Action learning comes of age: questioning action learning

Abstract

Action learning is a process of reflection and action, aimed at improving effectiveness of action where learning is an important outcome. Its purpose is to learn from experience in order to act more wisely. It can be used wherever a group can support the learning of others in a context where it is possible to learn from experience.The authors of this article are all experienced participants and set advisers in action learning. We have come to the conclusion that now is the time to question where and for whom action learning might not work. As advocates of action learning, we have helped it to make inroads into higher education alongside more traditional models of learning. It is felt that action learning is now robust enough to take care of itself if we stand back and reflect on our experience to seek the limits of the method.Action learning has reached a maturity which allows us to ask the question "what can go wrong?" without feeling disloyal to its principles. We believe that the case for action learning has now been established in principle and the focus can now be shifted to improving the practice. By sharing our mistakes as well as our successes, we can discover where and with whom it works best and, in this way, we can learn to do action learning better. This is in the spirit of action learning: looking for the obstacles rather than basking in the successes.

The troublesome relationship between action learning and organizational growth

“…What we see in practice is that when action learning programs are evaluated, they seem to have led to personal growth but not very often to organizational growth (Harrison, 1996;Wallace, 1990). At the same time, we find more and more articles in the literature questioning the effectiveness of current action learning programs and asking for a reconsideration of the method, so that its future performance may be enhanced (Bourner et al, 1996;Pedler, 1997;Vince and Martin, 1993;Weinstein, 1994). A problem is that the theoretical underpinnings of action learning are rather scarce (Revans (1971), is basically still the only book to date ± although Yorks et al (2000) contains some interesting contributions as well), and many books and articles that are published on the subject are comprised of certain``tricks of the trade'' or practical guidelines for setting up à`s uccessful'' action learning program (Inglis, 1994;McGill and Beaty, 1992;Weinstein, 1999).…”

Using action learning to support doctoral students to develop their teaching practice

“…Cusins (1995) suggested five possible group behaviours that can hinder effective action learning: bullying; blocking all ideas; using jokes to avoid real issues; withdrawal from the process; and members who don't get to the point. Bourner, Beaty, Lawson and O'Hara (1996) also examined reasons why ALGs had not been effective and, again, group behaviours (including that of the facilitator) were central to the problems. All of these difficulties can be managed by effective facilitation and the use of the ground rules agreed upon by the group.…”

Management control bij action learning

“…Daardoor zouden bedrijven die werken met action learning substantiële voordelen kunnen opdoen ten opzichte van hun concurrenten, en al doende vorm kunnen geven aan een 'lerende organisatie' (Weinstein, 1999). Internationaal onderzoek heeft uitgewezen dat action learning-programma's doorgaans weliswaar hebben geleid tot persoonlijke groei van degenen die erin geparticipeerd hebben, maar minder vaak tot organisatiegroei (Bourner et al, 1996;Harrison, 1996;Wallace, 1990;Weinstein, 1994). Desondanks zijn er anno 2003 veel Nederlandse bedrijven (waaronder Corus, Van Gend & Loos, Euro Express en Wolters-Kluwer Nederland) die, al dan niet in onderling verband, met action learning werken.…”