Cheryl Brook

Some debates and challenges in the literature on action learning: the state of the art since Revans

Action learning has travelled in some new directions and become an evolving practice since Revans first articulated his great idea. This paper focuses on some key challenges in the literature, some of which relate to these more recent directions in theory and practice. In particular, we consider the persistent problem of defining action learning and the varieties in practice which are in evidence, the nature of ‘action’ in action learning and the developing theory and practice of critical action learning as contrasted with the ‘classical’ approach to action learning. These debates are chosen for consideration here because they appear to strike at the heart of what action learning is for and because they are in evidence across a range of action learning literature. Some implications of these debates for human resource development (HRD) are also considered, including the potential action learning has for making a contribution to organizational learning, especially in treating ‘wicked’ problems and ill-structured challenges.

On stopping doing those things that are not getting us to where we want to be: Unlearning, wicked problems and critical action learning

This article explores the idea of unlearning on the basis of empirical data drawn from 73 social workers’ accounts of addressing their problems and challenges in critical action learning sets. To address intractable or wicked problems, characterized by having multiple stakeholders with competing perspectives and by an absence of obvious solution, it may be necessary first to unlearn existing responses and to ask fresh questions to illuminate what is as yet unknown. Action learning privileges questions over solutions in seeking learning from action on organizational challenges, whilst critical action learning is a variety that employs insights from critical social theory to promote critical reflection and unlearning in this process. The article breaks new ground in claiming: first, that unlearning in the context of the wicked problems of social work is characterized less by the discarding of outmoded knowledge and routines and more by a critical unlearning that opens up new possibilities of not knowing and non-action; and second, that critical unlearning is much more likely to take place when supported by a deliberated and social process such as that provided by critical action learning.

Reflections on ‘creative’ action learning in business education: some issues in its theory and practice

The purpose of this paper is to consider some issues in the uses of what we have termed ‘creative’ action learning in a business education context, and to review some aspects of its practice. A review of the literature, including its use in higher education, is followed by a case illustration of its use in a UK business school with predominantly international students. Action learning is principally thought of as a human resource development practice and is widely used in a variety of public and private sector organisations. The focus here, however, is on the use of action learning in a business school setting and the application of specific creative thinking tools, in order to explore its potential for developing collaborative peer learning and support.

Doing right in business: can action learning develop moral sensitivity and promote ethical behaviour?

The question addressed in this paper is whether action learning as a management development technique can be more effective in promoting ethical decision-making than more traditional approaches. Recent examples of moral failures which have emerged in both corporate and public sector organisations in the UK during recent years have prompted a review of some of the literature about the teaching of business ethics in and by business schools. While the use of theoretical approaches to ethical analysis (such as consequentialist and deontological approaches), coupled with the discussion of scenarios or cases is a common way of structuring the teaching of business and organisational ethics, it may be limited as an approach insofar as it does not necessarily address the affective aspects of the learning process which contribute to the development of moral sensitivity and moral character. It is suggested that an action learning approach may help fill this gap, particularly if coupled with an Aristotelian focus on the development of moral character. Action learning as a technique seeks to replace instruction with facilitation, and to enable individual personal growth rather than the acquisition of knowledge. It emphasises practical action in the workplace and working with peers as part of an action learning set. The action learning method may be more suitable to fostering both technical/scientific wisdom (poeisis) and practical or prudential wisdom (phronesis) and could be adapted for use with both business students and practising managers.

Work-based learning in a business school context: Artefacts, contracts, learning and challenges

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to highlight some of the issues involved in ensuring that final year undergraduate students have a meaningful WBL experience as part of their business degree. It originated in discussions between the authors concerning varying attitudes towards the idea and practice of WBL in business schools. The study examines examples of artefacts produced for assessment, as well as perceptions of the practice of WBL through an exploration of the perspectives and views of students and employers. Material was also gathered from the reflections of the authors in their capacity as WBL supervisors. Design/methodology/approach – This paper draws on a qualitative research study which used semi-structured interviews to obtain views on a range of issues associated with WBL, including the nature and scope of what is learnt and acted upon in the workplace and the value of the learning contract. The data comprise semi-structured interviews with 13 graduates of a post-1992 UK university and w...

The Nurses Memorandum of 1938: a first step in the development of action learning?

ABSTRACT This article concerns the origins of the idea of action learning, especially the claim by Revans that his Memorandum on ‘The Entry of Girls into the Nursing Profession’ in Essex hospitals written in 1938 was the first step in the development of action learning. Whilst Revans repeatedly made this claim, there is no evidence in the actual words of the Memorandum to support it, and he never explained the basis for his belief. Why Revans saw this paper as a first step is therefore a mystery. In this paper we examine the circumstances of the production of the Memorandum to find possible answers. After discussing the evidence we conclude that Revans’ claim is based on the ideas and insights which occurred to him in 1938 in his research and thinking, rather than upon what he actually wrote. We also suggest some defining aspects of action learning can be traced back to ideas first stimulated in the research and production of the 1938 Memorandum, including the importance of first-hand knowledge in tackling organisational problems; the limitations of expert knowledge in complex conditions; the impact of hierarchy on the flow of knowledge; the importance of problem ownership in bring about action for improvement and the primacy of learning in the processes of problem-solving and innovation.

The innovation paradox: a selective review of the literature on action learning and innovation

ABSTRACT This paper explores selective literatures in the two fields of action learning and innovation, and seeks insights into the processes of, and connections between, innovation, engagement and implementation. We searched the action learning articles for references to innovation, beginning with the work of Revans, who highlights the innovation paradox, which becomes a key theme of this paper. We searched the very large innovation literature for references to innovation as a learning process and as a factor in organisational learning. The paper surveys the factors said to enable innovation, and briefly outlines some inhibitors, before considering Revans’ contribution to thinking about innovation. This is followed by a consideration of developments in action learning and innovation since Revans. The findings suggest that paradox theory is a useful way of thinking about innovation, conceived of as a practical problem involving resistances and frequent failures of implementation and adoption, and also propose action learning as a means of working with and addressing paradox. A limitation of this study is its lack of empirical data. Further research could usefully interrogate examples of innovation practices and ask such questions as to why innovation remains so elusive, and how innovative capacities and capabilities can be developed and enhanced.

‘I have no English friends’:some observations on the practice of action learning with international business students

This account reports on some experiences of facilitating action learning with international business students. Interest in international student learning and the international student experience is significant and increasing with a considerable range of literature on the subject. Some of this literature is concerned with the perceived ‘problems’ or ‘deficits’ which international learners are said to bring to the UK university experience. Elsewhere the benefits which international students bring to the learning process are more positively highlighted. This paper describes some of the experiences derived from implementing action learning with a number of sets of international postgraduate business and management students in an HE business school setting. Specifically, it considers how educational, learning and cultural differences, expectations and assumptions influence the student experience, and how collaborative learning can be developed.

Action learning as a cost-effective organisational development tool

The Accounts of Practice in this edition focus on action learning as an organisational development tool. The impetus of the first two comes from budget cuts and austerity measures with the need to provide management development cost effectively with results for the end users. Although set in a different context, the third account has remarkable similarities to the other two, outlining the use of action learning within a conventional academic programme in order to develop knowledge and skills through a blended learning approach. In Moving from Opportunism to Expediency When Introducing Action Learning into an Organisation, Bloodworth outlines his own journey of becoming a facilitator alongside an account of introducing action learning into his not for profit organisation. The aim was to enable people with learning disabilities and mental health needs in London to have more choice and control over their support. The impetus for introducing action learning stemmed from three factors focusing on increasing a person-centred approach, a pilot project and the need for cost-effective management and leadership development. Bloodworth describes his own journey from an opportunistic to expedient action learning facilitator introducing action learning as a vehicle to try out a relatively unused learning and development technique within the organisation. The initiative was successful from being a little known and understood concept to, six months further on, action learning is now playing an integral part of a new wider leadership development programme being rolled out across the organisation over the coming year. Bloodworth also reflects on the challenges in order to ensure action learning remains at the forefront of the organisation’s consciousness throughout and beyond the duration of the intervention. In the second account, Nurturing the H in HR: Using Action Learning to Build Organisation Development Capability in the UK Civil Service, Saville and Hale also outline an account in the face of reform and austerity measures. The focus is on an organisation development capability building programme delivered by the authors within the civil service to enable HR managers and other professionals to develop their capabilities in providing advice to their internal clients. Action learning sets were introduced to help participants to scope challenges and support one another through problem solving over a six-month period. In addition, a final report is written up by each participant leading to the award of postgraduate level credits. We hear from each author in turn reflecting on the process of the programme and the outcomes and

Accounts of Practice – action learning in differing contexts

The Accounts of Practice in this edition are set in very different contexts. Louise Doyle is concerned with action learning in a single organisation, an acute hospital trust; Christine Abbott and Cathy Mayes with Action Learning sets with social workers from across one British county; Michelle Blackburn offers an account of her experience as ‘flying faculty’ delivering action learning in two African countries, and Mike Pedler, Bernhard Hauser and Ghislaine Caulat with Virtual Action Learning, VAL, with participants who come from all over the world and who may never meet face-to-face. Yet these apparently very different contexts have much in common. Whatever the setting participants have to set the ground rules that they want to work within and learn how best to communicate with one another. They get better at sharing the time, listening to each other, asking good questions. They grow in confidence. But the four different settings for these accounts also illuminate from different angles the issues that must be addressed if sets are to work well. For example, in the account of action learning in Malawi and Swaziland the facilitator was mainly working from a distance. She found she had to find some way that took the sets beyond supporting the students in their planning and assessment activities and simply telling their ‘war stories’ which helped them understand each other better but did not always move them forward. She developed a ‘coaching approach’ to action learning. Borrowing from football, she found an inventive way of enabling the students to first listen to each story teller, and then help them work towards resolving their problems before taking their own turn. For the VAL sets the issues above are also compounded by remoteness of both the participants and the facilitators. In this case this reflects the dispersed nature of many people’s working lives. In this context the learning set also provides participants with an opportunity to talk to others in a way that may not otherwise be available. Some of the sets combine VAL with face-to-face meetings but one of the facilitators has found that there are advantages to remaining completely virtual using good quality headsets. She feels strongly that this promotes, in particular, good listening skills. For the participants in the hospital trust and the cross county social workers the action learning sets are part of wider organisational initiatives. In the trust the sets were seen as offering the possibility of marrying leadership development in individuals with enhancing the trust’s social capital. In the county council there was a belief that the development of more critically conscious