Environmental learning culture

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

Radical structuralism Bent on a philosophy of social change, radical structuralists are committed to do away with existing structures (Boshier, 2000; Mills, 2001). Structuralists differ from radical humanists in that they criticise the structures, communities and social world, thereby implying a more objective, impersonal viewpoint (Boshier, 2000). Burrell and Morgan place this paradigm as objective, and intent on social change, as shown in Figure 1.5 (Batterham, 2002; Cohen et al., 2002; Cronje, 2000; Lehaney et al., 2004; Mills, 2001; Nurminen, 1997; Ritchie & Lewis, 2003). e-Readiness implies the individual’s relation to technology. Shulman sees technology as a highly structured social entity, as it is developed and then changed according to user needs and specifications (Shulman, 1986). These structures are not fixed but go through a virtually endless development cycle to address the needs identified by users.
It assumes that “technology and user behaviour co-evolve as a structurational process during the course of human-computer interactions” (Shulman, 1986). Shulman comments that the structuration theory probably describes the information systems processes best, because its strength lies in the ability to study changes. Again this study on e-readiness can be placed squarely within this paradigm in that the social structures of the target group can be investigated in the way they contribute to the state of readiness displayed by warehouse workers. e-Readiness, the result of the use of technology, confirms this assumption. But once again, from the epistemological point of view, it will imply that the research will have to be more objective and positivist, while the aim of this research is to identify and understand the condition of e-readiness as subjectively experienced by the South African warehouse worker.

Interpretivism

The interpretive view of social research recognises human differences and how people perceive knowledge in their own unique ways. Knowledge is constructed by the individual through social interaction and experience (Lehaney et al., 2004; Weber, 2004). Figure 1.5 illustrates this paradigm as subjective, and seen from a perspective of social regulation (Batterham, 2002; Cohen et al., 2002; Cronje, 2000; Lehaney et al., 2004; Mills, 2001; Ritchie & Lewis, 2003). With this I suggest that I need to understand the situation as it is, from a subjective point of view, and with the intention to experience the relationship the warehouse workers have with their technological environment. Traditional researchers will investigate social sciences by trying to discover universal and natural laws that determine human knowledge and behaviour, while interpretivists share the same concerns, but seek the existence of knowledge in the individuals and their relation with the environment and with one another (Cohen et al., 2002). My research is not intent on bringing on any changes, but mainly to understand and see the phenomenon from their point of view. Interpretive research studies the individual subjectively and how he/she interacts with the world around them, how they cope, manage, and give meaning to their environment (Cohen et al., 2002; Merriam, 1998; Vockell, 2005). They agree that the social world can only be understood from the perspective of the individuals who are involved in the phenomenon to be investigated. This concern for the individual (Cohen et al., 2002) is an accurate description of the aim of this research. Where the normative paradigm is intent on devising general theories of human behaviour, this research will rather try to understand, and position it-self to address e-learning as a modern learning strategy with more clarity.
Table 1.1 summarizes and compares the ontological epistemological preferences of the four research approaches (Batterham, 2002; Cohen et al., 2002; Cronje, 2000; Lehaney et al., 2004; Mills, 2001; Nurminen, 1997; Ritchie & Lewis, 2003). When the ontological assumption regarding the position of the warehouse worker relating to e-learning is evaluated, the typical question arises: Is this social phenomenon due to the consciousness, or lack, of the social reality? Taking guidance from (Cohen et al., 2002), ontology refers to either a nominalist or realist position regarding truth and knowledge. e-Readiness, as a relative condition, is very dependent on several intrinsic and extrinsic variables, and therefore this study chooses to regard the concept of e-readiness as nominalist, as this concept will only become meaningful when interpreted by an individual (Cohen et al., 2002). The epistemological assumption refers to the base of knowledge, whether it is “hard, real and tangible versus the anti-positivist view that it is softer or more spiritual and needs to be personally experienced” (Cohen et al., 2002 p. 6). Regarding the investigation into the readiness levels of warehouse workers, I assume an anti-positivist approach. There are several aspects of e-readiness that can only be understood if the investigation is conducted from an empathic, personal and involved point of view.
I need to explore and understand their confidence, attitudes and perceptions regarding technology. The aim of this research is to work with individuals and find out how they regard technology, whilst making sure that a clear understanding can be formed as to how they perceive the technology as a possible learning tool and platform. This makes this research subjective and interpretive; i.e. aiming to find several possible answers to a single question. (Cohen et al., 2002) describe subjective studies to be anti-positivist: Anti-positivism accepts people to be creative and deliberate, to create meaning to their environments by building and maintaining relationships with it. These relationships allow them to construct a meaningful social world, so that they can cope with the dynamics of that world. Every time an individual is confronted with a situation, he or she gives meaning to that event by reacting in a unique way, therefore taking care of the social relations in unique ways. This uniqueness is what the interpretivist is interested in, to try to understand a phenomenon from the different interpretations given to a situation (Cohen et al., 2002). Ritchie and Lewis state, “A social researcher has to explore and understand the social world through the participants’ and their own perspectives” (Ritchie & Lewis, 2003 p. 7). True understanding is believed to be possible when the investigator shares the frame of reference (Cohen et al., 2002). Merriam (1998) defines research, where an understanding of the meaning people construct is investigated, as qualitative research. When human nature as an assumption is evaluated, Burrell and Morgan (1979) distinguish between voluntarism and determinism. Determinism refers to the objectivist point of view that external environment issues determine human behaviour, while voluntarism imply that the human being is the initiator of his own actions (Cohen et al., 2002).
I concur with the latter that individuals are immersed in their social environments and build conscious relationships with their environments. In the context of this study, I believe that the e-readiness level of the warehouse workers is determined by each and every person’s ability to deal and cope with technology. This is in sync with Cohen et al’s view that supporters of the subjectivist approach will view the world as “softer, and humanly created…select from a comparable range of emerging techniques… personal constructs, for example” (Cohen et al., 2002 p. 6-7). The corresponding methodology for subjectivists as described by Cohen et al (2002) would then be idiographic in order to understand individual behaviour. I have adopted this interpretive method to interpret the way the warehouse worker experiences his/her world. In interpretive research, the target group is investigated in naturally occurring situations, and not in a controlled environment (Vrasidas, 2001). The actions, thoughts, attitudes and relevant social relations of the incumbents will have to be investigated. Merriam describes this phenomenon as an interpretive or qualitative research methodology interested in discovering factors by means of interviews, observations and reviewing documents (Merriam, 1998).

Table of Contents :

• Acknowledgements
• Ethics Clearance Document
• Declaration of Authorship
• Certificate of Proofreading and Editing
• Table of Contents
• List of Figures
• List of Tables
• List of Appendices
• List of Appendices
• Abstract
• List of Abbreviations
• Chapter Orientation
  • 1.1 Introduction
  • 1.2 Research problem
  • 1.3 Effects of Globalisation
    • 1.3.1 Globalisation
    • 1.3.2 Digital divide
    • 1.3.3 Warehouse workers exposed
  • 1.4 Rationale
  • 1.4.1 e-Learning
  • 1.4.2 e-Readiness
  • 1.5 Scope of the study
  • 1.5.1 Context
  • 1.6 Research questions
  • 1.7 Theoretical framework
    • 1.7.1 Positioning the research
    • 1.7.2 Functionalism
    • 1.7.3 Radical humanism
    • 1.7.4 Radical structuralism
    • 1.7.5 Interpretivism
  • 1.8 Perspective orientation
  • 1.9 Research methodology
    • 1.9.1 Qualitative research strategy
    • 1.9.2 Case study
    • 1.9.3 Unit of Analysis
    • 1.9.4 Methods of Data Collection
    • 1.9.5 Assumptions
  • 1.10 Data analysis procedures
  • 1.11 Limitations of the research
  • 1.12 Reliability and validity
  • 1.13 Ethical considerations
  • 1.14 Thesis structure
  • 1.15 Motivation to effect this research
• Chapter Literature Review
  • 2.1 Introduction
  • 2.2 e-Learning definitions, models and theories
    • 2.2.1 Definitions of e-learning
    • 2.2.2 e-Learning models and e-readiness attributes
  • 2.3 Advantages and disadvantages of e-learning
    • 2.3.1 Advantages
    • 2.3.2 Disadvantages and myths of e-learning
  • 2.4 e-Learning and the digital divide
    • 2.4.1 South African legislation and the ICT Black Employment Charter
    • 2.4.2 Reports on the divide
    • 2.4.3 Supply-chain management industry depending on technology
    • 2.4.4 Globalisation
    • 2.4.5 Digital divide
  • 2.5 Bridging the gap with the introduction of technology
    • 2.5.1 Case studies of developing communities
    • 2.5.2 Lessons learnt from previous studies
    • 2.5.3 Involve the learners
  • 2.6 e-Learning demands on organisations and employees
    • 2.6.1 Demands on business goals
    • 2.6.2 Technological demands on the organisation
    • 2.6.3 Software demands to manage the e-learning process
    • 2.6.4 Demands on the learning process
    • 2.6.5 e-Learning systems place a specific demand on managers and support staff
    • 2.6.6 Demands on the learner
    • 2.6.7 Selecting an e-learning approach
    • 2.6.8 New skills needed
    • 2.6.9 Time to change the strategy
  • 2.7 e-Maturity and e-Readiness
  • 2.8 Previous e-readiness assessments
    • 2.8.1 e-Readiness of developing nations
    • 2.8.2 e-Readiness of selected African states
    • 2.8.3 e-Readiness of Cape Town students
    • 2.8.4 Organisational readiness as investigated by Powell
  • 2.9 Assessing e-readiness
    • 2.9.1 e-Readiness of e-businesses
    • 2.9.2 Student Online Readiness Tool
    • 2.9.3 Guglielmino and Guglielmino on individual e-readiness
    • 2.9.4 Reeves’ model to guide instructional designers for www learning
  • 2.10 Synthesis of e-Readiness
    • 2.10.1 Experience with technology
    • 2.10.2 Access to technology
    • 2.10.3 Organisational contributions
    • 2.10.4 Motivational aspects
    • 2.10.5 Life style, attitudes, habits and individual differences
    • 2.10.6 Cultural influences
  • 2.11 Theory codes of e-readiness for warehouse workers
  • 2.12 Research question
  • 2.13 Conceptualizing the e-readiness of the warehouse worker
  • 2.14 Summary of Chapter
• Chapter Research design and methodology
  • 3.1 Introduction
  • 3.2 Interpretive approach to understand the aspirations and objectives
  • 3.3 Qualitative research
  • 3.4 Case study as preferred research design
  • 3.5 Warehouse workers as the unit of analysis
    • 3.5.1 Selection Procedure
  • 3.6 Research methodology
  • 3.6.1 Data collection strategy
  • 3.7 Phase 1 Identifying the categories of e- readiness
    • 3.7.1 Previous e-readiness research and reports
    • 3.7.2 Subject-matter experts
    • 3.7.3 The Delphi technique
    • 3.7.4 Rate the importance of identified elements of e-readiness
  • 3.8 Phase 2 Interviews and observations with warehouse workers
    • 3.8.1 Utilising a questionnaires to obtain background information
    • 3.8.2 Interviews
    • 3.8.3 Observations
  • 3.9 Phase 3 Interviews with warehouse managers and supervisors
    • 3.9.1 Making use of Atlas.tiTM to prepare the data analysis
    • 3.9.2 Defining theory codes and conceptual codes of e-readiness
  • 3.10 Validity
  • 3.11 Reliability
  • 3.12 Data-analysis
  • 3.13 Ethical issues
  • 3.14 Limitations
  • 3.15 Summary
• Chapter Identifying the Aspects of e-Readiness
  • 4.1 Introduction
  • 4.2 Results of subject matter expert ratings
    • 4.2.1 Cultural influences on learning
    • 4.2.2 Environmental learning culture
    • 4.2.3 Attitude and Aptitude Influences Personal Learning
    • 4.2.4 Attitude and Individual Differences Influenced by Environment
    • 4.2.5 Origins of Motivation – Personal attributes
    • 4.2.6 Origins of Motivation Influenced by the Environment
    • 4.2.7 Summary of SME evaluation
  • 4.3 Emerging theory codes to structure the research for e-Readiness
  • 4.4 Summary
• Chapter Data Analysis and Initial Findings
  • 5.1 Introduction
  • 5.2 Technical experience with computer technology (Sub-question 1)
    • 5.2.1 Technical experience with computers
    • 5.2.2 Conclusion about technical experience of warehouse workers
  • 5.3 Affective experience with technology (Sub-question 2)
    • 5.3.1 Affective experiences
    • 5.3.2 Anxiety of warehouse workers as affective experience
    • 5.3.3 Experience with technology also led to warehouse worker frustrations
    • 5.3.4 Warehouse workers’ attitudes as affected by computer experience
  • 5.3.5 Conclusions on warehouse workers’ affective experience of computers to determine e readiness
  • 5.4 Observed aptitude as evidence of e-readiness (Sub-question 3)
    • 5.4.1 Conclusion about warehouse workers’ aptitudes for e-learning
  • 5.5 Origins of motivation determine e-readiness of warehouse workers (Sub-Question 4)
    • 5.5.1 The types of motivators that affects the warehouse workers
    • 5.5.2 Extrinsic motivation contributes to e-readiness of warehouse workers
    • 5.5.3 Computer use as extrinsic motivator
    • 5.5.4 Facilitator contributions as extrinsic motivator
    • 5.5.5 Relevancy of training as extrinsic motivator
    • 5.5.6 Financial support as extrinsic motivator
    • 5.5.7 Allocated time for training as extrinsic motivator
    • 5.5.8 Intrinsic motivation
    • 5.5.9 Conclusion about the origins of motivation that influence warehouse workers’ e readiness
  • 5.6 Access and infrastructure as contributors to e-readiness (Sub-question 5)
    • 5.6.1 Access to computer technology
    • 5.6.2 Computer access at home
    • 5.6.3 Computer access at work
    • 5.6.4 Access to technology as a motivator
    • 5.6.5 Conclusion about theory code access contributing to the e-readiness of warehouse workers
  • 5.7 Contributions and constraints of the organisation’s culture (Sub-question 6)
    • 5.7.1 Cultural differences and diversity
    • 5.7.2 Business language and communication
    • 5.7.3 Support and guidance available to warehouse workers
    • 5.7.4 Importance of a relevant learning plan
    • 5.7.5 Financial support and time for training
    • 5.7.6 Conclusion about organisation culture contributing to the e-readiness of warehouse workers
  • 5.8 Conclusion Chapter
• Chapter Synopsis of e-Readiness Findings
  • 6.1 Introduction
  • 6.2 Synoptic overview of the research
  • 6.3 Executive Summary of Findings
    • 6.3.1 Computer use, encounters with IT and computer literacy
    • 6.3.2 Anxiety and attitude as a result of experience with IT
    • 6.3.3 Managerial contributions, guidance, support and knowledge of e-learning
    • 6.3.4 Infrastructure and connectivity
    • 6.3.5 Learning preferences adapt with new skills
    • 6.3.6 Access to computer technology as origin of motivation
    • 6.3.7 The organisation holds the final key
  • 6.4 Conclusion Executive Summary
• Chapter Conclusion
  • 7.1 Overview of Study
    • 7.1.1 Introduction
    • 7.1.2 Overview
    • 7.1.3 Conclusion – e-Readiness of the warehouse worker
    • 7.2 Limitations of this study
    • 7.2.1 Methodological limitations
  • 7.2.2 Project limitations
  • 7.3 Value of the research
  • 7.4 Recommendations for further research
  • 7.5 Personal reflection of this study
    • 7.5.1 Learner expectations
    • 7.5.2 Dealing with cultural differences
    • 7.5.3 Personal reflection
  • 7.6 Final thoughts

GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT