I'd just add that the learner should have a thorough understanding of business issues, where the business fits in the competitive landscape, and business intelligence impacting that fit. But I don't separate learning from that larger understanding. And, for that mattter, learning developers in organizations should be intimately involved in these issues as well since these are the critical elements of the performance and task analysis that form the heart of instructional design. Training and informal learning should always be about that bigger picture; they're not separate except as currently implemented.
I think Peter's point is important, to keep learners hooked into that bigger picture,the learner should be responsible for his/her own talent management (though this can be nurtured and supported by management). The ideal of LAK is to keep the worker/learner a self-directed participant in the work culture in order to give the learner a sense that he/she has some ownership in the business (and no, LAK is not currently implemented that way, either in education or in organizations).