A study on factors affecting learning organization

Chia sẻ: Huỳnh Ngọc Toàn | Ngày: | Loại File: PDF | Số trang:10

Thêm vào BST

Báo xấu

18
lượt xem 0
download

Download Vui lòng tải xuống để xem tài liệu đầy đủ

The primary purpose of this research is to study the level of penetration of Learning Organization concept in Sugar Industry. The research is focused on identifying the factors that determine the existence of the Sugar factory as a learning organization.

Chủ đề:

Bình luận(0) Đăng nhập để gửi bình luận!

Lưu

Nội dung Text: A study on factors affecting learning organization

International Journal of Management (IJM) Volume 7, Issue 7, November–December 2016, pp.134–143, Article ID: IJM_07_07_014 Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijm/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=7&IType=7 Journal Impact Factor (2016): 8.1920 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com ISSN Print: 0976-6502 and ISSN Online: 0976-6510 © IAEME Publication A STUDY ON FACTORS AFFECTING LEARNING ORGANIZATION Ms. Reshma G Sable Assistant Professor, Research Scholar, I2IM, CHARUSAT, Changa, Gujarat, India Dr. Govind B Dave Dean, Principal, FMS, I2IM, CHARUSAT, Changa, Gujarat, India ABSTRACT Purpose: The primary purpose of this research is to study the level of penetration of Learning Organization concept in Sugar Industry. The research is focused on identifying the factors that determine the existence of the Sugar factory as a learning organization. Design/methodology/approach: The research was carried out at Sangamner Sahakari Sugar Karkhana Ltd., Sangamner, Ahmed nagar district. The strengths of variables were tested using factor analysis, while the literature review was conducted to explore the concept of learning organization. Findings: The result shows that learning organization concept consists of six different aspects which are primarily related to the environment of the organization. Research limitations/implications: The study is limited to the selected generalization of the findings for other sugar industry/firms factories operating in Ahmed nagar district. Further research can be carried out with more sample size and extended to other firms for better generalization. This can strengthen the validity of current measurement tool. Originality/value: The research presents specific variables that affect learning organization in the sugar industry. Key words: Learning organization, Organizational Learning, Organizational Leadership, Sugar Industry Cite this Article: Ms. Reshma G Sable and Dr. Govind B Dave, A Study on Factors Affecting Learning Organization. International Journal of Management, 7(7), 2016, pp. 134–143. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=7&IType=7 http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 134 editor@iaeme.com
A Study on Factors Affecting Learning Organization 1. INTRODUCTION The concept of learning organization is more prominently reflected in the set up where there is a scope for continuous improvement in the organizational processes through the learning mechanism. Even though learning is considered to be a process; related to living beings, the organization as a whole was viewed as living organization since 1990s, as the concept of learning organization (LO) was popularised (Senge 1990, Watkins and Marsick 1993,Garvin 1993). LO is more of an environmental concept, which occurs at all levels of the organization. The research work carried out by Narver and Slater (1990) revealed that a company’s ability to learn and innovate has been demonstrated to be a key driver of the company’s capability to increase revenues, profits and economic value. The concept of LO was more respected because Peter Senge (1990) placed importance on organizational leadership which creates an environment for flourishing, where people continually expand their capacity to generate desired results, where new and valuable patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free, where people are continually learning how to learn together, and where people are bonded firmly in the same boat with clear future destiny. In addition Garvin, Edmondson, and Gino (2008) have also identified that organizational learning is strongly influenced by the behavior of leaders. When leaders actively question and listen to employees and thereby prompt dialogue and debate people in the institution feel encouraged to learn. Organizational listening and learning plays an efficient role in the development of followers. There has been an ample amount of research carried out in the area of learning organization in various industries. But no attempt is made to test the level of penetration of LO concept in sugar industry. In other words, there is no evidence of research being carried out to identify the various factors that affect the existence of learning organization in sugar industry. Therefore, the present research aims to identify the factors that contribute in building the organization as a learning organization in sugar industry. The present research will demonstrate theoretical as well as an empirical significance. The concept of LO can be best understood with the help of the learning organization model given by Peter Senge (1990). Empirically the strength of variables contributing in building the learning organization can be tested. Further the empirical findings can be made applicable to the organizations operating in sugar industry. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. The Concept and Process of LO The first significant work on learning organization is always credited to Peter Senge (1990). While laying the foundation of learning organization model, Peter Senge (1992, 1993) has discussed about the three most important level of work, required for existence of learning organization. The first level talks about development, production and marketing of products and services. The second level focuses on the designing and development of the systems and processes for production. The third level is concerned with the thinking and interactions among organizational employees. In other words it tells us that the quality of organizational thinking and interactions directly affects the organizational systems and processes and production and delivery of products and services. 2.2. Antecedent / Independent Variables of the Study Any organization can be referred as a learning organization only when it demonstrates sustainable improvement in three major areas. Viz. development in production process and marketing of the finished products, development of the organizational system as a whole and critical thinking and effective interactions among organizational employees. This expected area of development is possible when the organization is aware and conscious about few important factors that affect the process of building the learning organization. Literature review has resulted in few major factors that affect the learning organization in sugar industry. These can be classified into five major categories: http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 135 editor@iaeme.com
Ms. Reshma G Sable and Dr. Govind B Dave • Organizational Environment is defined as the prime factor that determines the existence of learning organization. This is facilitated by the defined organizational culture and continuous communication and daily dialog and inquiry. • Organizational Leadership is defined as a variable that is demonstrated through the senior management commitment and support, their extent of empowering others, their ability to re-enforce learning, effectiveness with which the vision is communicated and imbibed among employees, and continuous focus on knowledge acquisition, development, utilization and sharing. • Effectiveness of Organizational Processes and Practices is defined as a factor that demands the organization as a whole, to learn from the past mistakes and expects employees to introspect and identify the reason/s for the failures. At the same time it focuses on innovations and research and for this it strives to adapt and up-grade to the most updated technology. Learning organization demands all its employees to demonstrate and perform to maximum of their abilities. • Organizational Commitment is defined as a factor which expects employees to be adaptable to any change. It narrows down to the individual employee’s capacity to learn and explore new things. • Organizational Citizenship Behaviour is defined as a factor that affects the sustainability of learning organization. It focuses on continuous learning, training and development. It demands employees to be self-disciplined, cooperate and collaborate, voluntarily help each other and demonstrate the ability to work as a team. Depending on the classification of the factors affecting learning organization, a conceptual framework as mentioned in Figure-1, was developed and researched upon in sugar industry at Ahmedanagar district in Maharashtra. The current research is aimed at identifying the various factors that are responsible for creating and sustaining a learning organization, especially in a sugar industry. For this purpose exhaustive literature review was carried out, which resulted in identifying five different factors (viz. Organizational environment, Organizational leadership, Organizational processes and practices, Organizational commitment, and Organizational citizenship behaviour), that can contribute in building and sustaining a learning organization. Figure-1 shows the diagrammatic representation of the linkages that can exist between the factors identified to affect the learning organization. It further demonstrates the process of formation and sustaining of learning organization with the prime focus on development, production and marketing, designing and developing the systems, processes for production and critical thinking and interactions among employees at all levels. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 136 editor@iaeme.com
A Study on Factors Affecting Learning Organization 2.3. Research Framework/Model Organizational Environment • Organizational Culture • Continuous Communication / Daily Dialog & Inquiry Organizational Leadership • Senior Management commitment & support • Empowering others • Re-enforcing learning • Shared vision • Knowledge acquisition, development, utilization and sharing Organizational Processes & Practices • Learning from mistakes / Action on LEARNING Reflection ORGANIZATION • Focus on innovation and research • Technological up gradation Organizational Commitment • Openness to change • Individual’s readiness & capacity to learn Organizational Citizenship Behaviour • Continuous learning • Training & development • Self-discipline • Team learning • Co-operation & collaboration • Voluntarily helping others Figure 1 Research Framework & Expected Outcome 3. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY The primary objective of the study is to identify the factors that affect the existence of learning organizations in sugar manufacturing industry. 4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The factors affecting learning organization and the strength of those factors were determined with the help of factor analysis. 4.1. Sample and Data Collection The data was collected from 138 employees of Sangamner Sugar factory. Convenience sampling method was adopted during data collection. The data represented employees belonging to all departments of sugar factory. 100% respondents were male, as sugar factory don’t employ female workers. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 137 editor@iaeme.com
Ms. Reshma G Sable and Dr. Govind B Dave 4.2. Data Collection Instrument The instrument used in data collection was self-constructed based on literature review and included 30 variables to be rated over on five point rating scale (from 1- Strongly disagree, 2- Disagree, 3- Neutral, 4- Agree, 5- Strongly agree). The scale had five major dimensions which combined various factors affecting learning organization. viz. Organizational Environment, Organizational Leadership, Organizational Processes and Practices, Organizational Commitment and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour. 5. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION The collected data was first of all subjected to identification of correlation between the variables used in study. It was observed that a multicolinearity was existing between the variables (as shown in Table-1), of the study hence the data was further subjected to the Factor Analysis. The data was analysed, using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). Factor analysis was used to identify the most prominent dimensions of learning organization that are more salient in manufacturing industry’s context. All 30 items were factor analysed using principal component analysis followed by Varimax rotation. Kaiser-Meyer- Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy resulted in the value 0.864, which is sufficiently large indicating that the sample is adequate. The Chi-Square value was also significant, i.e. 3370.858 at 435 degrees of freedom under Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity, which is significant at 0.05 level. The P-value is 0.000, for the test and therefore fails to provide sufficient premises to accept the null hypothesis. On the other hand it suggests that the alternative hypothesis is acceptable, which indicates that all variables under study are correlated. KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .864 Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 3370.858 df 435 Sig. .000 5.1. Table-2: KMO and Bartlett’s Test The initial factor solution resulted in six factors with eigen values greater than 1. Same is reflected under the scree plot obtained in factor analysis. Figure 3 Scree Plot Correlation Matrix http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 138 editor@iaeme.com
A Study on Factors Affecting Learning Organization Table 1 Co-relation Matrix Q-1 Q-2 Q-3 Q-4 Q-5 Q-6 Q-7 Q-8 Q-9 Q-10 Q-11 Q-12 Q-13 Q-14 Q-15 Q-16 Q-17 Q-18 Q-19 Q-20 Q-21 Q-22 Q-23 Q-24 Q-25 Q-26 Q-27 Q-28 Q-29 Q-30 Q-1 1.00 .613 .717 .599 .225 .483 .499 .470 .398 .430 .384 .311 .274 .109 .243 .483 .482 .497 .429 .495 .419 .307 .464 .514 .438 .566 .354 .344 .243 .483 Q-2 .613 1.00 .703 .487 .480 .387 .461 .486 .424 .306 .332 .347 .652 .497 .340 .242 .355 .299 .246 .279 .302 .497 .758 .688 .599 .469 .413 .560 .340 .242 Q-3 .717 .703 1.00 .583 .368 .521 .550 .459 .552 .383 .484 .539 .475 .340 .427 .422 .511 .449 .456 .462 .457 .460 .559 .561 .499 .476 .421 .473 .427 .422 Q-4 .599 .487 .583 1.00 .208 .418 .572 .383 .501 .443 .516 .512 .364 .289 .380 .349 .554 .554 .447 .522 .372 .345 .415 .370 .354 .356 .394 .500 .380 .349 Q-5 .225 .480 .368 .208 1.00 .090 .246 .331 .240 .192 .092 .227 .472 .441 .233 .135 .150 .141 .192 .178 .304 .450 .579 .381 .380 .427 .377 .447 .233 .135 Q-6 .483 .387 .521 .418 .090 1.00 .501 .537 .625 .430 .626 .539 .331 .181 .333 .490 .495 .377 .515 .439 .441 .279 .321 .396 .297 .340 .438 .312 .333 .490 Q-7 .499 .461 .550 .572 .246 .501 1.00 .477 .661 .466 .659 .576 .426 .317 .246 .404 .564 .528 .520 .567 .500 .328 .406 .428 .492 .380 .503 .532 .246 .404 Q-8 .470 .486 .459 .383 .331 .537 .477 1.00 .653 .455 .540 .380 .405 .265 .279 .449 .528 .449 .526 .550 .522 .595 .461 .406 .369 .346 .409 .440 .279 .449 Q-9 .398 .424 .552 .501 .240 .625 .661 .653 1.00 .480 .706 .611 .415 .345 .271 .427 .477 .446 .613 .478 .614 .486 .348 .390 .339 .343 .371 .366 .271 .427 Q-10 .430 .306 .383 .443 .192 .430 .466 .455 .480 1.00 .451 .433 .255 .200 .348 .426 .366 .298 .462 .423 .428 .409 .263 .185 .192 .416 .276 .246 .348 .426 Q-11 .384 .332 .484 .516 .092 .626 .659 .540 .706 .451 1.00 .641 .354 .248 .290 .382 .511 .386 .608 .569 .602 .311 .282 .369 .266 .230 .507 .364 .290 .382 Q-12 .311 .347 .539 .512 .227 .539 .576 .380 .611 .433 .641 1.00 .227 .217 .419 .307 .415 .332 .445 .417 .402 .284 .342 .246 .152 .261 .356 .285 .419 .307 Q-13 .274 .652 .475 .364 .472 .331 .426 .405 .415 .255 .354 .227 1.00 .710 .422 .087 .316 .221 .231 .171 .303 .466 .664 .667 .626 .296 .436 .547 .422 .087 Q-14 .109 .497 .340 .289 .441 .181 .317 .265 .345 .200 .248 .217 .710 1.00 .428 -.041 .130 .154 .121 .064 .237 .398 .605 .546 .525 .235 .402 .464 .428 -.041 Q-15 .243 .340 .427 .380 .233 .333 .246 .279 .271 .348 .290 .419 .422 .428 1.00 .097 .235 .251 .179 .278 .247 .228 .400 .289 .223 .261 .375 .293 1.00 .097 Q-16 .483 .242 .422 .349 .135 .490 .404 .449 .427 .426 .382 .307 .087 -.041.097 1.00 .513 .514 .451 .450 .448 .233 .188 .261 .293 .336 .327 .218 .097 1.00 Q-17 .482 .355 .511 .554 .150 .495 .564 .528 .477 .366 .511 .415 .316 .130 .235 .513 1.00 .768 .615 .724 .573 .294 .413 .429 .418 .172 .531 .505 .235 .513 Q-18 .497 .299 .449 .554 .141 .377 .528 .449 .446 .298 .386 .332 .221 .154 .251 .514 .768 1.00 .553 .579 .475 .224 .265 .340 .384 .202 .434 .385 .251 .514 Q-19 .429 .246 .456 .447 .192 .515 .520 .526 .613 .462 .608 .445 .231 .121 .179 .451 .615 .553 1.00 .740 .674 .396 .268 .298 .280 .297 .405 .343 .179 .451 Q-20 .495 .279 .462 .522 .178 .439 .567 .550 .478 .423 .569 .417 .171 .064 .278 .450 .724 .579 .740 1.00 .636 .372 .319 .320 .282 .349 .507 .420 .278 .450 Q-21 .419 .302 .457 .372 .304 .441 .500 .522 .614 .428 .602 .402 .303 .237 .247 .448 .573 .475 .674 .636 1.00 .453 .389 .365 .331 .429 .558 .322 .247 .448 Q-22 .307 .497 .460 .345 .450 .279 .328 .595 .486 .409 .311 .284 .466 .398 .228 .233 .294 .224 .396 .372 .453 1.00 .585 .440 .364 .435 .333 .442 .228 .233 Q-23 .464 .758 .559 .415 .579 .321 .406 .461 .348 .263 .282 .342 .664 .605 .400 .188 .413 .265 .268 .319 .389 .585 1.00 .685 .633 .440 .527 .604 .400 .188 Q-24 .514 .688 .561 .370 .381 .396 .428 .406 .390 .185 .369 .246 .667 .546 .289 .261 .429 .340 .298 .320 .365 .440 .685 1.00 .876 .461 .584 .608 .289 .261 Q-25 .438 .599 .499 .354 .380 .297 .492 .369 .339 .192 .266 .152 .626 .525 .223 .293 .418 .384 .280 .282 .331 .364 .633 .876 1.00 .416 .542 .615 .223 .293 Q-26 .566 .469 .476 .356 .427 .340 .380 .346 .343 .416 .230 .261 .296 .235 .261 .336 .172 .202 .297 .349 .429 .435 .440 .461 .416 1.00 .518 .455 .261 .336 Q-27 .354 .413 .421 .394 .377 .438 .503 .409 .371 .276 .507 .356 .436 .402 .375 .327 .531 .434 .405 .507 .558 .333 .527 .584 .542 .518 1.00 .649 .375 .327 Q-28 .344 .560 .473 .500 .447 .312 .532 .440 .366 .246 .364 .285 .547 .464 .293 .218 .505 .385 .343 .420 .322 .442 .604 .608 .615 .455 .649 1.00 .293 .218 Q-29 .374 .541 .464 .365 .375 .232 .470 .374 .270 .315 .335 .210 .480 .374 .277 .286 .445 .402 .222 .381 .352 .363 .542 .619 .644 .378 .685 .706 .277 .286 Q-30 .447 .529 .467 .342 .443 .361 .352 .464 .419 .346 .237 .221 .456 .311 .277 .271 .262 .265 .224 .313 .285 .525 .503 .532 .478 .576 .472 .596 .277 .271 http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 139 editor@iaeme.com
Ms. Reshma G Sable and Dr. Govind B Dave The six-factor solution accounted for 71.938% of variance. Total Variance Explained Extraction Sums of Squared Rotation Sums of Squared Initial Eigen values Loadings Loadings % of Cumulative % of Cumulative % of Cumulative Component Total Variance % Total Variance % Total Variance % 1 13.047 43.489 43.489 13.047 43.489 43.489 6.333 21.108 21.108 2 3.327 11.091 54.580 3.327 11.091 54.580 5.174 17.247 38.355 3 1.587 5.291 59.871 1.587 5.291 59.871 2.716 9.054 47.409 4 1.384 4.612 64.483 1.384 4.612 64.483 2.691 8.971 56.379 5 1.226 4.088 68.571 1.226 4.088 68.571 2.583 8.609 64.989 6 1.010 3.367 71.938 1.010 3.367 71.938 2.085 6.949 71.938 7 .930 3.100 75.037 8 .773 2.576 77.614 9 .752 2.508 80.122 10 .655 2.182 82.304 11 .633 2.112 84.415 12 .502 1.672 86.087 13 .438 1.461 87.549 14 .416 1.387 88.936 15 .396 1.322 90.257 16 .365 1.216 91.473 17 .327 1.090 92.563 18 .298 .993 93.556 19 .269 .896 94.452 20 .248 .828 95.281 21 .236 .787 96.067 22 .212 .705 96.772 23 .196 .655 97.427 24 .170 .566 97.993 25 .148 .494 98.487 26 .139 .462 98.949 27 .108 .361 99.310 28 .092 .307 99.617 29 .067 .224 99.841 30 .048 .159 100.000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Figure 4 Total Variance Explained http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 140 editor@iaeme.com
A Study on Factors Affecting Learning Organization In Rotated Component Matrix, items which had no strong loading (less than 0.5) on any of the factors were identified and consequently eliminated. Rotated Component Matrixa Component 1 2 3 4 5 6 Continuous questioning and feedback .302 .166 .137 .803 .246 .098 Organizational support for shared learning .135 .685 .059 .480 .261 .161 Contribution in organizational decision making .353 .401 .086 .582 .194 .305 Focus on productive reasoning skills .382 .200 .248 .453 .028 .437 Open systems of communication .070 .470 .127 -.061 .559 .056 Effective knowledge sharing .588 .172 -.015 .348 .065 .302 Promoting dialogue .576 .285 .273 .259 .024 .294 Contribution towards organizational goals and targets .667 .317 .015 .152 .332 -.011 Challenge employees to do better .761 .308 -.106 .134 .153 .238 Knowledge from internal and external environment .461 -.025 .011 .204 .425 .381 Transparency in sharing vital information .743 .186 .100 .072 -.036 .374 Knowledge creation and sharing .517 .114 -.020 .150 .049 .634 Zero or minimum mistakes .168 .835 .095 .029 .112 .198 Proper analysis of mistakes .066 .789 .074 -.174 .088 .303 Reflection and introspection of mistakes .076 .241 .171 .040 .139 .740 Continuous innovation .530 -.088 .176 .480 .182 -.087 Technological updation .661 .160 .493 .288 -.123 .026 Continuous R & D .550 .086 .479 .360 -.128 .027 Welcome change .825 .047 .167 .103 .117 .030 Acquiring new skills and knowledge .703 -.035 .428 .175 .161 .096 Easy adaptation to change .737 .137 .230 .001 .281 .044 Taping people’s commitment & capacity to learn .416 .451 -.071 .001 .576 -.030 Understand new changes .159 .726 .192 .190 .315 .140 Recognition for contribution .174 .744 .325 .327 .124 -.023 Learning for education and growth .146 .710 .409 .302 .080 -.102 Learning to stand in market competition .123 .142 .215 .350 .710 .160 Reinforcing level of knowledge and needs .329 .313 .675 .000 .259 .223 Value and reward collaboration .200 .506 .581 .097 .260 .140 Work and learn together .112 .420 .677 .159 .288 .085 Collective work towards common goal .109 .350 .297 .249 .619 .085 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. a. Rotation converged in 17 iterations. Figure 5 Rotated Component Matrix http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 141 editor@iaeme.com
Ms. Reshma G Sable and Dr. Govind B Dave The factors identified through Rotated Component Matrix, with strong loading (greater than 0.5) were placed together and labelled. Thus the Factor Analysis has resulted in identification of six major factors that are found to affect the learning organization in sugar manufacturing industry. The factors with loading with Eigen value greater than 0.5 are as follows: Factor Labeling Variable Details Loading Effective knowledge sharing 0.588 Promoting dialogue 0.576 Contribution towards organizational goals and targets 0.667 Challenge employees to do better 0.761 Factor-1: Transparency in sharing vital information 0.743 Organizational Leadership, Technological updation 0.661 Commitment & Innovation Continuous R & D 0.550 Welcome change 0.825 Acquiring new skills and knowledge 0.703 Easy adaptation to change 0.737 Organizational support for shared learning 0.685 Zero or minimum mistakes 0.835 Factor-2: Proper analysis of mistakes 0.789 Learning Organization Understand new changes 0.726 Recognition for contribution 0.744 Learning for education and growth 0.710 Reinforcing level of knowledge and needs 0.675 Factor-3: Value and reward collaboration 0.581 Team Work Work and learn together 0.677 Factor-4: Continuous questioning and feedback 0.803 Organizational Culture Contribution in organizational decision making 0.582 Open systems of communication 0.559 Factor-5: Taping people’s commitment & capacity to learn 0.576 Organizational Learning Learning to stand in market competition 0.710 Collective work towards common goal 0.619 Factor-6: Knowledge creation and sharing 0.634 Organizational Development Reflection and introspection of mistakes 0.740 6. CONCLUSION Literature review resulted in identifying various viz. Organizational environment, Organizational leadership, Organizational processes & practices, Organizational commitment, and Organizational citizenship behaviour. Empirically it is proved that the variables that affect the existence of learning organization in sugar industry can be classified into six different variables, viz., Organizational Leadership, Commitment, Innovation and Training, Adaptation to change, Learning Organization, Team Work, Organizational http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 142 editor@iaeme.com
A Study on Factors Affecting Learning Organization Culture, Organizational Learning, and Organizational Development. All these factors collectively were found to affect the existence of learning organization in sugar industry. All these factors are primarily contributing to the continuous process of building and sustaining learning organization. This is feasible only when the organizational focus is on development production and marketing, design & development of systems & processes for production and critical thinking and interactions among employees at all levels. 7. MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS The prime purpose of research is to identify the extent to which the concept of learning organization is penetrated in a sugar manufacturing factory. The various factors that affect the existence of learning organization is sugar manufacturing industry were empirically tested and identified. The current research also provides basic guidelines for further researches in similar and diverse industries. The research has demonstrated the validity of the claim that learning organizations also exist in sugar industry. Further the existence of learning organization in sugar industry is backed by various variables. If an organization focus more on nurturing the six significant factors identified through research, then it can certainly become a learning organization in future. In essence, the firm/organization in general and sugar industry in particular can concentrate its efforts on the new named variables to achieve progress for being learning organization. REFERENCE [1] Bechtold, B. L. (2000). Evolving to organizational learning. Hospital Materiel Management Quarterly, 21(3), 11-26. [2] Daft, R. L., & Huber, G. P. (1987). How organizations learn: A communication framework. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 5, 1-36. [3] Basim, H. N., Sesen, H, Sozen, C., &Hazir, K. (2009). The effect of employees' learning organization perceptions on organizational citizenship behaviors. Selcuk University Social Sciences Institute Journal. 22, 55-66. [4] Garvin, D.A., Edmondson, A.C. & Gino, F. (2008). Is yours a learning organization? Harvard Business Review, 86(3) 109-116. [5] Huber, G. P. 1991. The contributing processes and the literatures, Organizational Science, Vol. 2 N0. 1, 88-115. [6] Inkpen, A. C., & Crossan, M. (1995). Believing is seeing: Joint ventures and organizational learning. Journal of Management Studies, 32, 595-618. [7] Narver, J.C., and S.F. Slater. 1990. The effect of a market orientation on business profitability. Journal of Marketing (October) 54, no. 4: 20–35. [8] Senge P M (1990), The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, Currency Doubleday, New York. [9] Watkins, K.E., and V.J. Marsick. 1993. Sculpting the learning organization: lessons in the art and science of systemic change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [10] CMA. Dr. M. Sheik Mohamed and G. Saifudeen. An Empirical study on Learning Organization Practices in Tamil Nadu Newsprint and Papers Limited (TNPL), Karur District. International Journal of Management (IJM) , 7(2 ), 2 016, pp. 620 - 62 8 [11] Ms. Singh. N . and Dr. Kolekar , B . D Testing Reliability of Organizational Citizenship Behavior Scale (OCBS) f or Non - Teaching Staff in Academics , International Journal of Management (IJM) 6(9), 2015, pp. 55 - 66 . http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 143 editor@iaeme.com