There is the mindset that recruiting and retaining younger, talented yet less expensive workers is a practice that is better suited for managers from comparable generations who understand what motivates workers by generation (Young, 2008). There is also the theories of how contingency-based leadership as defined by Fielder and others (Fielder, Mahar, 1979) have also shown how metrics can define the goodness of fit between a given manager's leadership style and the needs of the organizations they serve. Finally the use of balanced scorecard (BSC) methodologies has a significant impact on how companies measure the retention and growth in skills of employees over time. The metrics in each of these cases is managed to a series of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and measured for variance over time to ensure managers stay on track towards their goals. 2. How do we learn? Identify and discuss the theories to explain the process by which we acquire patterns of behavior. Be sure to specifically identify the key elements of each of these theories by name.

There are dozens of theories that explain how people learn with the majority of peer-reviewed research concentrating on the areas of learning by observation and self-efficacy, behaviorism, cognitivism, and social learning. Theorists have also worked to create frameworks that encompass learned behavior in the context of strategic planning as well (Hunt, Sorenson, 2001). This is highly relevant in industries marked by rapid and abrupt changes in their structure and their competitiveness, as is evidenced by Freestyle Semiconductor for example. Each of these theories of how patterns of behavior are learned also must concentrate on the extent to which collaboratively-based information sharing and intelligence can provide competitive advantages over time as...

Learning by observation assumes the level of innate motivation is present in an employee and that the guidance being receives is accurate given the task at hand. Learning by observation is most successful in self-efficacy scenarios where employees have internalized the objectives of their positions and can readily see the value of the learned behavior. Behaviorism however relies more on observation and the quantifying of it without regard to the attitudes, beliefs and values of the employee. How this affects learned behaviors in organizations is therefore limited it is value as it does not accurately gauge motivation that is innate, only observed. As a result it is often seen as one of several strategies for defining learning programs in organizations, and is also one that is often seen as only part of a potential solution set. Additional insight is needed to define a more complete strategy for enabling organizational development for the long-term.
Cognitivism is in direct contrast to behaviorism in that its key components are entirely internalized within the learner. The information processing is entirely internal and therefore not measurable through observation, only through attitudinal questionnaires and other forms of interviews over time. There is the need for managing retention strategies based on this aspect, measured through a series of questionnaires and internal assessments to ensure that retention programs are resonating and seen as relevant with key contributors. There is also the aspect of cognitivism being more of a continual development cycle that is recursive in nature; there is a continual focus on how to create the greatest learning experience from the standpoint of relevancy to key contributors based on their perceptions alone. This is inherently more challenging and