Errors are an inevitable by-product of human labour. Therefore, organizational learning from errors should be regarded as a strategic goal of HR development. Despite a large number of studies on organizational learning from errors, a thorough understanding of error-related learning processes at work is still missing. In the present article, we present the results of a literature review that was used to derive an integrated model of organizational learning processes in the consequence of errors and to develop the questionnaire to assess the error-related learning climate in organizations. The questionnaire was evaluated on a sample of 383 employees of two companies. Confirmatory factor analyses support the suggested structure of error-related learning climate. Further analyses stress the relevance of constructive error handling in organizations by revealing substantial links between error-related learning climate and the effectiveness of error learning, self-perceptions and error-related behaviours of team members, as well as group cohesion and certain aspects of team performance.

Complex problem solving is challenging and a high-level cognitive process for individuals. When analyzing complex problem solving in teams, an additional, new dimension has to be considered, as teamwork processes increase the requirements already put on individual team members. After introducing an idealized teamwork process model, that complex problem solving teams pass through, and integrating the relevant teamwork skills for interdependently working teams into the model and combining it with the four kinds of team processes (transition, action, interpersonal and learning processes), the paper demonstrates the importance of fulfilling team process demands for successful complex problem solving within teams. Therefore, results from a controlled team study within complex situations are presented. The study focused on factors that influence action processes, like coordination, such as emergent states like collective orientation, cohesion and trust and that dynamically enable effective teamwork in complex situations. Before conducting the experiments, participants were divided by median split into two-person teams with either high (n=58) or low (n=58) collective orientation values. The study was conducted with the microworld C³Fire, simulating dynamic decision making and acting in complex situations within a teamwork context. The microworld includes interdependent tasks such as extinguishing forest fires or protecting houses. Two firefighting scenarios had been developed, which takes a maximum of 15 minutes each. All teams worked on these two scenarios. Coordination within the team and the resulting team performance were calculated based on a log-file analysis. The results show that no relationships between trust and action processes and team performance exist. Likewise, no relationships were found for cohesion. Only collective orientation of team members positively influences team performance in complex environments mediated by action processes such as coordination within the team. The results are discussed in relation to previous empirical findings and to learning processes within the team with a focus on feedback strategies.

In process automation, skill decay has not been investigated systematically. In two experimental studies, refresher interventions (RIs) were compared to support skill and knowledge retention of a start-up procedure on a simulated process control task. Based on theories of proceduralisation, the 'testing-effect' and mental practice, four different RIs were designed. In Study 1 (N = 68), two experimental groups (EGs) received either an RI called 'Practice' or an RI called 'Skill Demonstration'. Both RIs support skill retention, but the Skill Demonstration-RI performed with a higher mental workload. In Study 2 (N = 68), two EGs received an RI called 'Symbolic Rehearsal' or an RI called 'Procedural Knowledge Test', and aimed at supporting knowledge retention. Both EGs supported knowledge retention but showed moderate skill decay. Results imply that RIs affect skill and knowledge retention differently and should be applied in accordance with the task requirements and their dependence on accurate skill or knowledge maintenance.