The Relationship Between Transformational Leadership and Organisational Learning Capability with the Mediating Role of Perceived Human Resource Effectiveness

Abstract

The study investigates the relationship between transformational leadership (TL) and organisational learning capability (OLC) and explores the mediating role of human resource (HR) effectiveness. A quantitative survey method was used to gather data from the software industry in Pakistan through a self-administered questionnaire (N = 504). Both exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to check the reliability and validity of the research instrument. In addition, structural equation modelling (SEM) was used to test the proposed hypotheses. Research findings have demonstrated that TL positively affects OLC in software companies. Moreover, perceived HR effectiveness mediates the relationship between TL and OLC. Current research has several theoretical and practical implications as it extends the ability-motivation-opportunity (AMO) theory by considering perceived HR effectiveness as an important facilitator of a firm’s learning capability. This study provides valuable insights for organisational leaders to ensure HR effectiveness in terms of HR practices including recruitment, training and compensation for the development of learning capabilities. It also recommends managers to adopt TL for utilising HR effectiveness in order to improve learning at an organisational level.

Keywords

Ability-motivation-opportunity theory perceived human resource effectiveness organisational learning capability transformational leadership

Introduction

Software enterprises have experienced rapid growth in the South Asian region by leveraging business knowledge, technical capability and learning to attain competitive advantage (Khan et al., 2010). In Pakistan, software industry contributes significantly to the GDP. It has a 30% growth rate and it generates 4.5 billion dollars in revenues annually (P@SHA, 2008). It is a major contributor to the economy and exerts considerable efforts to provide better technological capability and a skilled workforce to attain competitiveness. In the software industry, several organisations face the dilemma of retaining skilled human resources all over the globe. As skilled human resource adds value, offers creativity, knowledge and new capabilities for effective organisational outcomes, organisations must consider employees as valuable assets to strengthen their learning capability (Pregnolato et al., 2017).

Organisational learning plays a crucial role in developing the capacity to create value and bring innovation to the knowledge-based market. The development of a firm’s knowledge capital and transformation of key knowledge into organisational learning (OL) is the greatest challenge to compete in the market (Amy, 2008). Intensive globalisation requires organisations to adapt to the changing environment by enhancing individual and organisational learning (Pasamar et al., 2019). Vashdi et al. (2019) observed that organisations are oriented towards developing employee learning ability through providing opportunities to develop new ideas and share knowledge. In knowledge-based firms, employees are encouraged to learn and share their knowledge with others not only for the sake of survival but also to attain sustainable competitiveness (Imran et al., 2016).

Organisational learning capability (OLC) is defined as an organisational process that comprises the acquisition, processing and transfer of ideas among team members that directly influence organisational performance (Obeidat et al., 2018). It can also be understood on the basis of ability-motivation-opportunity (AMO) theory which posits that the development of employee knowledge and learning capabilities leads to organisational success (Jerez-Gómez et al., 2019). Employees develop their skills and share knowledge with others in order to enhance organisational productivity (Gómez et al., 2004). AMO framework guides current research that intends to develop learning capabilities and knowledge through strengthening of leadership behaviour and HR processes.

Extant literature identified the antecedents of organisational learning including knowledge management, organisational innovation and leadership styles (García-Morales et al., 2012; Tan & Wong, 2015). According to Xie (2019), transformational leadership (TL) is a key determinant and facilitator of OLC because leaders help to create a learning environment, broaden the thinking pattern of employees and support positive organisational outcomes. TL is a participative leadership style that empowers employees to gain new knowledge and capabilities (Imran et al., 2016). Tipu et al. (2012) stated that leaders inspire their subordinates to develop intellectual capabilities and to contribute towards achieving the firm’s strategic objectives. Therefore, transformational leaders pay significant attention to the developmental needs of employees and encourage their employees to attain collective goals. Organisational leaders encourage employees to promote new ideas and integrate knowledge to transform existing work practices. Furthermore, they assist their employees to enrich their learning experience through the acquisition of new knowledge and information (Pasamar et al., 2019).

Previous studies posited that leaders implement effective HR practices such as staffing, training and performance appraisals to facilitate employees. Previous literature has discussed the antecedents of OLC, though there is a dearth of empirical studies about the role of leadership and HR effectiveness in developing learning capabilities (Pasamar et al., 2019). To address this gap in the literature, the current study pursues three main objectives. The first objective is to investigate the relationship between TL and OLC. The second objective is to understand the mediating role of perceived HR effectiveness between TL and OLC. The third objective is to validate the research scales/instruments in the context of Pakistan.

Significance of the Research

The current research examines the link between TL and OLC along with the mediating effect of perceived HR effectiveness in the software industry of Pakistan. Existing literature provides theoretical evidence regarding the strategic importance of organisational learning; however, the impact of TL on organisational learning remains a relatively understudied area (Vashdi et al., 2019). Current research is in line with Pasamar et al. (2019) that suggested future researchers study the intervening effect of HR practices in order to promote and develop organisational learning capabilities. Our research addresses this gap by examining the mediating effect of perceived HR effectiveness on the relationship of TL and OLC. Though earlier studies have not discussed AMO theory to explain the relationship of focal variables, current research contributes to the literature by incorporating principles of AMO theory to offer a novel perspective on organisational learning.

In the knowledge-intensive software industry, the survival of firms is based on employees’ ability to innovate, learn new skills and develop novel capabilities (Amy, 2008). Nonetheless, such studies have not previously been conducted in the context of the software industry. In addition, extant literature has mainly focused on developed countries to study OLC (Jyoti et al., 2017; Pasamar et al., 2019; Xie, 2019). However, current research suggests a new perspective regarding the influence of perceived HR effectiveness on organisational learning capability in the software industry of a developing country (Pakistan).

Literature Review and Theoretical Model

Organisational Learning Capability

Organisational learning capability is conceptualised as a set of organisational processes involving the acquisition, sharing and dissemination of knowledge among team members aimed at improving the firm’s capabilities (Vashdi et al., 2019). OLC is the ability of an organisation to absorb and transform existing knowledge and apply that knowledge for organisational development (Svetlik et al., 2007). Organisational theorists found that the development of learning capability facilitates experimentation of new ideas, increases the ability to handle uncertain situations and empowers employees to take major decisions. According to Amitay et al. (2005), the development of learning capabilities results in improved organisational performance. Therefore, the organisation strives to learn from its internal and external environment and manage the flow of knowledge.

Current research is guided by AMO theory that takes into account learning behaviours that provide impetus to desired performance. This theory is relevant to our research in several ways. First, ‘ability’ relates to TL in our model that helps in the development of abilities and skills (Jerez-Gómez et al., 2019). Second, ‘motivation’ relates to HR effectiveness in our model that drives employee interest towards the desired goals. Finally, ‘opportunity’ relates to organisational learning capability in our model that helps in performing job roles effectively (McDermott et al., 2013). According to AMO theory, organisations should integrate TL style into higher management to provide employees with an opportunity to learn and develop themselves (Vashdi et al., 2019). Our study framework also posits that the learning behaviour of employees gets reinforced when they interact with their transformational leaders, and the organisation exhibits effective HR practices.

Several studies have revealed that organisational learning capability is dependent on the individual employees to a large extent because employees are the main entities that acquire and disseminate knowledge, thereby contributing immensely to organisational learning. Previous literature has pointed towards five factors of organisational learning that shed light on this argument and provide further evidence about the role of individual employees in enhancing organisational learning (Svetlik et al., 2007; López-Cabrales et al., 2011). First, employees bring new ideas and provide innovative solutions to existing organisational problems and, in this way, they practise experimentation that is the first factor of organisational learning (Svetlik et al., 2007). Second, the employees discuss key challenges and share experiential knowledge with other members through dialogue that is considered the second most important factor of organisational learning (Rana & Chopra, 2016). Third, employees utilise the firm’s resources to develop and launch new projects and adopt new technologies despite a high degree of uncertainty. As a result, they show their risk-taking ability, the third factor of organisational learning (Obeidat et al., 2018). Employees also involve themselves in the fourth crucial factor of organisational learning called participative decision-making when they come to a consensus about choosing the best possible solution/alternative (Jamil & Obeidat, 2019). Lastly, employees interact with stakeholders to build direct contacts and interpret the changes in the external environment. These five factors are considered significant to explain the importance of employees as they put great effort to incorporate knowledge, integrate new ideas and information to promote organisational learning (López-Cabrales et al., 2011).

Extant literature has identified various antecedents that reinforce organisational learning capabilities including organizational culture, organisational innovation and leadership styles. Recent literature postulated that TL is a key antecedent of OLC that directly influences the learning behaviour of employees (Imran et al., 2016). Keeping in view different aspects of TL and its impact on the organisation, the current research examines organisational learning as a potential outcome of TL. Transformational leaders create organisational learning and assist individuals in aligning their interests with collective goals.

Conceptualisation of Transformational Leadership as an Antecedent of Organisational Learning Capability

In contemporary organisations, TL is considered a strategic prerequisite for the survival and development of a firm’s capability. Bass and Riggio (2006) defined transformational leaders as facilitators who provide growth and learning opportunities to their subordinates. Burns (1978) conceptualised TL as the mutual interaction of leaders and employees in which leaders communicate shared goals and provide moral support to employees. Bass (1985), in their pioneer book explained that leaders stimulate their followers to set aside their self-interest and engage them to achieve organisational goals. In an organisation, leaders provide long-term vision, utilise knowledge resources and augment the intellectual abilities of employees. The shared vision inspires employees to develop a mutual understanding of the firm’s policies and encourages them to strive for strategic objectives (Hassan et al., 2019). In this manner, leadership plays a significant role in stimulating an individual’s capabilities and skills to achieve common objectives.

According to Van et al. (2018), leadership relates to organisational learning as transformational leaders exert a substantial effort to develop the learning capabilities of employees. Studies have considered TL as an important antecedent of OLC (Alsabbagh & Khalil, 2016; García-Morales et al., 2012; Imran et al., 2016; Van et al., 2018; Vera & Crossan, 2004). Pasamar et al. (2019) supported the argument that firms benefit more when leaders develop the knowledge, skills and competencies of employees to add economic value. They concluded that the TL style (idealised influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, individualised consideration) promotes a learning environment at the workplace.

Leaders are mainly responsible for creating a learning environment and facilitating knowledge transfer from individuals to organisations (Amy, 2008). Through ‘ideal influence’, transformational leaders inspire individuals to think creatively, experiment with new ideas and attain up-to-date knowledge (Trung et al., 2014). Transformational leaders ‘intellectually stimulate’ their subordinates to utilise the knowledge and learn by engaging in decision-making. Leaders actively manage the tasks, solve critical problems with diverse perspectives and derive future opportunities through ‘dialogue’ (Chang, 2005).

The study by Alsabbagh and Khalil (2016) endorsed that leaders’ intellectual stimulation and ‘individualized consideration’ positively influence employees’ learning capabilities. Transformational leaders provide ‘individual consideration’ to employees and pay attention to their individual learning needs (Vashdi et al., 2019). They reflect ‘inspirational motivation’ by encouraging employees to talk about future challenges and instilling optimism in them. Consequently, employees focus on an attainable vision that contributes towards organisational success (Amy, 2008). In this way, leaders support organisational learning through creating knowledge capital, integrating learning culture and facilitating the flow of ideas (Vashdi et al., 2019). Subsequent to the above-discussed literature, we hypothesise the following relationship between TL and OLC in current research.

Hypothesis 1: TL style has a positive impact on OLC.

Previous studies have revealed that leadership is responsible for formulating HR policies to create a learning environment and utilise available knowledge resources (Chang & Hughes, 2012). Though various studies confirm the theoretical link between TL and organisational learning constructs, they do not include HR effectiveness as a potential mediator. Present research fills this gap by examining the mediating role of perceived HR effectiveness that ultimately improves the learning abilities and competencies of employees (Pasamar et al., 2019). The next section discusses how human resource effectiveness (HRE) facilitates the development of a firm’s learning environment.

Human Resource Effectiveness as a Mediator between TL and OLC

Human resource is a firm’s key asset as it possesses specialised knowledge and information to attain a sustainable competitive advantage for the firm (Demo et al., 2012). Organisations consider human knowledge and skills as valuable resources that are hard to imitate by competitors (Pasamar et al., 2019). Sikora and Ferris (2011) observed that firms ensure HRE to create long-term value and improve organisational outcomes. Human resource management refers to key effective tools for the development of a skilled workforce through compensation, training interventions and performance feedback to meet organisational expectations (Otoo & Mishra, 2018). HRE is defined in terms of key human resource management practices including staffing, training and their alignment with strategic business objectives (Kadiresan et al., 2015).

HR effectiveness refers to the organisational ability to utilise human resources effectively and contribute towards organisational outcomes (Richard & Johnson, 2001; Das & Chaurasia, 2017). It is measured in terms of the HR department’s performance to achieve organisational goals. The effectiveness of HR systems is also dependent on the HR department’s ability to produce positive outcomes for employees with regard to effective HR processes and practices. López et al. (2006) in their study found that TL has the potential to translate shared vision into HRE and develop human resources to contribute towards organisational goals. Zhu et al. (2005) supported the theoretical relevance between TL and HR and explained that leaders formulate a common vision and communicate it through HR practices and policies. Leaders are capable enough of achieving HR effectiveness that encourages individuals to learn new skills or capabilities that ultimately contribute towards their growth and development (Ogbonnaya & Nielsen, 2016).

Despite the growing interest of leaders with respect to HR, the empirical evidence that explores the mediating role of perceived HR effectiveness between TL and organisational learning is scarce (Ogbonnaya & Nielsen, 2016). Previous research findings indicate the association between TL and HR practices (Hassan et al., 2019; Manshadi et al., 2014). Leaders invest in human resources to strengthen their learning and enact employee-oriented HR practices to support, motivate and facilitate employees. They align management activities with strategic objectives and facilitate employees by providing the opportunity to improve their capabilities. Manshadi et al. (2014) provided empirical evidence in their study that leadership has a significant influence on the implementation of effective HR practices and improves employee learning in an organisation. They also asserted that HR effectiveness helps strengthen organisational learning and enhances organisational knowledge resources. According to López et al. (2006), organisational leaders formulate and implement various HR strategies and practices including employee acquisition, training and retention that significantly influence the learning environment. Various scholars found a strong correlation of human resource practices with organisational learning capability (Vasilaki et al., 2016; Pasamar et al., 2019; Khilji & Wang, 2006).

Researchers have paid attention to the effectiveness of four key HR functions which actively contribute towards strategic objectives, that is, staffing, training, performance management and compensation (Kadiresan et al., 2015; López et al., 2006; Vasilaki et al., 2016). Effective staffing refers to hiring the best resource that takes risks and is open to new experiences and ideas for the development of the firm (Stone & Deadrick, 2015). Leaders incorporate acquisition practices to identify candidates with specified knowledge and abilities that the company needs to improve learning capacity (Kavoo-Linge & Kiruri, 2013). The training and development function of HR develops job-related skills and competencies of employees. Training initiatives also make sure that all employees have implicit and explicit knowledge and capabilities in their respective disciplines (Gómez et al., 2004). HR helps to develop human potential through group discussions, workshops and team exercises (Pasamar et al., 2019). Performance management potentially builds the relationship of leaders with employees and provides constructive feedback for employees’ growth and development (Getnet et al., 2014). HR appraisal programmes provide performance evaluation and constructive feedback to promote best performers. Finally, compensation effectiveness involves corporate strategies and policies regarding salaries, rewards and bonuses for motivation and commitment of employees (Jyoti et al., 2017).

Transformational leaders focus on ensuring HR effectiveness and utilise HR practices to facilitate organisational learning and development (Das & Chaurasia, 2017). HR encourages individuals to share their knowledge and build their capacity to learn through experimentation and participative decision-making (Intan-Soraya & Chew, 2010). Imran et al. (2016) concluded that developing organisational learning through leadership and HR was neglected in the context of Asian countries including Pakistan. Despite its strategic importance, the link between TL and organisational learning via human resource effectiveness has not been studied in previous research. Therefore, current research sheds light on the role of transformational leaders in developing organisational learning through effective implementation of HR as indicated in the conceptual framework (see Figure 1). The proposed hypothesis for current research is presented next.

Hypothesis 2: Perceived HR effectiveness mediates the relationship between TL and OLC.

Research Methodology

Population and Sample

Software enterprises have developed business knowledge and technical skills to attain a competitive advantage all over the globe. In Pakistan, software firms put considerable efforts to improve technological capability, skilled workforce and quality to sustain market competitiveness. In the software industry, organisations are competing for skilled human resources because they add value and offer creativity, knowledge and new capabilities for effective organisational outcomes (Pregnolato et al., 2017). Due to intense market competition over knowledge resources, the software industry faces a serious challenge to improve employees’ learning capability. Therefore, current research intends to study how software firms can improve organisational learning capability through the implementation of perceived HR effectiveness including training, compensation packages, skill development and mentoring programmes.

Keeping in view the need for continuous development of knowledge resources and learning capability in Pakistan’s software industry, software houses were selected as the study population in current research. Due to the large population, the researchers have collected data through multi-stage sampling from managerial level employees. In Multi-stage sampling, a combination of cluster and random sampling was used in subsequent stages. In the first stage, a list of software houses registered with P@SHA was obtained. According to P@SHA (n.d.), there were 350 registered software houses. For data collection, 50% of software houses were selected based on systematic random sampling (n = 175). In the second stage, five employees from each software house were randomly selected (175 × 5 = 875) and were asked to fill out the questionnaire. Of them, 504 (57.6%) responses were obtained. Data were collected through personal visits to randomly selected software houses and online contact through the LinkedIn portal. To address ethical concerns, official permissions were obtained from the HR department of software houses through emails, and respondents were informed about the purpose of the study beforehand.

The composition of the sample was as follows: 88% of respondents were male and 12% were female. A total of 115 respondents (23.1%) worked in Karachi, 37 respondents (6.2%) worked in Islamabad, 326 respondents (65.5%) worked in Lahore and 26 respondents (5.2%) worked in other cities such as Faisalabad and Sialkot. Of the respondents, 19% were from senior management, 56% from middle-level management and 25% from lower-level management (Table 1).

Table 1.

Sample Demographics.

Respondent Characteristics	Categories	Frequency	Mean of OLC	Mean of HRE	Mean of TL
Respondent’s gender	Male	443	2.51	2.66	2.35
	Female	61	2.62	2.71	2.42
	Total	504
IT-related experience	1–5	285	2.49	2.62	2.32
	6–10	123	2.60	2.71	2.45
	11–15	69	2.51	2.69	2.37
	16–20	20	2.65	2.93	2.39
	21 and above	7	2.22	2.48	2.19
	Total	504
Education	Bachelors	221	2.51	2.66	2.36
	Masters	173	2.54	2.70	2.43
	MPhil	62	2.64	2.67	2.38
	PhD	6	2.12	2.58	2.11
	Others	43	2.31	2.52	2.08
	Total	504
Office location	Islamabad	37	2.57	2.70	2.30
	Karachi	115	2.62	2.83	2.52
	Lahore	326	2.50	2.61	2.33
	Others	26	2.24	2.55	2.13
	Total	504
Level of management	Upper (head of unit, VP, director and departmental heads)	69	2.53	2.69	2.36
	Middle (assistant director, associate manager, software engineers, executives and officer)	231	2.53	2.67	2.37
	Lower (administrative and operations staff and interns)	198	2.53	2.57	2.29
	Total	504
Company size	50–250	110	2.59	2.70	2.38
	250–500	199	2.53	2.76	2.46
	500 and above	195	2.45	2.58	2.28
	Total	504

Source: The authors.

Unit of Analysis

The sample for current research comprised different managerial levels operating in the IT industry ranging from vice president to administrative staff. Several studies in the extant literature have used individuals as a unit of analysis for measuring variables such as perception about perceived HR effectiveness and learning capability, thereby providing evidence of the suitability of this unit of analysis (Chang, 2005; Obeidat et al., 2018). Subsequently, the data for current research were also collected at the individual level.

Research Measures

The first section of the questionnaire briefly explained the purpose of the study. The next section asked employees about transformational leadership, human resource effectiveness and organisational learning capability on a five-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (05) to strongly agree (01). The questionnaire comprised 40 close-ended questions. A 12-item multi factor leadership questionnaire (MLQ 5x short form) questionnaire was used to measure TL style (Bass & Avolio, 1997). A 14-item scale developed by Svetlik et al. (2007) was used to measure organisational learning capability. We measured perceived HRE through two scales: a 10-item scale developed by Chang (2005) which measured the effectiveness of staffing, training and development and performance appraisal; and a 4-item scale developed by Balkin and Gomez (1990) which measured compensation effectiveness (Table 2).

Table 2.

Research Instrument Measures.

Transformational leadership (Bass & Avolio, 1997)
Idealised influence	II1	My leader makes others feel good to be around him/her.
	112	My leader has complete faith in me.
	II3	Others are proud to be associated with my leader.
Inspirational motivation	IM1	My leader expresses with a few simple words what I could and should do.
	IM2	My leader provides appealing images about what we can do.
	IM3	My leader helps others find meaning in their work.
Intellectual stimulation	IS1	My leader enables others to think about old problems in new ways.
	IS2	My leader provides others with new ways of looking at puzzling things.
	IS3	My leader gets others to rethink ideas that they had never questioned before.
Individualised consideration	IC1	My leader helps others to develop themselves.
	IC2	My leader lets others know how he/she thinks they are doing.
	IC3	My leader gives personal attention to others who seem rejected.
Organisational Learning Capability (Svetlik et al., 2007)
Experimentation	EX1	People support others when presenting new ideas from the team members.
	EX2	People provide and receive favourable responses to new initiatives.
	EX3	People encourage others to share new information and ideas (newly added).
Risk-taking	RT1	People are encouraged to take risks in this organisation.
	RT2	Mistakes done in the process of risk taking are not accounted for (newly added).
	RT3	People here often venture into unknown territory.
Interaction with environment	IE1	Employees are encouraged to communicate.
	IE2	There are systems and procedures for receiving, collating and sharing information from outside the company.
	IE3	People are encouraged to interact with the environment (e.g., competitors, customers, technological institutes, universities and suppliers).
Dialogue	D1	It is part of the work of all staff to collect, bring back and report information about what is going on outside the company.
	D2	There is a free and open communication within the workgroup.
	D3	Managers facilitate communication within teams.
	D4	Cross-functional teamwork is a common practice here.
Participative decision-making	PD1	Managers in this organisation frequently involve employees in important decisions.
	PD2	Processes and Policies are significantly influenced by the view of employees.
	PD3	People feel involved in main company project decisions.
Perceived HR Effectiveness (Balkin & Gomez, 1990; Chang, 2005)
Placement effectiveness	PE1	The company effectively reflects situational changes by rearranging personnel to appropriate positions.
	PE2	Overall, the company effectively places personnel to the appropriate positions.
	PE3	Company provides an orientation that integrates new employees with organisational processes, values and culture (newly added).
Training effectiveness	TE1	The company provides appropriate job training.
	TE2	The company provides good training opportunities to improve job-related skills.
	TE3	Overall, company employee training programs are effective.
	TE4	The company fails to provide effective training for the job I am currently holding.
	TE5	The company fails to provide effective training for the job; I will be in charge of it in the near future.
Compensation effectiveness	CE1	Our pay policies and practices are highly effective.
	CE2	Management is very happy with the way the compensation system contributes to the achievement of overall organisational goals.
	CE3	All things considered, the compensation strategies used in our organisation truly give shareholders’ ‘their money’s worth’.
	CE4	Our pay policies and practices appear to enjoy widespread acceptability among employees.
	CE5	Our pay policies and practices greatly contribute to the retention, attraction and motivation of employees.
Performance appraisal	PA1	Performance appraisals are based on objective and quantifiable results.
	PA2	The company has provided enough information regarding specific methods of the performance evaluation system.
	PA3	Employees are allowed to formally communicate with supervisors regarding the appraisal results.

Source: The authors.

In the current study, structural equation modelling (SEM) was used for scale validation and hypotheses testing in which each latent variable comprises at least three items for model identification (Hair et al., 2010). As a result, additional items were developed and added to the questionnaires in which all the dimensions had less than three items (Table 2). In the questionnaire of OLC, only two items each in the original questionnaire measured experimentation and risk-taking. Therefore, we added EX3 and RT2 in this questionnaire based on the literature (Table 3). In addition, the placement effectiveness dimension in the perceived HR effectiveness questionnaire also included only two items, thus PE3 was added as an additional item to reach the minimum acceptable number of three items. As all the dimensions of TL had at least three items, this questionnaire was not modified in any way.

Table 3.

Rotated Component Matrix of OLC.

Construct	Variance Explained	Items	Factor Loadings
Construct	Variance Explained	Items	1	2	3	4	5
Organisational learning capability (OLC)	69.7%	EX1					0.717
		EX2					0.723
		EX3					0.816
		RT1				0.619
		RT2				0.824
		RT3				0.881
		IE1		0.874
		IE2		0.729
		IE3		0.866
		D1	0.787
		D2	0.771
		D3	0.789
		D4	0.677
		PD1			0.735
		PD2			0.755
		PD3			0.765

Source: The authors.

Results and Findings

SEM has been used for multivariate analysis and hypotheses have been tested using IBM AMOS software (Creswell & Clark, 2017). SEM is a statistical method used to validate the measurement scales and to analyse the interrelation among observed and latent constructs to test the proposed hypotheses (Byrne, 2013). The reason behind choosing SEM is that it estimates the interrelation among constructs, identifies measurement errors and is considered a suitable tool for multivariate analysis (Hair et al., 2010). Therefore, to conduct SEM, the critical ratio value of kurtosis must lie within the acceptable range |1.96| for all the items (Tan & Wong, 2015). In the present research, we applied various transformations on individual items including natural log, square root, inverse, square and cube to remove kurtosis from the data (Hair et al., 2010). Initially, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted for the constructs of organisational learning and perceived HRE because additional items were added in these questionnaires as explained in methodology. The details of EFA are explained next.

Exploratory Factor Analysis of Organizational Learning Capability (OLC)

Exploratory factor analysis of organisational learning capability (Table 3) shows that the KMO score for this construct was 0.862, and sphericity was significant prior to extraction at p < 0.0100, which means that the sample met all required assumptions to run exploratory factor analysis (Field, 2013). Overall, the extracted factors of OLC explained 69.7% of the total variance. In addition, five factors emerged through Varimax rotation (Table 3). The basic purpose of running EFA was to ensure that the newly developed items load on their respective factors. Table 2 shows that EX3 has loaded with other items of experimentation, and RT2 has loaded with other items of risk-taking. Thus, it is evident that the newly developed items measure the intended variables, and further analysis can be conducted using this scale of OLC.

Exploratory Factor Analysis of Human Resource Effectiveness

The original scale of perceived HR effectiveness was also modified in current research by adding items to measure placement effectiveness. Therefore, EFA of this scale was conducted and the HRE scale was found suitable for factor analysis as KMO indicated a score of 0.899 and sphericity was significant at p < 0.000 (Field, 2013). Table 4 shows that four factors emerged based on Eigenvalue >1 which explained 69.8% of data variance. The newly added item (PE3) loaded with the other items of placement effectiveness, thus making it clear that this item measures what it intends to measure, and further analysis for hypotheses testing can be conducted using this scale.

Table 4.

Rotated Component Matrix of HRE.

Construct	Variance Explained	Items	Factor Loadings
Construct	Variance Explained	Items	1	2	3	4
Perceived human resource effectiveness	69.8%	PE1			0.641
		PE2			0.863
		PE3			0.886
		TE1	0.732
		TE2	0.789
		TE3	0.722
		TE4	0.841
		TE5	0.813
		CE1		0.697
		CE2		0.716
		CE3		0.735
		CE4		0.827
		CE5		0.759
		PA1				0.670
		PA2				0.717
		PA3				0.812

Source: The authors.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Measurement Model

Before testing the hypothesised relationship among constructs, we used confirmatory factor analysis of the measurement model to calculate and assess model fit indices. In the current research, the measurement model had 990 sample moments and 104 distinct parameters to be estimated. Thus, it was an over-identified model with 886 degrees of freedom. The model fit indices were: CMIN/df = 1.854, sig. = 0.000, CFI = 0.933, RMSEA = 0.041, PCLOSE = 1.000, SRMR = 0.0540 (Figure 2). The acceptable values for the goodness of fit statistics are: CMIN/df < 3, CFI > 0.9, RMSEA < 0.05, PCLOSE > 0.50, SRMR < 0.09 and HOELTER (0.05) > 200) (Byrne, 2001). Therefore, our measurement model showed a good fit.

Figure 1.

Source: The authors.

Figure 2.

Source: The authors.

Construct validity can be indirectly assessed by evaluating the convergent and discriminant validity to measure the suitability of each factor of the construct.

Convergent Validity

Convergent validity estimates the correlation of items with the dimensions of that construct (Hair et al., 2010). Average variance extracted (AVE) values of all constructs greater than 0.5 (Table 5) show that all scales have convergent validity. Table 5 also provides evidence of convergent validity based on significant factor loadings (higher than 0.5).

Table 5.

Assessment of Model Fit, AVE, CR and Cronbach α.

Scales	Items		Loadings	AVE	CR	Cronbach α	Model Fit Indices
Transformational leadership	Idealised influence	II1	0.733	0.533	0.819	0.906	CMIN/df = 1.854SIG = 0.000CFI = 0.933RMSEA = 0.041SRMR = 0.0540
		112	0.653
		II3	0.778
	Inspirational motivation	IM1	0.640	0.518	0.772
		IM2	0.660
		IM3	0.842
	Intellectual stimulation	IS1	0.823	0.618	0.826
		IS2	0.783
		IS3	0.751
	Individualised consideration	IC1	0.830	0.727	0.776
		IC2	0.676
		IC3	0.687
Organisational learning	Experimentation	EX1	0.979	0.676	0.832	0.875
		EX2	0.709
		EX3	0.750
	Risk taking	RT1	0.709	0.531	0.739
		RT2	0.670
		RT3	0.704
	Interaction with environment	IE1	0.671	0.50	0.717
		IE2	0.649
		IE3	0.798
	Dialogue	D1	0.748	0.524	0.844
		D2	0.750
		D3	0.768
		D4	0.609
	Participative decision-making	PD1	0.698	0.544	0.738
		PD2	0.772
		PD3	0.717
Perceived human resource effectiveness	Placement	PE1	0.581	0.670	0.838	0.828
		PE2	0.980
		PE3	0.852
	Training	TE1	0.765	0.622	0.871
		TE2	0.838
		TE3	0.799
		TE4	0.707
		TE5	0.692
	Compensation	CE1	0.767	0.574	0.879
		CE2	0.673
		CE3	0.615
		CE4	0.868
		CE5	0.837
	Performance appraisal	PA1	0.675	0.508	0.708
		PA2	0.770
		PA3	0.688

Source: The authors.

Assessment of Reliability and Internal Consistency

In the current research, the construct reliability of each construct was determined to check whether the research instrument would provide consistent results (Sekaran & Bougie, 2016). Extant research studies suggest the use of two measures to assess reliability: Cronbach’s alpha (α) and composite reliability (CR). In this research, values of Cronbach’s α and CR were higher than 0.7 which assure internal consistency and reliability of research scales, respectively (Table 5) (Bagozzi et al., 1991; Hair et al., 2006).

Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity measures the degree to which variables are distinct from each other. As described by Gefen and Straub (2005), the square root of AVE for all latent constructs must be greater than inter-item correlation as a condition for discriminant validity. Table 6 shows that the square root of AVE for all constructs is higher than their correlation with other constructs (0.741, 0.7633, 0.735) respectively, thereby providing the evidence of discriminant validity.

Table 6.

Assessment of Discriminant Validity (correlation matrix and √AVE).

	TL	OL	HRE	√AVE
	1			0.741
TL	0.000
	504
	0.591*	1		0.7633
OL	0.000
	504	504
	0.485*	0.657*	1	0.735
HRE	0.000	0.000
	504	504	504

Source: The authors.

Note: * Correlation is significant at 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Assessment of Structural Model for Hypotheses Testing

After validating the measurement model, the structural model was developed (Figure 3) and evaluated through SEM to test the proposed relationships between variables (Hair et al., 2010). Table 7 shows that the impact of TL on organisational learning capability in this model is significantly positive (β = 0.267, p < 0.05). Therefore, hypothesis 1 (i.e., TL has a positive impact on organisational learning capability) is confirmed. This result is in line with the previous studies in which researchers found that a firm’s leadership have a positive influence on organisational learning capability (Aragón-Correa et al., 2007; García-Morales et al., 2012; Jamil & Obeidat, 2019; Van der Voet, 2014; Vera & Crossan, 2004). Research findings of Obeidat et al. (2018) also revealed that transformational attributes of leaders enhance the intellectual capital of the firm and ultimately improve the learning capability of firms.

Figure 3.

Source: The authors.

Table 7.

Total, Direct and Indirect effects (mediation analysis).

TL → HRE → OLC	β-value	p-Value	Result
Total effect	0.770	0.001	Hypothesis 1 and 2 supported
Direct effect	0.267	0.001
Indirect effect	0.433	0.001

Source: The authors.

Mediation Analysis

The second hypothesis of current research postulates an indirect relationship between TL and organisational learning capability through HR effectiveness. To test this hypothesis, HRE was added as a mediator in the structural model between TL and OLC (Figure 3). Mediation was tested using SEM with 2000 bootstrapping samples and 90% bias-corrected confidence intervals to identify the direct, indirect and total effects. The fit indices for structural model were found to be acceptable (CMIN/df = 1.940; RMSEA = 0.044; CFI = 0.948, PCLOSE = 0.979, HOELTER = 287). It can be observed from Table 7 that after adding a mediator in the model, the indirect path was significantly positive (β = 0.433, p < 0.05). Therefore hypothesis 2 that posits that HR effectiveness mediates the relationship between TL and organisational learning capability is supported.

Discussion and Conclusion

The current research contributes to the literature by examining the relationships among transformational leadership, perceived HR effectiveness and organisational learning capability in the software industry of Pakistan. Based on the theoretical model, TL contributes towards the development of organisational learning capability. In other words, it has been found that leaders enhance the OL capabilities of employees that contribute to better organisational outcomes.

The current research findings indicate that TL significantly influences OLC in the software industry of Pakistan. This finding lends support to previous findings that showed that leaders consider employees as intellectual resources and reinforces their learning and development through shared vision (Imran et al., 2016; Jyoti et al., 2017; Pasamar et al., 2019). In addition, transformational leaders inspire employees to acquire or learn new knowledge for the development and success of the organisation (Van der Voet, 2014; Vashdi et al., 2019).

Previous studies reported TL as a critical enabler of learning capability in organisations (Aragón-Correa et al., 2007; García-Morales et al., 2012). Obeidat et al. (2018) found a positive correlation between TL and OLC. It is argued that leaders are in the best position to inspire employees through stimulating cognitive patterns and strengthening their ability to gain new knowledge (Van der Voet, 2014; Vera & Crossan, 2004). Le and Lei (2017) highlighted that transformational leaders encourage individuals to try new experiments and widen their horizons through innovation and creativity.

Current research found in the light of AMO theory that transformational leaders communicate a clear vision to employees and provide them access to training and development opportunities. In addition, leaders reinforce employees learning by providing personal recognition and rewards through effective HR practices (Jerez-Gómez et al., 2019). It is observed that leadership motivates employees to develop OL capability and provides an opportunity for growth and learning. AMO theory provides a guiding framework in which leaders/managers implement effective HR practices in terms of training, feedback and appraisals to enhance the potential of employees to learn, share and transfer knowledge within an organisation (Vashdi et al., 2019).

Current research has found that perceived HR effectiveness has a mediating effect on the relationship between TL and organisational learning. This finding is of theoretical interest for two reasons. First, it covers the gap in the literature regarding the role of TL in the development of organisational learning processes. Though previous studies (Imran et al., 2016; Vashdi et al., 2019; Xie, 2019) have documented that TL style was closely linked to OL, the support of HR effectiveness behind this relationship could never be explored. Previous research has found that leaders take advantage of employee’s knowledge and develop human capital to stimulate organisational learning and development (Pasamar et al., 2019).

The importance of TL for the creation of organisational learning has previously been found in the context of developed countries including the United States of America (Xie, 2019) and China (Liao et al., 2017), Korea (Le & Lei, 2017) and Spain (Pasamar et al., 2019). Previous studies have found a direct relationship between TL and organisational learning in the Western context (Amy, 2008; Jyoti et al., 2017; Vashdi et al., 2019; Xie, 2019). However, the present research examines the mediating effect of human resource effectiveness that was rarely examined in the Asian context.

Software organisations incorporate TL to facilitate a skilled workforce that possesses explicit knowledge, creative skills and technical competencies to keep up with the emerging technological trends (Naqvi & Bashir, 2015). Organisations continuously invest in HR practices to satisfy the developmental needs of employees at software houses, as they face high turnover and dissatisfaction of employees. The research study of Jyoti et al. (2017) affirms that HR tends to focus on employee’s needs and interests and facilitates human resources through providing growth and development opportunities to improve employee’s learning capabilities. Effective HR practices foster a congenial learning environment, open exchange of critical ideas and facilitate knowledge acquisition. According to Loshali and Krishnan (2013), transformational leaders help in the strategic alignment of HR practices, that is, selection, training and rewards with the organisational objectives by communicating the strategic vision and align their goals with organisational interests.

Theoretical and Practical Contributions

Current research offers several practical and theoretical implications for employees and organisations. Though extant literature suggested a positive relationship between leadership and OLC, limited research studies have analysed this relationship empirically in a single model. The first contribution of the current study is to examine the relationship between TL and organisational learning capability using the AMO model. While previous studies have established that leadership behaviour influences the learning capability of an organisation, intervention of HR effectiveness as a mediator was missing in the previous literature. Therefore, our study filled this research gap by examining the role of perceived HR effectiveness as a mediator. Present research enriches the literature by explaining the relationships between variables in the light of AMO theory that have not been incorporated in previous research. It provides a multi-dimensional framework in which transformational leaders develop the abilities and competencies of employees and motivate them to contribute towards organisational learning.

Concerning practical contributions, this study analyses the relationships among focal variables in the context of the software industry of Pakistan. The software industry is dependent on HR for providing knowledge-based resources and technical solutions. Previous research studies revealed that managing employees becomes a serious challenge for software firms (Naqvi & Bashir, 2015). This study provides guidance to leaders, executives and managers to promote learning through providing growth, career opportunities and empowerment of employees working in various departments of the software industry. Consequently, the study enables organisations to improve their knowledge, relevant skill-sets and capabilities through improving the learning and professional development of employees. Given the positive influence of TL on learning, this study recommends HR managers to focus on developing TL attributes to facilitate human resources. Current research suggests that software organisations should offer specialised training and mentoring programmes and performance-based incentives in each department of a software firm. This implies that if organisations invest in the development of employees, they are more likely to engage in knowledge sharing and transferring of organisational learning. In this manner, software organisations can improve their competitive advantage over others.

Research Limitation and Future Research Directions

There are several limitations in present research that might open up avenues for future research. First, the scope of current research is limited to the software industry of Pakistan and researchers collected the data at a specific time using a cross-sectional design. Future researchers are suggested to collect data multiple times and generalise findings to other contexts. Current research examines the mediation of perceived HR effectiveness in the relationship between TL and organisational learning. The mediating effect of other intervening variables can also be studied such as knowledge management, organisational innovation and organisational culture. In terms of research methods, researchers can also use qualitative and mixed approaches in the future to understand and explain different phases of learning mechanisms.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Shiza Kazmi

References

Alsabbagh

, & Khalil

(2016). The impact of leadership styles on organizational learning: An empirical study on the education sector in Damascus city. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences , 6(5), 197–216.

Amitay

, Popper

, & Lipshitz

(2005). Leadership styles and organizational learning in community clinics. The Learning Organization , 12(1), 57–70.

Amy

A. H.

(2008). Leaders as facilitators of individual and organizational learning. Leadership & Organization Development Journal , 29(3), 212–234.

Aragón-Correa

J. A.

, García-Morales

V. J.

, & Cordón-Pozo

(2007). Leadership and organizational learning’s role on innovation and performance: Lessons from Spain. Industrial Marketing Management , 36(3), 349–359.

Avolio

B. J.

, Bass

B. M.

, & Zhu

F. W. W.

(2004). Multifactor leadership questionnaire: Manual and sampler set . Mind Garden.

Bagozzi

R. P.

, Yi

, & Phillips

L. W.

(1991). Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Administrative Science Quarterly , 36(3), 421–458.

Bass

B. M.

(1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations . Free Press.

Bass

B. M.

, & Riggio

R. E.

(2006). Transformational leadership . Psychology Press.

Balkin

D. B.

, & Gomez-Mejia

L. R.

(1990). Matching compensation and organizational strategies. Strategic Management Journal , 11(2), 153–169.

10.

Bass

B. M.

, & Avolio

B. J.

(1997). Full range leadership development: Manual for the multifactor leadership questionnaire . Mind Garden.

11.

Bryne

B. M.

(2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming . L Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

12.

Byrne

B. M.

(2013). Structural equation modeling with Mplus: Basic concepts, applications, and programming . Routledge.

13.

Burns

J. M.

(1978). Leadership . Harper & Row.

14.

Chang

(2005). Employees’ overall perception of HRM effectiveness. Human Relations , 58(4), 523–544.

15.

Chang

Y. Y.

, & Hughes

(2012). Drivers of innovation ambidexterity in small-to medium-sized firms. European Management Journal , 30(1), 1–17.

16.

Creswell

J. W.

, & Clark

V. L. P.

(2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research . SAGE Publications.

17.

Das

S. C.

, & Chaurasia

(2017). Perceived HR efficiency and effectiveness in Indian commercial banks: A qualitative measurement. Pacific Business Review International , 9(9), 106–117.

18.

Demo

, Neiva

E. R.

, Nunes

, & Rozzett

(2012). Human resources management policies and practices scale (HRMPPS): Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. BAR—Brazilian Administration Review , 9(4), 395–420.

19.

Field

(2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics . SAGE Publications.

20.

García-Morales

V. J.

, Jiménez-Barrionuevo

M. M.

, & Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez

(2012). Transformational leadership influence on organizational performance through organizational learning and innovation. Journal of Business Research , 65(7), 1040–1050.

21.

Gefen

, & Straub

(2005). A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-graph: Tutorial and annotated example. Communications of the Association for Information Systems , 16(1), 91–109.

22.

Getnet

, Jebena

, & Tsegaye

(2014). The effect of employees’ fairness perception on their satisfaction towards the performance appraisal practices. International Journal of Management and Commerce Innovations , 2(1), 174–210.

23.

Gómez

P. J.

, Lorente

J. J. C.

, & Cabrera

R. V.

(2004). Training practices and organisational learning capability. Journal of European Industrial Training , 26(1) 234–256.

24.

Hair

J. F.

, Anderson

R. E.

, Babin

B. J.

, & Black

W. C.

(2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective .Pearson Education.

25.

Hair

J. F.

, Black

W. C.

, Babin

B. J.

, Anderson

R. E.

, & Tatham

R. L.

(2006). Multivariate data analysis .Pearson University Press.

26.

Hassan

, Jati

M. K. K.

, Majid

M. A. A.

, & Ahman

(2019). The role of transformational leadership towards MAHB. International Journal of Accounting, Finance and Business , 4(17), 1–7.

27.

Imran

M. K.

, Ilyas

, & Aslam

(2016). Organizational learning through transformational leadership. The Learning Organization , 23(4), 232–248.

28.

Intan-Soraya

, & Chew

K.-W.

(2010). A framework for human resource management in the knowledge economy: Building intellectual capital and innovative capability. International Journal of Business and Management Science , 3(2), 251–273.

29.

Jamil

N. R.

, & Obeidat

(2019). Reviewing the mediating role of organizational learning capability on the effect of transformational leadership on entrepreneurial orientation. Journal of Business & Management (COES&RJ-JBM) , 7(2), 111–136.

30.

Jerez-Gómez

, Céspedes-Lorente

, & Pérez-Valls

(2019). Do high-performance human resource practices work? The mediating role of organizational learning capability. Journal of Management & Organization , 25(2), 189–210.

31.

Jyoti

, Chahal

, & Rani

(2017). Role of organizational learning and innovation in between high-performance HR practices and business performance: A study of telecommunication sector. Vision , 21(3), 259–273.

32.

Kadiresan

, Selamat

M. H.

, Selladurai

, Ramendran

C. S.

, & Mohamed

R. K. M. H.

(2015). Performance appraisal and training and development of human resource management practices (HRM) on organizational commitment and turnover intention. Asian Social Science , 11(24), 162–176.

33.

Kavoo-Linge

, & Kiruri

J. K.

(2013). The effect of placement practices on employee performance in small service firms in the information technology sector in Kenya. International Journal of Business and Social Science , 4(15), 213–219.

34.

Khan

M. I.

, Qureshi

M. A.

, & Abbas

(2010, June). Agile methodology in software development (SMEs) of Pakistan software industry for successful software projects (CMM framework). 2010 International Conference on Educational and Network Technology (pp. 576–580). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICENT.2010.5532104

35.

Khilji

S. E.

, & Wang

(2006). ‘Intended’ and ‘implemented’ HRM: The missing linchpin in strategic human resource management research. The International Journal of Human Resource Management , 17(7), 1171–1189.

36.

P. B.

, & Lei

(2017). How transformational leadership supports knowledge sharing. Chinese Management Studies , 11(3), 479–497.

37.

Liao

S.-H.

, Chen

C.-C.

, Hu

D.-C.

, Chung

Y.-C.

, & Liu

C.-L.

(2017). Assessing the influence of leadership style, organizational learning and organizational innovation. Leadership & Organization Development Journal , 38(5), 590–609.

38.

López

S. P.

, Peón

J. M. M.

, & Ordás

C. J. V.

(2006). Human resource management as a determining factor in organizational learning. Management Learning , 37(2), 215–239.

39.

López-Cabrales

Á.

, Real

J. C.

, & Valle

(2011). Relationships between human resource management practices and organizational learning capability. Personnel Review , 40(3), 344–363.

40.

Loshali

, & Krishnan

V. R.

(2013). Strategic human resource management and firm performance: Mediating role of transformational leadership. Journal of Strategic Human Resource Management , 2(1), 9–19.

41.

Manshadi

M. D.

, Ebrahimi

F. P.

, & Abdi

H. M.

(2014). A study of the relationship between transformational leadership and organizational learning. European Journal of Experimental Biology , 4(1), 12–20.

42.

McDermott

A. M.

, Conway

, Rousseau

D. M.

, & Flood

P. C.

(2013). Promoting effective psychological contracts through leadership: The missing link between HR strategy and performance. Human Resource Management , 52(2), 289–310.

43.

Naqvi

S. M. M. R.

, & Bashir

(2015). IT-expert retention through organizational commitment: A study of public sector information technology professionals in Pakistan. Applied Computing and Informatics , 11(1), 60–75.

44.

Obeidat

, Yousef

, Nofal

, & Masa’deh

(2018). The effect of transformational leadership on entrepreneurial orientation: The mediating role of organizational learning capability. Modern Applied Science , 12(11), 77–104.

45.

Ogbonnaya

C. N.

, & Nielsen

(2016). Transformational leadership, high performance work practices, and an effective organization. 76th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management . https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2016.11152abstract

46.

Otoo

, & Mishra

(2018). Measuring the impact of human resource development (HRD) practices on employee performance in small and medium scale enterprises. European Journal of Training and Development , 42(7/8), 517–534.

47.

Pasamar

, Diaz-Fernandez

, & de la Rosa-Navarro

M. D.

(2019). Human capital: The link between leadership and organizational learning. European Journal of Management and Business Economics , 28(1), 25–51.

48.

P@SHA. (2008). State of the industry report . https://www.pasha.org.pk/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/P@SHA-IT-Industry-Report-2007-8.pdf

49.

P@SHA. (n.d.). Who we are? Pakistan Software Houses Association for IT & ITES. https://www.pasha.org.pk/about-us/who-we-are/

50.

Pregnolato

, Bussin

M. H.

, & Schlechter

A. F.

(2017). Total rewards that retain: A study of demographic preferences. SA Journal of Human Resource Management , 15(1), 1–10.

51.

Richard

O. C.

, & Johnson

N. B.

(2001). Strategic human resource management effectiveness and firm performance. International Journal of Human Resource Management , 12(2), 299–310.

52.

Rana

, & Chopra

(2016). Exploring the antecedents of organizational learning capability in small and medium enterprises. International Journal in Management & Social Science , 4(2), 404–424.

53.

Sikora

, & Ferris

G. R.

(2011). Critical factors in human resource practice implementation: Implications of cross-cultural contextual issues. International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management , 11(2–4), 112–140.

54.

Sekaran

, & Bougie

(2016). Research methods for business: A skill building approach . John Wiley & Sons, New York.

55.

Stone

D. L.

, & Deadrick

D. L.

(2015). Challenges and opportunities affecting the future of human resource management. Human Resource Management Review , 25(2), 139–145.

56.

Svetlik

, Stavrou-Costea

, Chiva

, Alegre

, & Lapiedra

(2007). Measuring organisational learning capability among the workforce. International Journal of Manpower , 28(1), 224–242.

57.

Tan

L. P.

, & Wong

K. Y.

(2015). Linkage between knowledge management and manufacturing performance: A structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Knowledge Management , 19(4), 814–835.

58.

Tipu

S. A. A.

, Ryan

J. C.

, & Fantazy

K. A.

(2012). Transformational leadership in Pakistan: An examination of the relationship of transformational leadership to organizational culture and innovation propensity. Journal of Management & Organization , 18(4), 461–480.

59.

Trung

N. N.

, Nghi

P. T.

, Soldier

L. L.

, Hoi

T. V.

, & Kim

W. J.

(2014). Leadership, resource and organisational innovation: Findings from state and non-state enterprises. International Journal of Innovation Management , 18(5), 1–30.

60.

Van der Voet

(2014). The effectiveness and specificity of change management in a public organization: Transformational leadership and a bureaucratic organizational structure. European Management Journal , 32(3), 373–382.

61.

Van

N. T.

, Phong

L. B.

, & Loan

L. T.

(2018). Antecedents of innovation capability: The role of transformational leadership and organizational learning. International Journal of Business Administration , 9(5), 1–10.

62.

Vashdi

D. R.

, Levitats

Z. S.

, & Grimland

(2019). Which transformational leadership behaviors relate to organizational learning processes? The Learning Organization , 26(2), 176–189.

63.

Vasilaki

, Tarba

, Ahammad

M. F.

, & Glaister

A. J.

(2016). The moderating role of transformational leadership on HR practices in M&A integration. The International Journal of Human Resource Management , 27(20), 2488–2504.

64.

Vera

, & Crossan

(2004). Strategic leadership and organizational learning. Academy of Management Review , 29(2), 222–240.

65.

Xie

(2019). Leadership and organizational learning culture: A systematic literature review. European Journal of Training and Development , 43(1), 76–104.

66.

Zhu

, Chew

I. K.

, & Spangler

W. D.

(2005). CEO transformational leadership and organizational outcomes: The mediating role of human–capital-enhancing human resource management. The Leadership Quarterly , 16(1), 39–52.