An Evolving Understanding of My Work-based Problem: Gathered feed back from Action

Learning (set), Research, and practice Reflection

Raimundo Santa Rosa
Student ID no. H00014960
I Introduction
It looks clearer now that in action learning (AL) there are no right or wrong answers as suggested by Pedler
(2008) and Revans (1981), what really matters is asking the right questions that help us reflect and further
grasp our problem as we detach from it. But how to do it? Alone? Literature on action learning shows that
the best way is a learning set. In this assignment, reflecting in this weeks readings, I analyze how my
understanding of my work based problem has evolved through action learning (learning set interaction)
my research and practice reflection, mainly considering: (1) What new information have I learned? (2)
What questions I am considering now? (3) How AL works and how it can help me learn as a leader?
II Discussion
My initial problem statement
My initial problem as I saw in week 4 could briefly be read like this:
I am in the brim to losing my job I am constantly in shock/confronting top management. I have an
insurmountable amount of work, while other people who receive the same or higher salary as I do
are doing nothing. I am not told beforehand of a job I have to do and there are always rushed orders.
Recently the new financial manager, my department head and 5 other middle managers received
new cars, some of them are working here less than a year and I am here for three years and did not
receive one. I was not able to do a job and my boss exploded, telling me that I was undermining her
deanship and that she would never ask me to do anything again. From this information I deducted
that there is: (1) lack of collective planning and participation in decision making (2) unfair
distribution of work and no life and work balance and that (3) there is in the faculty an inappropriate
reward policy.
What new information have I learned?
Reading from the above presented problem, it is clear that it is vested with a lot of emotions, personal
bias, selfishness, unclearness as to the real problem, lack of reflection and research and most important
lack of consideration of relevant stakeholders interests (symptoms only being addressed), and little or no
clue for real action to take place, sounds like someone is out there trying to get me. After a trial in
framing this problem in the context of literature and with the aid of my peers, I gained new learning that
can be summarized as follows:
New learning from learning set participation my peers, Research and reflection
Marc remarked the importance of Initial knowledge that according to Landry (1995) helps shaping our
thinking about possible intervention through reflection. He also warned me of the danger of being too
preogressive and, paraphrasing, trying to hug the baobab tree rather build in small changes (suggesting
interpersonal relationship). This agrees with Amr as he suggests that I should solve the problem in multiple
stages, creating positive feeling in the organization, which led me to the article by Frohman (1997) that
encourages small changes authored by middle managers . While Mark warned me of the danger of taking
the expert consultant high ground, who may possess little or no understanding of organizational context,
and reminded me of the power of simply asking questions as suggested by Marquardt (2006), which I think
is the back bone of action learning, of not resolving the problem for the set member but help him by
challenging him with relevant questions that might direct his/her reflection.
On the other hand although trying to present a solution which is not advisable in learning sets, Pakdee
redirects me to understand the key stakeholders of my problem (who are they? What is their interest? Why
is this problem important to them? Do I pose a threat to my supervisors job, if yes what is my role as a
leader? How to change my supervisors misperception about me? [Amr]).
Tomislavs advised me to start looking at my own behavior, start the change in me suggesting the removal
of all possible bias and then look on that of others (stakeholders) removing bias in interpreting their

behavior made important questions. This calls for an objective, subjectivist and constructivist view of the
problem (Landry, 1995). Amr further questions made me reflect on what is my role as a manager or
leader? I am I a citzen in this organization? I am being assertive with my superiors? What assumptions I
am making? Will a precipitated action on this problem unleash worse consequences?
Research overall helped me a start in framing the problem in the context of literature, and an
understanding that others have somehow written about this issue. This problem could be taken in the
strategic planning domain as lack of collaborative planning can have ramification to reward police and
work load. Literature helped me understand that various aspects of the problem as it relates to action
learning such as the rigidity of the organization, the need of radical and collaborative planning, but on a
middle management or team level to inseminate the example throughout the organization as it is at this
level that the researcher has some authority for taking action. One key finding is that I need to at the
same time abstract myself from the problem to have a unbiased view and at the same time be involved
with to better take action and that action will not be of success if not drawn from consensus of relevant
stakeholders. This enlightens the need of tracking
What new questions am I now considering?
The more the problem seems clear or is unbiased, the more complicated and wicked it seems. Key
questions now are:
1. Why is this important to me as to take action and motivation
2. Why is it important to the others (my fellow co-workers and the organization overall)
3. As I cant sort this problem by taking action on my own how to gain buy in in this undemocratic
environment? Is there a way of starting small and making key questions?
4. Am I free of normal reactions, unbiased and have I let go of selfishness and how to really care
about the organization as a whole?
5. What will progress in this problem look like to me and others?
6. What is my personal development in this undertaking as I am investing time and effort?
7. What further light can literature shed on framing the problem for scholarly practice?
8. How and what can I learn from action learning leaning?
What is learned in action learning? How can it help me learn as a leader?
This weeks reading focused on the contribution of AL to develop us as a leader and Revans (classical
principles point us to uphold the gold standard and reflection goes to do we really understand what the
gold standar is, has Revans fully understood it. Do I understand it? Action leaning will never be understood
unless one practices it and thus be doers of the word nor hears only. According to Revans (1981) action
learning can help us develop ourselves (self-development) by mutual support of equals (the learning set
1). On other hand Pedler, Burgoyne and Brook suggest that action learning bases on action for learning, a
profound personal development resulting from reflection upon action and Marquardt and Waddill defend
that the 6 steps/component approach to action learning are linked to adult learning. Action learning from
these perspectives helps develop leaders as they need to constantly reflect and act at the same time as
they refer not to themselves but to their peers.
IV - References
Marquardt, M. & Waddill, D. (2004) The power of learning in action learning: a conceptual analysis of how
the five schools of adult learning theories are incorporated within the practice of action learning, Action
Learning: Research & Practice, 1(2), pp. 185-202, EBSCOhost Business Source Premier [Online]. Available
from: http://ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login?url=http://openurl.ac.uk.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/?title=Action+Learning:
+Research+and+Practice&volume=1&issue=2&spage=185&date=2004(Accessed: 29 May 2013).
Pedler, M., Burgoyne, J.G. & Brook, C. (2005)What has Action Learning learned to become? Action
Learning: Research & Practice, 2 (1), pp. 49-68, EBSCOhost Business Source Premier [Online]. Available
from:http://ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login?url=http://openurl.ac.uk.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/?title=Action+Learning:
+Research+and+Practice&volume=2&issue=1&spage=49&date=2005 (Accessed: 19 December 2013).
Revans, R.W. (1981) The nature of action learning, Omega, 9 (1), pp. 9-24, ScienceDirect [Online].
Available from: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/10.1016/0305-0483(81)90061-X (Accessed: 19 December
2013).
Pedler, M. (2008). Action Learning for Managers Aldershot, England: Gower Publishing Ltd.
Landry, M. (1995) A Note on the Concept of 'Problem', Organization Studies, 16 (2), pp. 315-343,
EBSCOhost Business Source Premier [Online]. Available from: http://ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login?

url=http://openurl.ac.uk.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/?
title=Organization+Studies&volume=16&issue=2&spage=315&date=1995(Accessed: 28 November
2013).
Frohman, A. L. (1997). Igniting organizational change from below: The power of personal
initiative. Organizational Dynamics, 25(3), 39-53. [Online]. Available from:
http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=1997-02567003&site=eds-live&scope=site (Accessed: 4 December 2013).