Action learning litrature review

The review will focus on action learning within the corporate sector organizations as the author of this review is attentive to the application of action learning within the private sector organizations. The overall trends commanded by the literature is constructive influence given the many instances where action learning has produced excellent outcomes for the organization and individuals. Action Learning has been much more than a problem solving tool for organizations, but also a tool for strategic thinking, especially for leaders to make important business decisions, creation of management teams that are rich social networks to take more tactically aligned actions, and to create organizational cultures that shifts from change resistance to becoming agile and customer focused, and effective leadership development, by utilizing an organization's complicated challenges as focal points for management development.

Methodology most applied is inquiry based, where learning is enhanced by the various experiences of participants, and action learning sets, that are structural methods to enable a group address complex issues by working collaboratively. This literature review also captures the array of challenges of action learning, especially as experienced by those who handle action learning approaches, and point out the causes of the challenges experienced. Challenges This review is therefore sectioned to correspond with the outlined themes above. Therefore, one of the main reasons for this review is to understand what is currently described and sold as action learning, and its application to organization development. Action learning: Definition, History and Development Reginald Revans, considered the father of action learning, never gave a single definition of action learning, maintaining that there is no one way to what he described as "ancient wisdom”, he rather described it in terms of what it is not.

(McGill and Beaty 1995, p. 21) defined it as "a continuous process of learning and reflection, supported by colleagues, with the intention of getting things done," similarly, (Inglis 1994, p. Its vision was a mixture of learning individual actions and systems change, but this has been regarded as controversial and going against the prescription of traditional managers, thereby contributing to its turbulent history (Pedler et al. Action Learning is considered a powerful management tool for developing leaders, solving problems, building teams and transforming organizations (Marquardt 2013; Dessler 2013, p. 288), ranks action learning as one of the most widely used on-the-job managerial training methods, which is substantiated by (Foy 1977), who describes action learning as an in-house training program for managers to learn by experience. It is among the most utilized interventions for leadership and organization development (Dillworth and Boshyk 2010; O'Neill and Marsick 2007; Pedler 2011) more than 50 percent of action learning cases are used as equipment for leadership and organization development in various contexts as indicated by (Park, Kong, Valencic, and Cho 2012), content analysis of 127 action learning cases published in Action Learning: Research and Practice between 2004 and 2012.

Many action learning frameworks, according to (Raelin 2008; Revans 1982, 2011) focus on the combination of two recurring themes of real, work-based issues and team learning. Participants enhance their competencies both in content knowledge and practical skills. They learn problem solving strategies, effective communication and decision making, leadership skills and conflict management. Action Learning encourages questioning, reflection and feedback to generate transformational learning and effective solutions in problem solving processes. Action Learning coaches or facilitators provide assistance to enhance leadership skills, problem solving, critical analysis, reflection and feedback processing. These components by Cho and Bong, almost corresponds to (Marquardt 2011, p. The learning equation is provided as: L = P + Q In which "P" is programmed knowledge, "Q" is Questioning insight. (Revans 2011, p. 3) is more interested in the Q.

(Mann et al. 2004) diversified this equation, and repurposed "Q" to be the skill to renew trust, and "P" as a skill to strengthen independence. • Systematic learning, discovery of patterns in experienced problems and turn them into systematic change. Action sets remain its distinctive feature, the sets help each other commit to working in teams, pick challenges or opportunities that appeal to the members of the group, evaluate individual perception of the challenge, take action, support and challenge one another and reflect on and learn from their experiences. The action learning sets form the basis of the methodology applied in the process of action learning. Revans approach was based on what he described as "general theory of human action" which comprised of three interacting systems: 1.

Alpha - the strategy system comprising of the external environment, available internal resources and managerial value systems. This is the reason for some literature reviewed suggesting that the facilitator should be a senior manager or supervisor from the management body of the organization, while some suggest that sets should be tailored to the needs of the target audience and designed to need as little external facilitation as possible. Revans argued that the need for a facilitator was contrary to the philosophy of action learning, according to him a facilitator was only necessary to launch the set into quick discussion, he disagreed with the idea of set facilitation as a profession, because action learning would become a package quality, that could be propagated and sold.

Facilitation skills can be learned through formal preparatory skills (O'Hara et al 2004) which is contrary to the belief that people can learn facilitation skill from being members of the set themselves. According to (O'Hara et al 2004) quality control of any action learning set can be problematic, and rests for the most part on the trust in the skills and professionalism of the facilitator. Action Learning program implementation can be very difficult, and requires support (Marquardt 2011, p. Implement the action strategies 11. Assess, capture and transfer the participants, group and organisational learnings 12. Make action learning part of the corporate culture This guideline is supported by several other literatures. Benefits and Limitations of Action Learning as Methodology for Organization Development Action Learning presents many benefits for the organization as a methodology for problem solving and organization development.

Through action learning, set participants are able to solve long-standing problems that could not be solved by simple training while developing their leadership abilities (Lanahan and Maldonado 1998). Provide structured peer support. Enable more disciplined ways of working in powerful teams. Enable individuals and teams to learn while working. Build leadership competencies. Develop systems thinking, creativity, and flexibility and problem-solving skills. Bring something along that you already know how to do. Keep quiet about tour real issues. Turn up infrequently to meeting. Do not take any action between set meetings. Do not reflect. Action learning works mostly in two ways in the organization (Gifford 2005), that is; breaking barriers, in which action learning is applied to break barriers between department and sections and enable them, work collaboratively.

This is achieved by having the action learning set consist of members from different sections and working sub-cultures, to have a wholesome experience and understanding of the organization. Secondly, resolving key issues, action learning can enable taking stock of the organization, therefore identifying key matters, and dealing with them effectively, by (Marquardt 2005) account, companies such as Boeing, Du Point, Motorola and Nokia have looked to action learning to deal with pressing problems and develop leadership. In the academic sector, action learning has been applied extensively, (Gifford 2005, p. 3) examine the application of action learning in Lancaster University, especially the adoption of action learning sets as a component of learning design on some of its MBA programs. Change agent, ability to gain learning and take action from action learning that will effect change in the individual participant and the organization.

Innovator and risk-taker, ability to push the boundaries of comfort zones and formulate novel sustainable ideas, thinking and systems. Servant and steward, desire to serve others, support others, yet challenge them. Polychronic coordinator, ability to effectively manage synergies and integrate many organizational elements all at the same time. Teacher, mentor, coach and learner, willingness to learn and share knowledge to improve colleagues and the organization in general. (Cho 2011) provides the case study of Daelim Industrial Co. Ltd and Hyundai Oilbank application of action learning for organization development, and the growing application of action learning in South Korea. Organizational culture contributes to huge part of organization development, and action learning can be used for the creation of an agile and customer focused organization culture that on the other hand is flexible, therefore not resistant to change.

Action Learning is also applied in nursing education to encourage clinical nurses to reflect on and learn from clinical experiences (Haddock 1997). It improves the clinical comprehension ability of learners. According to (Dick1997), "Action learning, action research and experiential learning, it can be determined that all are cyclic, all involve action and reflection on that action; all have learning as one of their goals. When considering action research and action learning it can be seen that in each:- action informs reflection and is informed by it. The reflection produces the learning" This corresponds to Revans' assertions, that there cannot be action without learning and learning without action. The cyclic nature of action learning, action research and experiential learning captures the interference of their elements or components, which include action, reflection, questioning and implementation, with action and reflection taking place in turns.

All the approaches involve action, especially taken in teams, to solve a significant problem. He expresses the blurring distinction between action learning and action research, which he attributes to the introduction of in-company action learning programs. The main difference between action learning and action research is the same as that between learning and research generally (Zuber-Skerritt 2001). While action research intends to introduce some change, action learning uses some intended change as a motivation for learning through reflection. (Dick 1997) according to him, in Action research, the learners draw their learning from the same change activity, they are all stakeholders in the activity, while in action learning, the learning and the activity are unique. In his examination of the differences between action learning and action research and experiential learning, he states that experiential learning is the basis for the learning component of both action learning and action research.

It is not limited to any sector or profession, as it can be applied both in the public and private sector, for industry and in academia, which has seen many organizations turn to it for success. It has witnessed substantial growth since the 1980s and it is perhaps closer now to the 'mainstream' than at any other time in its history (Action Learning: Its Origins and Principles 2012, p. This is owing to use of action-based approaches in corporate programs and interest from academics and higher learning institutions, is born out of both organizational researchers interested in 'actionable knowledge' (Coghlan 2011). It is increasingly being utilized for knowledge creation and establishing knowledge sharing culture in organizations (Cho and Bong 2011, p. On the other hand, action learning is continuously now applied to create management teams that are rich social networks and take more collaborative and strategically aligned action.

Besides, (Revans 2011) belief that that questioning process cannot be taught has received skepticism, with (Smith 1988) suggesting several ways of stimulating meaningful questioning, which can be tutored by an "expert". According to (Vince and Martin 1993) the political and emotional aspects of the group process must be considered, because group dynamics can determine the outcome of the process, there can be conflicts of personalities motivated by diverse socio-cultural, economic and political backgrounds. At the same time, some characters within the teams can become more dominant than others, alongside other disruptive characters. Moreover, sometimes it is difficult to strike a balance between the action and the learning, individual benefit and organisational benefit, as (Wallace 1990) indicates from a performance measure, that the process made a huge impact on some individuals, but little impact on the organization, which may occur over a period of years.

There can also be resistance by the community or the leadership; the leadership can view it as challenging the prescription of traditional managers and executives. The problem should be of value to the organization, and the action sets should have the autonomy to implement developed solutions and their recommendations genuinely regarded. The field of action learning is so wide and widely studied, that this review could not possibly intend to look at all the literature done on it, however the most relevant literature have been considered to paint a cross sectional picture on action learning. The reviews intentionally focus on action learning with regard to organization development in the corporate sector. Generally, the literature makes a strong case for action learning, based on successfully executed and implemented action learning unit of studies that have successfully adopted action learning.

These organizations have reaped the benefit of action learning, that has changed their approach to doing business and thereby their fortunes. 8, no. 4, pp. Dick, B 1997, 'Action learning and action research' (http://www. scu. edu. Gifford, J 2005, 'Action learning: principles and issues in practice’, Institute for Employment Studies Haddock, J 1997, 'Reflection in Groups: Contextual and Theoretical Considerations within Nurse Education and Practice’, Nurse Education Today vol. 17, pp. Huang, H. B 2010, 'What is good action research? Why the resurgent interest?’ Action Research, vol. 8, no. Marquardt, M 2004, 'Harnessing the power of action learning" , American Society for Training and Development pp. 26 – 32 Marquardt, M. 2011, optimizing the power of action learning. 2nd ed. USA: Nicholas Brealey Publishing. J 2007, Understanding Action Learning, New York: AMACOM. Pedler, M and Boutall, J 1992, 'Action learning for change’, a resource book for managers and other professionals, National Health Service Training Directorate Revans, R 1980, Action Learning: New Techniques for Management.