iDocQ 2016 20x20 presentation
•Télécharger en tant que PPT, PDF•
1 j'aime•791 vues
PechaKucha 20x20 presentation delivered at iDocQ 2016 at the University of Strathclyde on June 23rd 2016.
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
En vedette
En vedette (11)
Similaire à iDocQ 2016 20x20 presentation
Similaire à iDocQ 2016 20x20 presentation (20)
Plus de Lyndsey Middleton
Plus de Lyndsey Middleton (7)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
iDocQ 2016 20x20 presentation
- 1. Lyndsey Jenkins 1st year PhD student Edinburgh Napier University Centre for Social Informatics Institute for Informatics and Digital Innovation School of Computing
- 2. Enhancing the capacity for workplace learning and innovation in Scotland Supervisors: Professor Hazel Hall and Professor Robert Raeside
- 7. Leap into Research (Edinburgh Napier University, March 2016)
- 9. Workplace learning and innovation Cognitions Behaviours Organisational context Motivations Provide a valuable framework for dissemination by skills agencies
- 11. Methods 1. UK Labour force survey 2. Workplace employee relations survey 3. The employment surveys dataset 4. European labour force survey, European working conditions survey, International labour organisation database
- 13. Multi-method approach Quantitative Qualitative The ‘what?’ and the ‘why?’ Why this method?
- 14. Triangulation Combined or separate… they still make sense! survey interviews focus groups McNamara, Fealey, Casey, O’Connor, Patton, Doyle & Quinlan, 2014). Enrich data quality Validates data Why this method?
- 15. Social Cognitive Theory Bandura (1986): Self-efficacy Pálsdóttir, A. (2013). Social cognitive theory. In Wilson, T. D. (Ed.). Theory in information behaviour research. Sheffield, UK: Eiconics Ltd. [E-book] ISBN 978-0-9574957-0-8. EnvironmentBehaviour Intra-personal factors
- 16. Social Cognitive Theory Pálsdóttir, A. (2013). Social cognitive theory. In Wilson, T. D. (Ed.). Theory in information behaviour research. Sheffield, UK: Eiconics Ltd. [E-book] ISBN 978-0-9574957-0-8. EnvironmentBehaviour Intra-personal factors “Knowledge creates the precondition for change” (Bandura, 1997) Triadic Reciprocal Causation
- 18. Findings from literature search so far… Organisation Individual innovation capabilityAttributes Individual abilityPersonality Behaviours Individual skills
- 20. Find me elsewhere: Email: L.Jenkins@napier.ac.uk Twitter: @LJenk2015 PhD Blog: lyndseyjenkins.org Napier Page: http://www.iidi.napier.ac.uk/l.jenkins
Notes de l'éditeur
- Hi everyone! My name is Lyndsey and I am a first year student at Edinburgh Napier University. My research takes place within the Centre for Social Informatics and I am part of the Institute for Informatics Digital Innovation as my research fits in with the research areas of the group. I'm going to give a brief overview of what my research is and how far along I am with it.
- So that is the title of my research. I am looking at how people learn in the workplace, and more specfically whether workplace learning can be used to enhance individual innovation capability and no organisational innovation as much research does. I am supervised by Hazel and Robert so a good combination of employment and social informatics. I am also funded partly by SDS who are one of the main beneficiaries of my research outcome.
- WPL and innovation benefit employers in terms of training employees to meet the goals of the organisation. Innovative employees can help provide a competitive advantage over other organisations if they can respond change and overcome challenges. Sweden reformed its VET system for courses to include workplace learning. This was de to the changing demands of the labour market and it was found that skills gaps were not being filled. Employers contribute to placements and internships so trainees are trained to meet the demands needed. Finland reformed its university system and created 31 polytechnic universities instead. Courses focused more on work / employment and practical training so education was based on employability and making sure people were skilled one complete. Workplace learning has VALUE! Scotland spent £75 million worth of funding for modern apprenticeships between 2012-13 with nearly 26,000 starting an apprenticeship. In England, the government provide £1500 for each apprentice (aged 16-18) hired and employers don’t pay national insurance contributions. More services incorporating workplace learning, including apprenticeships (National Apprenticeships Service in England, and Skills Development in Scotland). Sweden and Finland have reformed their Vocational, Education and Training (VET) systems to incorporate more workplace learning.
- Workplace learning: Two types (informal and formal) Lots of influencing factors Depends on organisational context You CAN learn to innovate. Boer & during (2000); De Laat (2013) However…
- Findings form literature search so far… Learning to innovate can benefit organisations Organisations can train staff to innovate, to approach challenges differently. Training delivery to suit needs. Leads to highly skilled employees. Tavassoli & Karlsson, 2015, p.1890. Organisations can then… Respond quickly to change. Develop and implement new ideas. Competitive advantage over other organisations.
- Explain research questions in slightly more detail and why it is important. Which skills are important to the development of a capacity to innovate?
- Explain research questions and why it is important. How can successful workplace learning be identified within organisations? What are the determinants of successful workplace learning?
- The main output of the research will be a framework that presents individual and contextual determinants of successful workplace learning, showing the relationship between workplace learning and the development of innovation capability. It is anticipated that as well as developing theoretical perspectives this work will have practical value in policy development for Skills Development Scotland (SDS) Two main contributions: 1. Provide a valuable framework for dissemination by skills agencies. Factors that influence workplace learning and innovation. -sponsor of the study.
- Through me literature searching, both individual and organisational factors are important. Individual influences can be classified into three categories that are independent of organisational contexts). These are: (1) cognitive factors, i.e. mental processes that are involved in understanding and acquiring knowledge, such as an individual’s own ability to learn and previous experience that the learner has; (2) behavioural factors explain influences that relate to how individuals act or conduct themselves, such as participating in learning activities; and (3) motivational factors which initiate certain behaviours, such as self-belief in learning a new skill or wanting to develop new skills at work. Organisational influences are things such as the culture the organisation has (such as promoting knowledge haring and a positive learning environment) or the strategy of the organisation.
- The second contribution is to fill a knowledge gap. Currently these is no framework that incorporate all several factors categories. Many research focus on certain elements like organisation solely but do not consider other factors like behavioural, cognitive or motivational that are also important. There is also little research into the relationship between workplace learning and innovation so I am going to explore this further to ensure that results highlight relationships. Two main contributions: 2. Fill knowledge gap: No framework combining individual and organisational factors. Lack of research into the relationship between workplace learning and innovation.
- Explain methods Stage 1 – to see if there are any trends in training and skills (could help incorporate this in empirical work) and to practice stats. Stage 2 – Own empirical work. To determine how organisational culture (such as knowledge sharing and training provision) and strategy are linked to the development of innovation within the workplace. Statistical models will be produced to gain insight into the factors that make training effective in terms of increasing skills development in the workplace.
- Stage three is one of the most important stages as this is what makes the research important in terms of practical uses. Its necessary to get perspectives form practitioners as they are the on Stage three: Practitioner perspectives on success factors. Explore potential constraints. Interviews with practitioners (from SDS). Workshop to deliver results. Focus groups to discuss results further. es working in the service and their views and options are important as my results may not reflect what they encounter / feel.
- I'm going to use a multi method approach so that I can combine both quantitative and qualitative data. This is because quantitative data (ie, numbers) does not always give you the in-depth detail. How much an be interpreted from relationships and umbers? The qualitative data will give more detail in terms of meaning of the data and also incorporate views and opinions of employees and practitioners – you cant get this from quantitative data. Also, you an encourage elaboration etc doing focus groups and interviews to find reasons behind trends in the data. Methods – why choose this method? Multi-method approach Mix of quantitative and qualitative. Numbers vs detail???
- Multi method approach also enabled triangualtion of data so validation will be increased if all data suggests the same thing. Data can either be combined as w hole study or used separately and still make sense so if one stage required further research then this could be done. Triangulation is a powerful technique that facilitates validation of data through cross verification from two or more sources. In particular, it refers to the application and combination of several research methods in the study of the same phenomenon.
- Add Bandura’s theory if this is what we decide on - image So I'm currently working on the framework that my research will be based on. As its very multi-disciplinary (not just information science), ill probably struggle to find an exact fit. A lot of my research focuses on how we learn (to innovate) so you would imagine that I’d be including some learning theories in there, however, some of these don’t fit – operant and classical conditioning for example. But theirs like Social learning theory (Bandura) and how we learn form others might contribute as well as cognitive theories that help us understand how we process information. there will definitely be theories based on knowledge and information sharing as this is a core aspect of my research
- Findings form literature search so far… There are many different types of innovation! Product or service Managerial Organisational (procedures, policies, strategy) Innovation skills are not actually ‘innovation skills’: Individual innovation behaviour (Wu, Parker & De Jong, 2014, p.1512). Innovative work behaviour (Battistelli, Montani & Odardi, 2013, p.27).
- So what I have found again is that there is not just one influence, there are many different types. This can range from the personality and characteristics of a person including their own attribute and behaviours down to the organisational context, and like workplace learning, whether the organisation facilitates the innovation process to happen. Influences on being about to innovate Characteristics and attributes (of individual) Behaviours of individual and employer Organisational context
- So for me, my next steps are to further justify my methods and approach so that I know what I am doing. This will help me solidify my framework that the research will be based on. This will help me when approaching organisations as I can explain the approaches and benefits. It will also help me during data analysis of the datasets as I will be able to analyse the datasets based on aspects of he framework of my research. Next steps Further justification of methods and philosophical approach. Solidify framework. Identify potential organisations for empirical work. Data analysis – secondary data.
- Thank you for listening and these are the details of where you can find me other than here. I tweet and blog quire regularly so the details are there for you. The QR code takes you straight to my Napier web page so no need to type the details in. Any questions? References Al-Samarraie, H., Teo, T., Abbas, M. (2013). Can structured representation enhance students’ thinking skills for a better understanding of E-learning content? Computers and Education, 69, 463-473. Allred, S.L., Harrison, L.D., & O’Connell, D.J. (2013). Self-Efficacy: An Important Aspect of Prison-Based Learning. The Prison Journal, 93(2), 211-233. Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Battistelli, A., Montani, F., & Odoardi, C. (2013). The impact of feedback from job and task autonomy in the relationship between dispositional resistance to change and innovative work behaviour. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22(1), 26-41. Boer, H., & During, W.E. (2001). Innovation, What Innovation? A comparison between product, process and organizational innovation. International Journal of Technology Management, 22(1/2/3), 83-107. De Laat, M., & Schreurs, B. (2013). Visualizing Informal Professional Development Networks: Building a Case for Learning Analytics in the Workplace. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10) 1421–1438 Detlor, B., Ruhi, U., Turel, O., Bergeron P., Choo, C.W., Heaton, L. & Paquette, S. (2006). The effect of knowledge management context on knowledge management practices: an empirical investigation. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(2), 117–12. Ellinger, A.D., & Cseh, M. (2007). Contextual factors influencing the facilitation of others' learning through everyday work experiences. Journal of Workplace Learning, 19(7), 435-452. Holt, E.B., & Brown, H.C. (1931). Animal drive and the learning process, an essay toward radical empiricism. New York: H. Holt and Co. Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential Learning. Experience as The Source of Learning and Development. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. Leve, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: University of Cambridge Press. Li, J., Brake, G., Champion, A., Fuller, T., Gabel, S., & Hatcher-Busch, L. (2009). Workplace learning: the roles of knowledge accessibility and management. Journal of Workplace Learning, 21(4), 347-364. McNamara, M.S., Fealy, G.M., Casey, M., O’Connor, T., Patton, D., Doyle, L., & Quinlan, C. (2013). Mentoring, coaching and action learning: interventions in a national clinical leadership development programme. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 23, 2533-2541. Mesto, S., & Kianto, A. (2014). Vocational students’ perspective on professional skills workshop learning. Journal of workplace Learning, 26(2), 128-148. Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science 5(1), 14–37. Ramage, C. (2014). Learning to learn through university accredited work-based learning: a threshold conception. Journal of Workplace Learning, 26(8), 488- 510. Tavassoli, S., & Karlsson, C. (2015). Persistence of various types of innovation analysed and explained. Research Policy, 44, 1887-1901. Wu, C.H., Parker, S.K., & de Jong, J.P.J. (2014). Need for Cognition as an Antecedent of Individual Innovation Behaviour. Journal of Management, 40(6), 1511-1534. Wyatt, J.C., & Sullivan, F. (2005). Keeping up: learning in the workplace. British Medical Journal, 331, 1128-1132.