View/Open - Scholarly Commons Home

More documents

Recommendations

Info

While the NSO had what could be termed low levels of receptivity, the PSF also displayed a similar level of receptivity. While participants felt there organisation was superior, or the more powerful of the two, they felt that they indentified only tiny crossovers where they could learn from the PSF. While opinions were divided, some participants thought both organisations were symmetrical in there levels of learning. There were those participants that, due to the superior resources of the PSF, felt strongly that they were the teacher in the relationship. Opinions like this would suggest that the NSO would struggle to learn because of the knowledge distance between organisations. According to Hamel (1991) some organisations may never be able to close the skills gap, due to the knowledge gap being so significant. While some participants reiterated that the PSF resources were valuable and justified their teacher status, others also spoke of the PSF as a creative student. Being a creative student would suggest that the PSF had little interest in learning from the NSO, preferring instead to be more self-reliant in their knowledge generation. While members of both organisations detailed certain areas that it could possibly learn from its partner, no tangible examples could be provided of what had actually been learnt. This was apart from one PSF participant who thought they, the PSF, had caught up in regard to junior development. The PSF was able to provide an example of where they and the NSO had combined resources to produce a coaching manual, where the PSF had provided coaching expertise and the NSO the opportunity to distribute the manual. The evidence suggests that these organisations had in fact learnt very little from their alliance partner. 108
5.5 Future Research There are a number of research opportunities in the area of inter-partner learning emerging from this study. These can be divided into research context and research questions. In terms of context, there are additional NSO-PSF case study opportunities in New Zealand. As with any single case study, the issue of extrapolation is problematic and the question of whether the results of this research are applicable to other relationships is best left until data from these alliances is collected. Whilst instances of NSO-PSF alliances may be rare in the world, there are examples in Australia whereby state sporting organisations have a close relationship with PSFs. This context is very suitable to the study of alliances. The inter-partner learning between and amongst organisations in a sport - the clubs, the regional bodies and its NSO – is another context that should also be explored. Athletes and coaches who are employed by both the NSO and the PSF is a more specific set of circumstances within which there is a reasonable expectation that the opportunity for inter- partner learning is quite high. There are also those external relationships between sport organisations and their media and commercial partners (i.e. sponsors). A number of research questions can also be raised. These include: 1) To what extent does profit orientation impact upon inter-partner learning? 2) What is the impact of dual appointments (i.e. a person being employed both organisations) on the transfer of knowledge between alliance partners? 3) Do organisations realise the benefits of learning payoff in alliances? 4) How does inter-partner learning evolve over time? 5) Are NSO’s able to protect their competencies given their public status? 6) What level of trust exists between partners in an alliance? 7) Which employees are the key sources of knowledge transfer between organisations? 109
Page 1 and 2:
Determinants of Inter-Partner Learn
Page 3 and 4:
3.3 Data Sources...................
Page 5 and 6:
INDEX OF FIGURES Figure 1: Case Stu
Page 7 and 8:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to of
Page 9 and 10:
DEDICATION I would like to dedicate
Page 11 and 12:
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Backgrou
Page 13 and 14:
Harvey, 1997). However, the study o
Page 15 and 16:
take over management of the Knights
Page 17 and 18:
“to be New Zealand’s leading pa
Page 19 and 20:
transparency and receptivity to lea
Page 21 and 22:
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Int
Page 23 and 24:
To summarise this section, transfer
Page 25 and 26:
separated into internal and externa
Page 27 and 28:
least some form face-to-face contac
Page 29 and 30:
experiences with a view to improvin
Page 31 and 32:
are amongst the most important fact
Page 33 and 34:
Whether learning becomes self-susta
Page 35 and 36:
alliance. Organisations with a pref
Page 37 and 38:
uncontrolled access. Organisations
Page 39 and 40:
additional factor influencing recep
Page 41 and 42:
The rationale for this research was
Page 43 and 44:
the organisation and the relationsh
Page 45 and 46:
By keeping accounts of the research
Page 47 and 48:
number of questions where developed
Page 49 and 50:
interviews. Not only was there the
Page 51 and 52:
The next section focussed on the se
Page 53 and 54:
the opportunity to archive the data
Page 55 and 56:
3.4.4 Communication A major factor
Page 57 and 58:
three determinants of learning deve
Page 59 and 60:
the type of organisation but not th
Page 61 and 62:
CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS 4.1. Introductio
Page 63 and 64:
een one of the factors that had res
Page 65 and 66:
Interestingly NSO3 made this commen
Page 67 and 68: some duplication, then, there’s c
Page 69 and 70: [I]t’s mainly the management, but
Page 71 and 72: Other participants supported this b
Page 73 and 74: [the sport] in the country. And tha
Page 75 and 76: communication, April 18, 2008). Thi
Page 77 and 78: [W]e’ll come back from the intern
Page 79 and 80: [PSF1], and [PSF2] and ... the owne
Page 81 and 82: When probed further as to why this
Page 83 and 84: In certain areas the NSO1 thought i
Page 85 and 86: However in an unusual move, likely
Page 87 and 88: Since I’ve come on board, and cer
Page 89 and 90: obviously doing it. So on that leve
Page 91 and 92: PSF6 also reiterated this, wanting
Page 93 and 94: with them, you never know what you
Page 95 and 96: the answer: I think as I said, we
Page 97 and 98: access....so, in return for univers
Page 99 and 100: important.....we’re opening up ou
Page 101 and 102: It was clear that there had been so
Page 103 and 104: When questioned about who was the t
Page 105 and 106: We have three full time coaches her
Page 107 and 108: wanting to know more, I guess, yes,
Page 109 and 110: CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION 5.1 Introducti
Page 111 and 112: Both organisations are collaboratin
Page 113 and 114: Hamel’s (1991) study that argued
Page 115 and 116: financial issues. However one parti
Page 117: 5.4 Receptivity of Organisations in
Page 121 and 122: REFERENCES Alexander, T., Thibault,
Page 123 and 124: Contractor, F. J., & Lorange, P. (2
Page 125 and 126: Inkpen, A. C. (2002). Learning, kno
Page 127 and 128: New Zealand Companies Office. (2008
Page 129 and 130: Tsang, E. W. K., & Kwan, K.-M. (199
Page 131 and 132: Area Research Question Appendix 1:
Page 133 and 134: Appendix 2: AUTEC Ethical Approval
Page 135 and 136: Appendix 3: Participant Information
Page 137 and 138: How do I agree to participate in th
Page 139 and 140: Appendix 4: Participant Consent For
show all

View/Open - Scholarly Commons Home

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?