A contextual theory of learning and the learning organization

More documents

Recommendations

Info

RESEARCH ARTICLEor theories. It means judging which rule is the mostappropriate in the concrete situation.Another important consideration in the discussionof knowledge is the difference betweenespoused theory and theory-in-use. The way individualsact in the world depends of how they interpretthe world. The theory of action approachposits the existence of a behavioral world createdby the individuals in an interaction (Argyris andSchön, 1996, p. 50). These interpretations are againdependent on the way in which individuals are incontrol of generating, interpreting, testing andusing data and information about the world. Theseactions of generating, interpreting, testing andusing data and information will very often lead toa difference between what a person is saying andbelieves to be doing and the things that the personreally is doing. This is because the person, as a consequenceof the testing discovers that he has toexplain or justify a given pattern of activity(Argyris and Schön, 1996, p. 13). However, the personin action does often not realize this differencebetween what is said and what is done. This meansthat a person can believe that in reality he is doingwhat he is saying. This lack of awareness is in away ‘designed’ in the head of that person to enablehim to justify the fact that on the one hand he doesthings differently from what he says he does.Furthermore it enables the person to deal withthe fact that it is not acceptable to express the realnature of his actions in public.Argyris and Schön give an example of the differencesbetween espoused theory and theory-in-useand the (perceived) difficulties in revealing thesedifferences. The case describes a large electronicsfirm, where the Information Technology group,according to top management, did not react to theusers’ needs and always had difficulties with linemanagement. The head of the IT group (the CIO)was interviewed about his thoughts and feelingsafter a staff meeting in which the problems werediscussed.When asked what led him not to make thesethoughts and feelings public, he looked astonished.‘If I said these feelings and thoughts, all Ihave done was add fuel to the fire.’ ...whensome of the professionals were asked if they hadany idea of their bosses’ private thoughts, theyresponded with words that were almost identicalto the ones the CIO used. When they were askedwhat led them not to say so, they responded withthe same look of astonishment. ‘Are you kidding?’,said one of them. ‘That would make thingsworse.’ Quite likely, the subordinates were alsocarrying on internal monologues that were notKnowledge and Process Managementvocalized. Thus we have people holding privateconversations about each other and thinking thatthe others do not hear these conversations. Inactuality, the others do hear them but act as ifthey do not. (Argyris and Schön, 1996, p. 87f.).CHANGING THE PROCESSESOF LEARNINGNot being aware of this difference between what issaid and what is done will often present an obstacleto learning. But to be aware of this difference could,at least in some situations, mean that the individualshave to change the context or even, in radicalsituations, break out of the context and create awhole new context. This leads to three degrees oflearning situations:(1) Single-loop learning. Such instrumental learningconsists of becoming better at doing what youcan already do. Thus the actions involved thatexist in this context must be of identifiabletypes.(2) Double-loop learning. This is learning that resultsin a change in the values of the theory-in-use,as well as in its strategies and assumptions(Argyris and Schön, 1996, p. 20f.). This meansthat the individual involved is aware and canthen take the context into consideration in thelearning process.(3) Triple-loop learning. In this situation is it impossibleto learn in the given context. Thus theindividual involved has to break out of, andcompletely change, the context. This meanscreating or accepting new values in the theoryin-useas well as new strategies in the learningprocess (Bateson, 1987, p. 287ff.).When a person has to go from double-loop learningto triple-loop learning, it is a consequence of adouble bind. On one side learning within the givencontext does not work because, even if the personchanges the values and strategies in the theory-inuse,this does not result in the expected consequences.On the other hand, the person sees thecontext as given and unchangeable. This meansthat either the person breaks down or breaks out.The latter means that the person would resort totriple-loop learning and, in other words, createsan entirely new context.Represented in a diagram it looks as shown inFigures 1–3. Single-loop learning includes an adoptionof ways to do things better (illustrated inFigure 1 by the single feedback loop). But existingnorms and routines are not changed. Double-loop56 P. E. Jensen
Knowledge and Process ManagementFigure 1Figure 2Figure 3Single-loop learningDouble-loop learningTriple-loop learninglearning includes the kind of learning where normsand routines are changed, where the valuesguiding the existing context and strategies arequestioned and assumptions are under consideration(illustrated by the double feedback loop inFigure 2). In situations where double-loop learningtakes place (going from single-loop learning) thereis an adoption of the results of the actions that stemsfrom the new activity, which can be calculatedahead and that, in fact, becomes the new activity.In situations where triple-loop learning takesplace an entirely new activity that cannot be precalculatedhas to be formulated and achieved. Itis, of course, a contradiction to do or to plan anactivity that is not known. Thus the new activityis achieved as a result of the contradictionsbetween the activity, on the one hand, which couldbe calculated to be the answers to the newdemands from the environments (double-loopfeedback) and a feasible new context selectedfrom among those which seem to be at hand and,on the other hand, the unknown and unpredictablefuture. This means that the context which, in fact,becomes the result of the ‘breaking out’ will be differentfrom the one predicted, because the newRESEARCH ARTICLEactivities lead to results other than those beingcalculated. This is so even though these activitiesare available or are seen as a possibility from thevantage-point of the existing context. In this waythese activities expand, transform and even breakthe frameworks of the calculated new contextand develop into something even more distantand uncontrollable. That is why the new contextnever is, and never can be, qualitatively thesame as planned in advance from the old context(Engeström, 1987, p. 184f.).These kinds of new activities are different fromthe adjustment of organizations by the changingof routines. They are the creation of new activitiesthat lead to new contexts. Changes in the formattingcontext represent a parallel to double-looplearning. Double-loop learning is a process thatquestions the formatting context that, in turn, givesmeaning to the routines guiding single-loop learning.So if double-loop learning in itself is a routine(as Nelson and Winter (1982, p. 16f.) regard it tobe), it has to be of a different kind than those routinesguiding single-loop learning. And even so, itwill be impossible to treat triple-loop learning asroutine, because triple-loop learning cannot be calculatedin advance, and thus is not consistentenough or predictable enough to become a routine(Ciborra and Schneider, 1992, p. 273). Triple-looplearning is not something that happens automaticallyleading to new, more appropriate behaviour.On the contrary, resistance towards changes canlead to ignoring facts or the suppression of events,abnormalities and disturbances under the name of‘leadership’ (Ciborra and Schneider, 1992, p. 272).Triple-loop learning also involves recognizing thedifference between espoused theories and theoryin-use,which is often a painful process.Let us see how such learning processes can beillustrated. In the example above where a studentin economics had to answer a question in descriptiveeconomics about employment/unemployment,a student who is well trained in theapplication of descriptive statistics will have littledifficulty in finding the appropriate statisticssources and extracting the appropriate data fromthem. The more the student uses these kinds ofstatistics, the better (and faster) he will be at collectingthe appropriate data. Single-loop learning hasoccurred, i.e. the student uses his ‘action programme’(see Figure 1), which in this situation‘tells’ him what kind of descriptive statistics hecan use in order to fulfil the ‘production process’,i.e. to answer the question by giving an appropriateestimate over a period in which both employmentand unemployment have grown for the samepopulation.A Contextual Theory of Learning 57
Page 1 and 2: Knowledge and Process Management Vo
Page 3: Knowledge and Process Managementwhe
Page 7 and 8: Knowledge and Process ManagementRES
Page 9 and 10: Knowledge and Process ManagementThe
Page 11 and 12: Knowledge and Process ManagementORG

A contextual theory of learning and the learning organization

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?