UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER CENTRE FOR LABOUR MARKET STUDIES STEFAN AGIUS MSc HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT & PERFORMANCE

MANAGEMENT

'Managers are vital to the success of a workplace learning system'. Critically discuss with reference to relevant learning theories. This assignment attempts to go beyond a direct assessment of why managers1 are considered vital, if so, for the success of a workplace learning system. It will rather attempt to understand learning and the extent that employees need someone more experienced to guide their workplace learning; how the rationale behind workplace learning has evolved; the principles that underline a successful workplace learning system; and the part that managers play in building and supporting this system. The focus will then be to identify if in fact managers are to be considered vital for a successful workplace learning system or rather how they can make themselves vital for its success. All this will be discussed with reference to learning theories, primarily Situated Learning. The first part gives a brief overview of the critical role learning has today as well as its distinction from training. The second part discusses workplace learning and the importance it has today within the contemporary organisation. An overview and criticism of situated learning is given before moving on to understand the relevance of other learning theories. Workplace learning is then discussed in further detail initially through formal and informal learning, and then through factors that affect learning within the workplace. This leads to a discussion on developments in the workplace which highlight the extent that learners seek someone more experienced to guide or co-ordinate their learning, and the key role that a manager can play in this process. The final part will discuss the evolution of the managers role and the important shift towards the development of an employees intrinsic motivators. An overview of workplace practices that hinder learning opportunities will be given as well as the importance the manager needs to give them for a workplace learning system to be successful. Finally the managers vital position will be discussed, first through his/her positive traits and personal attributes, and then through other external factors to the manager but that still fall within the wider internal organisational context.
1

For the purposes of this assignment, the manager is defined as a line manager responsible for a group of subordinates who do not have any further subordinates

The importance that learning has taken within the organisation today can be identified through the ample literature and research that has been conducted on the subject. Stern and Sommerlad encapsulate this correctly by stating that learning has become the new buzzword and is often prefaced according to its location (workplace), duration (lifelong) or breadth (lifewide) (citied in Felstead et al., 2005:4). All three play an important role in what we nowadays know as the 21st century learner (Lambert, 2001) and the learning organisation (M1 U1:10), and are considered beneficial as they have knowledge and intellectual capital as their focus considered as keys to success in the new economy. (Lahteenmaki et al. citied in Slotte et al., 2004:5). Thus it is an

inevitable reality that learning is important at the individual, collective, and organisational levels (Slotte et al., 2004). Such words clearly have a strong impact on the critical role that learning plays today and the way it is viewed as part of the wider economic context in our society. It is a fact of reality that being at an educational institution, at the workplace, or at home, we all need to be more knowledgeable all the time. It is important to understand that learning should not necessarily result in a tangible output such as a qualification or a particular skill. We are learning all the time through any intentional or unintentional auxiliary knowledge gained through our daily interactions. Our minds are constantly opening up to new perspectives of seeing, thinking, and communicating. Most of us still make the fundamental mistake of only associating learning with formal academic or training methods, thus it is important for a distinction to be made as they are often looked at as one and the same. Training is there for learning specific tasks or skills and is just one of the various tools used to enhance a workplace learning environment. Every time a new employee joins our company, he/she participates in a number of in-house training courses that focus on combining both that employees experience as well as the experience of the company. The scope is for that employee to learn through the combination of personal and organisational experiences. Learning on the other hand is an evolutionary process. It encompasses an individuals acquisition and assimilation of experiences, information, and daily activit ies (Pangarkar and Kirkwood, 2003). Our employees are trained to give them the necessary foundations, however it is then even more important for them to actively use these tools and enhance them within a continuous learning process. This brief

overview puts us in the right frame of mind to understand the importance of learning, the distinction from training and the relevance that they both have to workplace learning, the topic of our next discussion. Workplace learning has been defined as any knowledge or skills gained through any interactions in the workplace that result in changes in behaviour, understanding and/or attitude. It can take the form of on-the-job learning, experiential learning, informal learning, formal training and development, training transfer, and coaching, and can be forwarded by any advocate in the organisation (NWLN, 2008). Eraut, Raelin, and Evans take it a step further and highlight the key concepts that workplace learning is centred around mainly that it is concerned with refle ction on and learning from experience; based on real-life problem solving; [and] is a collective activity situated within a specific social context (citied in Clarke, 2004:5). Thus from all this we can establish that to understand workplace learning one has to recognize both formal and informal learning, as well as the use of productive reflection (CLMS, M1 U3:7) and experience to focus on actual problem solving with individual, socio-cultural, and organisational perspectives in mind. Given this statement, it might be useful to take a step backwards and understand why workplace learning has gained importance in todays organisation. It is a fact that we have moved towards a more globalised economy and competitive workplace, bringing significant changes on the way we look at the workplace and its employees. We are acknowledging more and more that educational institutions are not the sole learning providers but the workplace is playing a considerable role in this too. Employee skills have to develop continuously in line with the changing requirements of the contemporary organisation which has evolved from a Fordist model to a more knowledge-based one. It is clear that both employees and organisations have to be in a continuous educating, training, and learning mode, and the common ground for this is essentially the workplace. To understand better this shift in thinking, it is useful to take a brief look at how learning theories participated in the evolution of how we today look and understand the workplace.

When looking at workplace learning from a learning theories point of view, it is important to look at the context, subject matter and process of learning (Hammer, 2008:3)2. Given the mentioned key points, it is evident that conceptually workplace learning has taken a lot from Situated Learning Theory pioneered by Lave and Wenger (1991) where the focus [is] on the interactive and relational process within the individual and the collective; is tied to practice, experience, and participation, [and] the learner is self-motivated and can be independent if environment enables him to do so (Hammer, 2008:7). The learner needs to be in constant social interaction between him/herself and a community of practice which encapsulates the common beliefs and behaviours to be acquired by the learner. In time that learner as a novice shifts from the periphery of this community to its centre, becoming an expert, not only from a technical but also from a social and cultural point of view within that group or community. Once again the focus here is on the importance of the relationship between the employee within his/her workplace, the immediate environment consisting of the team, and the wider context consisting of the organisation. However it is important not to just focus on this aspect and thus isolate workplace learning from other learning theories. A wider view will now be taken to understand the evolution towards situated learning. One of the criticisms aimed at immeasurable learning of which workplace learning is often considered to form part of, compliments behaviourist theories where mainly through classical conditioning (Pavlov) and operant conditioning (Skinner) in the early 20th century, the focus is on what is observable, that is the action and measurable reaction, and the structured input and reward system (Hammer, 2008:4). Banduras social theory highlighted the importance of observation to form ideas and subsequent behaviour, as well as the impact of the environment, behaviour, and ones psychological processes on personality. In the 1960s, Cognitive Theorists took Banduras perspective further and focused on the inner happenings of an individual where knowing, thinking, memory, and problem solving are important pre-conditions for processing in order to be in a position to learn. Through Social Development Theory pioneered by Vygotsky, the attention now focused on the

Source was given as a power point presentation and sent by email to all students

fundamental role that social interaction has within the process of cognitive development, and the learner interaction with a person or entity that has higher knowledge regarding a specific task to situation. This, when attributed to the workplace, can be seen as another important step towards the recognition of a managers important role in co-ordinating learning. Situated Learning Theory was then brought to the forefront, expanding further on the individual and the collective and providing the fundamental basis for workplace learning in that learning is the individual engaging with the social aspect, and not only through personal interactions as Vygotsky and others proposed (Billet, 2002). Adult and Experiential learning also moved in this direction, taking in account self-motivation, experiences, reflection, and essentially putting the individuals experience as the point of departure, as well as shifting the responsibility to employees to address and take hold of their learning (Billett, 2002). It is however important to point out that Situated Learning Theory, although closely related to workplace learning, has been criticized of not being representative of the contemporary workplace (Rainbird et al. citied in Lee et al., 2004), on the basis of what happens to an expert when fullparticipation is achieved, and on what happens to learning that takes place outside the community of practice (Fuller et al. citied in Lee et al. 2004). Given the above criticism which makes sense given the constant progression of the contemporary workplace, a more dynamic evolution of this theory can be attributed to Engestrom with his developments on expansive learning, essentially focusing on the action-oriented process of constructing and reconstructing learning, the transformation of the community of practice itself, and the evolution of the objects, tools and structures within the workplace (Lee et al., 2004:9). Engestroms development adds an important perspective to workplace learning which is potentially encountered within ones workplace when a new employee is introduced within an existing team with its established practices. The learning process in one where the new employee is absorbing the existing practices, whilst team peers are learning from potential ideas and new practices that the employee brings with him. This learning process, if managed correctly, can be extremely beneficial for the whole team and is one of the key responsibilities of the manager within a workplace learning system.

Given that we went over briefly the evolution of learning theories keeping the workplace learning in mind, as well as the dynamic nature of learning and the workplace, another important aspect to understand better workplace learning, is that of recognizing both formal and informal learning, both of which take place in varying degrees in the workplace. The core differences that have been highlighted between the two aspects of learning are in the areas of control, the physical location, and the prediction of learning outcomes (Macneil, 2001). These three areas are reflected in the extent of independence which workplace learners have in expressing their choice of learning approach, the physical location where learning takes place for workplace learners, and the extent where you can reliably predict the outcome of learning which in the case of informal learning can be somewhat difficult. Thus, although workplace learning can essentially take both forms of learning, workplace learners will need to gain highly developed skills in critical reflectivity, be able to question tacit assumptions and beliefs, and also consider alternative solutions to problems, for informal learning to be effective (Macneil, 2001). Critical reflectivity is an important aspect which is sought after from employees within the workplace potentially through incorporating double-loop learning (Argyris citied in Macneil, 2001). It is useless to look and tackle daily events at face value. If one doesnt question these events, both from an individual aspect and also by including his/her co-workers or managers input, that individual cannot learn sufficiently and thus evolve quicker and become much more independent in his learning and decision-making process. Billett on the other hand believes that pigeonholing workplace learning as formal or informal takes a lot from the human capacity of making choices and imposing such choices within the constructive process of thinking-actinglearning (Billett, 2002). Given that we now have a good understanding of workplace learning from a theoretical aspect, it is useful to start digging deeper and turn our attention directly to the workplace and the extent that employees seek someone more experienced to guide their workplace learning. Within the workplace, activities are structured by factors which have an effect on the kind and quality of learning that occurs through work. Ashton (2004) argues that it is important to look at organisational structure to understand how it affects the learning process and why employees acquire different levels of knowledge and skills. Billett (2002) also mentions the historical, cultural, and

situational factors within the workplace. Thus it is clear that we need to look at the workplace holistically to understand how employees are affected or conditioned in their learning. Ashton (citied in Lee et al., 2004:16) through a series of direct interviews with employees identified several factors within organisations that affect workplace learning, amongst which hierarchical structuring of relationships, design of jobs, movement of employees, organisational decisions about learning, and decisions about system of rewards. Individual agency as well as formal and informal interactions between employees are also other key factors (Lee et al., 2004:17). Watson (citied in Lee et al., 2004) conceptually amplified this further to take note of both the official and unofficial aspects of such organisational activities as well as the importance of looking at the structure as made up of dynamic and not just static entities, on similar lines to what Engestrom did with expansive learning. Thus it can now be argued that there are three key components that condition workplace learning: the dynamic organisational structure in its official and unofficial form, employee agency, and employee interactions. This organisational structure is one which has been experiencing constant changes due to the prevailing rapid economic change, moreover in these recent years where an uncertain scenario is even more dominant and headcount decreases are becoming the order of the day. This change is producing an organisational structure with a flatter hierarchy as a means of increasing communication at all levels of the organisation, increasing team work further to enhance knowledge-sharing, and thus resulting in a shift from individual to shared learning and knowledge (Appelbaum et al., Proehl, citied in Macneil, 2001). The individuals personal history, culture, and experiences plays an important role here, as it influences the way in which that individual understands and engages his team peers, resulting in a potential social versus individual practice (Billett, 2002). However this flatter structure can imply that in such situations, employees are potentially looking at their team peers for learning guidance, which in some cases may not necessarily be the right thing given that team peers may help to shortcut processes and thus find the easiest or shortest way around (Purcell and Hutchinson, 2007). Employees are also tending to manage their learning needs so that they mi nimise supervisors involvement (Boud and Middleton, 2003). However this individual learning does not imply that it is

effective as it can be fragmented, unfocused or the employee becomes strategically complacent (Hodkinson, 2008). This can result in rather ineffective learning and thus a manager figure is needed as fundamentally they are still critical agents in the people and performance casual chain who can create effective team functioning......and they play the strongest part in structuring peoples actual experience of the job (Purcell and Hutchinson, 2007b:4). Applying this to the workplace, one can often see that employees do not automatically seek their manager when they need to tackle an issue, but more often they go directly to their team peers. The manager has to thus focus on this by making sure that what is being learnt from team peers is a close as possible to his/her ideas. At the end of the day, joint attention and shared problem solving is needed to create a process of cognitive, social, and emotional interchange (Hausfather, 1996), something that a manager is after and which further highlights the importance of a co-ordinator for a positive workplace learning environment to be fully effective. Laves tailors (Billett, 1996) and Billetts hairdressing salon apprentices (Billett, 2002) studies are good examples in understanding how such work practices are intentionally formulated and co-ordinated so that formal and informal learning are combined in the workplace. Given that most of the learning within the workplace is not tangible thus not structured or planned, it is important for someone to understand what is going on and make sense or use of it, in this case the manager himself (Eraut et al., 1999:3). Thus, another key point is that of identifying what additional knowledge and skills need to be brought on board as well as co-ordinating team work, consultation, knowledgesharing, and observation. All these are daily occurrences in the workplace, and need to be fully managed to provide a more effective and enriching workplace learning experience (Eraut et al., 1999:3). It is now on these managers roles that we will elaborate further to understand better their role within a successful workplace learning system. A quote from Slotte sets the tone for the final part of this assignment, in that People still see their superiors as role models and therefore, managers with their own behaviours and communication styles set the pattern for the whole team. There has thus been a big development since the Marxist perspective which viewed managers as maximizing returns at the expense of their employees and that they find disguised ways and means to control and encourage workers to see their interests as

identical to their employers (M1 U4:5). Going back to our prior identification of organisational structure, employee agency, and employee interaction as the main factors that have an impact on workplace learning, today managers have the key role within the organisation to serve as the interface between the organisation and the workforce (Macneil, 2001:1). One can argue that this has always been the case, however they are more than ever effective in putting in practice the policies that HRM and HRD want to implement, ultimately to achieve strategic organisational goals by identifying, developing and supporting the appropriate knowledge, skills, commitment, and performance in people (Macneil, 2001:3). This is quite a big responsibility, and thus it is inevitable that the manager is seen as having a pivotal role within the workplace. However let us take a brief look at the evolution of the role of the manager within the workplace. The role of the manager has changed significantly from what was essentially instructing employees what to do and how to do it. Taylors influence in the early 20th century focused the attention away from the expertise of the worker and more on the decisions and ideas of management (M1 U3:5), an approach pioneered by Henry Ford, where the focus was on organisation, making sure that employees know how to perform a limited number of tasks efficiently. LeBow and Spitzer (2002) sum up the evolution of the managers role in a three phase evolution: 1. Top-Down: where the focus was on controlling and limiting employee access to resources; 2. Reward Driven: where the focus was on improving productivity through external motivators such as money; and 3. Situational Accountability: where the focus is on delegating more responsibility to the employee and improving their engagement and trust as a way to improve performance. The big shift for the manager has thus been that of developing intrinsic motivators for improving knowledge and performance rather than using extrinsic motivators. Amongst these intrinsic motivators one can find motivation and self-belief which go hand in hand with the employee having the right challenges, the right micro-climate and the right style of management. The key person in potentially helping and sustaining the former intrinsic motivators, but more importantly having a strong impact on the latter mentioned points, is the manager. It is the manager who has a lasting

influence on the micro-climate of the workplace and the creation of a favourable learning environment where employees work hand in hand, both in knowledge sharing and in problem solving. This is a very important element for those who are managed, and the influence on workplace learning is stronger than through formal learning activities (Eraut el al., 1999). Once the importance of the manager focusing on individual intrinsic motivators vis-a-visworkplace micro-climate has been established, attention needs to be turned on workplace practices that formulate the way and the tasks employees can participate in, as learning outcomes would be severely limited for those who would have been limited from participating fully (Billett, 2002). Within the workplace there can be several factors that limit learning outcomes, such as gender, race, status, connections within organisation, factions, or even excessive control of employees (Lee et al, 2004). Several case-studies have been made that feature a number of such factors, amongst which Lave & Wengers (1991) newcomers and old-timers, Hughes & Bernhardt (1999) full and part-time workers, or Darrahs (1996) teams positioned differently in the workplace ( all cited in Billett, 2002). It can be argued that these factors and case studies all raise the importance that the manager has to have in recognizing and tackling these limiting factors so that employees can be positively geared towards workplace learning. Another important aspect to take note of, as it also can vary due to the size of the workplace, is the extent to which workplace learning becomes more or less formalised (M1 U3:10). A study on SMEs in UK and Singapore highlights how an owner-manager run firm or an SME is different than a blue-chip company in that learning can possibly be more easily formalised within the large organisation, although this does not imply more training or at better standards. This insight has to be taken in the context that formality and informality need to be balanced out according to the size and capacity of the workplace. Too much informality can lead to inadequate practices whereas too much formality can lead the manager to lose touch with the learning and skills that are being developed on a daily basis in the workplace (M1 U3:11), or difficulties in linking learning to organisational performance (M1 U3:20). Thus insofar it has been established that the manager has a key part to play at the employee micro level, mainly focusing on their psychological and sociological being through the focus on intrinsic motivators, organisational practices that may limit

learning outcomes, as well as the formalisation of workplace learning. So fundamentally, what should the manager aim for to make his position vital within the overall workplace learning system? Employees look at the relationship with their line manager as being important and powerful (Purcell and Hutchinson, 2007a), so it would be useful to start off with what employees attribute as positive traits in their manager. From a study conducted by Eraut et al. (1999), amongst the traits cited were dynamic, has a clear objective, fair, standard, loyal to subordinates, innovative, drives things forward, expects high level of independence from staff, makes people feel they are important in their niche, encouraging, advises rather than influences, and promotes a blame-free culture. These are all various attributes that should be part of a managers DNA if the aim is to establish a positive and trustful relationship with employees. From a wider perspective, a manager should not look at either workplace learning or the employee one-dimensionally but a more elaborate approach needs to be taken in order to understand all the elaborate components mentioned in this assignment of what makes the employee and a workplace learning system merge together successfully. It is a delicate process and not easily achievable. A manager must act objectively in this approach and not subjectively as there are situations where their approach may be viewed as one with the intention of protecting their own interests (Ashton, 2002), or manipulating the employees decision-making (Nixon and Carroll, 1994). This is extremely incorrect and will definitely not foster trust from their subordinates. However it is not just the personal attributes that were previously mentioned by Eraut, that make a managers position stronger with his/her employees, but there are also other factors which need to be in place for a manager to be put in a vital position within the workplace. Billett (2002) mentions structures, norms, values and practices with workplace learning in mind. All these can actually be embodied within the organisational culture which needs to be congruent with what the manager is trying to establish within a workplace learning system. The necessary flexibility from senior management to focus on long-term goals and not just keep short-term objectives in mind needs to be embedded within this culture. This can go hand in hand with a lifelong learning mentality as this induces the organisation to be focused on all aspects that Billett mentions so as to facilitate

effective learning experiences throughout the various stages of the career of its employees. This is ever more important given the significance that talent management has in todays competitive environment. Although at this level, HR play a significant role (M1 U4:29), it is inevitable that they have to work closely with managers to retain talent, as policies on their own will serve for nothing without the right implementation, follow-ups, and feedback. In fact, the HR/Manager relationship is crucial as inadequate HR practices can be rescued by good management as well as potentially negated by weak managers (Purcell and Hutchinson, 2007). Thus it is clear that both senior management and HR have to be on the managers same wavelength. However at times senior management errs when putting the wrong person in a managerial position. More than often these would be people with specific technical experience who would have been serving the company for a number of years, but who would fundamentally having little managerial experience or know-how. Given the attributes that a manager needs to have which have been mentioned before, as well as the fact that he/she needs to act like a sponge absorbing as much as possible on the ground information and using it in an emotionally intelligent way to enhance the workplace experience, as well as liaising between HR and senior management to develop the learning experience within the whole organisational structure, it is clear that not everyone can be good at managing people. Management is an emotionally laborious process [citied in Domagalski T., 1999] and the role of a manager has to be as dynamic as the organisation and its workplace learning system is today. If the manager is not capable of doing this, the shift from just motivating and appraising employees to creating a workplace climate which promotes learning to develop further the individual, the team and ultimately the organisation would be highly unlikely. Finally it is worth noting that the workplace learning discourse will continue to evolve. High Performance Work Practices have been a recent development in this respect, highlighting the positive outcomes they can produce if tackled in the right manner, essentially factoring in the intrinsic job satisfaction of employees (Sparham and Sung, 2007). However given all the positive attributes of a workplace learning system, senior management can take the view that a learned workforce and a successful workplace learning system do not necessarily mean a thriving and successful organisation

(Hodkinson, 2008). This can potentially have a negative impact in the near future, as organisations try to battle with the bottom-line through cost-cutting exercises and reduced HR budgets at the scope of workplace learning. This assignment has taken a look at how learning plays a central part in todays world, society, and ultimately workplace. It has shown how workplace learning, within its formal and informal nature, is closely related to the theory of situated learning. It has established that the dynamic organisational structure, employee agency, as well as employee interactions are the key factors that affect workplace learning. Employee agency has a strong impact into the willingness to participate actively and critically in both formal and informal learning structures, however the need for a coordinator is a must. The manager has been identified as such co-ordinator in order for workplace learning to be more effective and enriching. Intrinsic motivators have increased in importance today for employees to actively participate within a workplace learning system, and the manager has an important role to play in identifying and focusing on these motivators as well as focusing on workplace practices that hinder workplace learning. All the points mentioned highlight the vital position that a manager holds within the success of a workplace learning system, however to attain this position it was argued that having positive personal traits which are conducive to create a positive and trustful relationship with employees, as well as an environment and organisational culture that is supportive of the manager and a positive workplace system, is definitely a must.

REFERENCES
Billett, S. (2002) Critiquing Workplace Learning Discourses: Participation and Continuity at Work, Studies in the Education of Adults 34(1): 56-67, in CLMS (2006) MSc in HRD and PM (Version 1) Reading 952

Billett, S. (1996): New Prospects for Vocational Education and Training. International Conference on Vocational Education and Training. Taipei, Taiwan [online]. Available: http://www98.griffith.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/10072/11141/1/taipei_pap.pdf [2008, Dec 22] Boud, D. and Middleton, H. (2003) Learning from Others at Work: Communities of Practice and Informal Learning, Journal of Workplace Learning 15(5): 194-202, in CLMS (2006) MSc in HRD and PM (Version 1) Reading 948 Clarke, N. (2004) HRD and the Challenges of Assessing Learning in the Workplace, International Journal of Training and Development 8(2): 142-156

CLMS (2006) MSc in Human Resources Development and Performance Management, Module 1, Unit 1. Centre for Market Studies

CLMS (2006) MSc in Human Resources Development and Performance Management, Module 1, Unit 3. Centre for Market Studies

CLMS (2006) MSc in Human Resources Development and Performance Management, Module 1, Unit 4. Centre for Market Studies Domagalski, T. (1999) Emotion in Organizations: Main Currents, Human Relations 52(6): 833-852, in CLMS (2006) MSc in HRD and PM (Version 1) Reading 971 Eraut, M. Alderton, J. Cole, G. Senker, P. (1999) The Impact of the Manager on Learning in the Workplace, Speaking Truth to Power: Research and Pol icy on Lifelong Learning, in CLMS (2006) MSc in HRD and PM (Version 1) Reading 958 Felstead, A. Fuller, A. Unwin, L. Ashton, D. Butler, P. Lee, T. (2005) Surveying the Scene: Learning Metaphors, Survey Design and the Workplace Context, Journal of Education and Work 18(4): 359383, in CLMS (2006) MSc in HRD and PM (Version 1) Reading 966

Guest, D. Michie, M. Conway, N. Sheehan, M. (2003) Human Resource Management and Corporate Performance in the UK, British Journal of Industrial Relations 41(2): 291-314, in CLMS (2006) MSc in HRD and PM (Version 1) Reading 964

Hammer, N. (2008, 29 November): A Brief Overview of Learning Theories, Lecture 1. FHRD - Malta Hausfather, S. (1996) Vygotsky and Schooling: Creating a Social Contest for Learning Action in Teacher Education (18): 1-10 [online]. Available: http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/courses/edpsy317/sp03/challenge-reports/kurt.htm [2008, Dec 20]

Hodkinson, P. (2008) Improving Workplace Learning: Learning Cultures The Key, TAFE NSW [online]. Available: http://www.icvet.tafensw.edu.au/ezine/year_2008/feb/thinkpiece_workplacelearning.htm [2008, Dec 21] Lambert, M. (2001, 4 July): 21st Century Learners - and their approaches to learning. Eighth International Literacy and Education Research Network Conference on Learning, Spetses, Greece [online]. Available: http://ultibase.rmit.edu.au/Articles/sept02/lambert1.htm [2008, Dec 21]

LeBow, R. and Spitzer, R. (2002) Accountability. Berrett-Koehler Publishers [online]. Available: http://www.accountable-workplace.com/managers-role.html [2008, Dec 18]. Lee, T. Fuller, A. Ashton, D. Butler, P. Felstead, A. Unwin, L. Walters, S. (2004) Workplace Learning: Main Themes and Perspectives, Learning as Work Research Paper no.2, Leicester Center for Labour Market Studies, in CLMS (2006) MSc in HRD and PM (Version 1) Reading 951 Macneil, C. (2001) The Supervisor as a Facilitator of Informal Learning in Work Teams, Journal of Workplace Learning 13(6): 246-253

National Workplace Learning Network (2008) About Workplace Learning [online] Available: http://www.campaign-for-learning.org.uk/workplacelearningnetwork/aboutworkplacelearning [2008, December 18]. Nixon, J. and Carroll, M. (1994) Can a Line Manager also be a Counsellor?, Journal of Workplace Learning 6(1): 10-15

Pangarkar, A. and Kirkwood, T. (2003) Workplace Learning Beyond the Classrom: How a Learning Environment Empowers Employees to Develop Imaginative Strategies and Innovative Practices , CMA Management, [online]. Available: http://www.centralknowledge.com/members/pdfdocs/learnarticles/Workplace%20learning%20may03. pdf [2008, Dec 22]

Purcell, J. & Hutchinson, S. (2007)a. Rewarding Work: The Vital Role of Line Managers, CIPD [online]. Available:www.cipd.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/72035864-98CD-495A-8CB996989B96E73C/0/vitalrolmgrca.pdf [2008, Dec21]

Purcell J. & Hutchinson S. (2007)b. Learning and the Line: The Role of Line Managers in Training, Learning and Development. CIPD [online]. Available: http://www.cipd.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/45B74613-3157-4064-93CD-7EA30AA8A172/0/learnline.pdf [2008, Dec 21] Slotte, V. Tynjala, P. Hytonen, T. (2004) How do HRD Practitioners Describe Learning at Work?, Human Resource Development International 7(4): 481-499, in CLMS (2006) MSc in HRD and PM (Version 1) Reading 954 Sparham, E. Sung, J. (2007) High Performance Work Practices: Work Intensification or Win -win?, [online]. Available: http://www.scribd.com/doc/6911832/High-Performance-Work-Practices-WorkIntensification-or-WinWin [2009, Jan 12] Svensson, L. Ellstrom, P. Aberg, C. (2004) Integrating Formal and Informal Learning at Work, Journal of Workplace Learning 16(8): 479-491. Swan, J. Scarbrough, H. Robertson, M. (2002) The Construction of ''Communities of Practice'' in the Management of Innovation, Management Learning 33(4) 477-496, in CLMS (2006) MSc in HRD and PM (Version 1) Reading 968