning; interactive activities would include things like discussion providing suggestions observation mentoring correction training. Conversational (answer questions, ask for opinions) and work execution (practicing a skill, trial and error, observe others practice the same skill, mimic action from another person) activities are the key (Schei & Nerbø, 2015). Informal learning is characterized by the intentionality and consciousness of learning; informality in life can be divided into four types: 1) with intentionality, with consciousness, including self-directed learning/mentoring/practice/imitation; 2) without intentionality/thoughtfulness- incidental learning; 3) no awareness with intention (not knowledge-based); 4) unintentional no thoughts of practice – through conversation or making mistakes. After 2010, Informal learning a branch of independent research unit of workplace learning that covers a wide range of informal areas such as one the learning from mistakes, attention observation and imitation critical reflection and unlearn.

      Positive learning outcomes can also come from work mistakes. People learn new ways of looking at the problem when they fail a task and find out that many practices usually regarded as good were wrong. However, mistakes do not need to be automatically equated with learning; indeed, fear for the repercussions of mistakes as well as covering up mistakes discourages entering a learning process (Leicher & Mulder, 2016). For learners to learn from mistakes, the cost of making them, of getting negative feedback and fear and punishment must be low. Common strategies for learning from errors include induction, e.g., examining task experiences as references for analyzing the error at question, eliciting self-interpretation and reflection through prompts or producing a video recording in order to document and annotate the situation to be analyzed. Most of the time, learning from mistakes comes along with reflection; when change occurs and people approach their mistakes with constructive contemplation, the effectiveness of learning is enhanced exponentially which can lessen error strain in ones career. At high levels of critical reflection, non-reflective learners make more errors than reflective learners (Hetzner et al., 2011). Imitation is a process of learning wherein learners intention to reproduce (replicate) an observed behavior, which involved three steps: observation, observer-imitation interaction and practice. The workplace but some constitutes a type of apprenticeship learning in that imitation can be found to be very significant for acquiring skills. Imitation can effectively improve the relationship between mentor and apprentice in many of the nonverbal communications and trade jobs (Chan, 2017). The imitation also allows learners to make micro-comparisons with their own behavior versus others behavior while receiving feedback comparable through reflection + interaction. Counter-learning (intentional forgetting) is a process in which we overwrite and revise old knowledge and experience, discover to establish new strategies needed to transform our wisdom so as newly acquire the information, value or skills necessary for adapting being under Related Environment. Cumulative learning is largely associated with developmental efforts to deepen and enhance existing capacity, while counter-learning engages in more exploratory activity such as novel applications and reconsidered assumptions (Matsuo, 2018a). Anti-learning is also related to reflection; it is only through critical reflectio that one can evoke anti-learning in oneself (Matsuo, 2018b). In the context of rapid social change and technology development, lot knowledge and skills need to be timely updated; therefore, anti-learning is an essential process for people to adapt to new circumstances.

   5. The Process and Methods of Organizational Learning

      Organizational learning is the different behaviors taken by an organization to foster creating and developing individual and collective knowledge towards organizational achieving development goals. Organizational learning is a multi-dimensional process where interactions happen at various levels (individual, team, organization and inter-organizational). In fact, organizational learning only happens when individual knowledge becomes shared knowledge and is redistributed in the organization which ultimately evolves to organizational norms and standards. For the past few decades, organizational learning research has mainly studied internal learning in organizations e.g., inquiry and dialogue (Argyris, 1977); teamwork; Students empowerment; Top management ads strategic vision, knowledge creation and sharing process. This led many researchers up to October 2023 to focus on unstructured organizational learning and how collective learning can promote the creation of employee knowledge with help from knowledge sharing.

      Chan (2017) constructed a model of organizational learning taking into account, a total of 20 Models on Organizational Learning, including single-loop, double loop models of learning and team learning models as well as 3-Loop learning models (see Figure 3).

      This framework, which breaks down organizational learning into fundamental and advanced models, takes information technology innovation into account. The elementary stage incorporates processes like knowledge acquisition, sharing, use and storing; the advanced totals processes are structures such as knowledge creation, transformation internalization and forgetting. Finally, at the level of an organization, a team, and individual learning constitutes a form of internal process of organizational learning. At the individual and team levels, learning is reactive (problem-solving) and procedural; while organizational-level learning becomes proactive (vision-mission driven) and strategic (organization-initiated collective learning). Learning at the social/community and global level is an external form of organizational learning, which brings to organizations the ability to compete and survive. R. Knapp asserts the role of metacognition as central to organizational learning and suggest that (1) team beliefs impact employee learning and performance; (2) team structure has an indirect effect on team performance via both team beliefs and teams' learning behaviors; and (3) team performance, in turn, has effects on team beliefs and teams' learning behaviors. Moreover, several researchers argue that organizational learning is subject to reflection in action or critical reflection (Knapp, 2010). Reflection as a means for the consolidation and sharing of best practice is tied to developing standard processes, but it also acts as a major catalyst in reworking institutionalized practice/innovating process and convention (Goh, 2019). Knipfer et al. (2013) explained that all organizational learning is through the process of reflection and accumulation of knowledge from individuals and teams within an organization; employee experiences must be shared, and results from reflection must be externalized in order for any type of organizational learning or creation to occur.

      Figure 5. Comprehensive model of organizational learning (Lee et al., 2019)

      Knowledge sharing is the behavior of organizational members increasing knowledge flow by discussing and exchanging knowledge, experience, methods and attitudes. It is one of the most important techniques employed by organizations to boost productivity and creativity. This process involves two sub-processes as mentioned in this study, knowledge collection and knowledge contribution. Knowledge collection is when the individuals deliberately seek guidance from their colleagues that motivates them to share their intellectual capital with others; however, knowledge contribution is when the developers intentionally provide their personal intellectual capital to other colleagues (Ahmad & Karim, 2019). The factors that affect the behavior of knowledge sharing are individual characteristics, interpersonal and team characteristics, cultural characteristics, organizational background, Motivational Factors. According to research, organizations could even create defensive routines intentionally or unconsciously workplace exclusion and organizational silence that can hinder knowledge sharing (Takhsha et al., 2020). Another point here is that organizations must avoid groupthink in the decision-making process and make employees feel comfortable sharing opinions, proposing new ideas and solutions to problems so they can maximize the scope of knowledge sharing as well as work collaboratively across functional silos.

   6. Enhancement and Development of Work Competencies

      The development of work competency is the process through which individuals continuously achieve working knowledge, performance and remuneration improvement and grow in promoting their own work practice. In competence research identified the academic competence, nursing competence, professional attitude, teaching competence, management competence and digital technology competence as prerequisite competences for a nursing teacher (Zlatanovic et al., 2017). Sharma and Pandher (2019) identified teaching competence, leadership competence, innovation competence, research competence and evaluation competence as competences required by educational leaders. Most important competencies for educational leaders are the following: "helping

      others improves without complaining about environment," "setting out highest goals," and "aligning classroom activities with learning objectives." Leadership has been defined as one of the key work competencies; core competencies for leaders include formal education, compassion and high emotional intelligence (Pradhan et al., 2017; Shuck et al., 2019). Imagine that according to the research, transformational leadership is the best of all types followed by servant leadership and charismatic leadership. These behaviors involve articulating the vision, associating the vision with relevant business models, teaching acceptance of team goals as priority, exhibiting high performance expectations and offering individualized consideration (coaching) and intellectual stimulation. Such behavior positively influences the creation of organizational knowledge and innovation (Gillet & Vandenberghe, 2014; Han et al., 2016). Generally, the development of professional competence is a lengthy process and should be reinforced and enhanced gradually to establish work practice. Common routes to development of professional competence have been articulated, e.g., these examples could be attending training programs, reading books and watching work videos; gaining new assignments or project roles; consulting with mentors, peers or supervisors; network at communities/organizations further exchanging and sharing information etc.; reflection & summarization. Think that the development of teacher professional competence is primarily focused on four aspects: trial and error, conversation and cooperation with others, reflection and practical application (Hoekstra & Crocker, 2015). The developmental pathway of IT software engineers can be divided into the following processes (Ha, 2015): obtaining basic technical knowledge through training courses, books, and internet information resources; practical work in technology often involving low-risk tasks within one's area of expertise; involvement in challenging and high-risk tasks or projects as an important learning set of events; differentiation of rofessional knowledgerefinement of existing technical skills or shifting to a more managerial role. There are many factors that affect professional development. McDonald and Hite (2023) found that succession planning, mentorship and coaching, job satisfaction, special assignments and performance evaluations positively influence professional development; while job rotation negatively influences it. It is appropriate for employees who work in exploring various careers or essential management skills, but it will decrease task diversity and model autonomy for those who want to become experts, resulting in a negative impact on employee performance (Lee et al., 2019). In a word, the development of professional competence relies on a multi-pronged strategy, developing personalized development plans and paths to help participants reach higher level of professionalism and achieve personal development goals depending on accumulation of practice experience and self-reflection.

4. SHIFTS AND REFLECTIONS IN INTERNATIONAL WORKPLACE LEARNING RESEARCH

   When we look through the last decade findings related to international workplace learning, it is noticeable that current studies are diversified and micro-level oriented. Researchers are no longer concerned with learners' explicit skills but rather the implicit, unstructured ways in which we learn. These research perspectives support enterprises and organizations to optimize their workplace learning environment, improve corporate training system and enhance employees performance while providing theories and methods of individual professional development road planning.

   1. Research Paradigm: From "Human Resource Development" to "Workplace Learning"

      Being a new research field, the lines and meaning of what workplace learning is has been contentious. Previous studies studied, rather, the effect and change induced by the individual learning within an organization in the context of human resource development paradigm; The workplace learning paradigm emphasized internal mechanisms and processes involved in various levels of learning. The two research camps of human resource development and workplace learning gradually approached each other in recent years. Researchers usually take an interest in the organizational context within which learning takes place, as well as how the organizational context interacts with learners. The limits between the individuals and enterprise are gradually blurring, and research focus of learning activity is transferring to more micro level regard to learning internal action logic. Finally, this paradigm has a growing tendency toward a workplace learning paradigm characterized by human resource development, and implies that in the future, there will be further integration of two paradigms. Therefore, it is necessary to establish inter- institutional and interdisciplinary research teams and strengthen cooperation and exchange to promote the rapid development of workplace learning research.

   2. Research Methods: Empirical Research is the Mainstream

      The dominant tool in international workplace learning research is empirical research. Emerging as one of the largest conflicts within empirical research is a paradox between quantitative researchers and qualitative researchers. From 2010 to now, quantitative research has contributed half of the workplace learning field at an international level. But at the same time there is growing quantitative research methods (such as case studies, ethnographic/biographic, interview, and diary studies) plus text analysis, social networks data analysis and some digital research techniques. The United States tends to rely more on quantitative research in workplace learning research and shows a strong behavioral-pragmatist profile while European countries adopt

      qualitative investigation for this field which is predominantly social constructivist. Our quantitative research methods enable companies to quickly diagnose and enhance organizational and individual learning capabilities. Other measurement of learning greatly depends on assumed notions about the research subjects. While the search for general knowledge has produced quantitative results, qualitative methods are needed to understand the motivations, processes and experiences of learners. Now researchers will need to combine various theories, disciplinary methods and tools to reach a more complete and scientific understanding of organizational learning.

   3. Research Environment: The Increasing Impact of Emerging Technologies

      The rapid development of the technological environment has not only transformed the work context but also opened up new avenues for research. Shaped by mobile and social technologies, organizations are developing intelligent environments to enhance learning at individual level. In the investigation of learning in an international workplace social networks, electronic media, and virtual learning spaces are hotly debated topic areas, not least because many researchers aim to enhance the environments for learning by designing virtual educational environments. New immersive technologies (for example, VR and AR) combined with the capabilities of big data and data analytics are leading to more effective personalized or bespoke learning. Future research can explore the relevant themes of learning on agenda for emerging technologies reflexing spectacular. Researchers should develop a theory underlying technological innovation and learning surrounding virtual teams and cross-cultural realization to expand existing knowledge from generalization theories on organizational behavior, finding out how adult learning and improvement in performance are depicted through these new extended accesses to technology services.

   4. Research Perspective: Learner Factors Gain Attention

      The research perspectives on workplace learning are many and have a clear interdisciplinary character. Early research it examined how to adapt to the learning needs of individuals, both in terms of organization and social shape. Since 2010, under the influence of theories from work sociology, anthropology, political science and feminism more and more studies have paid attention to factors such as work experience, motivation, gender, culture and self-efficacy in learning, constantly trying to explore individualized identity construction process and meaning making at work while individuals show autonomous personalized learning paths. With these transformations has come the recognition of more nuanced and profound dilemmas about work and learning. Individual: Individuals are the initiators and subjects of learning; individual factors may affect the process and results of learning. Future workplace learning research should not only try to understand additional empirical work practices and conditions and introduce the study of workplace learning issues into different social, economic, and political environments but also elaborate on individuals' internal and external behavioral-cognitive mechanisms. It should rather be a system (multi-dimensional and multi- level) based on the interaction and regulation process wherein individual with individual, organization socio-cultural context with individual, work task with individuals, and the life history of individuals.

   5. Research Trends: Informal Learning is the Core of Workplace Learning

Concerning the context of workplace learning, there are researchers who believe it is informal, incidental, contextual and that the outcomes are implicit; others believe it can be both formal and informal as well, yet the value of informal learning has no substitute. In fact, there are no hard distinctions of easier versus more challenging forms of learning both formal and informal learning activities often exist on a continuum. Given the officially recognized qualfication and certificate, informal learning is much more flexible and convenient to operate. Informed by these learning perspectives such as learning as participation and learning as practice, the research on informal workplace learning is on the rise while that of informal learning is declining. As for research trends and tendencies, researchers continuously taking veils away from improving learners' explicit abilities and skills towards the implicit, the intangible, the unintended, unstructured or difficult to articulate types of learning processes. The transition from behaviorist learning theory and cognitivist learning theory to social constructivist learning theory has transformed the theoretical underpinnings of workplace learning. The mainstream theories in workplace learning research today are practical theory, cultural-historical activity theory and actor network theory. They pay more attention to learners' subjectivity, their social context their construction of meaning; the interaction between learning and organizational social development. Estimation of these types in workplace learning are important and it will be part of another important research topic in future which can clarify intrinsic mechanisms of workplace learning help to enhance the processes and structures.

REFERENCE

1. Ahmad, F., & Karim, M. (2019). Impacts of knowledge sharing: a review and directions for future research. Journal of Workplace learning, 31(3), 207-230.

2. Akdere, M., Jiang, Y., & Acheson, K. (2023). To simulate or not to simulate? Comparing the effectiveness of videobased training versus virtual reality

   based simulations on interpersonal skills development. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 34(4), 437-462.

3. Argyris, C. (1977). Double loop learning in organizations. Harvard business review, 55(5), 115-125.

4. Beinicke, A., & Kyndt, E. (2020). Evidence-based actions for maximising training effectiveness in corporate E-learning and classroom training. Studies in Continuing Education, 42(2), 256-276.

5. Billett, S. (2011). Subjectivity, self and personal agency in learning through and for work. In The SAGE handbook of workplace learning (pp. 60-72). SAGE Publications Ltd.

6. Billett, S. (2020). Learning in the workplace: Strategies for effective practice. Routledge.

7. Chan, S. (2017). The reciprocity of imitative learningthrough apprenticeship. Vocations and Learning, 10(3), 325-342.

8. Engeström, Y. (2014). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Cambridge University Press.

9. Engeström, Y., Nuttall, J., & Hopwood, N. (2022). Transformative agency by double stimulation: Advances in theory and methodology. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 30(1), 1-7.

10. Fenwick, T. (2010). Rethinking the thing Sociomaterial approaches to understanding and researching learning in work. Journal of Workplace learning, 22(1/2), 104-116.

11. Fischer, C., Goller, M., Brinkmann, L., & Harteis, C. (2018). Digitalisation of work: Between affordances and constraints for learning at work. In Digital workplace learning: Bridging formal and informal learning with digital technologies (pp. 227-249). Springer.

12. Ford, J. K., Baldwin, T. T., & Prasad, J. (2018). Transfer of training: The known and the unknown. Annual review of organizational psychology and organizational behavior, 5, 201-225.

13. Gillet, N., & Vandenberghe, C. (2014). Transformational leadership and organizational commitment: The mediating role of job characteristics. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 25(3), 321-347.

14. Goh, A. Y. S. (2019). Rethinking reflective practice in professional lifelong learning using learning metaphors. Studies in Continuing Education, 41(1), 1-16.

15. Ha, T. S. (2015). Learning stories from IT workersDevelopment of professional expertise. Studies in Continuing Education, 37(1), 79-98.

16. Han, S. H., Seo, G., Yoon, S. W., & Yoon, D.-Y. (2016). Transformational leadership and knowledge sharing: Mediating roles of employees empowerment,

    commitment, and citizenship behaviors. Journal of Workplace learning, 28(3), 130-149.

17. Hetzner, S., Gartmeier, M., Heid, H., & Gruber, H. (2011). Error orientation and reflection at work. Vocations and Learning, 4(1), 25-39.

18. Hoekstra, A., & Crocker, J. R. (2015). ePortfolios: Enhancing professional learning of vocational educators. Vocations and Learning, 8(3), 353-372.

19. Illeris, K. (2016). How we learn: Learning and non-learning in school and beyond. Routledge.

20. Illeris, K. (2018). Workplaces and learning. In Learning, Development and Education (pp. 201-216). Routledge.

21. Jian, H. (2011(2)). Work-learning research: a new frontier of education – a review of theoretical achievements in the field of work-learning in the West. Open Education Research, 60-67.

22. Kemmis, S. (2010). What is professional practice? Recognising and respecting diversity in understandings of practice. In Elaborating professionalism: Studies in practice and theory (pp. 139-165). Springer.

23. Kim, E.-J., Park, S., & Kang, H.-S. (2019). Support, training readiness and learning motivation in determining intention to transfer. European Journal of Training and Development, 43(3/4), 306-321.

24. Knapp, R. (2010). Collective (team) learning process models: A conceptual review. Human Resource Development Review, 9(3), 285-299.

25. Knipfer, K., Kump, B., Wessel, D., & Cress, U. (2013). Reflection as a catalyst for organisational learning. Studies in Continuing Education, 35(1), 30-48.

26. Kochoian, N., Raemdonck, I., Frenay, M., & Zacher, H. (2017). The role of age and occupational future time perspective in workers motivation to learn.

    Vocations and Learning, 10(1), 27-45.

27. Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. FT press.

28. Kyndt, E., & Beausaert, S. (2017). How do conditions known to foster learning in the workplace differ across occupations? In Autonomous learning in the workplace (pp. 201-218). Routledge.

29. Kyoung Park, Y., Hoon Song, J., Won Yoon, S., & Kim, J. (2013). Learning organization and innovative behavior: The mediating effect of work engagement.

    European Journal of Training and Development, 38(1-2), 75-94.

30. Laker, D. R., & Powell, J. L. (2011). The differences between hard and soft skills and their relative impact on training transfer. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22(1), 111-122.

31. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge university press.

32. Lee, J. Y., Yoo, S., Lee, Y., Park, S., & Yoon, S. W. (2019). Individual and organisational factors affecting knowledge workers perceptions of the

    effectiveness of informal learning: A multilevel analysis. Vocations and Learning, 12(1), 155-177.

33. Lee, Y., & Lee, J. Y. (2018). A multilevel analysis of individual and organizational factors that influence the relationship between career development ad job-performance improvement. European Journal of Training and Development, 42(5/6), 286-304.

34. Leicher, V., & Mulder, R. H. (2016). Individual and contextual factors influencing engagement in learning activities after errors at work: A replication study in a German Retail Bank. Journal of Workplace learning, 28(2), 66-80.

35. Liu, P. (2018). Transformational leadership research in China (20052015). Chinese Education & Society, 51(5), 372-409.

36. Marsick, V., Watkins, K., & OConnor, B. N. (2011). Researching workplace learning in the United States. The SAGE handbook of workplace learning, 198- 209.

37. Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (2003). Demonstrating the value of an organization's learning culture: the dimensions of the learning organization questionnaire. Advances in developing human resources, 5(2), 132-151.

38. Martin, B. O., Kolomitro, K., & Lam, T. C. (2014). Training methods: A review and analysis. Human Resource Development Review, 13(1), 11-35.

39. Martin, H. J. (2010). Workplace climate and peer support as determinants of training transfer. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 21(1), 87-104.

40. Matsuo, M. (2018a). Effects of team unlearning on employee creativity: The mediating effect of individual reflection. Journal of Workplace learning, 30(7), 531-544.

41. Matsuo, M. (2018b). Goal orientation, critical reflection, and unlearning: An individuallevel study. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 29(1), 49-66.

42. McDonald, K. S., & Hite, L. M. (2023). Career development: A human resource development perspective. Routledge.

43. Noe, R. A., & Peacock, M. (2008). Employee training and development.

44. Noe, R. A., Tews, M. J., & Marand, A. D. (2013). Individual differences and informal learning in the workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83(3), 327- 335.

45. Pradhan, R. K., Jena, L. K., & Singh, S. K. (2017). Examining the role of emotional intelligence between organizational learning and adaptive performance in Indian manufacturing industries. Journal of Workplace learning, 29(3), 235-247.

46. Ruona, W. E. (2000). Core beliefs in human resource development: A journey for the profession and its professionals. Advances in developing human resources, 2(3), 1-27.

47. Schei, V., & Nerbø, I. (2015). The invisible learning ceiling: Informal learning among preschool teachers and assistants in a Norwegian kindergarten. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 26(3), 299-328.

48. Schön, D. A. (2017). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Routledge.

49. Schürmann, E., & Beausaert, S. (2016). What are drivers for informal learning? European Journal of Training and Development, 40(3), 130-154.

50. Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. Broadway Business.

51. Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational researcher, 27(2), 4-13.

52. Sharma, P., & Pandher, J. S. (2019). Competences desired among educational leaders of technical education degree institutions. Journal of Workplace learning, 31(6), 377-390.

53. Shivakumar, K. (2012). The case study method in training and management education. The IUP Journal of Soft Skills, 6(2), 55-64.

54. Shuck, B., Alagaraja, M., Immekus, J., Cumberland, D., & HoneycuttElliott, M. (2019). Does compassion matter in leadership? A twostage sequential equal status mixed method exploratory study of compassionate leader behavior and connections to performance in human resource development. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 30(4), 537-564.

55. Simmonds, D., & Pedersen, C. (2006). HRD: the shapes and things to come. Journal of Workplace learning, 18(2), 122-135.

56. Swanson, R. A. (2001). Foundations of human resource development. Brrettt-Koehler Publishers Inc.

57. Takhsha, M., Barahimi, N., Adelpanah, A., & Salehzadeh, R. (2020). The effect of workplace ostracism on knowledge sharing: the mediating role of organization-based self-esteem and organizational silence. Journal of Workplace learning, 32(6), 417-435.

58. Tynjälä, P. (2013). Toward a 3-P model of workplace learning: A literature review. Vocations and Learning, 6(1), 11-36.

59. Van Daal, T., Donche, V., & De Maeyer, S. (2014). The impact of personality, goal orientation and self-efficacy on participation of high school teachers in learning activities in the workplace. Vocations and Learning, 7(1), 21-40.

60. Wallin, A., Pylväs, L., & Nokelainen, P. (2020). Government workers stories about professional development in a digitalized working life. Vocations and Learning, 13(3), 439-458.

61. Yeo, R. K., & Marquardt, M. J. (2015). (Re) interpreting action, learning, and experience: Integrating action learning and experiential learning for HRD.

    Human Resource Development Quarterly, 26(1), 81-107.

62. Yoon, D.-Y., Han, S.-h., Sung, M., & Cho, J. (2018). Informal learning, organizational commitment and self-efficacy: A study of a structural equation model exploring mediation. Journal of Workplace learning, 30(8), 640-657.

63. Zlatanovic, T., Havnes, A., & Mausethagen, S. (2017). A research review of nurse teachers competencies. Vocations and Learning, 10(2), 201-233.