The Nature of Learning Climate in Public Administration: A Cross-Sectorial Examination of Its Relationship With Employee Job Involvement, Proactivity, and Creativity

• DOI: 10.1177/0275074018804667
• Published date: 01 May 2019
• Date: 01 May 2019
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074018804667

American Review of Public Administration

2019, Vol. 49(4) 425 –440

© The Author(s) 2018

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0275074018804667

journals.sagepub.com/home/arp

Article

Introduction

Learning as a strategic asset has received increasing attention

in both public- and business-sector organizations, highlight-

ing employees’ learning as a pivotal factor in their struggle to

achieve efficiency and knowledge management (Ellinger &

Cseh, 2007; Garvin, 2000; Kim & Wright, 2007; Marsick,

2009). Although public administration researchers have

studied the role of employee learning through formal learn-

ing and policy training (Grin & Loeber, 2007; Howlett, 2012;

Wright & Kim, 2004), learning climate in the public sector

remains unexplored, as does the link between learning cli-

mate and employee proactivity and creativity (Gilardi &

Radaelli, 2012; Maden, 2012; Sabel & Simon, 2011). An

alternative to constructed and formal learning might be a

learning climate, an environment that becomes an integral

part of the public-service workplace. It transpires through

organic, routine means that are part and parcel of public-sec-

tor employees’ workplace. Recent research in managerial

literature has increasingly acknowledged the advantages of

learning climate as a key motivator in business-sector orga-

nizations (Eldor & Harpaz, 2016; Govaerts, Kyndt, Dochy,

& Baert, 2011; Hauer, Nordlund, & Westerberg, 2012). Yet

only a handful of studies in the public administration litera-

ture have examined the advantage of learning (Busenberg,

2001; Common, 2004; Gilardi & Radaelli, 2012; Grin &

Loeber, 2007; Kim & Wright, 2007; Maden, 2012; Rashman,

Withers, & Hartley, 2009), while the learning-climate con-

cept and its effect on employee performance remain largely

untouched in the public-sector arena.

This study focuses on the nature of the learning-climate

construct and its relationship with employee job involve-

ment, proactivity, and creativity in the public administration

arena. Recent years have seen growing scholarly interest in

public administration, accompanied by public demands for

effective, innovative, and flexible public-service agencies

and personnel (Boston, 2011; Hefetz & Warner, 2012). Thus,

exploring whether learning climate can improve employee

involvement, proactivity, and creativity would help public

administration theory and practice alike in identifying a fac-

tor that may tackle these contemporary challenges and

demands (Howlett, 2012).

804667ARPXXX10.1177/0275074018804667The American Review of Public AdministrationEldor and Harpaz

research-article2018

1University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

2University of Haifa, Israel

Corresponding Author:

Liat Eldor, Management Department, The Wharton School, University

of Pennsylvania, 3214 Steinberg-Dietrich Hall, 3620 Locust Walk,

Philadelphia, PA 19104-6370, USA.

Email: leldor@wharton.upenn.edu

The Nature of Learning Climate in Public

Administration: A Cross-Sectorial Examination

of Its Relationship With Employee Job

Involvement, Proactivity, and Creativity

Liat Eldor1 and Itzhak Harpaz2

Abstract

To study the relation of learning climate in public organizations to desired employee performance in this sector, namely

proactivity and creativity, we engaged a sample of 227 public-sector employees, 295 business-sector employees, and their

supervisors, from an array of public and business organizations in Israel. The hypothesized relation was examined as a

moderated mediation model where employment sector (public vs. business) moderated the indirect relation of learning

climate to employee proactivity and creativity (through job involvement). Results were consistent with our theoretical

model: Learning climate in the public-sector workplace was positively associated with employee job involvement, proactivity,

and creativity. The indirect relation of learning climate to employee proactivity and creativity (through job involvement)

was moderated by employment sector (public vs. business). We conclude that learning climate is meaningful for public

administration theory and practice and deserves dedicated sectorial research as it is an important tool to foster employee

performance, tapping into present challenges before the public sector.

Keywords

learning climate, job involvement, proactivity, creativity, organizational learning

426 American Review of Public Administration 49(4)

Moreover, we investigated whether the public organiza-

tions and the business organizations differed in regard to the

relation between learning climate and employee job involve-

ment. We further examined the possibility of a conditionally

indirect relationship between learning climate and employee

proactivity and creativity, moderated by the given employ-

ment sector through job involvement (a moderated-mediated

model). The nature of the differences between the two sec-

tors has long been a topic of academic dispute (Rainey,

2003). By the traditional perspectives these sectors differ

considerably, whereas the New Public Management (NPM)

doctrine explicitly argues that “management is management”

regardless of sector (Hood & Peters, 2004). Utilizing two

sources and time points, this study thus contributes to this

debate by determining whether employment sector (public

vs. business) has a role in the relation of learning, job

involvement, and employee proactivity and creativity.

Learning Climate in Public Administration: Theory

and Hypotheses

The nature of learning climate. A public-service sector organi-

zation is a system whose mission is to serve its clients, the

public (Eldor & Shoshani, 2017). Its employees exercise a

systematic thinking process in regard to citizens’ needs,

obtaining official knowledge, seeking creative solutions to

ongoing constraints, and skillfully implementing them;

learning is essential at each stage of the process. Marsick and

Watkins (1990) define learning climate as “the way individ-

uals acquire, interpret, reorganize, change information,

skills, and feelings . . . It is primary to the way in which

people construct meaning in their personal and shared orga-

nizational lives” (p. 4). For Senge (1990), learning culture is

an environment in which employees continuously cultivate

new patterns of thinking, constantly gain knowledge, share

visions, and think systematically. From these perspectives,

learning climate can be defined as the organization’s prac-

tices, norms, and behaviors from which employees can cre-

ate, acquire, and transfer knowledge which benefits

employees as well as their organizations (Argyris & Schon,

1996; Garvin, 2000; Pedler, Burgoyne, & Boydell, 1997;

Schein, 1993; Watkins & Marsick, 1997). Yet as noted, only

few studies in the public administration literature have exam-

ined the nature of learning, and its effect on public-service

personnel performance has remained largely overlooked.

Moreover, due to common public-sector characteristics such

as the constraints of governmental regulation and rigid orga-

nizational structure, research has mainly focused on struc-

tured and formal leaning (Gilardi & Radaelli, 2012). Formal

learning often involves policy evaluation, technical learning

(Fiorino, 2001), instrumental learning (Gilardi & Radaelli,

2012), and policy-oriented learning (Howlett, 2012), given

its dependency on policy plans and governmental regula-

tions, rules, and procedures. In contrast, informal learning, as

embedded in a learning climate, is largely generated organi-

cally on the basis of ongoing observation of daily organiza-

tional actions and situations in the workplace (Marsick &

Watkins, 2003). Nevertheless, the learning climate in public

management has remained largely untouched (Gilardi &

Radaelli, 2012).

Inconsistent results of studies on the efficacy of formal

learning programs have led scholars of broader managerial

concerns to consider the idea of integral embedded learning

as an organic component of employee activities and environ-

ment (Garvin, 2000; Marsick, Watkins, Callahan, & Volpe,

2009). Marsick and Watkins’s (2003) conceptual model of

learning climate made a significant contribution to this shift

in scholarly perspective. They hold that in such an environ-

ment, employees continuously learn, gain knowledge, think

systematically, and are encouraged to engage in activities

that foster initiation and the cultivation of their performance

and knowledge. Doing so helps government employees meet

the organization’s public mission and encourages continual

learning that supports change, flexibility, and creativity

(Argyris & Schon, 1996; Garvin, 2000; Pedler et al., 1997;

Schein, 1993; Senge, 1990; Watkins & Marsick, 1997).

Nurturing learning climate in public-sector workplaces is

therefore essential because it produces innovative ways to

tackle the contemporary challenges and demands of the pub-

lic sector.

Marsick and Watkins’s (2003) conceptual model of learn-

ing climate concurs with the psychological climate perspec-

tive of L. R. James, Hater, Gent, and Bruni (1978). It explains

how employees perceive the significance of organizational

attributes when assessing their well-being in their workplace

(L. A. James & James, 1989). Learning climate can thus be

defined as public-service employees’ perceptions of organi-

zational activity, and how these activities allow them to cre-

ate, obtain and share knowledge, and to engage in learning

behaviors such as inquiry, dialogue, group discussions, and

creating a shared vision (Marsick & Watkins, 2003; Marsick

et al., 2009). Marsick and Watkins (2003) accordingly pro-

posed several interrelated components to be incorporated

into a general learning-climate construct: creating continu-

ous learning opportunities, promoting inquiry and dialogue,

encouraging team learning, sharing a collective vision, and

providing strategic leadership for learning. This structural

view also coincided with L. A. James and James’s (1989)

perspective that a multidimensional psychological climate

has a higher order construct comprising assessment of the

degree employees’ work environment affects their organiza-

tional well-being. Empirically speaking, previous studies’

research has indeed explored the learning-climate concept as

a higher order construct, particularly as its dimensions

strongly correlate (.66 ⩽ r ⩽ .75; see Egan, Yang, & Bartlett,

2004; Ellinger, Ellinger, Yang, & Howton, 2002; Joo, 2010;

Song, Joo, & Chermack, 2009; Wang, Yang, & McLean,

2007; Yang, 2003; Zhang, Zhang, & Yang, 2004). But not

one has been conducted in the public or nonprofit