Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-26T10:30:12.608Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Learning Agility: Many Questions, a Few Answers, and a Path Forward

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

D. Scott DeRue ,
Susan J. Ashford  and
Christopher G. Myers
D. Scott DeRue*
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Susan J. Ashford
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Christopher G. Myers
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
*
E-mail: dsderue@umich.edu, Address: Stephen M. Ross School of Business, University of Michigan, 701 Tappan Street, Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article responds to and extends the commentaries offered in response to our focal article on learning agility. After summarizing the basic themes in the commentaries, we use this response to clarify points that were unclear in our original article and push back on certain points raised in a few of the responses. In particular, we reframe the rigor–relevance debate from an “either–or” to a “both–and” discussion, clarify the relationship between learning agility and ability to learn, explain how learning agility in organizations moves beyond cognition, and describe how exchanges such as the one we have collectively engaged in here are central to progressing the scientific study on learning agility and its effective use in practice.

Type
Response
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 5 , Issue 3 , September 2012 , pp. 316 - 322
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Argyris, C. (1991). Teaching smart people how to learn. Harvard Business Review, 69, 99–109. Google Scholar
Arun, N., Coyle, P. T., & Hauenstein, N. (2012). Learning agility: Still searching for clarity on a confounded construct. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 290–293. Google Scholar
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. Google Scholar
Beck, J. W. (2012). Does learning agility vary primarily at the between- or within-person level of analysis? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 312–315. Google Scholar
Block, J. (1995). A common view of the five-factor approach to personality description. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 187–215. Google Scholar
Blume, B. D., Ford, J. K., Baldwin, T. T., & Huang, J. L. (2010). Transfer of training: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 36, 1065–1105. Google Scholar
Carette, B., & Anseel, F. (2012). Epistemic motivation is what gets the learner started. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 306–309. Google Scholar
De Meuse, K. P., Dai, G., Swisher, V. V., Eichinger, R. W., & Lombardo, M. M. (2012). Leadership development: Exploring, clarifying, and expanding our understanding of learning agility. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 280–286.Google Scholar
DeRue, D. S., Ashford, S. J., & Myers, C. G. (2012). Learning agility: In search of conceptual clarity and theoretical grounding. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 258–279. Google Scholar
DeRue, D. S., Nahrgang, J. D., Wellman, N., & Humphrey, S. E. (2011). Trait and behavioral theories of leadership: An integration and meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Personnel Psychology, 64, 7–52. Google Scholar
DeRue, D. S., & Wellman, N. (2009). Developing leaders via experience: The role of developmental challenge, learning orientation, and feedback availability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 859–875. Google Scholar
Gulati, R. (2007). Tent poles, tribalism, and boundary spanning: The rigor–relevance debate in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 775–782. Google Scholar
Hezlett, S. A., & Kuncel, N. R. (2012). Prioritizing the learning agility research agenda. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 296–301. Google Scholar
Johnson, R. E., & Scott, B. A. (2012). Learning agility requires proper action identification. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 309–312. Google Scholar
Kelley, E. L. (1927). Interpretation of educational measurements. Oxford, UK: World Book Company. Google Scholar
Kolb, D. (1974). Organizational psychology: An experiential approach. Englewood, CO: Prentice-Hall. Google Scholar
Lombardo, M. M., & Eichinger, R. W. (2000). High potentials as high learners. Human Resource Management, 39, 321–329. Google Scholar
Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1, 3–30. Google Scholar
Marsh, H. W. (1994). Sport motivation orientations: Beware of the jingle–jangle fallacies. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 16, 365–380. Google Scholar
Mitchinson, A., Gerard, N. M., Roloff, K. S., & Burke, W. W. (2012). Learning agility: Spanning the rigor–relevance divide. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 287–290. Google Scholar
Schaie, K. W. (1994). The course of adult intellectual development. American Psychologist, 49, 304–313. Google Scholar
Vandewalle, D. (2012). A growth and fixed mindset exposition of the value of conceptual clarity. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 301–305. Google Scholar
Wang, S., & Beier, M. E. (2012). Learning agility: Not much is new. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 293–296. Google Scholar
Woodrow, H. (1946). The ability to learn. Psychological Review, 53, 147–158. Google Scholar