View/Open - Scholarly Commons Home

More documents

Recommendations

Info

While those at the NSO saw the opportunity existed, they were quick to note that the PSF could also learn from the relationship, displaying what could be called symmetrical learning. NSO3 quoted: [T]here’s certainly some stuff that the [PSF] are doing as a professional club that we’d like to put in place. And certainly the [PSF] have worked with us surrounding some international trends and what’s happening internationally, with [the sport]. (personal communication, April 22, 2008) NSO2 also supported this symmetrical learning: [L]earning can go both ways. And I think that, because in [the NSO], although it is a non-profit organisation, it’s got a lot of professional people working for the organisation, so I think the you know the learning can go both ways, and should go both ways. I think both organisations can benefit from learning, from each other. (personal communication, April 21, 2008) It would appear that the NSO as an organisation was intent on learning from the PSF. Only NSO5 expressed an organisational view of limited intent by replying, “up until now they [the NSO] wouldn’t have looked at it like that” (personal communication, June 3, 2008). It would even appear that a learning intent had been discussed within the organisation. When speaking about the organisation, in terms of staff, NSO1 mentioned “they’re all very motivated, and I’ve spoken with them all about their own specific and personal objectives, and they’re very much in that learning mode. So I think enthusiastic is a very appropriate word for them” (personal communication, April 18, 2008). When further pressed on whether the NSO was doing all it could to learn from the PSF, the overall response was - no. NSO1 expanded on this point: [P]robably not, probably not to date and there’s probably more we can do. In an ideal world, I’d like to my staff interacting on a regular basis with them and then coming into our office and doing bits and pieces, but that’s the thing that will come over time as we strengthen the partnership relationship. (personal communication, April 18, 2008) 60
Other participants supported this believing more could be done to learn. NSO 4 commenting: “Ah, [chuckle and pause] well I guess you can always do more” (personal communication, April 23, 2008). While NSO3 further clarified: “I think you can always do more to learn from anyone.... but probably no” (personal communication, April 22, 2008). When asked to further expand on what more could be done to learn, NSO3 referred to the partnership document: “I think that’s part of what we’re negotiating at the moment” (personal communication, April 22, 2008). Those at the NSO where keen to utilise the resources of the PSF. It was explained that they viewed the PSF facility as an opportunity to learn. NSO5 expanded in that opportunity: [T]hey’ve got the facility, there’s an opportunity for from our point of view, the opportunity is that we could use that facility for our training camps and things like that, and that would be a way of assisting the [PSF] with their costs. (personal communication, 3 June, 2008) This resource was seen as hugely valuable for the NSO, as without the financial resource of the PSF the NSO would have never had the financial backing to develop a similar facility. The researcher certainly through his interaction with the participants felt a vibe that the opportunity to use the NSO resources was an exciting prospect. Participants were queried as to whether they saw the PSF as a source of knowledge which they could tap into. Opinions within the NSO varied. NSO3 stated: Probably not across the board in terms of operational staff, but certainly some of the [NSO] staff, which we have learned staff and coaching staff would certainly at various levels look at the [PSF] as an organisation to learn from, yes. (personal communication, April 22, 2008) However, NSO2 said “yes, certainly there is a knowledge there that [the NSO] can tap into” (personal communication, April 21, 2008). It was NSO4 who was aware that the PSF were a source, providing an example that they could possibly access: “Like I know that 61
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: [I]t’s mainly the management, but
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 and 118: 5.4 Receptivity of Organisations in
Page 119 and 120: 5.5 Future Research There are a num
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?