Nur Farhanah K., et all.

, Relationship Between Self-Directed Learning, Motivation to Learn Toward Learning Organization

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING,

MOTIVATION TO LEARN TOWARD LEARNING ORGANIZATION
AMONG LECTURERS AT A SELECTED PUBLIC UNIVERSITY
IN MALAYSIA
Nur Farhanah Kamarruddin, Norhasni Zainal Abiddin,
Khairuddin Idris
Department of Professional Development and Continuing Education
Faculty of Education Studies
Universiti Putra Malaysia
Abstracts
The purpose of this research is to examine the relationship between self-directed learning,
motivation to learn, and learning organization at one public university in Malaysia. Ninety two
academic staff were selected through stratified random sampling by post of Professor, Associate
Professor, Senior Lecturer and Lecturer. Three research objectives frame the research: (1) to
determine the level of learning organization, self-directed learning, and motivation to learn
among lecturers, (2) to determine the relationship between self-directed learning, motivation to
learn and learning organization among lecturers and (3) to determine the contribution of selfdirected learning and motivation to learn on learning organization among lecturers. Descriptive
analysis was used to determine the level of self-directed learning, motivation to learn and
learning organization. Pearson Product Moment Correlations test was used to determine the
relationship between self-directed learning, motivation to learn and learning organization.
Regression analysis was used to determine the contribution of elements of self-directed
learning and motivation to learn on organizational learning. Based on the findings of the study,
recommendations and policy implications are discussed and directions for future research are
provided.
Key words: higher education, learning organization, learning organization culture, motivation
to learn, self-directed learning.
Introduction
The rapid expansion of knowledgebased economy has driven individuals to
promote and improve their cognition in order
to remain competitive. Hence, organizations
increasingly are urged to become learning
organizations (Singh, 2010). Learning
organization provides a way by which faculty
act together with other colleagues to raise
the knowledge and skills of all members of
the governing bodies, especially in times of
rapid change happening in the workplace
environment (Conferrore, 2010). The learning
organization will consider the efficiency of
all individuals involved in the organization
and can implement and enhance their

self-directed learning ability (Conferrore,

2010).Organization competes to become a
more flexible organization to realize some
modifications of their day-by-day learning
(Malik & Ghafoor, 2011). The changes made
and carried a big impact on the organizations,
especially in creating a learning organization
culture.
Self-directed learning or individual
learning is the foundation of a learning
organization. Adult participation in selfdirected learning in their organization is
increasing from day to day (Tough, 1979).
Long and Morris (1995) state that 90 % of
adults carry at least one self-directed learning
activity in their organizations each year, while
23

International Journal of Education, Vol. 8 No. 1 December 2014

70 % of the knowledge and skill they practice

in organizational learning culture derived
from self-directed learning activities (Long &
Morris, 1995). Typically, an adult employee in
the learning organization must engage in five
independent learning activities on average and
take approximately 100 hours for each project
(Hiemstra, 2008).
An organization requires high
motivation (Bui and Baruch, 2011).
Motivation factors describe why people should
do the same work. In addition, motivation is
closely related to individuals (Miller, 2010).
Motivations will increase the performance of
each individual in the organization. Support
service within the institution of higher
education can achieve success with the
assistance from qualified workers and most
importantly satisfied employees are motivated
in doing the work (Malik & Danish, 2010). The
motivation to learn has a positive relationship
toward the performance of workplace learning
(Colquitt, Lepine & Neo, 2000). Employees
who enjoy learning in the workplace will be
more motivated. The probability to achieve
performance is very high. A study done on the
service organizations showed that employee
motivation is a key factor of the success
in service organization (Goldstein, 2001).
Employees who are motivated and have high
capacity are important for an organization to
achieve excellent quality service (Goldstein,
2001).
The creation of a learning organization
of institutions of higher education requires
not only the workers who have a high level
of education, but also those who can engage
in independent learning and have motivation
to learn. Motivation for learning itself is
the accumulation of desire, passion and
behavior to reach a target (Hodson, 2001).
The motivation to learn is also a motivation
and combined with encouragement and
guidance that will lead to success in the
organization (Morris, 1970). In addition, selfdirected learning or individual learning is also
important to establish and maintain a process
24

of learning in the workplace. Therefore,

these factors are important information to a
learning organization in institutions of higher
education.
Over the last few years, many
researchers have dealt with the issues of
learning organizational practices in an
organization (Singh, 2010). Various factors
have been reviewed from time to time.
However, the literature review indicated
that some gaps of the learning organization
should be emphasized. Research on learning
organization in the education sector is still
a few (White & Weathersby, 2005; Bui &
Baruch, 2011; Ali, 2012). A few studies of
organizational learning have been conducted,
such as among nurses (Tsai, 2014), managers,
supervisors and employees in the private
organization (Weldy & Gillis, 2010),
distance education students (Gaile, 2013) and
physiotherapist (Dannapfel, Pusan, & Nilsen,
2014).
Most of the studies have been conducted
to investigate different factors. However,
factors on the motivation to learn (Bui
&Baruch, 2011) and self-directed learning
factor (Conferrore, 2010) have not been
widely addressed in the study of learning
organization in the context of the organization.
Common factors that are emphasized
and studied as factors are organizational
commitment (Yaghoubi, Raeisi, Afshar,
Yarmohammadian,
Hasanzadeh,
Javadi
& Ansary, 2010), organizational culture
(Singh, 2010), job satisfaction and customer
satisfaction (Pantouvakis & Bouranta, 2013),
and leadership styles (Chang & Lee, 2007).
Existing research on learning organization
has been done in the West and in developed
countries like the United States (Nyhan et
al., 2004; Blackman & Henderson, 2005;
Birdthistle, 2008; Bui & Baruch, 2011).
Thus, the lack of research in Asian countries
like Malaysia can shed light to the learning
culture of the organization in Asian countries.
Therefore, this study was undertaken to
determine the factors that influence learning

Nur Farhanah K., et all., Relationship Between Self-Directed Learning, Motivation to Learn Toward Learning Organization

organization among lecturers at one public

university in Malaysia.
Learning Organization
A learning organization grows and
becomes a stronger concept when the concept
is associated with more extensive research
in the field of management and organization
(Bui & Baruch, 2011). The issue of a learning
organization has sparked more than 20 years
of debate, although there is still no universal
formula for creating a learning organization
that suits all organizations (Levine, 2006).
There are many views on organizational
learning and the learning organization is the
only one to play a role in developing and
implementing policies and strategies that
promote and use continuous learning at all
levels in the organization (Sackmann, Rehart
& Friesl, 2009).
Theodore (2012) has listed a number
of characteristics of a learning organization in
his persuasion that the figure of actors involved
in the on-going process of collaboration,
collective change, individual responsibility
in their study and the principles shared in the
organization involved. However, majority of
researchers prefer to refer to Senge (1990)
because he was the researcher who proposed
and developed the concept of learning
organization. Senge (1990) defines a learning
organization as a place to develop the ability
to make decisions, maintain continuous
thinking, inspire widespread release and learn
what to learn and how to learn.
Senge (1990) states five disciplines
of a learning organization: (1) openness in
systems thinking (Thinking System) is where
individuals within the organization, especially
the senior and middle leaders need to look at
something as a whole and not by segment,
(2) self-control (Personal Mastery) is that the
individual has a high degree of discipline and
learning to enhance their knowledge through
a variety of methods. Organizations need to
provide the opportunity and the space for
individual learning process and enable them

to apply their knowledge and expertise, (3)

mental model (Mental Models) or individuals
within the organization develop concepts and
understanding through reading and experience
in connection with their duties and at the same
time appreciate the concept and understanding
of other individuals in the team. Think open
and update mental model allow individuals to
unlearn and relearn, (4) shared vision (Shared
Vision) can be developed by members of the
organizations or from the proposal at the top;
build a learning organization and have the same
direction among its members and last but not
least (5) learning group (Team Building) is a
collective learning to generate new ideas and
improvements. Learning organizations strive
to document the tacit knowledge of expertise
individuals to be shared.
Senge (1990) also suggests that an
individual should set aside the old ways of
thinking (mental model), learn to continuously
improve knowledge (self-control), the
effectiveness of understanding the company
they work for (system thinking), and form
a joint planning consent (vision together
and work together to achieve the vision). A
learning organization is an organization where
everyone is engaged in identifying and solving
problems, which enables the organization
to continue to move onwards and improve
the ability of the involved organization
(Weldy, 2010). Learning organization works
to create value, practice, procedure in which
learning and employment are synonyms and
parallel to the organization (Rowley, 1998).
In addition, the learning organization also
presents challenges to the employee and the
organization in order to use their collective
wisdom, the ability to learn and their creativity
to transform the organization into one of the
best system (Bierema, 1998).
Self-Directed Learning
The term self-directed learning was
introduced by Houle (1961) in research
linked to students motivation. Tough (1979)
is one of the researchers who dealt with self25

International Journal of Education, Vol. 8 No. 1 December 2014

directed learning in research related to the

adult learning. Followed by Knowles (1975),
who explains about self-directed learning in
adult learning concept in which the concept
was well accepted in educational theory and
research. According to Knowles (1975),
self-directed learning is a process where an
individual takes the initiative of their own
without the help of others in diagnosing their
learning needs, formulating learning goals,
identifying materials for learning, choosing
and implementing appropriate learning
strategies as well as evaluating result learning.
Students who practice self-directed
learning must be responsible in identifying
their own learning needs and learning
objectives, deciding how to assess learning
outcomes, identifying and focusing on
resources and learning strategies as well as
evaluating the learning (Iwasiw, 1987). In
addition, self-directed learning is also regarded
as a learning process in which individuals take
the initiative, without the help of others, in
diagnosing their learning needs, formulating
learning goals, identifying learning resources
and materials to choose, in addition to
implementing and evaluating appropriate
learning outcomes (Brookfield, 2009). Selfdirected learning basic principles involve
the interaction between a person and their
environment in which knowledge is tentative,
quick to learn and developed socially (Candy,
2004). He also notes that the dynamics of the
free self-study will be considered, especially
when carried out by educators.
Self-directed learning is essential in the
learning and practice of adult education. Selfdirected learning has been reviewed in literature
review and concept, but it is important to bring
confusion and misunderstanding (Candy,
2004). Up until now, self-directed learning is
strongly connected to external management
in the process of learning (Garrison, 1997).
There is no concept of actually explaining
adult education and self-directed learning.
Self-directed learning can also be
understood through the three functions of
26

adult learning: (1) learn the job-oriented

instrumental in problem solving related to
controlling the surroundings and other people,
(2) learn to read what others mean through a
conversation between us and them, and (3)
self-reflective learning is about an individual
who understands about ourselves. Therefore,
self-directed learning is more than just knowing
what we want to read. Self-directed learning
also admits what we understand from people
around us, try to understand our surroundings,
and realize what is important. For these
reasons, self-directed learning is an approach in
which the scholars will be motivated, become
more responsible and control themselves (selfmonitoring) and context (self-management) in
the process of acquiring and validating learning
outcomes (Garrison, 1997).
Motivation to Learn
In the 1970s and 1980s, the motivation
in the workplace has become an important
topic (Ambrose & Kulik, 1999). Numerous
opinions about motivation in the workplace
were raised by researchers. Based on
the literature, different opinions brought
different definitions of motivation to learn.
Motivation for learning in the workplace is a
set of external and internal behavior that will
demonstrate a connection with the work and
will specify the shape, direction, and timeintensive of the individual work itself (Pinder,
1998). Motivation to learn has been studied
in education and psychology research in
different views (Winterstein, 1998).
Motivation is defined as a collection of
option desire, determination and behavior of
the feelings (Edwards, 1999), the behavior
intended to achieve a set goal (Hodson, 2001),
the desire to restore power, determination,
and behavior in doing a job and achieve
goals (Hancock, 2004). Motivation is also
considered as an endorsement, action or guide
towards an act, especially in performing a job
(Morris, 1970). In the setting of adult learning,
motivation to learn is fixed as the tendency
for somebody to receive or find learning

Nur Farhanah K., et all., Relationship Between Self-Directed Learning, Motivation to Learn Toward Learning Organization

activities that are meaningful and beneficial

for them (Wlodkowski, 1999). Motivation to
learn is also stated as the movement behavior
of a passionate and personal learning or a
continuing self-study (Colquitt, Lepine & Noe,
2000). The literature states that motivation is
an important factor in the learning process
and the process of organizational learning
in the workplace (Malik & Danish, 2010).
They noted a positive relationship between
motivation and learning organization.
Besides, Hays and Hill (2001) also state that
motivation is a factor that allows the creation
of a learning organization as a whole.
Motivation to learn is the key component
in the selection of individual learning (Klein,
Noe & Wang, 2006). With the motivation to
learn, an individual will choose to learn and
pick their own learning activities. Previous
surveys demonstrated that motivation to learn
is an important factor in learning and research
described that the motivation to learn affects
the individual as well as external conditions
of their learning (Colquitt [Link], 2000; Noe,
1986; Tannenbaum & Yulk, 1992). Motivation
to learn is a vital element to adults, especially
to their learning process (Gusho, 2013). In
adults life, motivation to learn plays a major
character in controlling and driving adults to
reach determinations in their spirits. In addition,
Teghant and Pogson (1995) state that adults will
choose to participate in all activities associated
with the learning if they are really motivated.

talk, discuss and explain their experience and

skills), 3. encouraging collaboration and group
learning (the extent to which organizations
are trying to plan the work for the members
of their organizations to achieve common
action), 4. developing a system for sharing
learning (create a system or medium for
employees to use all available technology to
conduct their learning partnerships with other
workers), 5. increasing towards a collective
vision (a process that allows the members of
the organization to take part in the formulation
of policies, to know how to get things done,
to assess their needs, to influence others and
to create a collective vision), 6. the system of
environmental connection (an open system to
connect the organization to the external and
internal environment and help the members of
the organization to perceive the impact of their
work to the entire organization), and 7. strategic
leadership to the environment (the efficiency of
the organizations leaders to think strategically;
to be a model in the organization, learning to
support and energize the organizations to bring
about positive changes).

Related Previous Research

Nzuve and Omolo (2012) conducted a
study in 43 banks under the auspices of the
Kenyan Commercial Banking. This study was
conducted to determine the practice of the
learning organization in each bank. There was
significant relationship between organizational
learning and organizational performance, such
as thinking systems, personal mastery, mental
Learning Organization Model by Watkins models, shared vision and team learning.
& Marsick
Overall, the level of organizational learning
Learning organization modelled by for each bank was significantly high.
Watkins & Marsick (1996) consists of seven
A research conducted in a banking
dimensions: 1. creating opportunities for institution in England by Antonacopoulou
continuous learning, personal and career (2006) found that self-directed learning
development in the workplace (level of activities and processes influenced practices
learning in the organization can be increased by within the organization. Activities and
acquiring how to learn new knowledge, values learning processes are: (1) the content of the
and skills), 2. promoting dialogue and inquiry learning process; (2) learning resources, and
(dialogue is the extent to which organizational (3) political in workplace learning.
culture allows members to practice open

Learning
organization
practiced
communication without the limitation to in the English Banking institution also
27

International Journal of Education, Vol. 8 No. 1 December 2014

affected employees self-directed learning

with understanding how the organization
should learn and how they grow. This study
supports Watkins and Marsicks (1996)
statement that the learning organization will
grow and learn from individual teams within
the organization. This study also supports
the study by March (1991) who reported
a learning organization will learn through
individual and the knowledge that goes on
within the organization involved.
A study conducted by Tanyaovalaksna
and Li (2013) on 106 laboratory supervisors
at the Ontario Hospital, which focused on
individual learning and group learning with
learning organization. The study showed a
significant relationship between individual
learning and learning organization, r (106)
= 0.97, p = 0.001 while group learning with
learning organization also showed a significant
correlation, r = 0.73, p = 0.001.
A study by Colquitt, Lepine & Noe
(2000) showed a significant relationship
between motivation to learn by learning
organizations, where employees would
motivate them to face their learning process

Gender
Male
Female
Age (n=92)
26-39 years old
40-53 years old
54-68 years old

Objectives
The purposes of the study are:
a) To determine the level of learning
organization, self-directed learning, and
motivation to learn among lecturers.
b) To determine the relationship between
self-directed learning, motivation to learn
and learning organization among lecturers.
c) To determine the contribution of selfdirected learning and motivation to learn
on learning organization among lecturers.

Table 1.
Profile of the Respondents (n = 92)
Frequency
%

Post

Lecturer
Senior Lecturer
Associate Professor
Professor
Work Experience
3-15 years
16-28 years
29-24 years
28

to increase the learning organization. Not

only that, workers must constantly learn and
practice learning activities to enhance their
knowledge to increase their performance
(Goldstein, 2001). In addition, Porter and
Lawler (1968) explained that in the study
of motivation to learn in the organization of
services for which the motivation to learn is
the most important key to achieving success in
a service organization. Normally, employees
will learn what they want and if the motivation
to learn does not achieve a higher level, the
process of learning will move slowly.

42
50

45.7
54.3

35
48
9

38
52.2
9.8

12
48
24
8

13.0
52.2
26.1
8.7

41
43
8

44.6
46.7
8.74

SD

1.60

0.63

2.30

0.81

1.61

0.60

Nur Farhanah K., et all., Relationship Between Self-Directed Learning, Motivation to Learn Toward Learning Organization

Methods
For this section, the topic will be
discussed on study setting and data sample
information, instrumentation, population and
research sample and result. Study Setting and
Data Sample Information
A total of 92 questionnaires were
distributed to the lecturers at one public
university in Malaysia. In this study, 12 (13.0%)
lecturers hold the position as Lecturers, 48
of them (52.2%) are Senior Lecturers, 24 of
them (26.1%) are Associate Professors and 8
of them (8.7%) are Professors.
Instrumentation
This study used questionnaires as a
research tool to collect data from respondents.
According to Saunders, Levis and Thirnhill
(2009), the questionnaire allows all data to be
collected, analyzed and compared easily. Ary,
Jacobs and Razavieh (1990) also note that the
use of questionnaire is easier and saves time
compared to other instruments. Field and
Abelson (1982) state that most researchers
use questionnaires to measure the perception
of the respondents. Therefore, the form of
measurement used in this study is based on
assumptions and perceptions. Overall, the
questionnaire contains four parts. Part A is the
background of respondent, Part B is a learning
organization, Part C is self-directed learning
and Part D is the motivation to learn. All four
parts use a Likert five-point scale (1 = never, 2
= rarely, 3 = sometimes, 4 = often, 5 = always).
The questionnaire was translated into Bahasa
Melayu (Malay language) to be adjusted to
the context of the country, Malaysia, which
predominantly uses Bahasa Melayu in its
communication.
Part A includes question about
demography profile for respondent. The
questions cover several points such as gender,
age, post and working experience. Questions
for Part B are about organizational learning is
an adoption and modification of the Dimension
Learning
Organization
Questionnaire
(DLOQ) developed by Watkins & Marsick

(1996). This questionnaire measures the

learning organizations including continuing
learning, dialogue and inquiry, team learning,
shared learning systems, control system,
connections and strategic leadership. As a
result of discussions with supervisors, twelve
items were selected and modified based on
the context of research and adaption of the
respondent.
Items for self-directed learning are
an adoption of the Self-Rating Scale of SelfDirected Learning (SRSSDL) developed by
Williamson (2007). The SRSSDL consisted
of 60 items, which are divided into five
dimensions in which each dimension has
12 items. The dimensions are (1) awareness
of self-directed learning, (2) self-directed
learning strategies, (3) self-directed learning
activities, (4) evaluation of self-directed
learning, and (5) interpersonal skill of selfdirected learning.
Measuring motivation to learn is an
adaption and modification of the Motivation
to Learn Questionnaire developed by Noe
(1989). There were eight items that matched
the purposes of the study and were used in
the study. Table 2 will show more detail about
instrument in this study.
Table 2.
Research Instrument

No
Instrument
1 Learning
Organization
Questionnaire
(DLOQ)
2 Self-rating Scale
of Self Directed
Learning (SRSSDL
3
4

Motivation to Learn
Total of item

[Link]
12

Researcher
Marsick
& Watkins
(1999)

12
12
12
12
12
8
80

Swapna
Naskar
Willianson
(2007)
Noe (1986)

Population and Research Sample

The sample is a subset of the population.
In this study, the population was determined to
be among the lecturers at one public university
in Malaysia. Based on statistics from the
29

International Journal of Education, Vol. 8 No. 1 December 2014

university registers office, an updated list of

lecturer is 1654 people.
This study employed a stratified random
sampling. Stratified random sampling is the
selection of respondents by group or strata
with similar characteristic. The samples were
randomly selected for each group or stratum.
Only social science faculty were chosen for
this study. So, four faculties were selected
with a total population of 380 lecturers.
Consequently, the selection of a sample
from the four faculties was done based on
the table of sample size by Bartlett, Katrlik
and Higgins (2001). Bartlett, Katrlik and
Higgins (2001) state that if population of 400
people, the samples will be taken around 24
%. Due to the process of selecting samples
by using stratified random sampling, then the
calculation was done through predetermining
academic positions namely (1) Lecturers, (2)
Senior Lecturer, (3) Associate Professor and
(4) Professor. For each of these positions, only
24% will be used as samples. The samples
were randomly selected using a systematic
list of lecturers who were identified based on
a randomly drawn initial number.
Result and Discussion
Cronbachs alpha was calculated to
examine the reliability of each variable in the
study that ranged 0.768 to 0.928. The means
for dependent and the independent variable
were calculated and are presented in the Table
1. From this table, all mean scores were well
above the mid-point (2.5) of the scale. The
highest mean score recorded was for the
motivation to learn variable (M = 4.46) while
the lowest means score was 4.10 for learning
organization.
Table 3.
Means and standard deviations of
variables (n = 92)
Variables
Mean
SD
Learning
4.10
.59
Organization
Self-directed learning
4.29
.29
Motivation to learn
4.46
.43
30

Descriptive Analysis
Results
showed
that
learning
organization (82.6%), self-directed learning
(98.9%) and motivation to learn (94.6%) were
at high level.
Correlation Analysis
To determine the nature and strength of
the relationship among variables, Pearsons
Product Moment Correlation procedure
was used. Table 2 presents the correlation
coefficients of the relationship between
variables. There was a positive strong
relationship between learning organization
and motivation to learn (r = 0.611, p =
.01). Motivation to learn is positively
and significantly related to the learning
organization (r = 0.521, p = .01).
Table 4.
Pearsons correlation among variables
(n=92)
Variables
1
2
3
Learning
1
Organization
Self-directed .521**
1
learning
Motivation to .611** .510**
1
learn
** Correlation is significant at 0.01 level
(2-tailed)

Regression Analysis
Multiple linear regression analysis
was performed to identify the factors that
explained the variance of the learning
organization among lecturers. Results showed
that both self-directed learning (=0.474,
p<.05) and motivation to learn (=0.263,
p<.05) significantly predicted the learning
organization. Thus, we concluded that selfdirected learning and motivation to learn
influenced learning organization among
lecturers.

Nur Farhanah K., et all., Relationship Between Self-Directed Learning, Motivation to Learn Toward Learning Organization

Table 5.
Self-directed learning and motivation to learn as predictor of learning organization
Unstandardized
Standardized
Model
Coefficients
Coefficients
B
Std. Error
Beta
T
Sig.
1 (Constant)
-1.537
0.704
-2.183 0.032
Self-directed learning
0.941
0.187
0.474
5.034 0.000
Motivation to learn
0.358
0.128
0.263
2.790 0.006

Note: R=0.651; R2=0.424; Adj.R2=0.411; F=32.78

In depth, this study was carried out

to determine variables affecting learning
organization in one public university at
Malaysia. The results showed that the
level of learning organization, self-directed
learning and motivation to learn were at high
levels. The scores indicated that lecturers
at the selected public university have high
motivation to learn and are also self-directed
in their learning. Results also showed that
the level of learning organization was high.
Employees within an organization will always
meet their needs when there is high motivation
to learn and they are more likely to engage in
self-directed learning to obtain knowledge
and skills required for the career (Munroe,
Schumaker & Carr, 1997).
Senge, Roberts, Ross, Smith and
Kleiner (1994) explain that when employees
would like to be a part of the organization
where they work, then they have to go through
the process to change them to fulfil the
requirement of the organization. Therefore,
in the case of lecturers at a higher learning
institution, they need high motivation to learn
and conduct regular self-directed learning
process so that they can continuously increase
their knowledge to be better equipped
to perform their work. Redding (1997)
points out that to make sure the learning
organization develops continuously, people
should persistently work on problems and
find solutions to these problems. Institutions
of higher learning generally through their
employees are expected to continuously learn
in order to become a learner.

The correlation analysis showed a

significant positive relationship between
learning organization and self-directed learning
(r =.611, p =.01). The relationship between
motivation to learn and learning organization
also showed a positive significant relationship
(r =.521, p =.01). Regression analysis showed
that self-directed learning and motivation
to learn predicted 42.4 % of variance of the
learning organization. Therefore, motivation
to learn and self-directed learning directly
influenced the learning organization. March
(1991) argues for the creation of a learning
organization. At the practical level, selfdirected learning done by every individual in
the organization contributes to knowledge and
learning in the organization involved. This
is because the flow of knowledge will occur
from an individual to another individual. At
the same time, the flow of knowledge is part
of the practice of a learning organization.
Conclusions
In professional and academic field,
the factors of self-directed learning and
motivation to learn are very important to
maintain the existing knowledge. Therefore,
this study will provide improvements to the
Learning Organization Theory. The results
indicated that the factors of self-directed
learning and motivation to learn contributed
to learning organization practices.
Learning Organization Theory is often
applied in different settings, particularly in
the areas of business, management and health.
In academic field, Learning Organization

31

International Journal of Education, Vol. 8 No. 1 December 2014

Theory is rarely employed and described

in detail. Therefore, this study describes
the importance of self-directed learning
and motivation to learn within the Learning
Organization Theory. Future research on
learning organization can utilize this theory as
a foundation. The addition of new knowledge
across different cultures and context will
contribute to knowledge that will be applied
in the evolution of a learning organization in
institutions of higher education.
A learning organization is a place where
skills are created, acquired and knowledge
is passed between individuals, units and
levels. To realize the creation of a learning
organization, an organization needs to identify
factors that affect the learning organization.
Thus, the outcomes of this research can be
used as a guide in designing and planning
the development and pattern of the learning
organization at institution of higher education
in Malaysia. 42.2 % of self-directed learning
and motivation to learn to predict the
learning organization. The outcomes of this
study could be the foundation for the initial
development of a learning system. Systems
can enhance self-directed learning practices
in an establishment. Motivation to learn can
be fostered within each individual in the
organization.
In addition, the results of this study
can be a guideline for institutions of higher
education in developing plans and policies
for prescribing culture knowledge by making
learning an ongoing process. Institutions
of higher education can use the results of
this study to provide a basis for continuous
learning for self-directed learning and
motivation to learn. Therefore, the results of
this study can be used for the improvement
of the National Higher Education Strategic
Plan (PSPTN) in strengthening research and
innovation, to improve the quality of teaching
and learning and to build and sustain culture
of lifelong learning. Not only that, this study
may also be referred to the increase in system
performance assessment index (KPI) in every
32

institution of higher learning to increase

the quality of teaching and learning. Thus,
indirectly, it will have a huge impact on the
learning organization. This study will be an
important reference for policy on institutions
of higher education in Malaysia.
References
Ali, A. K. (2012). Academic staffs
perceptions of characteristics of learning
organization in a high learning institution.
International Journal of Educational
Management, 26(1), 55-82.
Ambrose, M. L., & Kulik, C. T. (1999).
Motivation research in the 1999s. Journal
of Management, 25(3), 231-292.
Antonacopoulou, E. P. (2006). The relationship
between individual and organizational
learning; New evidence from managerial
learning practices. Management Learning,
37(4), 455-472.
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Razavieh, A. (1990).
Introduction to research in education.
New York: Holt, Rineheart & Winstan.
Bartlett, J. E., Kotrlik, J. W., & Higgins,
C. C. (2001). Organizational research:
determining appropriate sample size in
survey research. Information Technology,
Learning, and Performance Journal,
19(1), 43-50.
Bierema, L. L. (1998). The process of the
learning organization: Making sense of
change. National Assocition of Secondary
School Princples, 83(406), 46-57.
Birdthistle, N. (2008). Family SMEs in
Ireland as learning organization. Learning
Organization, 15(5), 421-436.
Blackman, D., & Henderson, S. (2005). Why
learning organization do not transforms.
Learning Organization, 12(1), 42-56.
Brookfield, S. D. (2009). Self directed
learning. In Maclean, R. and Wilson, D.
(Eds), International of Education for The
Changing World of Work (pp. 2615-2627).
Berlin: Springer Science.
Bui, H. T., & Baruch, Y. (2011). Learning
organization in higher education:

Nur Farhanah K., et all., Relationship Between Self-Directed Learning, Motivation to Learn Toward Learning Organization

An empirical evaluation within an

international
context.
Management
Learning, 43(5), 514-544.
Candy, P. C. (2004). Self directed learning is
good for both society and the individual.
Department of Education, Science and
Training. San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass.
Chang, S. C., & Lee, M. S. (2007). A study
on relationship among leadership,
organizational culture, the operation of
learning organization and employees job
satisfaction. The Learning Organization,
14(2), 155-185.
Colquitt, J. A., Lepine, J. A., & Noe, R. A.
(2000). Toward an integrative theory of
training motivation; A meta-analytic path
analysis of 20 years of research. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 678-707.
Conferrore, S. J. (2010). Building a learning
organization: Counities of practice, selfdirected learning, and continuing medical
education. The Journal of Continuing
Education in The Health Professions, 17,
5-11.
Dannapfel, P., Peolsson, A., & Nilsen, P.
(2014). A qualitative study of individual
and organizational learning through
physiotherapists participation in a
research project. International Journal of
Clinical Medicine, 5, 514-524.
Edwards, D. (1999). Motivation and emotion.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.
Field, G. H., & Abelson, M. A. (1982). A
reconseptualization and proposed model.
Human Relation, 33(1), 181-222.
Gaile, A. (2013). External factors facilitating
development of the learning organizations
culture. Journal of Business Management,
7, 130-140.
Garrison, D. R. (1997). Self directed learning:
Toward a comprehensive model. Adult
Education Quarterly, 48(18), 18-33.
Goldstein, H. (2001). Appraising the
performance of performance appraisals.
IEEE

Gusho, L. P. (2013). What are the differences

among adult student regarding selfconfidence and motivation to learn?
Journal of Educational and Social
Research, 3(2), 351-357.
Hancock, D. (2004). Cooperative learning
and peer orientation effects on motivation
achievement. Journal of Education
Research, 97(3), 159-166.
Hays, J. M., & Hill, A. V. (2001). A preliminary
investigation of the relationship between
employee motivation/vision, service
learning, and perceived service quality.
Journal of Operations Management,
19(3), 335-349.
Hiemstra, R. (2008). More than three decades
of self directed learning; From whence
have we come? Adult Learning, 114(5),
5-8.
Hodson, C. (2001). Psychology and work.
New York, NY: Taylor and Francis Inc.
Houle, C. O. (1961). The inquiring mind: A
study of the adult who continue to learn .
Medison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Iwasiw, C. L. (1987). The role of the teacher
in self directed learning. Nurse Education
Today, 7(5), 222-227.
Klein, H. J., Noe, R. A., & Wang, C. (2006).
Motivation to learn and course outcomes;
The impact of delivery mode, learning
goal orientation, and perceived barriers
and enablers. Personnel Psychology(59),
665-702.
Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self directed learning:
A guide for learners and teachers. New
York: Association Press.
Levine, L. (2006). Integrating knowledge
and processes in a learning organization.
Information Systems Management, 1, 2133.
Long, H. B., & Morris, s. (1995). Self - directed
learning of women with breast cancer.
Adult education quarterly. American
Association for Adult and Continuing
Education, 367-380.
Malik, E. M., & Danish, Q. R. (2010). Impact
of motivation to learn and job attitudes
33

International Journal of Education, Vol. 8 No. 1 December 2014

on organizational leaning culture in

public service organizaton of Pakistan. A
Research Journal of South Asian Studies,
25(2), 217-235.
Malik, M. E., & Ghafoor, M. M. (2011).
Organizational effectiveness: A case
study of telecommunication and banking
sector of Pakistan. Far East Journal of
Psychology and Business, 2(1), 37-48.
March, J. (1991). Exploration and exploitation
in organizational learning. Organizational
Sciences, 2, 71-87.
Miller, M. P. (2010). Are first year
undergraduate student nurses prepred
for self directed learning. Nurses Times,
106(46), 21-24.
Morris, W. (1970). The American Heritage
Dictionary of The English Language.
New York, NY: American Heritage.
Munroe, D., Schumaker, J., Carr, S. (Eds)
(1997). Motivation and culture. New
York,
Noe, R. A. (1986). Trainee attitudes and
attributes: Neglected influence of training
program effectiveness. Academy of
Management Review, 11, 736-749.
Nyhan, B., Cressey, P., Tomassini, M.,
Kelleher, M., & Poell, R. (2004). European
perspectives on the learning organization.
Journal of European Industrial Training,
28(1), 67-92.
Nzuve, S. M., & Omolo, E. A. (2012). A study
of practice of the learning organization
and its relationship to performance among
Kenyan Commercial Banks. Problem of
Management in The 21st Century, 4, 4556.
Pantouvakis, A., & Bouranta, N. (2013). The
link between organizational learning
culture and customer satisfaction :
Confirming relationship and exploring
moderating effect. The Learning
Organization, 20(1), 48-64.
Pinder, C. C. (1998). Work motivation in
organizational behavior. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

34

Redding, J. (1997). Hardwriting the learning

organization. Training and Development,
51(8), 61-67.
Rowley, J. (1998). Creating a learning
organization in higher education.
Industrial and Commercial Training,
30(1), 258-271.
Sackmann, S. A., Rehart, E., & Friesl, M.
(2009). Sustainable change; Long-term
efforts toward developing a learning
organization. Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, 45(4), 521-549.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A.
(2009). Research method for business
students. London: Pearson Education.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline:
The art and practice of the learning
organization. London: Century Business.
Senge, P. M., Roberts, C., Ross, R. B., Smith,
B. .., & Kleiner, A. (1994). The fifth
discipline field book: Strategies and tools
for building a learning organization. New
York: Berkley Publishing Group.
Singh, K. (2010). An analysis of relationship
between the learning organization and
organization culture in Indian business
organization. Organizations and Markets
In Emerging Economies, 1(1), 142-165.
Tannenbaum, S. I., & Yulk, G. (1992). Training
and development in Wirk Organizations.
Annual review of Psychology, 399-441.
Tanyaovalaksna, S., & Li, X. (2013). There a
relationship between individual learning,
team learning and learning organization.
Alberta Journal of Educational Reseacrh,
59(1), 1-16.
Tegnant, M., & Pogson, P. (1995). Learning
and change in the adult years: A
development perspective. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Theodore, J. (2012). Learning organization,
the American employee and manager,
and the development role of the social
science. Global Journal of Management
and Business Research, 12(4), 7-10.
Tough, A. (1979). The adult learning projects.
CA: San Diego.

Nur Farhanah K., et all., Relationship Between Self-Directed Learning, Motivation to Learn Toward Learning Organization

Tsai, Y. (2014). Learning organizations,

internal marketing and organizational
commitement in hospitals. BMC Health
Service Research, 14(152), 2-8.
Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J. (1996).
In action: Creating the learning
organization. Alexandria: AL.
Weldy, T. G., & Gillis, W. E. (2010). The
learning organizations: Variations at
different organizational level. The
Learning Organization, 17(5), 455-470.
White, J., & Weathersby, R. (2005). Can
university
become
true
learning
organization? Learning Organization
Journal, 12(3), 292-298.
Williamson, S. N. (2007). Development of a
self-rating scale of self directed learning.
Nurse Reseaecher, 14(2), 66-83.

Winterstein, A. P. (1998). Organizational

commitment among intercollegiate head
athletic trainers; Examining our work
environent. Journal of Athletic Training,
45(2), 198-204.
Wlodkowski, R. J. (1999). Enhancing adult
motivation to learn; A comprehensive
guide for teaching all adults. San
Francisco: CA: John Wiley and Sons.
Yaghoubi, M., Raeisi, A. R., Afshar, M.,
Yarmohammadian, M. H., Hasanzadeh,
A., Javadi, M., & Ansary, M. (2010).
The relationship between learning
organizational
and
organizational
commitment among Nursing Managers
in Educational Hospital of Isfahan
University of Medical Sciences in 2008.
Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res, 15(2), 83-89.

35