Nur Farhanah K., et all., Relationship Between Self-Directed Learning, Motivation to Learn Toward Learning Organization 23 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING, MOTIVATION TO LEARN TOWARD LEARNING ORGANIZATION AMONG LECTURERS AT A SELECTED PUBLIC UNIVERSITY IN MALAYSIA Nur Farhanah Kamarruddin, Norhasni Zainal Abiddin, Khairuddin Idris Department of Professional Development and Continuing Education Faculty of Education Studies Universiti Putra Malaysia Abstracts The purpose of this research is to examine the relationship between self-directed learning, motivation to learn, and learning organization at one public university in Malaysia. Ninety two academic staff were selected through stratified random sampling by post of Professor, Associate Professor, Senior Lecturer and Lecturer. Three research objectives frame the research: (1) to determine the level of learning organization, self-directed learning, and motivation to learn among lecturers, (2) to determine the relationship between self-directed learning, motivation to learn and learning organization among lecturers and (3) to determine the contribution of self- directed learning and motivation to learn on learning organization among lecturers. Descriptive analysis was used to determine the level of self-directed learning, motivation to learn and learning organization. Pearson Product Moment Correlation’s test was used to determine the relationship between self-directed learning, motivation to learn and learning organization. Regression analysis was used to determine the contribution of elements of self-directed learning and motivation to learn on organizational learning. Based on the findings of the study, recommendations and policy implications are discussed and directions for future research are provided. Key words: higher education, learning organization, learning organization culture, motivation to learn, self-directed learning. self-directed learning ability (Conferrore, 2010).Organization competes to become a more flexible organization to realize some modifications of their day-by-day learning (Malik & Ghafoor, 2011). The changes made and carried a big impact on the organizations, especially in creating a learning organization culture. Self-directed learning or individual learning is the foundation of a learning organization. Adult participation in self- directed learning in their organization is increasing from day to day (Tough, 1979). Long and Morris (1995) state that 90 % of adults carry at least one self-directed learning activity in their organizations each year, while Introduction The rapid expansion of knowledge- based economy has driven individuals to promote and improve their cognition in order to remain competitive. Hence, organizations increasingly are urged to become learning organizations (Singh, 2010). Learning organization provides a way by which faculty act together with other colleagues to raise the knowledge and skills of all members of the governing bodies, especially in times of rapid change happening in the workplace environment (Conferrore, 2010). The learning organization will consider the efficiency of all individuals involved in the organization and can implement and enhance their International Journal of Education, Vol. 8 No. 1 December 2014 24 70 % of the knowledge and skill they practice in organizational learning culture derived from self-directed learning activities (Long & Morris, 1995). Typically, an adult employee in the learning organization must engage in five independent learning activities on average and take approximately 100 hours for each project (Hiemstra, 2008). An organization requires high motivation (Bui and Baruch, 2011). Motivation factors describe why people should do the same work. In addition, motivation is closely related to individuals (Miller, 2010). Motivations will increase the performance of each individual in the organization. Support service within the institution of higher education can achieve success with the assistance from qualified workers and most importantly satisfied employees are motivated in doing the work (Malik & Danish, 2010). The motivation to learn has a positive relationship toward the performance of workplace learning (Colquitt, Lepine & Neo, 2000). Employees who enjoy learning in the workplace will be more motivated. The probability to achieve performance is very high. A study done on the service organizations showed that employee motivation is a key factor of the success in service organization (Goldstein, 2001). Employees who are motivated and have high capacity are important for an organization to achieve excellent quality service (Goldstein, 2001). The creation of a learning organization of institutions of higher education requires not only the workers who have a high level of education, but also those who can engage in independent learning and have motivation to learn. Motivation for learning itself is the accumulation of desire, passion and behavior to reach a target (Hodson, 2001). The motivation to learn is also a motivation and combined with encouragement and guidance that will lead to success in the organization (Morris, 1970). In addition, self- directed learning or individual learning is also important to establish and maintain a process of learning in the workplace. Therefore, these factors are important information to a learning organization in institutions of higher education. Over the last few years, many researchers have dealt with the issues of learning organizational practices in an organization (Singh, 2010). Various factors have been reviewed from time to time. However, the literature review indicated that some gaps of the learning organization should be emphasized. Research on learning organization in the education sector is still a few (White & Weathersby, 2005; Bui & Baruch, 2011; Ali, 2012). A few studies of organizational learning have been conducted, such as among nurses (Tsai, 2014), managers, supervisors and employees in the private organization (Weldy & Gillis, 2010), distance education students (Gaile, 2013) and physiotherapist (Dannapfel, Pusan, & Nilsen, 2014). Most of the studies have been conducted to investigate different factors. However, factors on the motivation to learn (Bui &Baruch, 2011) and self-directed learning factor (Conferrore, 2010) have not been widely addressed in the study of learning organization in the context of the organization. Common factors that are emphasized and studied as factors are organizational commitment (Yaghoubi, Raeisi, Afshar, Yarmohammadian, Hasanzadeh, Javadi & Ansary, 2010), organizational culture (Singh, 2010), job satisfaction and customer satisfaction (Pantouvakis & Bouranta, 2013), and leadership styles (Chang & Lee, 2007). Existing research on learning organization has been done in the West and in developed countries like the United States (Nyhan et al., 2004; Blackman & Henderson, 2005; Birdthistle, 2008; Bui & Baruch, 2011). Thus, the lack of research in Asian countries like Malaysia can shed light to the learning culture of the organization in Asian countries. Therefore, this study was undertaken to determine the factors that influence learning Nur Farhanah K., et all., Relationship Between Self-Directed Learning, Motivation to Learn Toward Learning Organization 25 organization among lecturers at one public university in Malaysia. Learning Organization A learning organization grows and becomes a stronger concept when the concept is associated with more extensive research in the field of management and organization (Bui & Baruch, 2011). The issue of a learning organization has sparked more than 20 years of debate, although there is still no universal formula for creating a learning organization that suits all organizations (Levine, 2006). There are many views on organizational learning and the learning organization is the only one to play a role in developing and implementing policies and strategies that promote and use continuous learning at all levels in the organization (Sackmann, Rehart & Friesl, 2009). Theodore (2012) has listed a number of characteristics of a learning organization in his persuasion that the figure of actors involved in the on-going process of collaboration, collective change, individual responsibility in their study and the principles shared in the organization involved. However, majority of researchers prefer to refer to Senge (1990) because he was the researcher who proposed and developed the concept of learning organization. Senge (1990) defines a learning organization as a place to develop the ability to make decisions, maintain continuous thinking, inspire widespread release and learn what to learn and how to learn. Senge (1990) states five disciplines of a learning organization: (1) openness in systems thinking (Thinking System) is where individuals within the organization, especially the senior and middle leaders need to look at something as a whole and not by segment, (2) self-control (Personal Mastery) is that the individual has a high degree of discipline and learning to enhance their knowledge through a variety of methods. Organizations need to provide the opportunity and the space for individual learning process and enable them to apply their knowledge and expertise, (3) mental model (Mental Models) or individuals within the organization develop concepts and understanding through reading and experience – in connection with their duties and at the same time appreciate the concept and understanding of other individuals in the team. Think open and update mental model allow individuals to unlearn and relearn, (4) shared vision (Shared Vision) can be developed by members of the organizations or from the proposal at the top; build a learning organization and have the same direction among its members and last but not least (5) learning group (Team Building) is a collective learning to generate new ideas and improvements. Learning organizations strive to document the tacit knowledge of expertise individuals to be shared. Senge (1990) also suggests that an individual should set aside the old ways of thinking (mental model), learn to continuously improve knowledge (self-control), the effectiveness of understanding the company they work for (system thinking), and form a joint planning consent (vision together and work together to achieve the vision). A learning organization is an organization where everyone is engaged in identifying and solving problems, which enables the organization to continue to move onwards and improve the ability of the involved organization (Weldy, 2010). Learning organization works to create value, practice, procedure in which learning and employment are synonyms and parallel to the organization (Rowley, 1998). In addition, the learning organization also presents challenges to the employee and the organization in order to use their collective wisdom, the ability to learn and their creativity to transform the organization into one of the best system (Bierema, 1998). Self-Directed Learning The term self-directed learning was introduced by Houle (1961) in research linked to students’ motivation. Tough (1979) is one of the researchers who dealt with self- International Journal of Education, Vol. 8 No. 1 December 2014 26 directed learning in research related to the adult learning. Followed by Knowles (1975), who explains about self-directed learning in adult learning concept in which the concept was well accepted in educational theory and research. According to Knowles (1975), self-directed learning is a process where an individual takes the initiative of their own without the help of others in diagnosing their learning needs, formulating learning goals, identifying materials for learning, choosing and implementing appropriate learning strategies as well as evaluating result learning. Students who practice self-directed learning must be responsible in identifying their own learning needs and learning objectives, deciding how to assess learning outcomes, identifying and focusing on resources and learning strategies as well as evaluating the learning (Iwasiw, 1987). In addition, self-directed learning is also regarded as a learning process in which individuals take the initiative, without the help of others, in diagnosing their learning needs, formulating learning goals, identifying learning resources and materials to choose, in addition to implementing and evaluating appropriate learning outcomes (Brookfield, 2009). Self- directed learning basic principles involve the interaction between a person and their environment in which knowledge is tentative, quick to learn and developed socially (Candy, 2004). He also notes that the dynamics of the free self-study will be considered, especially when carried out by educators. Self-directed learning is essential in the learning and practice of adult education. Self- directed learning has been reviewed in literature review and concept, but it is important to bring confusion and misunderstanding (Candy, 2004). Up until now, self-directed learning is strongly connected to external management in the process of learning (Garrison, 1997). There is no concept of actually explaining adult education and self-directed learning. Self-directed learning can also be understood through the three functions of adult learning: (1) learn the job-oriented instrumental in problem solving related to controlling the surroundings and other people, (2) learn to read what others mean through a conversation between us and them, and (3) self-reflective learning is about an individual who understands about ourselves. Therefore, self-directed learning is more than just knowing what we want to read. Self-directed learning also admits what we understand from people around us, try to understand our surroundings, and realize what is important. For these reasons, self-directed learning is an approach in which the scholars will be motivated, become more responsible and control themselves (self- monitoring) and context (self-management) in the process of acquiring and validating learning outcomes (Garrison, 1997). Motivation to Learn In the 1970s and 1980s, the motivation in the workplace has become an important topic (Ambrose & Kulik, 1999). Numerous opinions about motivation in the workplace were raised by researchers. Based on the literature, different opinions brought different definitions of motivation to learn. Motivation for learning in the workplace is a set of external and internal behavior that will demonstrate a connection with the work and will specify the shape, direction, and time- intensive of the individual work itself (Pinder, 1998). Motivation to learn has been studied in education and psychology research in different views (Winterstein, 1998). Motivation is defined as a collection of option desire, determination and behavior of the feelings (Edwards, 1999), the behavior intended to achieve a set goal (Hodson, 2001), the desire to restore power, determination, and behavior in doing a job and achieve goals (Hancock, 2004). Motivation is also considered as an endorsement, action or guide towards an act, especially in performing a job (Morris, 1970). In the setting of adult learning, motivation to learn is fixed as the tendency for somebody to receive or find learning Nur Farhanah K., et all., Relationship Between Self-Directed Learning, Motivation to Learn Toward Learning Organization 27 activities that are meaningful and beneficial for them (Wlodkowski, 1999). Motivation to learn is also stated as the movement behavior of a passionate and personal learning or a continuing self-study (Colquitt, Lepine & Noe, 2000). The literature states that motivation is an important factor in the learning process and the process of organizational learning in the workplace (Malik & Danish, 2010). They noted a positive relationship between motivation and learning organization. Besides, Hays and Hill (2001) also state that motivation is a factor that allows the creation of a learning organization as a whole. Motivation to learn is the key component in the selection of individual learning (Klein, Noe & Wang, 2006). With the motivation to learn, an individual will choose to learn and pick their own learning activities. Previous surveys demonstrated that motivation to learn is an important factor in learning and research described that the motivation to learn affects the individual as well as external conditions of their learning (Colquitt et.al, 2000; Noe, 1986; Tannenbaum & Yulk, 1992). Motivation to learn is a vital element to adults, especially to their learning process (Gusho, 2013). In adults’ life, motivation to learn plays a major character in controlling and driving adults to reach determinations in their spirits. In addition, Teghant and Pogson (1995) state that adults will choose to participate in all activities associated with the learning if they are really motivated. Learning Organization Model by Watkins & Marsick Learning organization modelled by Watkins & Marsick (1996) consists of seven dimensions: 1. creating opportunities for continuous learning, personal and career development in the workplace (level of learning in the organization can be increased by acquiring how to learn new knowledge, values and skills), 2. promoting dialogue and inquiry (dialogue is the extent to which organizational culture allows members to practice open communication without the limitation to talk, discuss and explain their experience and skills), 3. encouraging collaboration and group learning (the extent to which organizations are trying to plan the work for the members of their organizations to achieve common action), 4. developing a system for sharing learning (create a system or medium for employees to use all available technology to conduct their learning partnerships with other workers), 5. increasing towards a collective vision (a process that allows the members of the organization to take part in the formulation of policies, to know how to get things done, to assess their needs, to influence others and to create a collective vision), 6. the system of environmental connection (an open system to connect the organization to the external and internal environment and help the members of the organization to perceive the impact of their work to the entire organization), and 7. strategic leadership to the environment (the efficiency of the organization’s leaders to think strategically; to be a model in the organization, learning to support and energize the organizations to bring about positive changes). Related Previous Research Nzuve and Omolo (2012) conducted a study in 43 banks under the auspices of the Kenyan Commercial Banking. This study was conducted to determine the practice of the learning organization in each bank. There was significant relationship between organizational learning and organizational performance, such as thinking systems, personal mastery, mental models, shared vision and team learning. Overall, the level of organizational learning for each bank was significantly high. A research conducted in a banking institution in England by Antonacopoulou (2006) found that self-directed learning activities and processes influenced practices within the organization. Activities and learning processes are: (1) the content of the learning process; (2) learning resources, and (3) political in workplace learning. Learning organization practiced in the English Banking institution also International Journal of Education, Vol. 8 No. 1 December 2014 28 affected employees’ self-directed learning with understanding how the organization should learn and how they grow. This study supports Watkins and Marsick’s (1996) statement that the learning organization will grow and learn from individual teams within the organization. This study also supports the study by March (1991) who reported a learning organization will learn through individual and the knowledge that goes on within the organization involved. A study conducted by Tanyaovalaksna and Li (2013) on 106 laboratory supervisors at the Ontario Hospital, which focused on individual learning and group learning with learning organization. The study showed a significant relationship between individual learning and learning organization, r (106) = 0.97, p = 0.001 while group learning with learning organization also showed a significant correlation, r = 0.73, p = 0.001. A study by Colquitt, Lepine & Noe (2000) showed a significant relationship between motivation to learn by learning organizations, where employees would motivate them to face their learning process to increase the learning organization. Not only that, workers must constantly learn and practice learning activities to enhance their knowledge to increase their performance (Goldstein, 2001). In addition, Porter and Lawler (1968) explained that in the study of motivation to learn in the organization of services for which the motivation to learn is the most important key to achieving success in a service organization. Normally, employees will learn what they want and if the motivation to learn does not achieve a higher level, the process of learning will move slowly. Objectives The purposes of the study are: a) To determine the level of learning organization, self-directed learning, and motivation to learn among lecturers. b) To determine the relationship between self-directed learning, motivation to learn and learning organization among lecturers. c) To determine the contribution of self- directed learning and motivation to learn on learning organization among lecturers. Table 1. Profile of the Respondents (n = 92) Frequency % M SD Gender Male 42 45.7 Female 50 54.3 Age (n=92) 1.60 0.63 26-39 years old 35 38 40-53 years old 48 52.2 54-68 years old 9 9.8 Post 2.30 0.81 Lecturer 12 13.0 Senior Lecturer 48 52.2 Associate Professor 24 26.1 Professor 8 8.7 Work Experience 1.61 0.60 3-15 years 41 44.6 16-28 years 43 46.7 29-24 years 8 8.74 Nur Farhanah K., et all., Relationship Between Self-Directed Learning, Motivation to Learn Toward Learning Organization 29 Methods For this section, the topic will be discussed on study setting and data sample information, instrumentation, population and research sample and result. Study Setting and Data Sample Information A total of 92 questionnaires were distributed to the lecturers at one public university in Malaysia. In this study, 12 (13.0%) lecturers hold the position as Lecturers, 48 of them (52.2%) are Senior Lecturers, 24 of them (26.1%) are Associate Professors and 8 of them (8.7%) are Professors. Instrumentation This study used questionnaires as a research tool to collect data from respondents. According to Saunders, Levis and Thirnhill (2009), the questionnaire allows all data to be collected, analyzed and compared easily. Ary, Jacobs and Razavieh (1990) also note that the use of questionnaire is easier and saves time compared to other instruments. Field and Abelson (1982) state that most researchers use questionnaires to measure the perception of the respondents. Therefore, the form of measurement used in this study is based on assumptions and perceptions. Overall, the questionnaire contains four parts. Part A is the background of respondent, Part B is a learning organization, Part C is self-directed learning and Part D is the motivation to learn. All four parts use a Likert five-point scale (1 = never, 2 = rarely, 3 = sometimes, 4 = often, 5 = always). The questionnaire was translated into Bahasa Melayu (Malay language) to be adjusted to the context of the country, Malaysia, which predominantly uses Bahasa Melayu in its communication. Part A includes question about demography profile for respondent. The questions cover several points such as gender, age, post and working experience. Questions for Part B are about organizational learning is an adoption and modification of the Dimension Learning Organization Questionnaire (DLOQ) developed by Watkins & Marsick (1996). This questionnaire measures the learning organizations including continuing learning, dialogue and inquiry, team learning, shared learning systems, control system, connections and strategic leadership. As a result of discussions with supervisors, twelve items were selected and modified based on the context of research and adaption of the respondent. Items for self-directed learning are an adoption of the Self-Rating Scale of Self- Directed Learning (SRSSDL) developed by Williamson (2007). The SRSSDL consisted of 60 items, which are divided into five dimensions in which each dimension has 12 items. The dimensions are (1) awareness of self-directed learning, (2) self-directed learning strategies, (3) self-directed learning activities, (4) evaluation of self-directed learning, and (5) interpersonal skill of self- directed learning. Measuring motivation to learn is an adaption and modification of the Motivation to Learn Questionnaire developed by Noe (1989). There were eight items that matched the purposes of the study and were used in the study. Table 2 will show more detail about instrument in this study. Table 2. Research Instrument No Instrument No.item Researcher 1 Learning Organization Questionnaire (DLOQ) 12 Marsick & Watkins (1999) 2 Self-rating Scale of Self Directed Learning (SRSSDL 12 12 12 12 12 Swapna Naskar Willianson (2007) 3 Motivation to Learn 8 Noe (1986) 4 Total of item 80 Population and Research Sample The sample is a subset of the population. In this study, the population was determined to be among the lecturers at one public university in Malaysia. Based on statistics from the International Journal of Education, Vol. 8 No. 1 December 2014 30 university register’s office, an updated list of lecturer is 1654 people. This study employed a stratified random sampling. Stratified random sampling is the selection of respondents by group or strata with similar characteristic. The samples were randomly selected for each group or stratum. Only social science faculty were chosen for this study. So, four faculties were selected with a total population of 380 lecturers. Consequently, the selection of a sample from the four faculties was done based on the table of sample size by Bartlett, Katrlik and Higgins (2001). Bartlett, Katrlik and Higgins (2001) state that if population of 400 people, the samples will be taken around 24 %. Due to the process of selecting samples by using stratified random sampling, then the calculation was done through predetermining academic positions namely (1) Lecturers, (2) Senior Lecturer, (3) Associate Professor and (4) Professor. For each of these positions, only 24% will be used as samples. The samples were randomly selected using a systematic list of lecturers who were identified based on a randomly drawn initial number. Result and Discussion Cronbach’s alpha was calculated to examine the reliability of each variable in the study that ranged 0.768 to 0.928. The means for dependent and the independent variable were calculated and are presented in the Table 1. From this table, all mean scores were well above the mid-point (2.5) of the scale. The highest mean score recorded was for the motivation to learn variable (M = 4.46) while the lowest means score was 4.10 for learning organization. Table 3. Means and standard deviations of variables (n = 92) Variables Mean SD Learning Organization 4.10 .59 Self-directed learning 4.29 .29 Motivation to learn 4.46 .43 Descriptive Analysis Results showed that learning organization (82.6%), self-directed learning (98.9%) and motivation to learn (94.6%) were at high level. Correlation Analysis To determine the nature and strength of the relationship among variables, Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation procedure was used. Table 2 presents the correlation coefficients of the relationship between variables. There was a positive strong relationship between learning organization and motivation to learn (r = 0.611, p = .01). Motivation to learn is positively and significantly related to the learning organization (r = 0.521, p = .01). Table 4. Pearson’s correlation among variables (n=92) Variables 1 2 3 Learning Organization 1 Self-directed learning .521** 1 Motivation to learn .611** .510** 1 ** Correlation is significant at 0.01 level (2-tailed) Regression Analysis Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to identify the factors that explained the variance of the learning organization among lecturers. Results showed that both self-directed learning (β=0.474, p<.05) and motivation to learn (β=0.263, p<.05) significantly predicted the learning organization. Thus, we concluded that self- directed learning and motivation to learn influenced learning organization among lecturers. Nur Farhanah K., et all., Relationship Between Self-Directed Learning, Motivation to Learn Toward Learning Organization 31 In depth, this study was carried out to determine variables affecting learning organization in one public university at Malaysia. The results showed that the level of learning organization, self-directed learning and motivation to learn were at high levels. The scores indicated that lecturers at the selected public university have high motivation to learn and are also self-directed in their learning. Results also showed that the level of learning organization was high. Employees within an organization will always meet their needs when there is high motivation to learn and they are more likely to engage in self-directed learning to obtain knowledge and skills required for the career (Munroe, Schumaker & Carr, 1997). Senge, Roberts, Ross, Smith and Kleiner (1994) explain that when employees would like to be a part of the organization where they work, then they have to go through the process to change them to fulfil the requirement of the organization. Therefore, in the case of lecturers at a higher learning institution, they need high motivation to learn and conduct regular self-directed learning process so that they can continuously increase their knowledge to be better equipped to perform their work. Redding (1997) points out that to make sure the learning organization develops continuously, people should persistently work on problems and find solutions to these problems. Institutions of higher learning generally through their employees are expected to continuously learn in order to become a learner. The correlation analysis showed a significant positive relationship between learning organization and self-directed learning (r =.611, p =.01). The relationship between motivation to learn and learning organization also showed a positive significant relationship (r =.521, p =.01). Regression analysis showed that self-directed learning and motivation to learn predicted 42.4 % of variance of the learning organization. Therefore, motivation to learn and self-directed learning directly influenced the learning organization. March (1991) argues for the creation of a learning organization. At the practical level, self- directed learning done by every individual in the organization contributes to knowledge and learning in the organization involved. This is because the flow of knowledge will occur from an individual to another individual. At the same time, the flow of knowledge is part of the practice of a learning organization. Conclusions In professional and academic field, the factors of self-directed learning and motivation to learn are very important to maintain the existing knowledge. Therefore, this study will provide improvements to the Learning Organization Theory. The results indicated that the factors of self-directed learning and motivation to learn contributed to learning organization practices. Learning Organization Theory is often applied in different settings, particularly in the areas of business, management and health. In academic field, Learning Organization Table 5. Self-directed learning and motivation to learn as predictor of learning organization Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients B Std. Error Beta T Sig. 1 (Constant) -1.537 0.704 -2.183 0.032 Self-directed learning 0.941 0.187 0.474 5.034 0.000 Motivation to learn 0.358 0.128 0.263 2.790 0.006 Note: R=0.651; R2=0.424; Adj.R2=0.411; F=32.78 International Journal of Education, Vol. 8 No. 1 December 2014 32 Theory is rarely employed and described in detail. Therefore, this study describes the importance of self-directed learning and motivation to learn within the Learning Organization Theory. Future research on learning organization can utilize this theory as a foundation. The addition of new knowledge across different cultures and context will contribute to knowledge that will be applied in the evolution of a learning organization in institutions of higher education. A learning organization is a place where skills are created, acquired and knowledge is passed between individuals, units and levels. To realize the creation of a learning organization, an organization needs to identify factors that affect the learning organization. Thus, the outcomes of this research can be used as a guide in designing and planning the development and pattern of the learning organization at institution of higher education in Malaysia. 42.2 % of self-directed learning and motivation to learn to predict the learning organization. The outcomes of this study could be the foundation for the initial development of a learning system. Systems can enhance self-directed learning practices in an establishment. Motivation to learn can be fostered within each individual in the organization. In addition, the results of this study can be a guideline for institutions of higher education in developing plans and policies for prescribing culture knowledge by making learning an ongoing process. Institutions of higher education can use the results of this study to provide a basis for continuous learning for self-directed learning and motivation to learn. Therefore, the results of this study can be used for the improvement of the National Higher Education Strategic Plan (PSPTN) in strengthening research and innovation, to improve the quality of teaching and learning and to build and sustain culture of lifelong learning. Not only that, this study may also be referred to the increase in system performance assessment index (KPI) in every institution of higher learning to increase the quality of teaching and learning. Thus, indirectly, it will have a huge impact on the learning organization. This study will be an important reference for policy on institutions of higher education in Malaysia. References Ali, A. K. (2012). Academic staff’s perceptions of characteristics of learning organization in a high learning institution. International Journal of Educational Management, 26(1), 55-82. Ambrose, M. L., & Kulik, C. T. (1999). Motivation research in the 1999s. Journal of Management, 25(3), 231-292. Antonacopoulou, E. P. (2006). The relationship between individual and organizational learning; New evidence from managerial learning practices. Management Learning, 37(4), 455-472. Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Razavieh, A. (1990). Introduction to research in education. New York: Holt, Rineheart & Winstan. Bartlett, J. E., Kotrlik, J. W., & Higgins, C. C. (2001). Organizational research: determining appropriate sample size in survey research. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 19(1), 43-50. Bierema, L. L. (1998). The process of the learning organization: Making sense of change. National Assocition of Secondary School Princples, 83(406), 46-57. Birdthistle, N. (2008). Family SMEs in Ireland as learning organization. Learning Organization, 15(5), 421-436. Blackman, D., & Henderson, S. (2005). Why learning organization do not transforms. Learning Organization, 12(1), 42-56. Brookfield, S. D. (2009). Self directed learning. In Maclean, R. and Wilson, D. (Eds), International of Education for The Changing World of Work (pp. 2615-2627). Berlin: Springer Science. Bui, H. T., & Baruch, Y. (2011). Learning organization in higher education: Nur Farhanah K., et all., Relationship Between Self-Directed Learning, Motivation to Learn Toward Learning Organization 33 An empirical evaluation within an international context. Management Learning, 43(5), 514-544. Candy, P. C. (2004). Self directed learning is good for both society and the individual. Department of Education, Science and Training. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass. Chang, S. C., & Lee, M. S. (2007). A study on relationship among leadership, organizational culture, the operation of learning organization and employees’ job satisfaction. The Learning Organization, 14(2), 155-185. Colquitt, J. A., Lepine, J. A., & Noe, R. A. (2000). Toward an integrative theory of training motivation; A meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 678-707. Conferrore, S. J. (2010). Building a learning organization: Counities of practice, self- directed learning, and continuing medical education. The Journal of Continuing Education in The Health Professions, 17, 5-11. Dannapfel, P., Peolsson, A., & Nilsen, P. (2014). A qualitative study of individual and organizational learning through physiotherapists’ participation in a research project. International Journal of Clinical Medicine, 5, 514-524. Edwards, D. (1999). Motivation and emotion. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication. Field, G. H., & Abelson, M. A. (1982). A reconseptualization and proposed model. Human Relation, 33(1), 181-222. Gaile, A. (2013). External factors facilitating development of the learning organizations culture. Journal of Business Management, 7, 130-140. Garrison, D. R. (1997). Self directed learning: Toward a comprehensive model. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(18), 18-33. Goldstein, H. (2001). Appraising the performance of performance appraisals. IEEE Gusho, L. P. (2013). What are the differences among adult student regarding self- confidence and motivation to learn? Journal of Educational and Social Research, 3(2), 351-357. Hancock, D. (2004). Cooperative learning and peer orientation effects on motivation achievement. Journal of Education Research, 97(3), 159-166. Hays, J. M., & Hill, A. V. (2001). A preliminary investigation of the relationship between employee motivation/vision, service learning, and perceived service quality. Journal of Operations Management, 19(3), 335-349. Hiemstra, R. (2008). More than three decades of self directed learning; From whence have we come? Adult Learning, 114(5), 5-8. Hodson, C. (2001). Psychology and work. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis Inc. Houle, C. O. (1961). The inquiring mind: A study of the adult who continue to learn . Medison: University of Wisconsin Press. Iwasiw, C. L. (1987). The role of the teacher in self directed learning. Nurse Education Today, 7(5), 222-227. Klein, H. J., Noe, R. A., & Wang, C. (2006). Motivation to learn and course outcomes; The impact of delivery mode, learning goal orientation, and perceived barriers and enablers. Personnel Psychology(59), 665-702. Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. New York: Association Press. Levine, L. (2006). Integrating knowledge and processes in a learning organization. Information Systems Management, 1, 21- 33. Long, H. B., & Morris, s. (1995). Self - directed learning of women with breast cancer. Adult education quarterly. American Association for Adult and Continuing Education, 367-380. Malik, E. M., & Danish, Q. R. (2010). Impact of motivation to learn and job attitudes International Journal of Education, Vol. 8 No. 1 December 2014 34 on organizational leaning culture in public service organizaton of Pakistan. A Research Journal of South Asian Studies, 25(2), 217-235. Malik, M. E., & Ghafoor, M. M. (2011). Organizational effectiveness: A case study of telecommunication and banking sector of Pakistan. Far East Journal of Psychology and Business, 2(1), 37-48. March, J. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organizational Sciences, 2, 71-87. Miller, M. P. (2010). Are first year undergraduate student nurses prepred for self directed learning. Nurses Times, 106(46), 21-24. Morris, W. (1970). The American Heritage Dictionary of The English Language. New York, NY: American Heritage. Munroe, D., Schumaker, J., Carr, S. (Eds) (1997). Motivation and culture. New York, Noe, R. A. (1986). Trainee attitudes and attributes: Neglected influence of training program effectiveness. Academy of Management Review, 11, 736-749. Nyhan, B., Cressey, P., Tomassini, M., Kelleher, M., & Poell, R. (2004). European perspectives on the learning organization. Journal of European Industrial Training, 28(1), 67-92. Nzuve, S. M., & Omolo, E. A. (2012). A study of practice of the learning organization and its relationship to performance among Kenyan Commercial Banks. Problem of Management in The 21st Century, 4, 45- 56. Pantouvakis, A., & Bouranta, N. (2013). The link between organizational learning culture and customer satisfaction : Confirming relationship and exploring moderating effect. The Learning Organization, 20(1), 48-64. Pinder, C. C. (1998). Work motivation in organizational behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Redding, J. (1997). Hardwriting the learning organization. Training and Development, 51(8), 61-67. Rowley, J. (1998). Creating a learning organization in higher education. Industrial and Commercial Training, 30(1), 258-271. Sackmann, S. A., Rehart, E., & Friesl, M. (2009). Sustainable change; Long-term efforts toward developing a learning organization. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 45(4), 521-549. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research method for business students. London: Pearson Education. Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. London: Century Business. Senge, P. M., Roberts, C., Ross, R. B., Smith, B. .., & Kleiner, A. (1994). The fifth discipline field book: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization. New York: Berkley Publishing Group. Singh, K. (2010). An analysis of relationship between the learning organization and organization culture in Indian business organization. Organizations and Markets In Emerging Economies, 1(1), 142-165. Tannenbaum, S. I., & Yulk, G. (1992). Training and development in Wirk Organizations. Annual review of Psychology, 399-441. Tanyaovalaksna, S., & Li, X. (2013). There a relationship between individual learning, team learning and learning organization. Alberta Journal of Educational Reseacrh, 59(1), 1-16. Tegnant, M., & Pogson, P. (1995). Learning and change in the adult years: A development perspective. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Theodore, J. (2012). Learning organization, the American employee and manager, and the development role of the social science. Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 12(4), 7-10. Tough, A. (1979). The adult learning projects. CA: San Diego. Nur Farhanah K., et all., Relationship Between Self-Directed Learning, Motivation to Learn Toward Learning Organization 35 Tsai, Y. (2014). Learning organizations, internal marketing and organizational commitement in hospitals. BMC Health Service Research, 14(152), 2-8. Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J. (1996). In action: Creating the learning organization. Alexandria: AL. Weldy, T. G., & Gillis, W. E. (2010). The learning organizations: Variations at different organizational level. The Learning Organization, 17(5), 455-470. White, J., & Weathersby, R. (2005). Can university become true learning organization? Learning Organization Journal, 12(3), 292-298. Williamson, S. N. (2007). Development of a self-rating scale of self directed learning. Nurse Reseaecher, 14(2), 66-83. Winterstein, A. P. (1998). Organizational commitment among intercollegiate head athletic trainers; Examining our work environent. Journal of Athletic Training, 45(2), 198-204. Wlodkowski, R. J. (1999). Enhancing adult motivation to learn; A comprehensive guide for teaching all adults. San Francisco: CA: John Wiley and Sons. Yaghoubi, M., Raeisi, A. R., Afshar, M., Yarmohammadian, M. H., Hasanzadeh, A., Javadi, M., & Ansary, M. (2010). The relationship between learning organizational and organizational commitment among Nursing Managers in Educational Hospital of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences in 2008. Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res, 15(2), 83-89.