Total Quality Management & Business Excellence

ISSN: 1478-3363 (Print) 1478-3371 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ctqm20

A study on the effect of learning organisation

readiness on employees' quality commitment: the
moderating effect of leader–member exchange

Youngkeun Choi, Jeong Yeon Kim & Taejong Yoo

To cite this article: Youngkeun Choi, Jeong Yeon Kim & Taejong Yoo (2016) A study on the effect
of learning organisation readiness on employees' quality commitment: the moderating effect of
leader–member exchange, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 27:3-4, 325-338,
DOI: 10.1080/14783363.2014.981072

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2014.981072

Published online: 24 Nov 2014.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 654

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 7 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ctqm20
Total Quality Management, 2016
Vol. 27, No. 3, 325 –338, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2014.981072

A study on the effect of learning organisation readiness on

employees’ quality commitment: the moderating effect
of leader–member exchange
∗
Youngkeun Choi, Jeong Yeon Kim and Taejong Yoo

The Department of Business Administration, Sangmyung University, 7 Hongji-dong, Jongno-gu,

Seoul 110-743, South Korea

Though learning organisation has been positioned as a driving force of quality

management in the manufacturing industry under turbulent circumstances, few
studies have examined the relationship between employees’ learning organisation
readiness and quality management from the micro perspective or attempted to
identify the managerial moderating factors that influence this relationship. Using the
micro perspective of Senge’s model, this study empirically investigates the impact
of employees’ learning organisation readiness on their quality commitment and
inquires whether leader– member exchange (LMX) strengthens that impact. The
results indicate that employees’ learning organisation readiness (i.e. their shared
vision, mental model, personal mastery, team learning, and system thinking) is
positively associated with quality commitment and that LMX also positively
influences quality commitment. The study also shows that LMX positively
influences the impact of team learning and system thinking among the sub-variables
of learning organisation readiness on quality commitment.
Keywords: learning organisation readiness; social exchange theory; LMX; quality
commitment

1. Introduction
Most research on the learning organisation has defined psychological variables such as
organisational commitment and job satisfaction as the main outcome variables (Tsai,
2014). Recent research has proposed knowledge transfer as an outcome variable for learn-
ing organisation, but only in the narrow sense (Dekouloua & Trivellas, 2014). The aim of
an organisation’s high-level learning organisation readiness is maintaining and improving
competitiveness. Therefore, research must define concrete behavioural outcome variables
in studies of the learning organisation in order to reveal the effect of organisations’
competitiveness.
Turbulent business circumstances demand knowledge management through learning
organisation as well as conventional management assets such as financial and workforce
prowess (Novak, 2014). Learning organisation has been considered a driving force of
quality management in the manufacturing sector (Garvin, 1993).
The intimate relationship between learning organisation and quality management has
been investigated and its positive effects discovered (Deming, 1986; Lam, Lee, Ooi, &
Lin, 2011; Lapre & Tsikriktsis, 2006; Levin, 2000; Senge, 1990). However, most
studies have been confined to theoretical or macroscopic analyses of the relationship
between learning organisation and quality management. Few studies have examined the

∗
Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

# 2014 Taylor & Francis

326 Y. Choi et al.

relationship between employees’ learning organisation readiness and quality management

from the micro perspective, and no study has identified the managerial factors or frame-
works by which organisations may improve through their employees’ learning organis-
ation readiness.
The objective of this study is twofold. First, it presents an empirical analysis of the
impact of employees’ learning organisation readiness on quality commitment. Quality
management is achieved by engaging employees in quality commitment. The higher the
level of the learning organisation, the more quality improvement activities (such as a sug-
gestion system or Six Sigma project) will be performed. Moreover, one of the most impor-
tant quality commitment factors is employees’ learning organisation readiness (Peccei &
Wood, 1994). The study’s second objective is an empirical analysis of leader – member
exchange (LMX) as the key factor in improving the level of quality commitment. The ulti-
mate goal of all managerial activities is improving business excellence. To this end, learn-
ing can range from changing employees’ behaviour, both emotionally and intellectually, to
driving towards organisational excellence. Organisations must thus apply the managerial
factors that can foster employees’ learning activities and positively influence quality com-
mitment and business excellence. Social exchange theory assumes that perceived organ-
isational support increases employees’ affective attachment to their organisation and
their expectation that greater efforts towards meeting organisational goals will be
rewarded (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986). Therefore, this research
explores whether employees’ affective attachment through LMX can consolidate the
effectiveness of learning organisation readiness for quality commitment.

2. Theoretical background and research model

2.1. Learning organisation and quality commitment
Two research themes have emerged concerning quality management and learning organ-
isation. The first focuses on the relationship between total quality management (TQM)
activities and learning organisation components in order to prove that the learning
concept is inherent in TQM. In particular, the successful installation of TQM in an organ-
isation becomes a matter of utmost importance (Cândido & Santos, 2011; Green, 2012).
Senge argues that quality management is based on learning activities since basic quality
management processes such as ‘Plan, Do, Check, Act’ involve aspects of Dewey’s
method, such as the ‘Discover, Invention, Produce, Observe’ process (Senge, 1990). Of
the learning process that occurs in quality management Deming (1986) has said, ‘Learning
is not compulsory . . . neither is survival.’ This research theme posits that the sustainability
of a company can be guaranteed through learning activities. The second research theme
measures the effectiveness of a learning organisation by evaluating its quality manage-
ment performance. Studies have sought to prove the hypothesis that management perform-
ance can be improved through learning activity by comparing the time series of quality
management (e.g. quality reliability) to the learning curve (Lapre & Tsikriktsis, 2006;
Levin, 2000). Research has made it clear that the subcomponents of quality management
and learning organisation readiness are intimately related and that learning organisation
readiness has an extremely positive effect on quality management performance.
These studies were limited to theoretical interpretations. Though empirical, they were
not micro- but macro-level (i.e. company-level) analyses. Through the influence of learn-
ing organisation readiness, quality management can be affected by the quality improve-
ment activities of organisation members, and members’ quality commitment has a
significant effect on practical quality improvement activities (Peccei & Wood, 1994).
 Total Quality Management 327

Consequently, quality commitment must be investigated as a key factor in any research

concerning learning organisation readiness and quality management.
The first quality commitment study was conducted by the Work Psychology
Research Unit (WPRU) of Sheffield University in England. After reviewing the extant
research, they redefined ‘quality commitment’ in terms of two components: affective
quality commitment and behavioural quality commitment. Affective quality commitment
is derived from attitudinal commitment such as identification, involvement, and
emotional affection for organisational goals, while behavioural quality commitment is
generated through the attribution approaches to commitment with responsibility and
willingness. However, no research results were provided on the measurement of
quality commitment.
In other research, cognitive quality commitment has been proposed as a way to identify
the quality commitment principle and develop its measurement (Peccei & Wood, 1994).
Cognitive quality commitment is defined as an indicator of the mental processes and per-
ceptions about organisational values that generate a collective belief in the importance of
organisational goals. It includes three components: (1) the awareness of, and attention to,
the fulfilment of external and internal customer needs; (2) the willingness to continuously
improve; and (3) a high quality of immersion in, and confidence about, the job’s impor-
tance. Quality commitment includes affective quality commitment and is similar to com-
ponents (2) and (3) of the cognitive and behavioural quality commitment approaches
(Peccei & Wood, 1994). While researchers in industrial organisational psychology have
studied leading attitudinal variables such as job satisfaction, job involvement, and organ-
isational commitment, few empirical studies have been conducted on the determinant
factors in quality commitment.
Five core strategic building blocks – shared vision, mental model, personal mastery,
team learning, and system thinking – have been proposed as ways to improve a learning
organisation’s level (Senge, 1990). Senge’s five learning organisation disciplines have
been argued to have an affinity with quality commitment. First, ‘shared vision’ provides
a ‘picture of the future goal’ and creates a consensus among organisation members
about how to achieve it. If feeling a genuine commitment to their organisational goals,
values, and mission, all members can attain remarkable achievements and crate a focal
point and continuous dynamism for learning. The WPRU suggests that this can have a
positive effect on affective quality commitment, and Peccei and Wood argue that it
leads to a high quality of immersion and confidence in a job’s importance. Companies
must consider quality management as one of its most important goals. When a
company establishes quality management as a goal and creates a consensus among its
members about how to achieve it, its employees will endeavour to pursue quality improve-
ment with a common aspiration.
Second, ‘mental models’ are psychological images of how the world works – the
mind-set or frame of reference conditioning perceptions and thoughts. They have a
direct effect on the behaviour patterns and thinking spectrums of individuals and organis-
ations. Fundamental mind-set changes can occur through psychological reflection. This
approach, largely based on the cognitive commitment theory, is valuable in enabling
change management through strategic thinking; the WPRU suggests that it can have a
positive effect on behaviour quality commitment, and Peccei and Wood argue that it
can influence employees’ willingness to pursue continuous improvement. Quality man-
agement can also be the object of priority change management. Quality commitment
for continuous improvement can be fully supported by change management’s mind-set
or frame of reference.
328 Y. Choi et al.

Third, ‘personal mastery’ refers to the continuous clarification and deepening of an

individual’s abilities flowing from his or her essential and intrinsic value. Mature personal
mastery must be empowered by the achievement motive. Empowerment can provide the
motivation to unceasingly discover and develop fundamental principles through trial and
error and is thus similar to ‘task autonomy’, one of the prerequisites for quality commit-
ment. If task autonomy is not guaranteed through a lack of opportunities to use their skills
and knowledge, employees’ attention to, and willingness to, pursue quality improvement
will be reduced. Positive task autonomy allows all members to perform quality improve-
ment activities using their skills and knowledge. When they encounter unsolvable quality
problems, they will inform their team leader or quality management experts.
Fourth, ‘team learning’ refers to the process by which group members learn through
activities such as communication and discussion, experimentation, encountering new
facts, and interpretation. Since the basic unit of a modern organisation is the team, an
organisation cannot learn if its teams cannot learn. In pursing their organisation’s
mission, then, members must have the appropriate expertise and be able to harmonise
their individual abilities. Team learning must be vitalised to prevent the waste of individ-
ual expertise and ensure contribution to the mission. Quality improvement requires that
team members’ knowledge and experience be shared, which also enhances their ability
to problem solve and perform upward levelling tasks. This has a particularly significant
influence on quality commitment, as it allows members to not only solve problems but
also acquire skills such as problem prevention and problem solving from teammates,
quality management experts, and engineers.
Fifth, ‘system thinking’, the strongest thinking ability, sees the interrelationships
among things rather than mere linear cause-effect chains. It is the most important factor
in the development of an organisation’s learning ability (Senge, 1990), and the aforemen-
tioned four disciplines can be intimately connected through it. It is similar to the ‘request
for problem solving’, one of the prerequisites for quality commitment. In TQM, a request
for problem solving expresses the need for the knowledge of how to solve a problem such
as the quality improvement efforts of hands-on workers, which, through self-diagnosis,
can have a positive effect on the problem solving process. System thinking is thus a sig-
nificant factor in quality commitment.
Given the aforementioned findings on quality commitment, the hypotheses below are
proposed:
H1: The level of learning organisation positively affects quality commitment.
H2: The level of shared vision positively affects quality commitment.
H3: The level of mental models positively affects quality commitment.
H4: The level of personal mastery positively affects quality commitment.
H5: The level of team learning positively affects quality commitment.
H6: The level of system thinking positively affects quality commitment.

2.2. LMX and quality commitment

Social exchange theory (Blau, 1964; Homans, 1961) explained the motivation behind the
attitudes and behaviours exchanged between individuals. Eisenberger et al. (1986)
expanded this work by proposing and establishing that the theory of social exchange
also explains aspects of the relationship between the organisation and its employees.
They noted that employees form general perceptions about the intentions and attitudes
of the organisation towards them from the policies and procedures enacted by individuals
 Total Quality Management 329

and agents of the organisation, attributing human-like attributes to their employer on the
basis of the treatment they receive (Levinson, 1965). In this way, employees see them-
selves as having a relationship with their employer that is parallel to the relationships indi-
viduals build with each other. Recognising this tendency to personify the organisation,
they applied social exchange theory to the relationship between the personified organis-
ation and its employees. In particular, they predicted that the positive, beneficial actions
directed at employees by the organisation and/or its representatives contribute to the estab-
lishment of high-quality exchange relationships that create obligations for employees to
reciprocate in positive, beneficial ways’ (Choi & Yoo, 2014; Lee, Capella, Taylor, Luo,
& Gabler, 2014; Rupp, Shao, Jones, & Liao, 2014; Setton, Bennett, & Liden, 1996).
Social exchange theory provides the dominant theoretical basis for LMX as well. LMX
theory suggests that an interpersonal relationship evolves between supervisors and subor-
dinates against the background of a formal organisation (Graen & Cashman, 1975). The
relationship is based on social exchange, wherein ‘each party must offer something the
other party sees as valuable and each party must see the exchange as reasonably equitable
or fair’ (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). LMX relationships have been shown to vary in terms of
the material resources, information, and support exchanged between the two parties. The
greater the perceived value of the tangible and intangible commodities exchanged, the
higher the quality of the LMX relationship.
Based on it, LMX theory defines the relationship between leaders and members as a
vertical dyad linkage (Dansereau, Graen, & Haga, 1975), suggesting a differentiated
relationship among members, with some members benefitting through unique relation-
ships. The two member groups, in-groups and out-groups, are defined according to their
relationship type. In-group members have a high degree of mutual trust, respect, and obli-
gation and engage in high-quality exchanges (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). They enjoy pri-
vileges such as operating within the leader’s social network, getting high performance
ratings, receiving attention, and taking advantageous job placements (Gerstner & Day,
1997). Meanwhile, out-group members have a low level of mutual trust, respect, and obli-
gation and engage in low-quality exchange, including transactional contracts. Working
under low attention and with few rewards, out-group members merely perform the tasks
specified in their job descriptions (Suazo, 2002).
From the perceptual perspective of human organisational relations, LMX quality has
a tremendous influence on attitudes (Konovsky & Pugh, 1994). Research has found
that a high quality of LMX reflects members’ positive attitude and their effective perform-
ance of such tasks as organisational commitment (Schyns, Paul, Mohr, & Blank, 2005),
organisational citizenship behaviour (Bhal, 2006; Harris, Li, & Kirkman, 2014; Wayne,
Shore, & Liden, 1997), and job performance (Walumbwa, Cropanzano, & Hartnell,
2009; Wayne et al., 1997).
There is no research on the relationship between LMX and quality commitment, a
relationship this paper uses social exchange theory to explain. Social exchange theory
posits the concept of reciprocity, in which individuals expect a future reward for doing
favours (Gouldner, 1960). Reciprocity in organisations has a significant influence on
member behaviour: members predict the rewards resulting from their efforts; when
members are given positive attention by their organisation, they feel an obligation to
respond with official or unofficial effort (Eisenberger et al., 1986). The contract relation-
ship between an organisation and an individual carries unequal bargaining power and sub-
stantiality, while the common interpersonal relationship carries equal bargaining point and
personality. Therefore, in applying the social exchange theory to the relationship between
organisations and members, the organisation was personified to provide an equality
330 Y. Choi et al.

between the organisation and its members (Levinson, 1965). This was done for three
reasons: (1) the organisation is abetted by the its legal, moral, and financial responsibility
for the actions of its agents; (2) its rules, norms, and policies provide continuity and pre-
scribe the role of individual members; and (3) the power of the organisation is exerted over
its members by its agent. Through their long-term relationship with the organisation’s
agent, members believe that the organisation sets a high value on their contribution and
focuses on their career. The leader, who influences every aspect of members’ lives, acts
as a bridge between the organisation and its members (Bäckström, Ingelsson, &
Wiklund, 2011; Konovsky & Pugh, 1994). The LMX theory posits that members’ exist-
ence value and role category are construed according to their relationship type (Graen
& Scandura, 1987). Since the leader is the organisational agent responsible for
members’ rewards and punishments, the leader can be considered the organisation’s uni-
versal agent – the one best able to support the members.
Members’ attitudes to their organisation are affected by the quality of LMX, which
indicates the degree of relationship. Since the credit, attention, and caring offered by
leaders are regarded as forms of organisational support, members feel ethically obliged
to return the organisation’s favour and willingly undertake job-related action while
serving as an organisational citizen. In a company that applies quality management, all
members want to know what degree of reward they will receive for the quality improve-
ment efforts. Informal approaches such as problem solving using human networks and
knowledge sharing and formal approaches such as Six Sigma and TQM are equally essen-
tial for quality improvement (Nie, 2013). Members may even engage in organisational citi-
zenship for the sake of quality improvement through an ethical obligation felt after
experiencing positive LMX.
The aforementioned findings on LMX lead to the hypothesis below:
H7: The level of LMX positively affects quality commitment.

2.3. The effect of LMX on the relationship between learning organisation and
quality commitment
The learning organisation model proposed by Senge (1990) can be defined as a human
resource development programme. It proposes that five disciplines can improve individ-
uals’ level of learning organisation readiness. As the primary task of human resource
development is promoting members’ learning, the learning organisation supervises and
focuses on informal approaches to learning. However, because human resource develop-
ment’s conventional learning programme is limited (Ingelsson, Eriksson, & Lilja, 2012), a
learning organisation should provide several informal approaches to development. Fur-
thermore, since the learning objectives of the informal approaches are broadly defined,
learners’ and learning facilitators’ responsibility to be guided by former learners (e.g.
through mentoring, coaching) is vital.
Kuvaas (2008) studied the positive influence of employee-organisation relationship
factors (i.e. perceived organisational support, affective organisational commitment, and
procedural and interactional justice) on the relationship between employee perception
of developmental human resource programmes and employee outcomes. This research
showed that a high perception of organisational support created an affirmative attitude
to developmental human resource programmes and that LMX quality strengthened
members’ attitudes and actions. Procedural and interactional justice was found to influence
obligation, organisational citizenship, and withdrawal behaviours in the LMX.
 Total Quality Management 331

When members recognise a positive LMX, they will feel an obligation to join their
human resource department’s learning programme. Moreover, when leaders provide
members an opportunity to improve their ability and performance through developmental
human resource programmes, they strengthen LMX quality. Consequently, an organis-
ation’s level of learning support has a strong and positive effect on quality commitment
through the positive LMX created.
Given the aforementioned findings, the hypothesis below is proposed:
H8: The level of LMX positively affects a learning organisation’s effect on quality
commitment.

3. Analysis method
3.1. Data
This study is based on responses from students participating in training sessions offered by
the Korean Standards Association in January 2011. Korean Standards Association is a
public organisation under the Korean Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy and was estab-
lished in 1962 pursuant to Article 32 of the Industrial Standardization Act, and has been a
faithful partner for the industrial development of Korea over the last five decades. The
respondents are full-time workers who are involved in quality management in their compa-
nies and in particular, they participated in the training session of quality management. Of the
distributed 600 questionnaires, we used 509 in the final analysis after removing incomplete
or spurious responses. The effective response rate for the questionnaire was 84.8%.

3.2. Data characteristics and questionnaire structure

The respondents work for 286 companies, classified into manufacturing (74.8%), services
(2.3%), public enterprises (6.2%), and wholesale and retail trade (1.2%). We can also clas-
sify them according to age: 87 companies were under 10 years old (17.1%), 148 companies
were 10– 20 years old (29.1%), 51 companies were 20– 30 years old (10.0%), 85 companies
were 30 – 40 years old (16.7%), and 137 companies were more than 40 years old (26.9%). Of
the total, 43 companies (8.6%) had fewer than 10 people, 148 (29.1%) had between 11 and
50 people, 87 (17.1%) had between 51 and 300 people, 79 (15.5%) had between 300 and
1000 people, and 151 (29.6%) had more than 1000 people. Of the sample, 165 companies
(32.4%) had annual sales revenue of below 10 billion Korean won, 77 (15.1%) had
revenue of between 10 and 50 billion Korean won, 113 (22.2%) had between 50 and 300
billion Korean won, and 153 (30.1%) had over 300 billion Korean won.
The gender distribution of the 509 respondents was 477 males (93.3%) and 32 females
(6.7%). We had 49 respondents (9.6%) in their 20s, 137 (26.9%) in their 30s, 244 (47.9%)
in their 40s, and 79 (15.6%) in their 50s. Of the respondents, 171 (33.6%) had a high
school diploma or less, 115 (22.6%) were college graduates, 196 (38.5%) were university
graduates, and 27 (5.3%) had a master’s degree or higher. Of the total, 164 respondents
(32.2%) had less than five years of work experience, 87 (17.1%) had between 5 and 10
years, 68 (13.6%) had between 10 and 15 years, 71 (13.9%) had between 15 and 20
years, and 119 (23.1%) had more than 20 years. Their jobs were either production- or
R&D-related (256 respondents or 69.9%) or management- and office work-related (153
respondents or 30.1%). Respondents were classified as junior (125 respondents or
24.6%), senior (47 respondents or 9.2%), manager (165 respondents or 32.45%), or direc-
tor or higher (171 respondents or 33.5%).
332 Y. Choi et al.

Questionnaire items were sorted in reverse order of the variables in the research model.
Respondents were sequentially asked questions about learning organisation levels, LMX
theory issues, and quality commitment (the learning organisation level concept included
shared vision, mental model, personal mastery, team learning, and system thinking).
We reversed the order of the questions to make it difficult for respondents to predict the
flow of the questionnaire. The questionnaire had 37 questions: six questions on quality
commitment, 11 on LMX, five on shared vision, three on the mental model, five on per-
sonal mastery, five on team learning, and five on systems thinking. We also included 10
additional questions about personal identification with demographic groups.

3.3. Measurement
Respondents answered the questions (except the demographic questions) on a five-point
Likert scale.
For the learning organisation level, we employed the five areas described in Senge (1990)
– shared vision, mental model, personal mastery, team learning, and system thinking. We
used a modified questionnaire drawn from previous research with six descriptions of
shared vision. For example, ‘I know the vision of my company’, ‘I know that the vision of
our company is valuable’, ‘I think that the vision of our company has clear purpose and direc-
tion and suggests the direction that our members should pursue’, ‘I think that the vision of our
company is achievable’, ‘I try to achieve the vision of our company out of my own free will’,
‘I think that when the vision of our company is achieved, my vision will be also achieved.’
For the mental model, the questionnaire has three items. For example, ‘I think the efforts
to adopt new changes are required’, ‘I think that our company should be changed to the radical
change of our society’, ‘I think that when our company tries a new change, it should reflect the
members’ opinions.’ For personal mastery, the questionnaire has five items. For example, ‘I
know my weak points and try to reinforce them’, ‘I try to study consistently to develop my
ability related to my job’, ‘I try to keep self-development going to conduct my work profi-
ciently’, ‘I try to keep self-development going to develop my specialised field’, ‘I want to
change my situation with the attitude of challenge rather than to adapt myself to my situation.’
Team learning had five items. For example, ‘I think my team members can present their
opinions without any constraints in an open atmosphere’, ‘I think that our members have
an equal opportunity to present their opinions in our team’, ‘I think that lesson and discussion
are often created in our team’, ‘I think that our team members regard each other as a helpful
coworker’, ‘I think that there are the feedbacks for the results of members’ activities in our
team.’ For systems thinking, the questionnaire had five items. For example, ‘I evaluate the
results of my work and reflect them in future business activities’, ‘I know the effects of
my work on our team’, ‘When my work is related to the work of my colleague, I have a
prior consultation with my colleague’, ‘I try to resolve by investigating the root cause of
the problem rather than to resolve the superficial problem urgently’, ‘When I understand
the overall problem in our team, I consider the interrelationship among all works,’ The ques-
tionnaire thus had a total 24 items on learning organisation levels.
For LMX, we followed Liden and Maslyn (1998) and classified it into four different
areas: attachment, loyalty, motivation for contribution, and professional respect. Our
modified questionnaire based on previous research had 11 items. For attachment, it had
three items, such as ‘I have a good personal relationship with my boss’, ‘I want to be a
friend to my boss’, ‘I am glad to work with my boss’ For loyalty, it had three items,
such as ‘My boss tries to protect me from second-level supervisors, even when he does
not have a clear idea of what I have done’, ‘My boss tries to protect my work activity
 Total Quality Management 333

and style from the interfere of others’, ‘My boss tries to protect me form others, when I am
obliged to make a mistake.’ On motivation for contribution, it had two items, such as ‘I
endeavour to complete my given tasks through extra effort to help my boss’, ‘I endeavour
to achieve the goal of my boss’ task through extra effort’ On professional respect, it had two
items, such as ‘the boss’ job knowledge impresses me’, ‘I respect my boss’ experience and
ability related to the work’, ‘I respect my boss’ professional knowledge and skill.’
For quality commitment, we used six items. For example, ‘I try to increase customer
satisfaction’, ‘I try to improve the quality of product and service of our company’, ‘I try to
minimise the dissatisfaction of our customers’, ‘I try to maintain our existing client’, ‘I try
to attract new customers’, ‘I try to decrease fraction defective of product and service of my
company.’
We identified respondents’ demographic and corporation factors as additional control
variables that might affect their answers. Company history and size can affect the com-
pany’s quality management activities. We added dummy control variables for the sales
revenue of the previous year and the number of employees. If the company’s sales
revenue for the previous year was less than 50 billion Korean won, the additional
dummy variable was set to 1 and to 0 otherwise. For the operation period, we set
another dummy variable to 1 if the company was younger than 10 years. For the
number of employees, we set another dummy variable to 1 if the company had 50 employ-
ees or fewer. All other dummy variables were set to 0.

4. Analysis result
4.1. Verification of reliability and validity
The validity of variables is verified through the principal components method and factor
analysis with the varimax method. The criteria for determining the number of factors is
defined as a 1.0 eigen value. We applied factors for analysis only if the factor loading
was greater than 0.5 (factor loading represents the correlation scale between a factor
and other variables). In the factor analysis, we eliminated two items in the variables of
shared vision and system thinking.
The reliability of variables is judged by internal consistency as assessed by Cronbach’s
a. We used surveys and regarded each as one measure only if their Cronbach’s a values
were 0.7 or higher.

4.2. Relationship between variables

Table 1 summarises the Pearson correlation test results between variables and reports the
degree of multi-collinearity between independent variables. The minimum tolerance of
0.612, maximum variance inflation factor of 1.634, and Durbin – Watson’s d-statistics
for LMX of 1.983 show that the statistical significance of the data analysis was not com-
promised by multi-collinearity.

4.3. Hypothesis test

The result of the first regression step, consisting of the control variables, shows that sales
revenue has a positive relationship with quality commitment (b ¼ .13, p ¼ .089). The
result of the second regression step, consisting of the control and independent variables,
shows that the variables representing learning organisation have a positive relationship
with quality commitment. Moreover, shared vision (b ¼ .15, p ¼ .001), mental model
334 Y. Choi et al.

Table 1. Variables’ correlation coefficient and other statistics.

Average (SD) 1 2 3 4 5 6
Shared vision 3.63 (.69)
Mental model 4.35 (.48) .20∗∗
Personal mastery 3.53 (.63) .44∗∗ .23∗∗
Team learning 3.42 (.68) .46∗∗ .14∗∗ .31∗∗
Systems thinking 3.78 (.50) .43∗∗ .29∗∗ .55∗∗ .41∗∗
LMX 3.23 (.61) .63∗∗ .09∗ .34∗∗ .48∗∗ .36∗∗
Quality commitment 3.97 (.54) .37∗∗ .20∗∗ .44∗∗ .21∗∗ .40∗∗ .33∗∗
+
p , .1.
∗
p , .05.
∗∗
p , .01.

(b ¼ .07, p ¼ .089), personal mastery (b ¼ .17, p ¼ .010), team learning (b ¼ .07, p ¼

.087), and systems thinking (b ¼ .15, p ¼ .001) all have positive relationships with
quality commitment. This implies that the higher a company’s learning organisation
level, the stronger its commitment to improving quality. Thus, H2 – 6 are all supported
through the regression results in step 2, as shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Analysis results.

Variables Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4
Control variables
Sales revenue .13+ .15+ .15+ .16∗
Year .01 .05 .04 .05
Employee count 2.10 2.07 2.08 2.05

Independent variables
Shared vision .15∗∗ .15∗∗ .16∗∗
Mental model .07+ .07+ .06
Personal mastery .17∗∗ .17∗∗ .17∗∗
Team learning .07+ .06+ .10∗
Systems thinking .15∗∗ .15∗∗ .17∗∗

Moderators
LMX .13∗∗ .11∗∗

Moderating effect
Shared vision∗ LMX .04
Mental model∗ LMX .01
Personal mastery∗ LMX 2.01
Team learning∗ LMX .13∗∗
Systems thinking∗ LMX .10∗
Adj. R2 ¼ .001 Adj. R2 ¼ .071 Adj. R2 ¼ .855 Adj. R2 ¼ .103
F ¼ 1.038 F ¼ 5.815∗∗ F ¼ 6.274∗∗ F ¼ 5.174∗∗
Notes: In step 3, we have new moderators in the model. The partial correlation analysis results between
independent, dependent variables, and moderators are similar to the above results (i.e. shared vision .14∗∗ , mental
model .06+, personal mastery .16∗∗ , team learning .06+, systems thinking .14∗∗ , LMX .12∗∗ ).
+
p , .1.
∗
p , .05.
∗∗
p , .01.
 Total Quality Management 335

The result of the third regression step, consisting of moderators, shows that only
the LMX variable is positively related to quality commitment (b ¼ .13, p ¼ .001),
indicating that LMX has a positive effect on members’ quality commitments, thus
supporting H7.
The result of the fourth regression step, consisting of the interactions between the inde-
pendent variables and moderators, shows that only team learning (b ¼ .13, p ¼ .003) and
systems thinking (b ¼ .10, p ¼ .032) have a positive relationship with quality commit-
ment, implying that the effects of team learning and system thinking have a stronger
impact on quality commitment if the company’s LMX has a higher value and thus partially
supporting H8. We discuss H8 in more detail in the conclusion.

5. Conclusion
5.1. Summary and implications
This study investigated the impact of learning organisation levels on employees’ quality
commitment levels. We conducted a data analysis to discover if LMX theory can moderate
the relationship between learning organisation levels and quality commitment. The find-
ings can be summarised as follows.
First, members participating in higher levels of learning organisation tend to have a
higher quality commitment. Second, the LMX relationship is positively related to
quality commitment. Third, the variables for learning organisation levels and systems
thinking have an impact on members’ quality commitment only if the members have
good LMX relationships. Furthermore, team learning’s coefficient in the step 4 regression
(b ¼ .10, p ¼ .003) is more significant than that in the step 2 regression (b ¼ .07, p ¼
.087), implying that team learning’s effect on quality commitment can be magnified
through an improved LMX relationship.
Active team learning needs an open atmosphere of discussion based on respect for the
opinions of others. This desirable environment does not just appear spontaneously but
requires that members have a positive attitude to team learning activities. Members
with good relationships with their bosses feel a moral obligation to return their bosses’
hospitality, which can inspire them to improve their performance and adapt to standard
behaviours through organisational citizenship. Finally, members’ active participation in
team learning activities may vitalise positive dialogues with fellow members, creating
further positive impacts on members’ quality commitment.
The coefficient of systems thinking in the step 4 regression (b ¼ .17, p ¼ .000) is
more significant than that in the step 2 regression (b ¼ .15, p ¼ .001). Systems thinking
is the ability to understand the dynamic relationship between the overall structure and the
details. Team members with this ability may be able to properly define problems and find
solutions when participating in problem-solving activities. Members with moral obli-
gations imposed by their bosses’ hospitality will aggressively try to solve problems and
fortify their systems thinking. Problem solving efforts also strengthen quality
commitment.
This study makes three kinds of research contributions. First, we introduce the learning
organisation concept at the individual level and relate it to quality commitment. Studies on
quality management and learning organisation have focused on theoretical interpretations,
and the empirical research has explored the corporate rather than the individual level. As
studies have shown that corporate quality commitment is significantly impacted by
employees’ quality commitment (Peccei & Wood, 1994; Rodrı́guez-Antón & Alonso-
Almeida, 2011), we have empirically explored the relationship between employees’
336 Y. Choi et al.

learning organisation levels and their quality commitment levels. Second, we suggest that
LMX is the main factor moderating between learning organisation levels and employee
quality commitment. Previous research has found a positive relationship between learning
organisation levels and organisational effectiveness. However, we suggest that a new man-
agerial control factor, LMX, increases the positive effects of learning organisations. We
have also empirically demonstrated that LMX encourages employees’ positive partici-
pation in team-learning activities. Finally, we show the Korean context. Korean companies
have an authoritarianism culture and a hierarchy system. Therefore, the relationship
between superiors and subordinates is critically important in their organisations. This
characteristic of the research context influences the managerial control factor in quality
commitment.
Moreover, this study provides some of managerial implications to corporate executives
who try to improve organisational performance through the learning organisation. It is
especially worth noting the importance of LMX, and management should be interested
in its prerequisites. Previous research has identified organisation fairness (Erdogan,
Liden, & Kraimer, 2006; Walumbwa et al., 2009) and firm leadership (Schyns et al.,
2005) as the prerequisites of LMX, with fairness in distribution, procedures, and inter-
actions particularly emphasised. Innovative leadership also appears to be a requirement
for better LMX; companies are thus advised to help their leaders understand and apply
it. Finally, because this study shows the Korean case, we provide a good perspective of
managerial control in quality commitment to foreign corporate executives.

5.2. Limitations of the questionnaire and future research directions

The analysis results based on our interpretation of the questionnaires provided several
insights into the relationships between the learning organisation and product quality com-
mitment. However, we must also acknowledge the following limitations.
First, we collected our responses from students participating in quality control process
training conducted by the Korean Standards Association. We cannot be sure that all
respondents work on quality improvement in their workplace, though we tried to eliminate
all answers from respondents working in fields irrelevant to quality control, such as HR
workers, secretaries, and general office workers.
The importance of the variables, especially those relating learning organisation to
quality commitment, might vary, and the moderating effect of LMX may also differ
depending on the sample. Future studies should draw their sample exclusively from
employees on manufacturing sites.
Second, as the variables were all measured at the same time, we cannot be sure that
their relationships are constant. Although the survey questions occurred in reverse order
of the analysis model to prevent additional issues, the existence of causal relationships
between variables is a possibility.
Finally, future studies could consider another meditator between quality commitment
and the learning organisation level. For example, Kuvaas (2008) has suggested that
emotional organisation commitment and fairness in procedures and interactions are
employee – organisation relationship indicators for HR development programmes and
have a positive impact on job performance.
We can apply this study’s methods to other data samples in order to check the con-
stancy of our variables’ relationships. Examining samples from another industry (such
as the service industry) would be interesting because each industry uses a different defi-
nition of ‘quality’.
 Total Quality Management 337

References
Bäckström, I., Ingelsson, P., & Wiklund, H. (2011). Learning from others to adapt quality manage-
ment to the future. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 22(2), 187–196.
Bhal, K. T. (2006). LMX-citizenship behavior relationship: Justice as a mediator. Leadership &
Organizational Development Journal, 27, 106–117.
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York, NY: Wiley.
Cândido, C. J. F., & Santos, S. P. (2011). Is TQM more difficult to implement than other transforma-
tional strategies? Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 22(11), 1139–1164.
Choi, Y., & Yoo, T. J. (2014). Influence of HRM practices on privacy policy compliance intention: A
study among bank employees in Korea. International Journal of Security and Its Applications,
8(1), 9–18.
Dansereau, F., Graen, G. B., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad approach to leadership within
formal organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 46 –78.
Dekouloua, P., & Trivellas, P. (2014). Learning organization in Greek advertising and media indus-
try: A way to face crisis and gain sustainable competitive advantage. Procedia – Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 148, 338 –347.
Deming, E. (1986). Out of the crisis. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational
support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500–507.
Erdogan, B., Liden, R. C., & Kraimer, M. L. (2006). Justice and leader-member exchange: The mod-
erating role of organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49(2), 395–406.
Garvin, D. A. (1993, July –August). Building a learning organization. Harvard Business Review,
78 –91.
Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange theory:
Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 827–844.
Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological
Review, 25, 161– 178.
Graen, G. B., & Cashman, J. (1975). A role-making model of leadership in formal organizations: A
developmental approach. In J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership frontiers (pp. 143–
166). Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.
Graen, G. B., & Scandura, T. A. (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. Research in
Organizational Behavior, 9, 172 –208.
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of
leader-member exchange (LMX theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level
multi-domain perspective). Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219–247.
Green, T. J. (2012). TQM and organizational culture: How do they link? Total Quality Management
& Business Excellence, 23(2), 141 –157.
Harris, T. B., Li, N., & Kirkman, B. L. (2014). Leader –member exchange (LMX) in context: How
LMX differentiation and LMX relational separation attenuate LMX’s influence on OCB and
turnover intention. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(2), 314–328.
Homans, G. G. (1961). Social behavior. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace, and World.
Ingelsson, P., Eriksson, M., & Lilja, J. (2012). Can selecting the right values help TQM implemen-
tation? A case study about organisational homogeneity at the Walt Disney Company. Total
Quality Management & Business Excellence, 23(1), 1 –11.
Konovsky, M. A., & Pugh, S. D. (1994). Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Academy of
Management Journal, 37, 656– 669.
Kuvaas, B. (2008). An exploration of how the employee-organization relationship affects the linkage
between perception of development human resource practices and employee outcomes.
Journal of Management Studies, 45(1), 1– 25.
Lam, S.-Y., Lee, V.-H., Ooi, K.-B., & Lin, B. (2011). The relationship between TQM, learning orien-
tation and market performance in service organisations: An empirical analysis. Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, 22(12), 1277–1297.
Lapre, M. A., & Tsikriktsis, N. (2006). Organizational learning curve for customer dissatisfaction:
Heterogeneity access airline. Management Science, 52(3), 352–366.
Lee, J. J. Y., Capella, M. L., Taylor, C. R., Luo, M., & Gabler, C. B. (2014). The financial impact of
loyalty programs in the hotel industry: A social exchange theory perspective. Journal of
Business Research, 67(10), 2139–2146.
338 Y. Choi et al.

Levin, D. Z. (2000). Organizational learning and the transfer of knowledge: An investigating of

quality improvement. Organization Science, 11(6), 630–647.
Levinson, H. (1965). Reciprocation: The relationship between man and organization. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 9, 370–390.
Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: An empiri-
cal assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 4, 41–72.
Nie, P. (2013). Duopoly quality commitment. Economic Modelling, 33, 832–842.
Novak, V. M. (2014). Design management of sustainability values: A learning organization perspec-
tive. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 10, 218–232.
Peccei, R., & Wood, S. (1994). The impact of total quality management on quality consciousness.
London: Mimeo, London School of Economics.
Rodrı́guez-Antón, J. M., & Alonso-Almeida, M. M. (2011). Quality certification systems and their
impact on employee satisfaction in services with high levels of customer contact. Total
Quality Management & Business Excellence, 22(2), 145–157.
Rupp, D. E., Shao, R., Jones, K. S., & Liao, H. (2014). The utility of a multifoci approach to the study
of organizational justice: A meta-analytic investigation into the consideration of normative
rules, moral accountability, bandwidth-fidelity, and social exchange. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 123(2), 159–185.
Schyns, B., Paul, T., Mohr, G., & Blank, H. (2005). Comparing antecedents and consequences of
leader-member exchange in a German working context to findings in the US. European
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 14(1), 1–22.
Senge, P. M. (1990). Fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York,
NY: Doubleday.
Setton, R. P., Bennett, N., & Liden, R. C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations: Perceived organ-
izational support, leader-member exchange, and employee reciprocity. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 81, 219 –227.
Suazo, M. M. (2002). An examination of antecedents and consequences of psychological contract
breach (PhD dissertation). University of Kansas.
Tsai, Y. (2014). Learning organizations, internal marketing, and organizational commitment in hos-
pitals. BMC Health Services Research, 14, 152. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-14-152
Walumbwa, F. O., Cropanzano, R., & Hartnell, C. A. (2009). Organizational justice, voluntary learn-
ing behavior, and job performance: A test of the mediating effects of identification and leader-
member exchange. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 1103–1126.
Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., & Liden, R. C. (1997). Perceived organizational support and leader-
member exchange: A social exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 40,
82 –111.