Action learning
The main take home from the case assignments and other assignments is that, for effective learning and providing and solutions to the organization’s challenges, an organization requires not an expert or a professional, Instead it requires individuals within the organization to identify their challenges, evaluate themselves come up with creative, manageable and flexible strategies to process the problems. In other words, action learning in an organization is a self-diagnostic system by which an organization identifies what its challenges are and comes up with better ways to address them. The main importance of action learning principal is that it enables the employees to take action and resolve real issues affecting them in the organization while learn at the same time. Action learning within a team promotes development of new theories and ideas which the traditional teaching methods may not have promoted. Action learning can help our organization improve on some important areas in the organization such as team work, conflict resolution, leadership skills, problem solving and team confidence.
Systematic implementation of action learning can help solve organizational problems in effective and efficient manner through innovation and sustainable strategies. It can also develop team of employees with knowledge and capabilities to perform at any level such group or community levels. Through action learning, the organizational problems will be tackled in a process by asking questions to identify the nature of the problems, followed by reflection of the problem and finally coming up with possible solutions which will require actions to be taken. Action learning in these areas will help my organization to embrace team work, develop good working relations, solve problems as a team and finally collectively learn from the whole experience as illustrated by Byrne, Delmar, Fayolle, and Lamine, (2016).
I am optimistic that action learning implementation in the organization will have an added value to the staff and the organizations culture as a whole. An action learning program will narrow down to individual level of employees and enable them evaluate and have a self-reflection on how effective they can be to the organization. In addition, other levels of management can also be included, such as team and at group levels. At individual levels, action learning will enhance employees’ productivity and effectiveness. They will be able to evaluate how they can be productive and at the same time effective to the organization. Additionally, they will be able to improve on their personal leadership skills as it will be a common knowledge that all of them are leaders at whatever level of the organization they fall ( Byrne, Delmar, Fayolle, and Lamine, 2016). The employees will also be in a position to reflect and learn from personal experiences within the organization.
According to Volz-Peacock, Carson, and Marquardt, (2016), Action learning at team level will help improve team performance as minimal conflicts will be experienced. The working team within the organization will have a positive working relationship and through action learning they will be able to come up with collective problem solving and decision making strategies within the organization. On the other hand, action learning will improve the performance in all levels of organization, provide solution to business problems and improve organizations return on investments for the projects the organization is undertaking. Generally, action learning will provide the organization with learning opportunities just like it does at individuals and team levels hence enabling the organization to become a learning organization.
In assessing the organizations readiness for action learning, after filling out the questionnaire, the organization scores falls between 21 and 40. Yes- the organization is compatible with action learning and it can help the organization achieve its goals and purpose. The results are not surprising because so far, the organization has a way of appreciating the employees on their achievements. These rewards are in terms of recognition monetary motivations during staff meetings. Communication within the organization is also fairly smooth at every organization level and within the departments. The organization through research and development department encourages uptake and learning of new skills and ideas by allowing employees to advance their knowledge through weekly book reading sessions. The organization only lag behind in conflict resolution, flexibility among employees and constructive way of criticizing each other without causing conflict. The fear of criticism hinders the confidence in junior employees to openly and freely speak their minds to the senior employees on issues that affect the organizations operation.
As illustrated by Brook, Pedler, Abbott, and Burgoyne, (2016) implementation of action learning in an organization, Revan outlined possible logistics such as program phases, learning equations, problem not puzzle and exchange options among others. The implementation of each of the above logics comes with its own challenges to an organization. In my opinion, implementation of action learning in this organization may face challenges right from problem definition. Problem statement is a vital aspect in action learning and needs to done in an organized manner. It is this problem statement that would aid in coming up with suitable participants with a common goal to help in finding solutions. If problem statement becomes vague or incorrect, then it may challenge the capability of the participants to solve the identified problem (Brook, Pedler, Abbott, and Burgoyne, 2016). Another problem would be set formation, that is, a strategic decision to coming up with a group to solve the identified problem. Set formation cannot be randomly done as the group should comprise of individuals having programmed knowledge and questioning abilities. A diversified group can also be a challenge as friends or people with similar reasoning may not challenge and question each other. The set may consist of: jokers, who use joke to deviate from real issues, those who bully with their behavior, those who block other people’s ideas, those who withdraw from the discussion to disapprove others and the ramblers who do much of the talking without bringing out the point as outlined by Volz-Peacock, Carson, and Marquardt, (2016).
Byrne, Delmar, Fayolle, and Lamine, 2016) stipulates that the role of action learning facilitator is an important element in this process. Even though the facilitator is not a member of the set, but the control they have over the entire process of action learning may make the organization be more dependent on them. The set may not be able to solve the problem in its own capacity. Therefore, I strongly suggest that the organizations own resources should be trained to occupy the position of the facilitators. Lastly, action learning may face resistance from the community, organizations departments and leadership. Introduction of action learning may be misunderstood by the employees as they may perceive it as a threat to the previous learning methodology which already exist in the organization. It would mean that there would be retraining to the employees to have a better understanding on the new approach.
In designing an action learning program, I would carry out a group check for set members to report on problems they face such as team work challenges or conflict resolution hiccups. Secondly, I would allocate the group a ten minutes each to present their issues through the set leader. Then, I would follow by allowing presenters to present the problem and experience in ten minutes. After this, I would allow group to ask question to fully understand the problem stated without giving advice or making judgement. After sufficient understanding of the problem stated, the group members can engage in role playing, what is called ‘fish bowl’ setting. This will be followed by reflection and expansion by presenter on the problem and formulate possible options for actions. The group will assist the presenter to review the options for actions and welcome suggestions on other available options to address the problem. Finally the group will reflect on the entire process and provides feedback on the developments taking place.
The above action learning design for the organization would include diversified group of the organization, that is, senior employees and junior employees from different departments. This group will be mandated to look into a number of issues such as; conflict resolution, team work challenges, team confidence among employees and leadership challenge in the organization. The set will meet for half a day, after every 4 weeks. This time interval is set to minimize disruptions of the set in their day to day activities in the organization. From the process of action learning, I will expect my employees to learn and discover more about themselves. I also expect the participants to be able to experiment tasks with new approaches like embracing team work, coming up with suitable conflict resolution ideas and promoting leadership skills at every level of organization.
References
Byrne, J., Delmar, F., Fayolle, A., & Lamine, W. (2016). Training corporate entrepreneurs: an action learning approach. Small Business Economics, 47(2), 479-506.
Volz-Peacock, M., Carson, B., & Marquardt, M. (2016). Action learning and leadership development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 18(3), 318-333.
Brook, C., Pedler, M., Abbott, C., & Burgoyne, J. (2016). On stopping doing those things that are not getting us to where we want to be: Unlearning, wicked problems and critical action learning. Human Relations, 69(2), 369-389.