Published Online:

In this article, we explore how perceptions of other people’s exceptional success influence individuals’ motivation to learn—a relationship that has been surprisingly unexplored within the broad literature on learning in organizations. Our research reveals, across two distinct samples and methodologies, that an individual’s motivation to learn is higher when they perceive performance by another person to be more exceptionally successful, as compared to perceiving the other’s performance as a more “normal” success. We also observe, in line with prior research, marginal support for the notion that motivation to learn is higher when individuals perceive others’ performance as more of a failure; thereby suggesting a curvilinear relationship between perceived performance and motivation to learn. Our second study demonstrates that the relationship between others’ performance and the motivation to learn is mediated by interest and moderated by surprise. We discuss the implications of these results for provoking new theorizing, measurement, and practical implementation of learning in organizations.

Whiteboard Video Abstract


  • Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. 1996. Organizational learning II: Theory, method, and practice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Google Scholar
  • Bagiella, E., Sloan, R. P., & Heitjan, D. F. 2000. Mixed-effects models in psychophysiology. Psychophysiology, 37(1): 13–20. Google Scholar
  • Bamberger, P. A. 2018. AMD—Clarifying what we are about and where we are going. Academy of Management Discoveries, 4(1): 1–10.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Barrett, L. F. 2006. Solving the emotion paradox: Categorization and the experience of emotion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(1): 20–46. Google Scholar
  • Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. 2001. Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4): 323–370. Google Scholar
  • Bledow, R., Carette, B., Kühnel, J., & Pittig, D. 2017. Learning from others’ failures: The effectiveness of failure-stories for managerial learning. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 16(1): 39–53.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Borgatti, S. P., & Cross, R. 2003. A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Science, 49(4): 432–445. Google Scholar
  • Brown, A. D., & Starkey, K. 2000. Organizational identity and learning: A psychodynamic perspective. Academy of Management Review, 25(1): 102–120.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., & Quinn, R. E. 2003. Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline. San Francisco: Berrett-Keohler. Google Scholar
  • Cannon, M. D., & Edmondson, A. C. 2001. Confronting failure: Antecedents and consequences of shared beliefs about failure in organizational work groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2): 161–177. Google Scholar
  • Chandler, D., & Kapelner, A. 2013. Breaking monotony with meaning: Motivation in crowdsourcing markets. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 90: 123–133. Google Scholar
  • Cohen, M. D., & Bacdayan, P. 1994. Organizational routines are stored as procedural memory: Evidence from a laboratory study. Organization Science, 5(4): 554–568. Google Scholar
  • Collins, J. 2001. Good to great: Why some companies make the leap... and others don’t. New York, NY: Harper Business. Google Scholar
  • 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. Google Scholar
  • Colquitt, J. A., & Simmering, M. J. 1998. Conscientiousness, goal orientation, and motivation to learn during the learning process: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(4): 654–665. Google Scholar
  • Cooperrider, D. L., & Whitney, D. 2005. A positive revolution in change: Appreciative inquiry. In D. L. CooperriderD. WhitneyJ. M. Stavros (Eds.), Appreciative inquiry handbook: The first in a series of AI workbooks for leaders of change: 317–335. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Google Scholar
  • Cullen, J. B., Parboteeah, K. P., & Hoegl, M. 2004. Cross-national differences in managers’ willingness to justify ethically suspect behaviors: A test of institutional anomie theory. Academy of Management Journal, 47(3): 411–421.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Darley, J. M., & Fazio, R. H. 1980. Expectancy confirmation processes arising in the social interaction sequence. American Psychologist, 35(10): 867–881. Google Scholar
  • Dawson, J. F. 2014. Moderation in management research: What, why, when and how. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(1): 1–19. Google Scholar
  • Denrell, J. 2003. Vicarious learning, undersampling of failure, and the myths of management. Organization Science, 14(3): 227–243. Google Scholar
  • Denrell, J., Fang, C., & Zhao, Z. 2013. Inferring superior capabilities from sustained superior performance: A Bayesian analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 34(2): 182–196. Google Scholar
  • Denrell, J., & Liu, C. 2012. Top performers are not the most impressive when extreme perforance indicates unreliability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(24): 9331–9336. Google Scholar
  • Edmondson, A. C. 1999. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2): 350–383. Google Scholar
  • Ekman, P., Friesen, W. V., & Simons, R. C. 1985. Is the startle reaction an emotion? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(5): 1416–1426. Google Scholar
  • Erez, M., & Earley, P. C. 1993. Culture, self-identity, and work. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  • Escalas, J. E., & Stern, B. B. 2003. Sympathy and empathy: Emotional responses to advertising dramas. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(4): 566–578. Google Scholar
  • Gardiner, J. C., Luo, Z., & Roman, L. A. 2009. Fixed effects, random effects and GEE: What are the differences? Statistics in Medicine, 28(2): 221–239. Google Scholar
  • Hargadon, A. B. 2003. How breakthroughs happen: The surprising truth about how companies innovate. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Google Scholar
  • Hayes, A. F. 2013. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Google Scholar
  • Izard, C. E. 1977. Human emotions: Emotions, personality, and psychotherapy. New York, NY: Plenum Press. Google Scholar
  • Izard, C. E. 2007. Basic emotions, natural kinds, emotion schemas, and a new paradigm. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2(3): 260–280. Google Scholar
  • John, O. P., & Benet-Martínez, V. 2000. Measurement: Reliability, construct validation, and scale construction. In H. T. ReisC. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology: 339–369. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  • Joung, W., Hesketh, B., & Neal, A. 2006. Using “war stories” to train for adaptive performance: Is it better to learn from error or success? Applied Psychology, 55(2): 282–302. Google Scholar
  • KC, D., Staats, B. R., & Gino, F. 2013. Learning from my success and others’ failure: Evidence from minimally invasive cardiac surgery. Management Science, 59(11): 2435–2449. Google Scholar
  • Kopelman, S. 2020. Tit for tat and beyond: The legendary work of Anatol Rapoport. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 13: 60–84. Google Scholar
  • Kotsch, W. E., Gerbing, D. W., & Schwartz, L. E. 1982. The construct validity of the Differential Emotions Scale as adapted for children and adolescents. In C. E. Izard (Ed.), Measuring emotions in infants and children: 251–278. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  • Lewin, K., Dembo, T., Festinger, L., & Sears, P. S. 1944. Level of aspiration. In J. M. Hunt (Ed.), Personality and the behavior disorders, vol. 1: 333–378. New York, NY: Ronald Press Company. Google Scholar
  • Lilien, G. L., Morrison, P. D., Searls, K., Sonnack, M., & von Hippel, E. 2002. Performance assessment of the lead user idea-generation process for new product development. Management Science, 48(8): 1042–1059. Google Scholar
  • Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. 1990. A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Google Scholar
  • Mead, G. H. 1934. Mind, self and society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
  • Meyer, W.-U., Reisenzein, R., & Schützwohl, A. 1997. Toward a process analysis of emotions: The case of surprise. Motivation and Emotion, 21(3): 251–274. Google Scholar
  • Mitchell, M. 1993. Situational interest: Its multifaceted structure in the secondary school mathematics classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3): 424–436. Google Scholar
  • Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. 2005. Mplus user’s guide (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén. Google Scholar
  • Myers, C. G. 2018. Coactive vicarious learning: Toward a relational theory of vicarious learning in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 43(4): 610–634.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Noe, R. A. 1986. Trainees’ attributes and attitudes: Neglected influences on training effectiveness. Academy of Management Review, 11(4): 736–749.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Noe, R. A., & Schmitt, N. 1986. The influence of trainee attitudes on training effectiveness: Test of a model. Personnel Psychology, 39(3): 497–523. Google Scholar
  • Noordewier, M. K., & Breugelmans, S. M. 2013. On the valence of surprise. Cognition and Emotion, 27(7): 1326–1334. Google Scholar
  • Nordstrom, R., Lorenzi, P., & Hall, R. V. 1991. A review of public posting of performance feedback in work settings. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 11(2): 101–124. Google Scholar
  • O’Keefe, D. J. 2003. Message properties, mediating states, and manipulation checks: Claims, evidence, and data analysis in experimental persuasive message effects research. Communication Theory, 13(3): 251–274. Google Scholar
  • Orr, J. E. 1996. Talking about machines: An ethnography of a modern job. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Google Scholar
  • Pajares, F., Hartley, J., & Valiante, G. 2001. Response format in writing self-efficacy assessment: Greater discrimination increases prediction. Measurement & Evaluation in Counseling & Development, 33(4): 214–221. Google Scholar
  • Parker, S. K., & Axtell, C. M. 2001. Seeing another viewpoint: Antecedents and outcomes of employee perspective taking. Academy of Management Journal, 44(6): 1085–1100.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Pascale, R. T., Sternin, J., & Sternin, M. 2010. The power of positive deviance: How unlikely innovators solve the world’s toughest problems. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Publishing. Google Scholar
  • Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. 1991. Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar
  • Pratt, M. G., & Barnett, C. K. 1997. Emotions and unlearning in amway recruiting techniques: Promoting change through “safe” ambivalence. Management Learning, 28(1): 65–88. Google Scholar
  • Quinn, R. W., & Bunderson, J. S. 2016. Could we huddle on this project? Participant learning in newsroom conversations. Journal of Management, 42(2): 386–418. Google Scholar
  • Reisenzein, R. 2000. The subjective experience of surprise. In H. BlessJ. P. Forgas (Eds.), The message within: The role of subjective experience in social cognition and behavior: 262–279. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press. Google Scholar
  • Siemsen, E., Roth, A., & Oliveira, P. 2010. Common method bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3): 456–476. Google Scholar
  • Silvia, P. J. 2005. What is interesting? Exploring the appraisal structure of interest. Emotion, 5(1): 89–102. Google Scholar
  • Silvia, P. J. 2008. Interest—The curious emotion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(1): 57–60. Google Scholar
  • Simonsohn, U. 2018. Two lines: A valid alternative to the invalid testing of U-shaped relationships with quadratic regressions. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(4): 538–555. Google Scholar
  • Spreitzer, G. M., Myers, C. G., Kopelman, S., & Mayer, D. M. 2019.The conceptual and empirical value of a positive lens: An invitation to organizational scholars to develop novel research questions. Academy of Management Perspectives. Published online ahead of print. doi:10.5465/amp.2015.0056. Google Scholar
  • Stam, D. A., Van Knippenberg, D., & Wisse, B. 2010. The role of regulatory fit in visionary leadership. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(4): 499–518. Google Scholar
  • Starbuck, W. H. 1993. Keeping a butterfly and an elephant in a house of cards: The elements of exceptional success. Journal of Management Studies, 30(6): 885–921. Google Scholar
  • Staw, B. M., Barsade, S. G., & Koput, K. W. 1997. Escalation at the credit window: A longitudinal study of bank executives’ recognition and write-off of problem loans. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1): 130–142. Google Scholar
  • Thoits, P. A. 1989. The sociology of emotions. In W. R. ScottJ. Blake (Eds.), Annual review of sociology, vol. 15: 317–342. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews. Google Scholar
  • Van de Ven, A. J., Polley, D., Garud, R., & Venkataraman, S. 1999. The innovation journey. New York, NY: Oxford Press. Google Scholar
  • Vroom, V. H. 1964. Work and motivation. New York, NY: John Wiley. Google Scholar
  • Weick, K. E. 1993. The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(4): 628–652. Google Scholar
  • Weick, K. E. 1995. Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
  • Weick, K. E. 2007. The generative properties of richness. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1): 14–19.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Weick, K. E., & Ashford, S. J. 2001. Learning in organizations. In F. M. JablinL. L. Putnam (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods: 704–731. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
  • Westen, D., Pavel, B., Harenski, K., Kilts, C., & Hamann, S. 2006. Neural bases of motivated reasoning: An fMRI study of emotional constraints on partisan political judgment in the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18(11): 1947–1958. Google Scholar
  • Willink, J., & Babin, L. 2017. Extreme ownership: How U.S. Navy SEALs lead and win. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press. Google Scholar
  • Wood, R. E., & Bandura, A. 1989. Social cognitive theory of organizational management. Academy of Management Review, 14(3): 361–384.LinkGoogle Scholar
  Academy of Management
  100 Summit Lake Drive, Suite 110
  Valhalla, NY 10595, USA
  Phone: +1 (914) 326-1800
  Fax: +1 (914) 326-1900
Academy of Management