Introduction

Whilst action learning has been a feature of human resource development practice for over 50
years, the focus of literature reviews has been on gathering and exploring accounts of practice
and examples of application, often in case study form (Mumford 1994; Smith and O’Neil 2003a,
2003b) rather than exploring emergent debates and challenges in the field. An exception attempts
to distinguish amongst action-oriented, learning-oriented, and balanced action learning practices
(Cho and Egan 2009, 446).

Over the last 20 years, the literature on action learning has focused on a range of issues,
including (i) the need to inject more criticality into its practice and so questioning the ends as
well as the means of action, and challenging the often unstated assumptions attached to such
action (Fenwick 2003; Nicolini et al. 2004; Reynolds and Vince 2004; Rigg and Trehan 2004;
Pedler 2005; Lawless 2008; Vince 2008; Ram and Trehan 2010); (ii) the allied question of the
need to address and engage with the (often neglected) issue of emotion and politics in action
learning (Vince and Martin 1993; Vince 2004, 2008); (iii) what is meant by ‘action’ in the
context of practice (Park et al. 1999; Learmonth and Pedler 2004; Ashton 2006; Rooke et al
2007; Fox 2009); (iv) the varieties of practice and whether or not Revans’ original principles
have been compromised and, if so, whether this matters (Willis 2004; Pedler, Burgoyne, and
Brook 2005; Bourner and Simpson 2007; Boshyk and Dilworth 2010); (v) the extent to which
action learning focuses on individual or collective problems and the implications of this choice
for organizations (Donnenberg and De Loo 2004; Vince 2004; Pedler, Burgoyne, and Brook
2005; Rigg and Richards 2006; Brook 2009).

Research indicates that individuals learn better from each other and from the experience gained
by working together in the group. Collaborative methods based on empirical and action-oriented
strategies to make the newly created knowledge become the basis for new activities that is
intended to bring change. Action learning method is based on the experiences of the participants
whose individual problems become the basis for constructive solutions in the future. Action
Learning is a process that involves a small group working on real problems, acting, and learning
as individuals, as a team, and as an organization. It helps organizations develop creative,
flexible, and successful strategies to pressing problems. Action Learning solves problems and
develops leaders simultaneously because its simple rules force participants to think critically and
work collaboratively. Action Learning is particularly effective for solving complex problems
that may appear unsolvable. It elevates the norms, the collaboration, the creativity, and the
courage of groups. The Action Learning coach assists group members in reflecting on the
advancement of their group functioning, rather than on their problem solving. In this way,
Action Learning participants become effective leaders as they solve difficult problems.

If the purpose of evaluating action learning is to learn more about its impact on the parties
concerned (set member, set facilitator, sponsor, champion, etc.) and the outcomes for each party
and for the organization or organizations concerned, then an area worthy of further exploration
relates to ‘What happens next?’ in terms of whether and how the results of evaluation are
considered and applied. For example, should a set member come up with ‘unacceptable findings’
which run counter to the conventional wisdom in the organization, how might this be resolved (if
at all)? Even if this is not the case, there is some evidence that the demands of implementation
may be beyond the capacity of individuals and therefore require systematic organizational
approaches to succeed (Hunt, 1987) and the design of appropriate learning architectures to
achieve this (Pedler and Abbott, 2013).

This paper presents the idea of Action Learning as a learning by doing. This approach to the
development of individuals does not focus on what people need to learn, but on solutions to real
problems. The main objective method of action learning is that our everyday life is an endless
source of possibilities and opportunities for learning. The fastest and most effective way of
learning is to take some action which later could be used to draw conclusions.

Action Learning: Definition and History

Action Learning is a process that involves a small group working on real problems, acting, and
learning as individuals, as a team, and as an organization. It helps organizations develop creative,
flexible, and successful strategies to pressing problems. Action Learning solves problems and
develops leaders simultaneously because its simple rules force participants to think critically and
work collaboratively. Action Learning is particularly effective for solving complex problems that
may appear unsolvable. It elevates the norms, the collaboration, the creativity, and the courage of
groups. The Action Learning coach assists group members in reflecting on the advancement of
their group functioning, rather than on their problem solving. In this way, Action Learning
participants become effective leaders as they solve difficult problems.
Action Learning Helps Organizations
 Enhance business performance at all levels
 Rapidly solve urgent and important and business challenges
 Achieve a substantial Return on Investment (ROI) on organization improvement
projects
 Develop a culture of staff engagement, involvement, and performance
 Establish effective succession planning by developing highly qualified candidates
for promotion to executive leadership positions
 Become a learning organization
 Become more strategic in goal setting

Action learning emerged in the second half of the 20th century and is based on the theories of
learning by David Kolb from the 1980‘s. Kolb’s theory of the learning cycle implies that we
have to go through a four-step learning cycle to learn: experience, reflection, abstract
conceptualizing and active experimenting. For the learning process it is important to complete
the whole cycle and it does not matter at which point we will start.

Reginald W. Revans, the originator of action learning, had invented and developed this method
in the United Kingdom in the 1940s. He was involved with the British industry and health care,
working in these institutions he concluded that conventional teaching methods were largely
ineffective. People must be aware of their deficit in knowledge and motivated to its completion
by appropriately asked questions and help others struggling with similar problems. New
knowledge comes from asking questions and we can create new knowledge by looking at
existing science and ask critical questions. R.W. Revans developed action learning as an
educational process figure on the identification of a problem, integration theory, action
determination and outcome evaluation. The purpose of this method is to solve problems through
a process of asking questions, clarifying the exact nature of the problem, identifying possible
solutions and incorporating them in a possible strategy for action.

The term ‘action learning’ was created by R.W. Revans as ‘(…) a means of development,
intellectual, emotional or physical, that requires its subjects, through responsible involvement in
some real, complex and stressful problems, to achieve intended change sufficient to improve his
observable behavior henceforth in the problem field’.
Action Learning: Methods, Processes and Processes

Describing the action learning it is difficult to speak of a clear approach to the method,
because it means different things to different people. R.W. Revans defined action learning as a
process of intellectual development, emotional or physical, which requires participants to engage
in the various relevant issues to achieve the desired change and improve the current situation.
Action learning by M. Pedler is an approach to the development of people in organizations
which takes the task as ‘the vehicle for learning’. It assumes that there is no learning without
action, each action is appropriate. This method consists of three components: people, who are
responsible for their actions, problems or tasks that people set themselves and a set of six or
more people who support and seek to solve specific problems.
J. O'Neil, based on a review of literature and empirical studies conducted in the USA, UK and
Sweden, proposes four schools of approach to action learning method. These schools are
identified as: Scientific, Experiential, Critical Reflection, and Tacit.
Action learning in terms of The Scientific School of Thought is conceptualized as a problem-
solving technique based on three interactive systems: ‘alpha’, ‘beta’ and ‘gamma’. Alpha system
is the interplay of ‘the learner’s value system’, ‘the external system that affects the decision-
making process’, and ‘the internal systems in which the learner works. Beta system is based on
five steps: ‘survey’, ‘hypothesis’, ‘experiment’, ‘audit’ and ‘review’. In Gamma system personal
development and interaction between the learner and the social environment are very important.

In practice, this form of action learning has much in common with action research, however, is
directed towards science.

The other school is The Experiential School of Thought. This approach helps learners to learn
from their experiences, focus on personal development and monitor progress towards achieving
learning goals. Some advocates of action learning see Kolb’s experiential learning cycle as its
theoretical base. Kolb's theory is the theoretical basis for the activities of The Experiential
School of Action Learning supporters. In Kolb’s experiential learning cycle learning action,
reflection, theory, and practice are equally important. The action learning method is the
foundation for learning action and enables learning in each stage of the experiential learning
cycle. The most effective learning is based on the need to solve problems. This allows you to
acquire relevant knowledge, which gives discretion to further development.

According to The Critical Reflection School of Thought the kind of reflection that occurs in the
Experiential School is a necessary, but not sufficient. ‘Reflection is powerful, but critical
reflection is more powerful’. Through critical reflection, we can identify the source of the
problem and thus our beliefs, values, and we can make decisions about changes in our life and
gain a greater understanding of surrounding world. The critical reflection by Jack Mezirow is
‘assessment of the validity of the presuppositions of one’s meaning perspectives, and
examination of their sources and consequences’.

The fourth school of approach to action learning is the Tacit School of Thought, according to
which the emphasis is put on the accidental and unplanned learning that takes place from any
activity such as through observation, interaction, or routine work. This approach may be useful
for adult learning in educational contexts where problem solving can be achieved unexpectedly.

Applications of Action Learning

Education

O’Hara presents a model of implementing action learning in an academic context designed on

the model of education. The part called Learning to Learn Orientation is focused on ensuring the
secure sections of action learning and supportive working environment based on trust and mutual
support towards the aim of learning. The group meeting of action learning is the opportunity for
individuals to share their experiences and problems to find effective solutions of them. In this
sets the participants share a common purpose, intellectual and emotional energy.

The Higher Educational Framework includes traditional practices associated with the
programmed knowledge. The role of action learning is to add the element of questioning and
reflection of the problem. Such actions oriented to the problem may be an alternative for students
and adults to learn through the exchange of experiences with other people.

In the third part called Outcomes, the aim is to ensure that learners gain new experiences and
insights of the topic and the development of new skills and the ability to cope with new
situations, both at work and in your personal life. The development and implementation of
changes by individuals also help solve problems for all members of the group.

The first part constitutes the action learning practices and different approaches affecting the
shape of an action learning project. The second part consists of the individual and group
influences relevant to the process of effective learning. The third part contains the framework for
implementing action learning in an academic context. The fourth part presents the designed
individual elements of an action learning project.

Looking at the general definition of action learning this method is both a concept and a form of
action which aims to strengthen the ability of people in everyday situations. Everyone can
change the unfavorable situation for themselves with minimal outside help. With an action
learning people become more critical and aware of their values, objectives, activities, and can act
more rationally in the surrounding reality. Knowledge that already exists which students can
learn in school by reading books, learning different theories or concepts (programmed
knowledge called 'P') is an essential component of learning, but it is insufficient. Hence the idea
to develop this knowledge and make it even more effective (Questioning Insight ‘Q’). Both the
concept and theory are important in the learning process, but the action learning focuses
primarily on the application. Hence the emphasis on 'Q', that is, the questions that should be
asked and experience which can be purchased through the answers. At the heart of action
learning there is the ability to ask the right questions at the right time and take action.

In action learning it is more important what you do not know rather than what you do know, so
the most important thing is to focus on the right questions, not the right answers and the most
important issues are problems. On the one hand, there are questions that are described in the
literature as a perplexing questions to which the answer has already been formulated, the solution
of the problem already exists, but we do not have found yet. On the other hand, there are
questions and problems for which there is no correct answer. Different people will have different
ideas and suggestions to answer the question and fix the problem. There will be no right answer,
but you may get many satisfactory solutions. The purpose of action learning is to provide a
proper answer. This method is a process of first asking questions to clarify the exact nature of the
problem, then identifying possible solutions and finally acting. In action learning it is important
to analyze the situation to find effective solutions to problems. The measures taken are open to
people and people decide which ones to accept and put into practice. Action Learning is about
doing but it does not stop there. Generally doing may be vital, but it is not sufficient for learning.
Learning by doing may be sufficient if during the process of trying it we acquire the basic
mechanical skills. In addition, in the learning experience and problem-solving process there is an
important factor - a reflect on this experience - which determines exactly what you have learned.
It is also important to develop strategies to be able to take steps directed towards the efficient
operation of the new situation, both now and in the future. That is what action learning does.
That is how it differs from learning by doing.

In the context of asking questions in action learning an attention should be paid to the issue of
the right questions and what exactly are the ‘right questions? The ‘right questions’ are those
which can be answered at the right time and give us the information we need, for example: What
are we trying to do? What is stopping us from doing it? What might we be able to do about it?
Who knows about the problem? Who can do anything about it? Where can we find out about it?
These are only examples of questions that appear in the literature. We can also provide many
similar. If the questions are poorly worded, we cannot get the answers that would help us solve
the problem. That is why it is important to pay particular attention to ask questions which are
thoughtful and lead to effective solutions.

Action learning provides an appropriate and sustainable way of building the capacity of schools
to improve practice. Some of the advantages of action learning are flexibility, respect for the
knowledge and experience of participants, involvement, collegiality, empowerment, and
ownership. The challenge for schools is to engage students in the activity and the development of
skills necessary to function today. To improve teaching practice and thus the effective learning
of students The Quality Teaching framework model has been created. The model has been
designed to be used by principals, school executive and teachers ‘(…) to lead and focus the work
of the school community on improving teaching practice and hence student learning outcomes.
The model has been designed to be an aid and framework for reflection, action, and evaluation.
Quality Teaching framework includes three dimensions of pedagogy:
Intellectual quality, which is based on the promotion of a high intellectual level. The elements of
this dimension are deep knowledge, deep understanding, problematic knowledge, higher-order
thinking, metalanguage and substantive communication.

Quality learning environment, which is based on promoting productive learning environments

focused on learning, positive relationships and clear expectations between teachers and student.
The elements of this dimension are explicit quality criteria, engagement, high expectations,
social support, students’ self-regulation and student direction.

Significance which is based on involving meaningful learning that connects learning to prior
experience, multiple perspectives, and contexts beyond the classroom. It is comprised of the
following elements: background knowledge, cultural knowledge, knowledge integration,
inclusivity, connectedness, and narrative. These elements are incorporated into three dimensions
relating to classroom practice.

Action learning allows students to work in a team and create a new foundation to solve
problems. Students with the ability of expression are more motivated to act. This method focuses
on improving and changing the current situation. To achieve the desired educational goals, we
should improve the quality of implementing and promoting a conscious and critical thinking
leading to the formation of many effective and efficient ways of doing things.

Health Sector

People learn more and better when learning takes place practically than when passively being
provided with information. Action learning has been shown to be an effective method of learning
and developing leadership skills particularly for senior level managers in developed countries.
This may be attributed to its less formal nature making it a practical and interactive approach that
is directly related to the day-to-day problems that managers face. Although the technique has
been mainly used to develop the skills and competencies of senior managers, it is also used
among other ranks. The action learning technique has been shown to improve confidence,
resilience, conflict resolution, team work, empowerment, leadership skills, self-efficacy, critical
thinking and problem solving skills. All these skills are important for managers in general but
more so for those who work in highly stressful environments such as the neonatal unit.
Health workers working in neonatal units in district hospitals work under extremely stressful
conditions to care for critically ill infants. In developing countries, this may be combined with
daily challenges such as insufficient equipment and medication, poor transport to the referral
centre, as well as shortage and burn-out of staff, making it difficult for middle management to
critically develop ways of managing all the problems encountered. Neonatal units in district
hospitals are run by generalist doctors and nurses, without any on-site pediatrician, and are often
geographically isolated, far from specialist care. Managers of neonatal units are faced with day-
to-day problems for which solutions are required.

Action learning takes on a Socratic approach which involves an iterative and reflective process
of one’s challenges and the possible solutions. By employing this method, action learning allows
people to think critically about issues and come up with solutions on their own. These are
generic skills that can be applied to any work situation and can be anticipated not only to lead to
changes in the workplace during implementation of the action learning groups but to provide
skills that will promote personal development.

For any skills development intervention to be successful, particularly when participants are
working in isolated areas, considerable time and resources must be spent, and using action
learning as a method to develop skills for health managers is no different. Furthermore, the
development of management competencies is complex, but the action learning approach may
provide immediate benefits in terms of addressing practical workplace challenges. However,
actions could be taken to reduce costs, for example meetings could be held at internal venues and
conducted at the same time as other routine district management meetings. Using action learning
more broadly could allow for different cadres of health workers to use the method, and for the
method to be used as a generic process that can be applied to resolving various challenges within
the health system. Action learning faciltators could be trained among health staff but would have
to be carefully selected to maintain the trusting relationships within the action learning groups.
Implementation of action learning could contribute towards shifting some of the practices and
perceptions related to training programmes so that these are considered an integral part of health
workers’ jobs rather than being regarded as external, unnecessary, and time-consuming activities.

Orientation of senior management to action learning as a skills-development tool ahead of

implementation could address many concerns that senior managers may have regarding action
learning and resolve some of the logistical barriers identified, like obtaining permission to attend
action learning sessions. An additional role for action learning facilitators to improve success and
sustainability could be to establish the principles of action learning in each site, improve linkages
and communication with senior managers, and advocate for support for action learning at all
levels of the health system. Additionally, this could be used as an opportunity to advocate for
senior managers to use action learning themselves especially considering ts successful use
among managers.

Action Learning application in Researcher’s organization

One of the most common problems at the workplace is communication problems. These
problems if not tackled properly can cost the company money and productivity. The company
cannot exchange essential information without having efficient communication. Having effective
communication in the workplace tends to be based on professional correspondence that is
designed to assist in the company’s daily operations or the continued organization’s growth.
When an employee allows his or her personal issues to affect communication in the company,
there develops a communication problem that can take much time to resolve (Porte, 2010).
People who do not want to communicate based on their personal disagreement damages the
ability of the company to work and slow the growth of the company. Critical action and thinking
can help on understanding some of the issues in workplace communication, which can help in
creating policies that will address the problems and create a communication network that is more
efficient. Criticality can be used in solving the communication problems in the workplace.
Critical actions helps one in understanding and experiencing action learning, which through
questioning and refection can help the employees to experience different situations that can help
them in the work place (Porte, 2010). Critical action learning can help the workers to deepen
their understanding on the roles, duties, and responsibilities of an effective worker. It can also
help the workers to verbalize what is important for them in the workplace. It can also help the
workers agree on how they wished to have unity in their work. Critical learning action can help
the workers understand what helped their working in the company to be more productive and
valuable. They hence become aware of themselves as individuals and as company members

Action learning is increasingly becoming the problem-solving method of choice for many leaders
and managers in the world we live in today. Action learning is a process that engages the person
in practices that not only help the person to identify the problem, but also allow the person to
reframe the problem, in the bid to come up with an effective solution to the problem. (Cox,
2009). Critical Action Learning seeks to show the inclusion of power relations in Action
Learning. This shows that the emphasis of Critical Action Learning empowers an individual
learner and ways in which an organization support, prevent, and avoid learning through relations
of power. Relations of power may be presented by risk-averse behavior in an individual,
collective denial and defensiveness on an organization’s member failing to comply to certain
norms, habits, and expectations unconsciously. Critical learning can help one in understanding
through research. Critical learning helps the researcher to understand the principles and process
of doing research from the start. It develops the skills of the researcher in questioning and
reflection of the researched topic. It also helps one in handling the feelings of discomfort to the
researcher that often accompany the research and thus create positive research and learning
environment (Koshy,2005).

Critical learning helps the researcher to develop the confidence needed to move to being a self-
facilitating researcher. It helps the researcher to reflect on what they are learning, and this helps
the worker to work effectively. To review one’s actions from research, the researcher should
invest his time and attention in the research paper. Then one should have a reasonable
expectation that his work is unbiased, balanced and have ungrounded data. Critical learning will
help in reviewing the research, which will help in learning.

The researcher’s viewpoint on the benefits of action learning to an organization, team and
individual

The need for understanding how organizations learn and accelerating that learning is greater
today than ever before' (Senge in Starkey, 1996). Leaders of organisations seek new ways of
developing capacities in their organisations to learn and work around problem for better solution.
Action learning as long been held out by some researchers (Marquardt, 1999) to give a sound
basis for introducing learning into workplaces. The wide range of examples reviewed in action
learning literatures show that innovation works at its best when divisions between knowledge
producers, users and brokers, and indeed decision-makers are broken down. Direct stakeholders’
participation provides a means of achieving a much more multi-faceted, holistic approach to
addressing problems in sustainable agriculture and value-addition. It ensures the link with day-
to-day life. Thus learning process should be two-way, to do transfer of knowledge lacking to the
others .This contributes to developing productive, sustainable and resource-efficient primary
production systems. Action learning is for tackling the really difficult challenges and problems
facing us as managers and citizens, but it is also a profound source of personal development
which has benefited those organisations who have implemented it through development of
leadership skills; solving problems; and building teams, while challenges were identified and
reported in different articles reviewed.

Therefore, Action Learning being powerful management tool that for change and that can shape
and nature of an organisation and develop its leadership in a positive way. The management
commitment to the process of learning and responsibility for conducive environment for learning
is vital if the benefits are to be felt by the organisation.
Action Learning is well worth looking at to promote change for the enhancement of
organisational stability.

The difference between action learning and action research

Action learning, in contrast to action research, focuses on the learning and the action does not
require the extension of new knowledge in a theoretical sense. In action learning the participants
select some issues, analyze them, take some action, and say on that action, while Action research
is a process by which change, and understanding can be pursued at the one time. It is usually
described as cyclic, with action and critical reflection taking place in turn. It is commonly done
by a group of people, though sometimes people use it to improve their practice. It has been used
often in the field of education for this purpose. It is not unusual for there to be someone from
outside the team who acts as a facilitator.

As they were before practiced, I think a useful distinction could be made based on different
reviews on subject. In action learning, each participant drew different learning from different
experience. In action research a team of people drew collective learning from a collective
experience.
More recently, the advent of in-company action learning programs has begun to change this. The
use of a team with a common project or problem leads to an action learning program which looks
remarkably like action research.
There were also some differences, on average, in field of application. Action learning was more
often used in organizational settings. Action research more common in community and
educational settings. Both action research and action learning may be compared to experiential
learning. It can be described as a process of learning from experience. The experience can be
something which is taking place, or more often is set up for the occasion by a trainer or
facilitator. Clearly, both action research and action learning are about learning from experience.
The experience is usually drawn from some tasks assumed by a person or team. Action learning
and research involve action and reflection on that action and have learning as one of their goals.
As experiential learning is the basis for both the learning part of both action learning and action
research.
You could also say that both action learning and action research are intended to improve
practice.

Action research intends to introduce some change; action learning uses some intended change as
a vehicle for learning through reflection. In action research, the learners draw their learning from
the same change activity. All are stakeholders in this activity. In other words, action is informed
by intuitive theories. Critical review and planning are informed by well-planned and timed
deliberation from experience and used to plan the next move.

Challenges of implementing action learning programmes in General Researchers

Organization

Where should the focus of the ‘action’ in action learning lie – on the individual, on the
organization or on both? Eighty-five per cent of the respondents to a survey in the National
Health Service (NHS) were working on individually determined problems (Brook 2009); a
finding confirmed as typical by earlier research across a variety of sectors (Pedler, Burgoyne,
and Brook 2005). Rigg notes that in much action learning attention has shifted in the direction of
individual development and professional practice in the past 20 years, especially, though not
exclusively, in public sector organizations. With notable exceptions (Pedler et al. 2005 and
Edmonstone and Flanagan’s account of Stoke City’s multi-agency development, 2007)
investment has predominantly focused on potential for individual development. The tendency
has been to invest in individual development and hope for a ‘‘sum of the parts’’ e ffect on
organisational performance’ (2008, 106–7). Elsewhere she argues that a major problem with
action learning as presently practised is that it is ‘often presented as a dichotomous choice
between benefit for the collective ‘‘we’’ or the individual ‘‘I’’, either it can be used to enhance
organisation capacity and further organisation performance, or its purpose is for the benefit of
the individual participants’ (105).

Some issues are difficult to categorize, and the divide between personal development and
organizational development can sometimes become blurred. Where, for example, would one
place the issue of dealing with gender or race issues in the workplace? Rigg and Trehan (2004)
describe a race discrimination discussion in a set meeting which can be perceived as a personal
development issue, but any action taken might have implications for equality and diversity on a
much larger, possibly organization-wide, scale. In doing this they also provide an example of
what critical action learning looks like. The question then becomes how can this learning be
organizationally shared and understood, a point made by Vince (2004) in his emphasis on the
value of interconnectivity and networking between sets. Revans himself understood that personal
development – the work of the self – was part of the organizational development endeavour, and
Lawless points out that an important question lies in ‘the relationship between individual action
and action at an organisational level’ (2008, 117). All this is relevant to the issue of the
relationship between action learning and organizational learning.

What is lost by focusing overmuch on personal or self-development issues? Boydell and

Blantern (2007) and Rigg (2008) highlight the potential for action learning to advance
organizational development in the public services (and elsewhere) through individual
stakeholding in collectively determined problems that affect everyone, and whilst personal
development need not be diminished by this refocusing, the effort of riding these two horses at
once can be extremely challenging (Pedler 1997). Yet, the heart of the argument is expressed in
Revans’ Principle of Insufficient Mandate: ‘those unable to change themselves cannot change
what goes on around them’ (2011, 76).

Rigg argues that the separation between the ‘we’ and ‘I’ is not helpful, especially where action
learning is being employed to build organizational capability and capacity. Individualized,
personal development is, on its own, hard to defend, particularly in the public sector: ‘In a public
services context, and particularly when public money is being spent, it is hard to argue that there
is any point to action learning if there are not results for citizens’ lives. Individual development
for its own sake is a luxury. The focus has to be on the organisation, if not the wider system’
(2008, 107).

Whether or not action learning should focus on the individual or the collective is not a new issue,
but it persists as practice and challenges the RCP that personal development should flow from
engagement with organizational problems (Vince and Martin 1993; Willmott 1994; Pedler 1997;
Flowers and Reeve 2002; Coghlan and Coughlan 2004; Donnenberg and De Loo 2004; Vince
2004; Rigg 2008; Cho and Egan 2009). Pedler questions the view of the individual manager
operating as ‘‘heroic change agent’’ in the face of an organized conspiracy of inaction’ and notes
that: ‘An individualistic focus . . . limits the growth of collective understanding and competence
in organizations’ (1997, 251).

Nevertheless, despite the literature on the benefits of interconnectivity, networking and focusing
on the collective, a considerable amount of action learning in the public sector seems to retain a
strongly individualistic focus (Pedler, Burgoyne and Brook, 2005; Rigg 2008; Brook 2009).
Perhaps one of the reasons for this lies in the continuing evidence for the presence of deep-rooted
anxieties in settings such as the NHS (Menzies-Lyth 1988) and Revans himself wrote that
hospitals were ‘institutions cradled in anxiety’ (1982, 263). Flowers and Reeve (2002) observed
that managers on their masters’ programme who were engaging in action learning missed the
excitement of large group learning experiences; they therefore created what they termed the
knowledge fusion method. This was a ‘whole group’ action learning approach: ‘a combination of
traditional action learning and open space technology but extended beyond traditional constraints
by the addition of web based virtual communities. Donnenberg and De Loo suggest that
organizational development outcomes from action learning ‘can be negligible’, and that the
reasons for this, may include, inter alia, the ‘mindsets’ that are brought to it (for example, the
view that action learning is for single managers for the improvement of skills); that despite
instances of network action learning, the connections with the wider organization are limited or
even non-existent; that there is too little discussion of (and learning from) action learning
‘failures’ and that action learning is not repeated enough in organizations to become ‘embedded’
(2004, 167–84). Moreover, there are practical difficulties in focusing upon individual problems.
As Dilworth remarks, they can be ‘uneven in their difficulty’ and if other members of the set do
not have a vested interest in them; they are ultimately ‘someone else’s concern’ (2010, 14).

Raelin issues a clear refutation of those who see action learning as a mere tool for organizational
problem solving: ‘solving the problem is fine, but it isn’t as crucial that there be problem
resolution as much that there be learning from experience’ (2008, 85). Revans’ exchange options
included the prospect of a participant ‘examin(ing) afresh some aspect of his or her own job’
(2011, 18–21). He did not regard collectively determined problems as the only sort suitable for
action learning.

Conclusion

Action Learning is a tool for leadership development. Leaders gain knowledge and new skills at
the individual level. Part of the skills central to action learning is the ability to listen and question
critically. This gives such leaders the self-confidence that drives the team to success. With action
Learning, an individual can work effectively in a group and take better decisions for team
success.

Developing action learning program by an organization should be done by setting up an initial

team that should help carry out the tasks and be the basic leaners and adopt from the program.
Basically, it is the action learning that entails the program, Management and workers should be
co-operative and should try to resolve the problems together. Teamwork would initiate a fast
process of problem solving as there would be a bundle of solutions given by different problems
that can give an easy problem solution. This would lead organization towards growth and
development and a better environment of the workers where they are working, and the
productive work could be seen.