|
 Revans
was careful not to define Action Learning in a rigid way.
He left the concept open for growth,
experimentation and development. Others have attempted
more definitive models. As a result, Action Learning teams operate
with a wide variety of formats on a wide range of problems. However,
most practitioners would agree on this
summary of basic elements.
Revans’ Learning Formula
Reg
Revans described Action Learning with the formula
L = P + Q, where Learning (L) occurs through Programmed
knowledge (P) and insightful Questioning (Q).
Traditional instruction, or “programmed knowledge” is appropriate
when we are faced with puzzles,
i.e., challenges that have a right answer. However, when we are
faced with
“problems”, challenges that have
no right answer, we need critical
reflection or questioning insight. Action learning
encourages such reflection by providing the support to enable people
to learn from challenges as well as from themselves and the group
itself.
There are substantial benefits of
learning on all these multiple levels.
-
The
knowledge is more likely to be transferable to other situations.
-
Participants engage in double loop learning. They not only learn
new facts but also investigate their own underlying assumptions
and mental models. They learn how to learn.
|
Learning Teams (Sets)
Action
Learning is
always a team effort. Revans
referred to these teams as “sets.” Team concepts had not been
developed when Revans did his original work.
The problem often lies outside the expertise and knowledge of
some or all of the team members. This is an important
part of the learning experience. A team consisting only of experts
in the area of the problem would be unlikely to
question basic assumptions and mental models.
Real Problems
The
team is given a
real problem and
they are expected to solve it.
Contrived classroom exercises are not compatible with Action
Learning. The problem should also be a
challenging problem, e.g. one of
those recurring, intractable problems that seem to haunt
organizations, a problem where everyone thinks they know the answer
but all the answers are different.
Learning Must Dominate
The
problems and situations undertaken by an Action Learning team are
genuine, important and difficult. However,
the learning experienced must always be the
primary goal. Solving the problem should be a happy but
collateral result. This is primarily what
distinguishes Action Learning from the typical Kaizen Event or task
force.
Problem solving
Procedure
The team
needs a formal problem solving procedure, another adaptation from
the early Work Simplification movement, figure 3. The
formal procedures prevent a rush to judgment
or knee-jerk responses. They
structure the process and focus attention towards the
immediate task. A number of such procedures are popular as part of
TQM and Six Sigma. In essence, they are similar and most provide an
adequate framework.
|
