Following the action in action learning: towards ethnomethodological studies of (critical) action learning

Action learning is a pedagogical practice that helps participants learn by talking about their workplace action with fellow participants (‘comrades in adversity’) in their action learning set. This paper raises questions about the action in action learning, such as: how do members of an action learning set learn from and through each other? How do they learn through their developing conversation and interaction?

To answer such questions, I argue that, ‘ethnomethodology’ (the study of ‘member's methods’ or ‘folk methods’ for doing any kind of practical action) is useful for showing the intricacy of the practical learning process in action learning, as in learning in action, more generally. The paper illustrates the conversational and interactional work of members doing things and learning together in action (for example discovering things in science and in board meetings); and argues that this approach may also be used to study action learning in practice.     

Issues in action learning: a critical realist interpretation

The purpose of this paper is to argue that the perspective of ‘critical realism’ has considerable potential for moving forward the theory and practice of action learning. The paper addresses three questions: (1) Does action learning emphasise the individual or the collective? (2) Can action learning be thought of as critical, but should it also be the subject of criticism? (3) What gets carried forward from action learning by way of learning? Critical realism is argued to be illuminative of these issues; this involves dealing with ontological questions – what is there out there to learn about – as well as epistemological ones – how can this be learned about. It also involves seeing the world as an open system with emergent properties rather than the predictable machine of the positivist approach and the ‘nothing but a sea of meaning’ of the extreme social constructionist approach. The conclusions are that: (1) Yes, it can, and should, focus on both. Individual and organisational foci (one form of the individual-collective question) for action learning are compatible and reconcilable, though often with difficulty. (2) Yes to critical approach of and from action learning, which is its true intent. Suggestions are made on how to do this in an ultimately constructive way. (3) There are several answers to this, the ability to learn, ‘mechanisms’ that can but may not necessarily work in future situations, depending on circumstance and ‘state of play’ information.     

Exploring criticality in management education through action learning

The field of management education has been the focus of much debate in recent times. Issues relating to the real world and a lack of relevancy in business schools have caused much of this debate. In particular, questions have been raised regarding why business schools should endeavour to bridge this relevancy gap? However, it is important to define what is meant by relevance. How we define relevance has implications for all stakeholders of management education. As a result, this raises questions about the content and process of management education. For example, how applicable are the alternative approaches to management education such as action learning. How does such an approach translate into the professional practice of educators? What are the benefits and challenges of engaging in such an approach? In particular, what impact does it have for both management educators and their students? When we question what and how we teach it has the potential to open up new questions to be explored and insights to be revealed. This paper reveals a side of management education that is ever present in the philosophy and practice of action-learning practitioners. By exploring the impact of their practice it can inform our understanding and shape future practice. Management education like all education should be open to such exploration. Such an exploration is both timely and relevant for today's educators, students, managers and ultimately society.     

Leaders behaving badly: using power to generate undiscussables in action learning sets

‘Undiscussables’ are topics associated with threat or embarrassment that are avoided by groups, where that avoidance is also not discussed. Their deleterious effect on executive groups has been a point of discussion for several decades. More recently critical action learning (AL) has brought a welcome focus to power relations within AL sets. This paper brings these two streams of research together by exploring the relationship between undiscussables and the exercise of power by AL leaders. Analysis of statements and actions at times of negative affect in various AL sets over a two-year period showed three distinct categories of activities of AL set leaders that seemed effective in generating undiscussables within the set. It is argued that each of these categories represented an exercise of power by AL set leaders as they accessed privilege associated with their rank. Also proposed is that these activities seemed to be done without awareness by the AL set leader, with that lack of awareness being central to achieving the result of undiscussables. The paper concludes by inviting both AL set leaders and members to consider the described activities as a means of growing awareness about their role in generating undiscussables.     

Animating critical action learning: process-based leadership and management development

Increasing attention is focusing on the value of critical approaches to enhancing leadership and management development processes. This paper examines how a critical action learning perspectives can be harnessed to produce valuable learning and development through critically reflective practise. Critical action learning approaches not only explore underlying power and control issues, but actively engage in an examination of political and cultural processes affecting leadership development. The aims of this paper are to explore approaches to critical action learning, to elucidate its principal features, to highlight how it can be applied in leadership and management development contexts and, finally, to illuminate some of the complexities and challenges of working with critical action learning in practice.     

Developing an action learning design model

As the number of organizations implementing action learning increases, both successful and failed cases also increase in action learning practice in South Korea. Existing studies on action learning have listed key success factors of action learning at the program level or at the team level but have not paid sufficient attention to the program design process itself. The purpose of this study was to show how to develop a design model of action learning that incorporates a step-by-step decision-making process and that provides design principles necessary along the way. This design model will present the importance of contextualizing the action learning process by asking ‘highly required’ questions and help raise the level of successful implementation of action learning programs.     

Psychological climates in action learning sets: a manager's perspective

Action learning (AL) is often viewed as a process that facilitates professional learning through the creation of a positive psychological climate [Marquardt, M. J. 2000. “Action Learning and Leadership.” The Learning Organisation 7 (5): 233–240; Schein, E. H. 1979. “Personal Change Through Interpersonal Relationships.” In Essays in Interpersonal Dynamics, edited by W. Bennis, J. Van Maanen, E. H. Schein, and F. I. Steele, 129–162]. A psychological climate that fosters an environment in which learning set members feel psychologically safe enough to reflect upon both the successes and the failures in their professional life, without any form of repercussion. However, there has been little attention given to the ways that that psychological climate develops, and the differing facets that create that climate. In response to such deficit, this paper reports the outcomes of interviews with 11 managers, all of whom are former AL set (ALS) members, on their experiences of ALS membership. Drawing upon an interpretivist philosophy, the paper explores the key themes that emerged from the analysis of those interviews. The analysis serves to illustrate the differing facets that collectively contribute to the creation of a positive psychological climate that is conducive for learning. The analysis points to the relative importance of such facets as trust, honesty, vulnerability, reciprocity, confidentiality and personal disclosure, all of which have the capacity to lead to a positive psychological climate in ALSs. This paper is useful for developing an understanding of the differing facets in ALSs that create a psychological climate conducive for learning. As such, it has utility for AL facilitators, set members, academics and educational consultants.     

Action learning: the possibility of differing hierarchies in learning sets

This paper presents the proposition that a variety of differing hierarchies exist in an action learning set at any one time, and each hierarchy has the potential to affect an individual's behaviour within the set. An interpretivist philosophy underpins the research framework adopted in this paper. Data were captured by means of 11 in-depth interviews that formed part of wider research into set members' perceptions of what makes an effective action learning set. The interviewees were all former students of the researcher and her colleagues. The research draws upon grounded theory as a dominant research paradigm and uses thematic analysis to interpret the research findings. The findings of the research serve to simply illustrate that there is the potential for a variety of differing hierarchies to exist in an action learning set at any one time. Some of the hierarchies may exist for the full duration of the set; others are somewhat ephemeral. The findings from this research also present themselves as points of consideration for academics and practioners who have used or are about to use action learning as a learning vehicle.     

Developing self-managed action learning (SMAL)

This article provides an account of self-managed action learning (SMAL), where it came from and how it has been implemented in practice. Self-managed action learning offers a way of realising action learning without the continuing presence of a set advisor in set meetings to facilitate the process. It enables participants to manage and facilitate their own set meetings. The article provides a rationale for self-managed action learning and reports on how it was tested in action in a relatively benign context and then tested again in more challenging circumstances. It concludes with consideration of potential pitfalls and its further use.     

Workplace learning as a spiritual practice

This paper reviews the literature on workplace and transformational learning to explore how spirituality can be accessed to encourage individual growth through the development of critical awareness while providing a sense of direction in the workplace as part of organisational learning. In communities and societies where organisations may have replaced religious institutions as centres for adult learning, the workplace continues to respond to the universal need for community and support. These elements are related to spiritual values. Still, leaders of organisations need to consider values that underlie typical workplace activities and recognise how collective engagement and workplace interactions direct personal development and ground identity. Providing opportunities to reflect on meaning and direction at work supports a transformative approach to learning and leadership that promotes cooperative working conditions, conscious behaviour and informed citizenship through encouraging attitudes of critical awareness, praxis and collective engagement in workplace interaction.     

Insider research as part of a master's programme: opportunities lost and found within action learning sets

This account explores the role of action learning during and after an educational programme. We focus on the final stage of a master's programme and the insider research that is a key feature in many UK universities. Researching within one's own organization should lead to individual and organizational learning. However, there is relatively little published on how, indeed if, this learning occurs. Our account contributes to this gap and in doing so draws attention to the ethical and political challenges which can arise when undertaking research within one's own organization. We present the tale of two sets, one during and one after an educational programme. In doing so, we highlight the tensions involved in integrating learning with problem-solving. We illustrate how learning which seemed initially to be lost was later found through action learning.     

Turning to case studies as a mechanism for learning in action learning

Case studies are a useful means of capturing and sharing experiential knowledge by allowing researchers to explore the social, organisational and political contexts of a specific case. Although accounts of action learning are often reported using a case study approach, it is not common to see individual case studies being used as a learning practice within action learning sets. Drawing on a network action learning (NAL) project, this paper explores how the process of coaching, articulating, authoring, sharing and editing case studies provided a vehicle for learning and research within a NAL set. The intended contribution of this paper to the theory of action learning is to extend the range of learning practices to include the case study within the NAL set. It discusses how case studies act as boundary objects, which are artefacts that can be used to cross boundaries between groups in order to facilitate learning that might not otherwise occur.     

Enhancing postgraduate learning and development: a participatory action learning and action research approach through conferences

As supervisors who advocate the transformational potential of research both to generate theory and practical and emancipatory outcomes, we practice participatory action learning and action research (PALAR). This paper offers an illustrative case of how supervision practices based on action learning can foster emancipatory and lifelong learning within a university context that is becoming ever more focused on throughput of students, rather than on the quality of their learning. Conference attendance offers an excellent opportunity for postgraduate students to develop as researchers and lifelong learners, yet anxiety often prevents them from making the most of the learning experience. We explain how we encouraged the development of capabilities in students through a PALAR support programme that assisted postgraduate students prepare for a conference to make overall participation, presenting a paper and subsequent publication a true learning experience. We generated and analysed data from the written reflections of 11 postgraduate students who participated in the programme. The findings suggest that action learning, specifically PALAR, can be used to enable a rich learning experience for postgraduate students attending conferences through fostering relationships, building trust, a supportive environment, collaboration, communication and competence among them. Postgraduate students who experienced our PALAR support programme developed not only skills, knowledge, confidence and deeper appreciation of learning opportunities through conferences, but also understanding of the principles of PALAR that apply not just to the conference context but across all aspects of learning and research and life at large.     

Linking action learning and inter-organisational learning: the learning journey approach

The article presents and illustrates the learning journey (LJ) – a new management development approach to inter-organisational learning based on observation, reflection and problem-solving. The LJ involves managers from different organisations and applies key concepts of action learning and systemic organisational development. Made up of practitioners from 6 to 8 organisations, the LJ visits each of the organisations to explore management practices, taking into account their particular organisational context and challenges. Following a sequence of (a) becoming aware of the particular organisational context, (b) learning about established management practices and (c) working on a current challenge as ‘comrades in adversity’, the article introduces and illustrates the LJ approach. The article closes with a discussion of the approach's challenges and implications for research on – and development of – inter-organisational learning processes.     

Using action research and action learning for entrepreneurial network capability development

This paper applies an action research (AR) design and action learning (AL) approach to network capability development in an entrepreneurial context. Recent research suggests that networks are a viable strategy for the entrepreneurial firm to overcome the liabilities associated with newness and smallness. However, a gap emerges as few, if any, studies have examined the process and challenges in developing and using network capability to generate advantage through collaboration with network actors. In recognising that capabilities are developed rather than acquired, this paper address this theoretical gap and contributes to literature by tracing the development of network capability in an entrepreneurial context. A further contribution of the paper is in applying an AR design and AL sets as a method for capability development for the entrepreneurial firm. Findings suggest that, although network capability is of use, to develop the ability to use it requires a change in the market making perceptions of the entrepreneur from an independence mind-set to a more collaborative, interdependent one. Our research also supports the applicability of AL as an intervention strategy to promote action and learning among entrepreneurs for capability development, fitting the learning preferences of the nascent venture. For practitioners, evolving towards an interdependent mind-set facilitates network capability use and has the potential to relieve some of the resource pressure on entrepreneurs by providing them with strategic routes through their existing and potential network ties. For the entrepreneurship literature, a benefit stemming from this study is in introducing AR in its design and AL sets as an invention strategy in addition to developing theory in relation to network capability development.     

Student accounts of action learning on a DBA programme: learning inaction

This account of practice sets out the action learning experience of three doctoral students on the same Doctoral Programme in Business Administration at a UK university. It also include the sense-making of a fourth member of the set. It explores the tension between their area of work and their engagement in the action learning process and, in so doing, contributes to the ongoing debate about the relative priority of learning and problem-solving in action learning. The account narrates the students’ personal accounts of their involvement with the action learning set (ALS), what they felt worked and what did not before reflecting on their personal contributions as hybrid practitioner-learners. Insights into the experience are offered up to illuminate the function and purpose of the ALS within a management education programme.     

Reflections on a failed action learning intervention

This paper reflects on the failure of a recent action learning intervention with a UK television company. The aim of the project was to gain insight into the reasons why the viewing figures of their factual programming channels were in decline and to develop a new strategy enabled by the action learning methodology. Unfortunately, this intervention was not successful and resulted in the project being cancelled after only one set meeting. The purpose of this paper is to reflect on the reasons for this failure and to share my thoughts with others in the action learning community. The paper concludes that the reasons for this failed intervention were due to: my presence being considered by some set members as a threat to their credibility; a resistance to engage in the process of assumption breaking and reflective practice; and due to the perceived time it takes to apply the action learning methodology.     

The role of the blended action learning facilitator: an enabler of learning and a trusted inquisitor

This paper reports on a research study that involved the use of blended action learning to support leadership development within the New Zealand education sector. An important contributor to the success of this technology-enabled approach to professional learning was the role taken by the blended action learning facilitator. Two complementary aspects of this role were: enabling learning, the main focus of which was encouraging participation in online interactions; and acting as a trusted inquisitor, a process involving both supporting and challenging participants in their leadership learning. This study found that the balance between these two roles varied over the course of the blended action learning groups and this led to the identification of five distinct stages of blended action learning facilitation.     

Learning action learning: a journey

The action learning set (ALS) is an often-used tool in practice development to facilitate group reflection. As such, its use evolves in the hands of the participants as they become more comfortable with the process and as trust develops amongst group members. This paper aims to discuss the journey of one ALS over a 2-year period. It seeks to highlight the process of learning through an ALS and the complexity of making the process meaningful for the participants. The role of trust within an ALS cannot be overstated. This was an imperative factor in the overall effectiveness of the set.