The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive

ve of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister www.emeraldinsight.com/0309-0590.htm

A review of
A review of informal learning informal learning
literature, theory and
implications for practice in 283
developing global professional Received May 2003
competence Revised November 2003
Accepted December 2003
Thomas J. Conlon
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

University of Minnesota, St Paul, Minnesota, USA

Keywords Learning styles, Workplace Development, Knowledge, Globalization, Competences

Abstract Informal learning’s roots emerged from educational philosophers John Dewey, Kurt
Lewin and Mary Parker Follett to theorists Malcolm Knowles and other successive researchers.
This paper explores the background and definitions of informal learning and applications to the
global workplace. Informal learning’s challenges are applied to developing global professional
competence, including theory, practice and policy implications. The paper argues that informal
learning plays a considerable role in developing professional expertise in the workplace and private
life, yet believes no current theoretical model exists to balance conflicts between the role of
individual and organizational benefits in a global context.

Introduction and human resource development context

Workplace expertise is, and often believed to be, developed through formal
training. It may include classroom-led instruction, computer-based training,
structured hands-on-application, operation of a key task or some other
traditional planned method. Yet much of what we learn, both in an out of the
workplace, occurs during informal practice (Fox, 1997). A study by Marsick
and Watkins (1990) concluded that only 20 percent of what employees learn
comes from more formalized, structured training. Instead, they found that
personal strategies are most frequently used, with employees taking time to
question, listen, observe, read and reflect on their work environment. Other
estimates claim that closer to 90 percent of workplace learning takes place
through informal means (Sorohan, 1993).
Given such figures, it is no surprise that some things are learned best by
actually doing them (Bruner, 1996). A study by Ellinger et al. (2002) found a
positive association between learning organization practices and objective
measures of firms’ financial performance, making a business case for
Journal of European Industrial
embracing organizational learning in general. Yet the majority of what people Training
actually learn related to their work performance is not planned in the way Vol. 28 No. 2/3/4, 2004
pp. 283-295
training and development professionals have traditionally talked about q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0309-0590
work-related learning (Swanson and Holton, 2001). DOI 10.110803090590410527663
 JEIT Given the high costs of formalized training with such a low percentage of
28,2/3/4 actual tasks learned, is more informal learning a trend of the future? Will
informal learning be formally incorporated into the workplace, thus having the
effect of formalizing it? Have formalized training programs failed to do their
job? This paper attempts to explore informal learning in depth and pose
questions for future research, as well as to identify how informal learning may
284 shape new human resource development (HRD) interventions in the global
workplace. It also seeks to identify issues facing the global workplace where
informal learning may be involved.

Definitions and problem

Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

Global expertise, competence or perspective means many different things; this

paper focuses on its role in the workplace. From this perspective, Kobus (1983)
suggests global competencies incorporate indispensable information, skills,
and attitudes about the world in a person’s cognitive repertoire. Segall et al.
(1990) emphasize that understanding behavioral differences across cultures are
key elements of a global perspective. McCabe (1994), in a study of students
abroad, found global perspectives were shaped along five dimensions: Fear vs
openness to accommodating new experiences; recognizing similarities and
differences among people; naı̈vete versus cross-cultural awareness;
Nationalism versus anti-nationalism; and ethnocentrism versus
globalcentrism. To develop competence, global students or workers must
first identify where they are on the continuum and then be exposed to
educational experiences that can move them towards an enhanced global
perspective (McCabe, 1997). For workplace expatriate candidates, Harvey and
Novicevic (2001) cite eight competencies for success in the global workplace:
(1) cognitive IQ;
(2) emotional IQ;
(3) political IQ;
(4) cultural/social IQ;
(5) organizational IQ;
(6) network IQ;
(7) innovative IQ; and
(8) intuitive IQ.
Yet in a global economy where a competitive advantage is to exploit an
organization’s intellectual capital, many firms underestimate the importance of
cultural, technological, executive and learning imperatives that permeate
dynamic, knowledge-based environments (O’Keeffe, 2003).
Today’s workplace requires that employees be adaptable, be team players,
and be ready to function in a technocratic, complex global society (Cone, 2001).
Firms that move towards a transnational mode of strategic operation must
 focus on competence related to markets (cultures), functions and products A review of
(Engle et al., 2001). Despite the importance of global competencies in the informal learning
workplace, few companies have a clear idea of what the development of
international or global managers actually means (Selmer, 1998), yet a survey of
US companies indicated global orientation was ranked as the second major
competence to be developed among executives within their organizations in the
next five years (Vicere, 1998). Educational institutions need to reflect these
285
needs, as economic outcomes tend to drive the need for workplace global
competence, and global education programs that provide intercultural
competence and knowledge, promote continued learning through both formal
and informal means, and provide contested knowledge about the fate of the
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

global perspective will enhance students’ ability to be both productive and

responsible world citizens (Zeszotarski, 2001).
HRD is one way to address development of workplace competencies,
through formal or informal methods:
Human Resource Development is any process or activity that, either initially or over the long
term, has the potential to develop adults’ work-based knowledge, expertise, productivity, and
satisfaction, whether for personal or group team gain, or for the benefit of an organization,
community, nation, or, ultimately, the whole of humanity (McLean and McLean, 2001).
This being among numerous definitions since Len Nadler is considered to have
first coined the term HRD in 1969 (Swanson and Holton, 2001), the definition
certainly includes workplace formal and informal learning within its scope.
Formal learning is structured, institutionally sponsored, often
classroom-based, with an instructor or trainer planning, implementing and
evaluating the learning taking place (Merriam and Caffarella, 1991). In contrast
to formal learning, informal and incidental learning refer to learning resulting
from natural opportunities for learning that occur in everyday life when the
person controls his or her own learning (Cseh et al., 1999). Informal learning is
predominantly experimental and non-institutional; incidental learning is
unintentional, or a byproduct of a different activity (Cseh et al., 1998). Other
definitions of informal learning by Marsick and Volpe (1999) conclude it is an
integration of work with daily routines, triggered by an internal or external jolt,
not highly conscious, is often haphazard and influenced by chance, inductively
occurs through action and reflection, and is linked to the learning of others.
Experiential learning teaches experience based on real feelings and emotions
(Clements et al., 1995). Many organizations claim to be learning organizations,
which is probably true if one counts informal learning. A more formalized
definition defines the learning organization as one focused on the importance of
acquiring, improving and transferring knowledge, facilitating individual and
collective learning, and integrating and modifying behaviors and practices of
the organization and its members as a result of the learning (Appelbaum and
Reichart, 1998). Whether or not an organization understands or recognizes the
distinction between informal, formal, incidental and experiential learning is a
 JEIT different matter; self-defined learning organizations often tend to value their
28,2/3/4 formalized training programs as demonstrating to customers, competitors,
prospective and current employees, among others, that they are committed to
learning. While that may be true, one cannot overlook that any organization,
like it or not, breeds informal learning through the work and personal
experiences of its employees.
286
Informal learning theoretical roots
Education philosopher Dewey (1938) theorized that learning takes place
through an individual’s experiences, lifelong learning and the role of reflective
thought in education. A strong advocate of progressive education, he firmly
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

believed that the human element was vital to vocational education and needed
to develop one’s skills to live and be productive in a democratic society. He did
not believe separation between the learner and industrial education was neither
possible nor appropriate. Mary Parker Follett (1868-1933), a philosopher who
established community centers as important social and educational forums,
also valued informal learning to help develop a new democracy. She believed
informal learning was nurtured at birth and spanned one’s entire life, acquired
by the modes of living and acting that teach an individual how to grow a social
consciousness.
By doing so, all of life’s institutions and interactions shaped the individual
(Smith, 2002). A short while later, Lewin (1935) hypothesized that behavior is a
function of the interactions between a person and his or her environment, or life
space.
Both Dewey’s and Follett’s philosophies encouraged and valued informal
learning, even though the term itself did not emerge until Knowles (1950),
considered the father of andragogy, published his work, Informal Adult
Education. Informal learning research took yet longer to evolve, not emerging
until the 1980s (Marsick and Watkins, 1990), nearly 15 years after. Experiential,
informal and community based learning finally became legitimate sources and
settings for those engaged in work-based learning and development of generic
and transferable skills, multidisciplinary, multiliteracies and transcoding
(Edwards and Usher, 2001).

Informal learning theoretical research

As informal learning study began in earnest, researchers explored how
workplace training and development impacted learners and which methods
were most prevalent and effective. Johnson (1999) stated that as individuals
mature, they increase their capacity to learn, think and create, and they
recognize they can learn moment by moment, which can turn into wisdom † not
just information or knowledge. Johnson developed a four-step model assessing
individual levels of cognitive and emotional maturity as it relates to
organizational behavior, with individual interaction manifested in four stages:
 egocentric, protective, compliant and dynamism. Much of this learning is A review of
informal and comes from more experienced workers through listening and peer informal learning
interactions.
An organizational learning study by Crossan et al. (1999) noted that learning
cannot effectively take place without previous individual learning, much of
which rests on intuition combining formal schooling and informal experience.
Many participants stressed informal and tacit learning over the more formal
287
learning as having greater impact on their jobs.
Informal learning can include unlearning old behaviors or practices that
have negative consequences or free people to make change (Mariotti, 1999;
Cseh, 1998; Magrath, 1997). Other informal learning strategies include or
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

involve mentoring, coaching, networking, modeling, effective leadership and

facilitation, interrelational aspects of teams, and individual characteristics and
capabilities (Marsick and Watkins, 1990). Employees also use informal learning
to obtain help, information or support, learn from alternative viewpoints, gain
ability to give greater feedback, consider alternative ways to think and behave
(planned or unplanned), reflect on processes to assess learning experience
outcomes, and to make choices on where to focus their attention.
Brooks (1989) identified informal learning components stemming from a
variety of organizational work experiences, a liberal arts education,
consciousness raising seminars, open-ended assignments, modeling of others’
critical reflective learning, encouragement of questioning, honest feedback,
participation in policy making and implementation, intercultural experiences in
life, accepting another’s help, information gathering, experimenting, listening
to intuition, and examining issues from multiple perspectives.
Informal, personal and interpersonal learning can be used to aid team
building, and team members can be empowered by recognizing and using
informal learning strategies (Marsick et al., 2000). In addition, they found work
context learning often occurs in unplanned ways, is tacit, non-linear and
serendipitous as organizational participants were preoccupied with
interpreting and understanding the changed environment. Work rules,
politics, leadership and the nature of work were among participants’ concerns.
Marsick and Watkins (1997) developed an informed and incidental learning
model that is based on a core premise that individual behavior is a function of
their interaction of their environment as advocated by Lewin (1951). The model
advocates for the power of work and organization context as its primary
learning aid; learning, problem definition, problem solving and reflection are
shaped in the workplace.
Informal learning is also shaped by employee emotions, which may react
differently to individual circumstances. Emotions are integral to learning as the
whole person is involved in the learning process, including one’s own feelings
(Knowles et al., 1998). Emotions influence employee attitudes toward learning
needs, but also act to support learning and behavior change in general (Short
 JEIT and Yorks, 2002). Emotion is also often connected to change and can be used as
28,2/3/4 a property of change that can be celebrated or manipulated, or, in helping
people adapt to change through formal or informal processes (Callahan and
McCollum, 2002).
Reflection is a critical component of informal learning (Kolb, 1984) and is
less of an outcome than on ongoing learning process. Informal learning can be
288 facilitated by helping establish or allowing supportive mentoring relationships
to flourish, encouraging communities of practice to dialogue informally on
work-related issues of concern, providing skill development in process and
facilitation to support reflective practice, and developing a shared set of values
which reinforce the organization’s commitment to learning (Laiken, 2003).
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

Applications of informal learning in practice

Informal learning can be encouraged and supported in the workplace without
being forced on employees, or by making a conscious decision that, based on
research, formalized structured training may not be necessary except for the
most technical or legal aspects. A new sales representative for a large
multinational firm will likely need formalized training in the product line to be
sold and to learn company and legal policies. However, training in workplace
attitudes or specific, minute details of the job may hinder productivity, add
costs, and seldom be used when the new sales representative will figure out
what works best in practice. This may come from talking with individual
customers, peer sales representatives, or simply perfecting a routine where
better practices emerge through learned experience.
In new employee orientation sessions, formal training segregates employees
from the organizational insiders while informal training forces newcomers to
learn on the job (Cable and Parsons, 2001). And learning from experience
occurs most often when the learner is faced with an event or situation that is
recognized as disconcerting or non-routine (Larson, 1991).
Work-client relationships also benefit from informal learning. In teaching
patients using continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis, a qualitative study
showed patients learned at home – including an understanding of medical and
professional language, rusting their own experience, and living on the border of
life and death – although barriers included a diminished sense of personhood
and the low literacy level of participants (Keeping et al., 2001).
In pedagogical and higher education, informal learning is also applied. In a
study of elementary school science teachers, students were taken to museums
to engage themselves through participation, social interaction, enrichment and
nurturing curiousity as a learning enhancement model unavailable in a
classroom setting (Ramey-Gassert, 1997). Howard Gardner’s Theory of
Multiple Intelligences emphasizes many learning techniques that involve the
interpersonal, the intrapersonal and reflection as three ways people perceive
and understand the world. While used in designing formal training or
 schooling at the pedagogical or andragogical level, they are designed for A review of
application in many informal learning contexts as well (Smith, 2002). In informal learning
predicting academic performance in management education, an empirical
study by Yang and Lu (2001) suggested formal learning is not the most
important determinant for individual performance, but that informal learning
and practice should be an essential component of management education.
289
Informal learning challenges
While some organizations have no formal training programs and near
completely rely on informal learning, particularly those with small budgets and
unskilled tasks, informal learning alone can leave an employee feeling helpless
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

and directionless. This is particularly true in small organizations, where

informal learning is often reactive and directed at short-term, immediate
problems rather than development of people (Hill and Stewart, 2000). Unless
there is a strong mentor or supportive colleague to help one learn the job, a
“sink-or-swim” approach can cause unnecessary burnout and frustration. To
the contrary, a changing society has reduced the exposure to relationships and
informal learning through the decline of US American social, institutional,
religious and cultural associations (Putnam, 2000). Where workplaces may
sponsor athletic or social activities for employees, busy lifestyles and changing
priorities have drawn many US Americans away from such civic and social
involvements that help shape informal learning. Progressive-minded work
organizations that reward paid time off for community service or a child’s
school activities are one attempt to bridge this gap, even if offered for different
reasons such as tax breaks, employee retention and recruitment, or
commitment to a particular cause.
The rapidly-changing organization, impacted by globalization, higher
productivity demands, price competition and technological developments, have
forced change and uncertainty on many workers. During organizational change
efforts, many informal interactions will be oriented to making sense of and
deciding how to operate within the changing organizational context (Albers
Mohrman et al., 2001). As more and more jobs become knowledge occupations
with new skills, knowledge management is built on the cornerstones of
innovative technologies and informal methods of learning (Hrop, 2000).
Marsick et al. (2000) note that free agent learning is important to attracting,
developing and keeping knowledge workers in a time when self-directed
learners are replacing the traditional learning organization, but workers may
not know they are undergoing informal learning to achieve goals.
The needs of critically reflective learners are to have clear goals, a variety of
job experiences, access to information from upper management, exposure to
multiple perspectives, a chance to see how others are rewarded, the freedom to
determine one’s own paths to goal achievement, and help in learning critical
reflective leasing strategies (Brooks, 1989). Understanding informal learning
 JEIT can also benefit by being aligned with a more organized analysis and
28,2/3/4 understanding, based on attempts to engage with collective emotions (e.g. fear
and defensiveness) and in how power structures arise that reflect, reinforce and
institutionalize such emotions (Vince, 2002). Meeting these challenges,
particularly in more traditional hierarchical or small organizations that are
more financially or politically constrained, will prove challenging. Informal
290 learning through the grapevine and rumor mill rather than official channels, a
lack of teamwork or employee cooperation, or lacking conscious efforts to allow
healthy informal learning to take hold can be destructive to employee morale
and reduce productivity.
A different perspective sees workplace learning, whether formal or informal,
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

as a value laden, contextual social process that serves the employer and may
oppress workers and employee unions in the name of building cognitive
workplace skills (Rainbird, 1988). Bratton (2001) argues that most workplace
learning literature neglects the power relationships and struggles between
employer and employee.

Conclusions
The theoretical implications and challenges are to reach a common definition
on what informal learning is and who it serves, in part because informal
learning cannot be measured by readily accessible information on
qualifications and participation rates (Coffield, 1996). Cseh et al. (1999) argue
that informal learning is unintentional and non-institutional, thus if employers
attempt to incorporate it into learning or training programs, it becomes formal.
Yang and Lu (2001) state informal learning and practice must be incorporated
into management education. If management education incorporates informal
learning, they presumably argue it is necessary for the workplace, thus, in its
absence, the workplace suffers without such learning. These two different
viewpoints may leave practitioners unclear of what role, if any, they should
have in implementing informal learning in the workplace.
Since a vast majority of workplace learning is through informal means (Fox,
1997; Marsick and Watkins, 1990; Sorohan, 1993) and no consensus exists over
whether it should be influenced by workplaces, educational institutions, and/or
the individual, a third model needs development. A global model, or distinct
cultural-context models, that allow for the mix of individual informal learning
and a workplace role, will prove beneficial to organization and individual alike.
Such a model must also address informal learning evaluation within a new
context. An integrative individual-workplace informal learning model’s
limitations, however, lie in those who are suspicious of an organization or
sponsor’s power role in learning (who feel individuals should make this
determination), or those who feel the workplace should be the sole or primary
method of employee training. HRD continues to wrestle with the role of the
individual vs the role of the organization.
 Qualitative and quantitative research is needed to answer questions facing A review of
the twenty-first century global workplace: “What experiences have workers informal learning
had with learning how to do their jobs in their organizations?”, “What are the
shared cultures within varying organizations?”, “What differences have
emerged in cross-cultural and global settings?” and “To whose benefit does
informal learning serve, and does it matter?”.
Quantitative controls for location, type of work, profession, work vs social
291
activities, trust of peers, management and training providers, training and
learning structure, measures of learning, learner motivation, tacit vs explicit
knowledge, face-to-face vs on-line or other methods of learning, longevity of
employees in an organization, demographical groups and other research
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

variables are needed to develop such answers.

Using Hofstede’s (1996) dimensions of cultural variability theory identifying
power distance, individual vs collectivism, masculinity vs femininity,
uncertainty avoidance, and long-term vs short-term orientation, it is clear
informal learning may vary around the world. Are global models possible? Or
only in a particular cultural context? Might this differ from collectivist-oriented
cultures found in much of the world, from more individual-oriented workplace
cultures found in the USa and certain industrialized nations of Europe and
elsewhere? Has technology influenced learning in these contexts? Is informal
learning more effective in one type of culture over another and how?
The practical implications are reflected in the changing global workplace.
As organizations are changing to fit a globally competitive business climate,
knowledge tasks continue to evolve and grow, and the traditional unwritten
social contract providing lifetime career has ended, informal learning may
change to fit changing conditions, particularly in a cross-cultural context. As
formal training costs will continue to be monitored for cost-benefit, they are not
likely to grow in any significant number, if at all. This may place more
importance on making good hires that require less formal training and, like
most informal learners, are eclectic in their subjects and hungry for new
experiences (Gorard et al., 1999). With a large percentage of employee
knowledge emerging from informal learning, it would appear organizations
should seek ways to allow and plan for it while staying in the sidelines to let it
work. It is likely that much of the learning that goes on at work is unnoticed by
researchers and even employers, who unwittingly depend on their employees
learning informally and who could not function without the significant
contributions employees make in work organization and technology (Gorard
et al., 1999).
Practitioners likely care little over how we define informal learning in a
particular context, but whether or not it benefits their organizations, and, if so,
how to implement it effectively. At a time when large numbers of workers are
participating in evening college and university programs to keep skills current,
research on how to structure and integrate a consistent, parallel, higher
 JEIT education informal learning philosophy would improve skills of participants
28,2/3/4 and providers alike. Especially in the USA, many such programs follow
non-traditional, practitioner-oriented approaches to classroom learning.
Traditional lecture and theoretical approaches have given way to an
active-learning, participative approach, for non-traditional students. In this
sense, informal learning methods are already playing a greater role in the
292 classroom as students’ workplace experiences are shaping class discussions,
networks, and ideas for practice in their organizations. In many cases,
workplaces can apply similar approaches in their own training approaches,
depending on the task and other variables.
Policy implications, beyond organization and individual learning objectives,
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

may include setting up established mentorship programs and social events as

two ways of enhancing informal networks while improving business goals and
building workplace relationships. More research is needed to see how the
organization of the future can customize such opportunities in a global
marketplace. It could include ways to facilitate informal learning by setting
up workplace teams, social activities and tailoring formalized workplace
training to provide opportunities by deliberately planning for reflection and
informal learning applications or follow-up, much as active learning methods
strive to do.
A learner’s mental capacities, the quality and quantity of interaction
between organizational members and organizational structures are three such
ways to facilitate informal learning in organizations (Marsick et al., 2000).
Workplaces stand to gain with new research on how to help employees
perform better by utilizing informal learning approaches, known or unknown.
How to do this in a globally contextual information age for mutual
individual-organizational gain can give new meaning and use to the concept of
informal learning.

References
Albers Mohrman, S., Gibson, C. and Mohrman, A. Jr (2001), “Doing research that is useful to
practice: a model and empirical exploration”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44
No. 2, pp. 357-75.
Appelbaum, S. and Reichart, W. (1998), “How to measure an organization’s learning ability: the
facilitations factors – part II”, Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 15-28.
Bratton, J. (2001), “Why workers are reluctant learners: the case of the Canadian pulp and paper
industry”, Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 13 No. 7/8, pp. 333-43.
Brooks, A. (1989), “Critically reflective learning within a corporate context”, unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY.
Bruner, J. (1996), Toward a Theory of Instruction, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Cable, D. and Parsons, C. (2001), “Socialization tactics and person-organization fit”, Personnel
Psychology, Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 1-23.
Callahan, J. and McCollum, E. (2002), “Conceptualizations of emotion research in organizational
contexts”, Advances in Developing Human Resources, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 4-21.
 Clements, C., Wagner, R. and Roland, C. (1995), “The ins and outs of experiential training”, A review of
Training and Development, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 25-6.
informal learning
Coffield, F. (1996), “Nine learning fallacies and their replacement by a natural strategy for
lifelong learning”, in, Proceedings of EU Conference on Lifelong Learning, Newcastle.
Cone, D. (2001), “Active learning: the key to our future”, Journal of Family and Consumer
Sciences, Vol. 93 No. 4, p. 19.
Crossan, M., Lane, H. and White, R. (1999), “An organization learning framework: From intuition 293
to institution”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 522-37.
Cseh, M. (1998), “Managerial learning in the transition to a free market economy in Romanian
private companies”, unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Georgia,
Athens, GA.
Cseh, M., Watkins, K. and Marsick, V. (1998), “Informal and incidental learning in the workplace”,
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

in Torraco, R. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Academy of Human

Resource Development, Academy of Human Resource Development, Baton Rouge, LA.
Cseh, M., Watkins, K. and Marsick, V. (1999), “Reconceptualizing Marsick and Watkins’ model of
informal and incidental learning in the workplace”, in Kuchinke, K.P. (Ed.), Proceedings,
Academy of Human Resource Development Conference, Vol. 1, Academy of Human
Resource Development, Baton Rouge, LA, p. 349.
Dewey, J. (1938), Experience and Education., Collier Books, New York, NY.
Edwards, R. and Usher, R. (2001), “Lifelong learning: a postmodern condition of education?”,
Adult Education Quarterly, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 273-87.
Ellinger, A.D., Ellinger, A.E., Yang, B. and Howton, S. (2002), “The relationship between the
learning organization concept and firms financial performance: an empirical assessment”,
Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 5-21.
Engle, A., Mendenhall, M., Powers, R. and Stedham, Y. (2001), “Conceptualizing the global
competency cube: a transnational model of human resource”, Journal of European
Industrial Training, Vol. 25 No. 6/7, pp. 346-53.
Fox, S. (1997), “From management education and development to the study of management
learning”, in Burgoyne, J. and Reynolds, M. (Eds), Management Learning: Integrating
Perspectives in Theory and Practice, Sage, London, pp. 21-37.
Gorard, S., Fevre, R. and Rees, G. (1999), “The apparent decline of informal learning”, Oxford
Review of Education, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 437-56.
Harvey, M. and Novicevic, M. (2001), “Selecting expatriates for increasingly complex global
assignments”, Career Development International, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 69-82.
Hill, R. and Stewart, J. (2000), “Human resource development in small organizations”, Journal of
European Industrial Training, Vol. 24 No. 2/3/4, p. 105.
Hofstede, G. (1996), Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, rev. ed., McGraw Hill,
New York, NY, p. Hill.
Hrop, S. (2000), “Leading with knowledge: the nature of competition in the 21st century”,
Personnel Psychology, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 775-8.
Johnson, D. (1999), “A learning model for learning organizations”, Futurics, Vol. 23 No. 1/2,
pp. 74-5.
Keeping, L., English, L. and Fleming-Courts, N. (2001), “Informal and incidental learning with
patients who use continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis”, Nephrology Nursing Journal,
Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 313-30.
Knowles, M. (1950), Informal Adult Education, Association Press, New York, NY.
 JEIT Knowles, M., Holton, E. and Swanson, R. (1998), The Adult Learner, Gulf, Houston, TX.
28,2/3/4 Kobus, D. (1983), “The developing field of global education: a review of the literature”,
Educational Research Quarterly, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 21-7.
Kolb, D. (1984), Experiental Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Laiken, M. (2003), “Models of organizational learning: Paradoxes and best practices in the post
294 industrial workplace”, Organization Development Journal, Vol. 21 No. 1, p. 8.
Larson, B. (1991), “Informal workplace learning and partner relationships among paramedics in
the pre-hospital setting”, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia
University, New York, NY.
Lewin, K. (1935), A Dynamic Theory of Personality, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Lewin, K. (1951), Field Theory in Social Science: Selected Theoretical Papers, Harper, New York,
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

NY.
McCabe, L. (1994), “The development of a global perspective during participation in semester at
sea: a comparative global education program”, Educational Review, Vol. 46 No. 3,
pp. 275-86.
McCabe, L. (1997), “Global perspective development”, Education, Vol. 118 No. 1, Fall, p. 41.
McLean, G. and McLean, L. (2001), “If we can’t define HRD in one country, how can we define it in
another?”, Human Resource Development International, Vol. 4 No. 3.
Magrath, A. (1997), “The importance of unlearning”, Across the Board, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 39-41.
Mariotti, J. (1999), “Change requires learning – and unlearning”, Industry Week, Vol. 248 No. 12,
p. 59.
Marsick, V. and Volpe, F. (Eds) (1999), “Informal learning on the job”, Advances in Developing
Human Resources, Vol. 3, Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco, CA.
Marsick, V. and Watkins, K. (1990), Informal and Incidental Learning in the Workplace,
Routledge and Kegan Paul, New York, NY.
Marsick, V. and Watkins, K. (1997), “Lessons from informal and incidental learning”, in
Burgoyne, J. and Reynolds, M. (Eds), Management Learning: Integrating Perspectives in
Theory and Practice, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 295-311.
Marsick, V., Brooks, A., Cseh, M., Lovin, B., Vernon, S., Watkins, K. and Ziegler, M. (2000),
“Meeting the informal learning challenges of the free agent learner: drawing insights from
research-based lessons learned”, in Kuchinke, K.P. (Ed.), Proceedings, Academy of Human
Resource Development Conference, Vol. I-1, Academy of Human Resource Development,
Baton Rouge, LA.
Merriam, S. and Caffarella, R. (1991), Learning in Adulthood, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
O’Keeffe, T. (2003), “Preparing expatriate managers of multinational organizations for the
cultural and learning imperatives of their job in dynamic knowledge-based environments”,
Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 233-43.
Putnam, R. (2000), Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, Simon and
Schuster, New York, NY.
Rainbird, H. (1988), “New technology, training and union strategies”, in Hyman, R. and Streek,
W. (Eds), New Technology and Industrial Relations, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 174-85.
Ramey-Gassert, L. (1997), “Learning science beyond the classroom”, The Elementary School
Journal, Vol. 97 No. 4, pp. 433-51.
Segall, M., Dasen, P., Berry, J. and Poortinga, T. (1990), Human Behavior in Global Perspective,
Permagon General Psychological Series, Permagon, New York, NY.
 Selmer, J. (1998), “Expatriation: corporate policy, personal intentions and international A review of
adjustment”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 9 No. 6,
pp. 996-1007. informal learning
Short, D. and Yorks, L. (2002), “Analyzing training from an emotions perspective”, Advances in
Developing Human Resources, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 80-96.
Smith, M. (2002), “Mary Parker Follett and informal education”, in, The Encyclopedia of Informal
Education, available at: www.infed.org/thinkers/et-foll.htm (accessed 12 March 2002). 295
Sorohan, E. (1993), “We do; therefore we learn”, Training and Development, Vol. 4 No. 10,
pp. 47-52.
Swanson, R. and Holton, E. (2001), Foundations of Human Resource Development,
Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco, CA.
Vicere, A. (1998), “Changes in practices, changes in perspectives. The 1997 international study of
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

executive development trends”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 17 No. 7,

pp. 526-43.
Vince, R. (2002), “The impact of emotion on organizational learning”, Human Resource
Development International, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 73-85.
Yang, B. and Lu, D. (2001), “Predicting academic performance in management education: an
empirical investigation of MBA success”, Journal of Education for Business, Vol. 77 No. 1,
pp. 15-20.
Zeszotarski, P. (2001), “ERIC review: issues in global education initiatives in the community
college”, Community College Review, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 65-78.

Further reading
Cauldron, S. (1999), “Free agent learner”, Training and Development, Vol. 52 No. 8, pp. 26-31.
 This article has been cited by:

1. Kristiina Janhonen, Kaisa Torkkeli, Johanna Mäkelä. 2018. Informal learning and food sense in home
cooking. Appetite 130, 190-198. [Crossref]
2. Luciana Mourão. The Role of Leadership in the Professional Development of Subordinates . [Crossref]
3. Fadilah Puteh. 2018. Measuring Tacit Knowledge: A Deliberate Construct Validation Using Structural
Equation Modelling. Journal of Information & Knowledge Management 17:03, 1850025. [Crossref]
4. Clarissa Leite Flores, Francisco Antônio Coelho Junior, Rodrigo R. Ferreira, Maria do Carmo Fernandes
Martins. 2018. EVIDÊNCIAS DE VALIDADE PARA UMA MEDIDA DE PERCEPÇÃO DE
EFETIVIDADE DA APRENDIZAGEM INFORMAL NO TRABALHO. REAd. Revista Eletrônica de
Administração (Porto Alegre) 24:3, 77-101. [Crossref]
5. LetaGerba, Gerba Leta, StellmacherTill, Till Stellmacher, KelboroGirma, Girma Kelboro, Van
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

AsscheKristof, Kristof Van Assche, HornidgeAnna-Katharina, Anna-Katharina Hornidge. 2018. Social

learning in smallholder agriculture: the struggle against systemic inequalities. Journal of Workplace
Learning 30:6, 469-487. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
6. Rachel Fichter. 2018. Do the Right Thing! Developing Ethical Behavior in Financial Institutions. Journal
of Business Ethics 151:1, 69-84. [Crossref]
7. Martin Rehm, Allison Littlejohn, Bart Rienties. 2018. Does a formal wiki event contribute to the
formation of a network of practice? A social capital perspective on the potential for informal learning.
Interactive Learning Environments 26:3, 308-319. [Crossref]
8. Uttara Jangbahadur, Vandna Sharma. 2018. Measuring Employee Development. Global Business Review
19:2, 455-476. [Crossref]
9. Rovio-JohanssonAiri, Airi Rovio-Johansson. 2018. Experiences of practice-based learning in
phenomenographic perspective. Journal of Workplace Learning 30:1, 48-64. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
10. Martin Rehm. Soziale Medien als Möglichkeitsräume für Informelles Lernen in der beruflichen
Weiterentwicklung 101-121. [Crossref]
11. Anna Sutton. Learning and Development 222-247. [Crossref]
12. Daisung Jang, Hillary Anger Elfenbein, William P. Bottom. 2018. More than a Phase: Form and Features
of a General Theory of Negotiation. Academy of Management Annals 12:1, 318-356. [Crossref]
13. Cláudio Bezerra Leopoldino, Elisabeth Regina Loiola da Cruz Souza. 2017. VARIABILIDADE DE
MECANISMOS NA APRENDIZAGEM INDIVIDUAL SOBRE SOFTWARE LIVRE. REAd. Revista
Eletrônica de Administração (Porto Alegre) 23:spe, 210-231. [Crossref]
14. ANTONELLA DONATO, HELGA CRISTINA HEDLER, FRANCISCO ANTONIO COELHO
JUNIOR. 2017. INFORMAL LEARNING EXERCISE FOR TIC PROFESSIONALS: A STUDY
AT THE SUPERIOR MILITARY COURT. RAM. Revista de Administração Mackenzie 18:1, 66-95.
[Crossref]
15. Sue King, Ed Carson, Lisa Helen Papatraianou. 2017. Self-managed Supervision. Australian Social Work
70:1, 4-16. [Crossref]
16. Martin Rehm. Informelles Lernen in Sozialen Medien – Sozial-Mediale Möglichkeitsräume und die Rolle
des sozialen Kapitals. Eine quantitative Vergleichsstudie von Konversationen auf Twitter 45-60. [Crossref]
17. Brandon J. Patterson, Brianne K. Bakken, William R. Doucette, Julie M. Urmie, Randal P. McDonough.
2017. Informal learning processes in support of clinical service delivery in a service-oriented community
pharmacy. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy 13:1, 224-232. [Crossref]
 18. Martin Rehm, Ad Notten. 2016. Twitter as an informal learning space for teachers!? The role of social
capital in Twitter conversations among teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education 60, 215-223. [Crossref]
19. Matthew Hollow, Pål Vik. 2016. Another step up the ladder or another foot in the grave? Re-evaluating
the role of formal and informal training in the career development process within Barclays Bank, 1945–
1980. Management & Organizational History 11:4, 345-363. [Crossref]
20. ChoHyun Jung, Hyun Jung Cho, KimJin-Mo, Jin-Mo Kim. 2016. Administrative assistants’ informal
learning and related factors. Journal of Workplace Learning 28:7, 406-423. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
21. Jennifer L. Sparr, Kristin Knipfer, Friederike Willems. 2016. How Leaders Can Get the Most Out of
Formal Training: The Significance of Feedback-Seeking and Reflection as Informal Learning Behaviors.
Human Resource Development Quarterly 41. . [Crossref]
22. Steven Tam, David E Gray. 2016. The practice of employee learning in SME workplaces. Journal of Small
Business and Enterprise Development 23:3, 671-690. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

23. Eva Schürmann, Simon Beausaert. 2016. What are drivers for informal learning?. European Journal of
Training and Development 40:3, 130-154. [Crossref]
24. Eduardo Jardim Ushiro, Diógenes de Souza Bido. 2016. ESTRATÉGIAS DE APRENDIZAGEM
EM FUNÇÃO DA FINALIDADE PARA O APRENDIZADO: UM ESTUDO COM
TRABALHADORES DA LINHA DE PRODUÇÃO DE UMA EMPRESA DO RAMO
AUTOMOTIVO. REAd. Revista Eletrônica de Administração (Porto Alegre) 22:1, 166-192. [Crossref]
25. Maike Gerken, Simon Beausaert, Mien Segers. 2016. Working on professional development of faculty
staff in higher education: investigating the relationship between social informal learning activities and
employability. Human Resource Development International 19:2, 135-151. [Crossref]
26. Xu Wei, Zhang Jianping. Mobile Application Used in Museum Learning and Its Case Study 90-93.
[Crossref]
27. Vidar Schei, Ida Nerbø. 2015. The Invisible Learning Ceiling: Informal Learning Among Preschool
Teachers and Assistants in a Norwegian Kindergarten. Human Resource Development Quarterly 26:3,
299-328. [Crossref]
28. Margit Saskia Neher, Christian Ståhl, Per Nilsen. 2015. Learning opportunities in rheumatology practice:
a qualitative study. Journal of Workplace Learning 27:4, 282-297. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
29. Moira Bailey. 2015. Professional development of HR practitioners – a phenomenographic study. European
Journal of Training and Development 39:3, 220-238. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
30. Diogo Reatto, Arilda Schmidt Godoy. 2015. A produção sobre aprendizagem informal nas organizações no
Brasil: mapeando o terreno e rastreando possibilidades futuras. REAd. Revista Eletrônica de Administração
(Porto Alegre) 21:1, 57-88. [Crossref]
31. Fadilah Puteh, Maniam Kaliannan, Nafis Alam. 2015. Learning for Professional Development via Peers:
A System Theory Approach. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 172, 88-95. [Crossref]
32. Linda Dowling-Hetherington. Individual-Level Learning 63-83. [Crossref]
33. Valéria Vieira de Moraes, Jairo Eduardo Borges-Andrade. Informal Learning and Development 419-435.
[Crossref]
34. Stefano Za, Paolo Spagnoletti, Andrea North-Samardzic. 2014. Organisational learning as an emerging
process: The generative role of digital tools in informal learning practices. British Journal of Educational
Technology 45:6, 1023-1035. [Crossref]
 35. Jelena Andjelkovic Labrovic, Aleksandar Bijelic, Gordana Milosavljevic. 2014. Mapping Students’
Informal Learning Using Personal Learning Environment. Management - Journal for theory and practice
of management 19:71, 73-80. [Crossref]
36. Smith Tara, Barrett Rowena. 2014. Informal e-learning: the case of small business owners. Education +
Training 56:2/3, 219-232. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
37. Luciana Mourão, Juliana Barreiros Porto, Katia Puente-Palacios. 2014. Construção e evidências de validade
de duas escalas de percepção de desenvolvimento profissional. Psico-USF 19:1, 73-85. [Crossref]
38. Raymond A. Noe, Alena D.M. Clarke, Howard J. Klein. 2014. Learning in the Twenty-First-Century
Workplace. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 1:1, 245-275.
[Crossref]
39. Darlene Russ-Eft, Karen E. Watkins, Victoria J. Marsick, Ronald L. Jacobs, Gary N. McLean. 2014. What
Do the Next 25 Years Hold for HRD Research in Areas of Our Interest?. Human Resource Development
Quarterly 25:1, 5-27. [Crossref]
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

40. Sehoon Kim, Gary N. McLean. 2014. The Impact of National Culture on Informal Learning in the
Workplace. Adult Education Quarterly 64:1, 39-59. [Crossref]
41. Petra Dannapfel, Anneli Peolsson, Per Per Nilsen. 2014. A Qualitative Study of Individual and
Organizational Learning through Physiotherapists’ Participation in a Research Project. International
Journal of Clinical Medicine 05:09, 514-524. [Crossref]
42. K. London, V. Singh. 2013. Integrated construction supply chain design and delivery solutions.
Architectural Engineering and Design Management 9:3, 135-157. [Crossref]
43. Yu-Hsiu Hung, Woodrow W. Winchester, Tonya L. Smith-Jackson, Brian M. Kleiner, Kari L. Babski-
Reeves, Thomas H. Mills. 2013. Identifying fall-protection training needs for residential roofing
subcontractors. Applied Ergonomics 44:3, 372-380. [Crossref]
44. Makoto Matsuo, Jun Nakahara. 2013. The effects of the PDCA cycle and OJT on workplace learning.
The International Journal of Human Resource Management 24:1, 195-207. [Crossref]
45. Marcelo de Souza Bispo, Arilda Schmidt Godoy. 2012. A etnometodologia enquanto caminho
teórico-metodológico para investigação da aprendizagem nas organizações. Revista de Administração
Contemporânea 16:5, 684-704. [Crossref]
46. Matthias Barth, Daniel Fischer, Gerd Michelsen, Claudia Nemnich, Horst Rode. 2012. Tackling the
Knowledge–Action Gap in Sustainable Consumption: Insights from a Participatory School Programme.
Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 6:2, 301-312. [Crossref]
47. Janna Skagerström, Anne Lie Johansson, Marika Holmqvist, Eva-Karin Envall, Per Nilsen. 2012. Towards
improved alcohol prevention in Swedish antenatal care?. Midwifery 28:3, 314-320. [Crossref]
48. Vishal Singh, Andy Dong, John S. Gero. 2012. Computational studies to understand the role of social
learning in team familiarity and its effects on team performance. CoDesign 8:1, 25-41. [Crossref]
49. Eva Kassens-Noor. 2012. Twitter as a teaching practice to enhance active and informal learning in higher
education: The case of sustainable tweets. Active Learning in Higher Education 13:1, 9-21. [Crossref]
50. 박박박, 박박박. 2012. The Effects of Informal Learning on Financial Performance with the Mediation of
Non-financial Performance in Corporate Settings. The Korean Journal of Human Resource Development
Quarterly 14:1, 1-26. [Crossref]
51. Ed Carson, Sue King, Lisa H. Papatraianou. 2011. Resilience Among Social Workers: The Role of
Informal Learning in the Workplace. Practice 23:5, 267-278. [Crossref]
 52. Francisco Antonio Coelho Junior, Luciana Mourão. 2011. Suporte à aprendizagem informal no trabalho:
uma proposta de articulação conceitual. RAM. Revista de Administração Mackenzie 12:6, 224-253.
[Crossref]
53. Daniel Fischer. 2011. Educational Organisations as ‘Cultures of Consumption’: Cultural Contexts of
Consumer Learning in Schools. European Educational Research Journal 10:4, 595-610. [Crossref]
54. Aileen Kennedy, Jane McKay. 2011. Beyond induction: the continuing professional development needs of
early‐career teachers in Scotland. Professional Development in Education 37:4, 551-569. [Crossref]
55. Sadia Riaz, Dayang Rohaya Awang Ramb, Rohani Salleh, Arif Mushtaq. 2011. Exploratory Factor
Analysis (EFA) to Examine Learner’s Aesthetic Perceptions and Motivation Through their Aesthetic-
Emotions in Informal Visual Environments. Information Technology Journal 10:7, 1268-1284. [Crossref]
56. Leonardo Flach, Claudia Simone Antonello. 2011. Organizações culturais e a aprendizagem baseada em
práticas. Cadernos EBAPE.BR 9:1, 155-175. [Crossref]
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)

57. Valéria Vieira de Moraes, Jairo Eduardo Borges-Andrade. 2010. Validação de escala de estratégias de
aprendizagem no trabalho entre prefeitos(as) e secretários(as) municipais. Estudos de Psicologia (Natal)
15:3, 325-334. [Crossref]
58. Laura Menegon Zaccarelli, Arilda Schmidt Godoy. 2010. Perspectivas do uso de diários nas pesquisas em
organizações. Cadernos EBAPE.BR 8:3, 550-563. [Crossref]
59. David McGuire, Claire Gubbins. 2010. The Slow Death of Formal Learning: A Polemic. Human Resource
Development Review 9:3, 249-265. [Crossref]
60. Nicholas Clarke. 2010. Emotional intelligence and learning in teams. Journal of Workplace Learning 22:3,
125-145. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
61. F. Beddie, S. Halliday-Wynes. Informal and Non-Formal Learning in Vocational Education and Training
240-246. [Crossref]
62. Dan Bouhnik, Yahel Giat, Yafit Sanderovitch. 2009. Asynchronous learning sources in a high‐tech
organization. Journal of Workplace Learning 21:5, 416-430. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
63. Shelley A. Berg, Seung Youn (Yonnie) Chyung. 2008. Factors that influence informal learning in the
workplace. Journal of Workplace Learning 20:4, 229-244. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
64. Francisco Antonio Coelho Junior, Jairo Eduardo Borges-Andrade. 2008. Uso do conceito de aprendizagem
em estudos relacionados ao trabalho e organizações. Paidéia (Ribeirão Preto) 18:40, 221-234. [Crossref]
65. Roland K. Yeo. 2007. The Dialectic of Problem-Based Learning in Workplace Contexts. Journal of General
Management 33:2, 41-56. [Crossref]
66. David E. Gray. 2007. Facilitating Management Learning. Management Learning 38:5, 495-517. [Crossref]
67. Roland K. Yeo. 2007. (Re)viewing problem‐based learning. Journal of Managerial Psychology 22:4,
369-391. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
68. Nicholas Clarke. 2006. Why HR policies fail to support workplace learning: the complexities of policy
implementation in healthcare. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 17:1, 190-206.
[Crossref]
69. Julie L. Brockman, John M. Dirkx. 2006. Learning to become a machine operator: The dialogical
relationship between context, self, and content. Human Resource Development Quarterly 17:2, 199-221.
[Crossref]
70. Julia Bello-Bravo, Anne Namatsi Lutomia. Changing Formal and Informal Learning Practices Using
Smartphones 171-193. [Crossref]
 71. Jieun You. Institutionalization of Informal Learning Behaviors for Effective Tacit Knowledge Management
157-175. [Crossref]
Downloaded by MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY At 10:25 19 January 2019 (PT)