Send this Article to a Friend!
Challenged as never before by global competition and tough economic times, executives are asking critical questions about the value of training in achieving business results. In this context, customizable Action Learning methods provide a uniquely effective alternative to traditional training programs. Action Learning ensures that leadership development and organizational results truly go hand in hand.
Today, real-time, real-world problems typically demand the full-time dedication of an organization’s time, money, and people. Herein lies the unique magic of the Action Learning approach, which places as much emphasis on addressing strategically important business initiatives—such as driving down costs, implementing quality control programs, supporting organizational change, or launching new products—as it does on learning and leadership development. In fact, the intense breakthrough activity of Action Learning takes place in the space where learning and business results intersect, and it makes significant contributions to both.
In addition to its dual focus on results and learning, Action Learning differs from traditional business problem-solving in a couple of other important ways. Companies select employees to work on cross-functional, cross-organizational teams and facilitators and coaches help the teams stay on task, solve problems and learn.
GE Origins and the MDA Model
Most of the Action Learning models in use today can trace
their roots to General Electric’s
Change Acceleration Process (CAP) program, a seven-step model
created at GE in 1992 for its well-known training facility, the
Crotonville Center.
The CAP process was created from tried-and-true change management principles and tools. It is not revolutionary, but it has been extremely successful because it had ambitious goals and was championed by top management. CEO Jack Welch was the driving force behind CAP, and at one time personally approved each CAP project. CAP also succeeded because employees throughout the company were required to learn it and apply it to their work. As Dotlich wrote (1998, p.19), “At General Electric, the strategic mandate was to turn a company of domestic-minded engineers and managers into global thinkers.”
The GE model focuses intensively on business results, with learning as a byproduct. However, organizations can also approach Action Learning from a training and development standpoint.
MDA Consulting Group’s Action Learning model, applied to more than two dozen initiatives in a diverse group of organizations over the past three years, places a great deal of emphasis on learning. This model, which we execute through our Breakthrough Leadership Teams, supports several key goals:
A recent example of where MDA has successfully applied its Action Learning model was at one of the nation’s high-end clothing retailers. The senior team of the company’s primary distribution facility was under continued pressure to significantly reduce operating costs or face possible outsourcing and elimination of services. The senior team members had each been working with their own managers to cut costs, but it was evident that in order to really implement the change needed, the senior team needed to improve its understanding of organizational change and then work together to better define the change necessary, communicate it clearly with the middle managers responsible for implementing the change, and hold each other more accountable.
The senior team convened as a Breakthrough Learning Team. During a six-month period, MDA facilitated four full-day, skill-building team sessions and three two-hour “base touch” meetings to keep the senior team members on task. The meetings were designed to help the Action Learning team better understand the change process and assess the organization’s ability to adopt the change needed, as well as work together to define the change message, develop a communication plan for disseminating the message through all levels of the organization, and assume their role as change sponsors. Individually, each senior team member received one-on-one executive coaching that was tied specifically to their role in the change effort, providing a greater support structure and allowing each individual to focus on their own growth and development while addressing the bigger organizational issues.
While the facility still has work to do to reach its multi-million dollar cost reduction goal, MDA’s approach to Action Learning has already produced measurable results, giving the Action Learning team a much needed shot of confidence with the company’s management and the employees at the facility—both of whom are now even more committed to the facility’s long-term viability.
The Process
Action Learning works best when it is customized for the situation
at hand, making the process and design extremely flexible. One
constant that is crucial for success is the support and involvement
of top management.
Selecting the problem. To effectively implement Action Learning in your organization, start by defining the results you want to achieve—in both development and business results—and how they will be measured. Your purpose should drive the design of your program. Focus on a real-time problem that is integral to business results.
Naming the team. Next, select small, cross-functional teams (the size can range from 7 to 12 people) who represent the right mix of individuals to learn together and tackle the issue. Emerging leaders make the best participants, and you may need to consider temporarily shifting parts of their day-to-day workloads to others. Sometimes an Action Learning challenge calls for a team that is a diagonal slice of the organization; sometimes it calls for peer teams.
Supporting players. Members of the management team and/or outside consultants can serve as facilitators and coaches. They can be involved in the assessment process, which helps identify team members’ development needs. Once teams begin meeting, facilitators set up invigorating team-building and small group learning situations linked to desired business results. The role of the coaches is integral to learning and leadership development. Coaches—whether outsiders or insiders—should strive to be objective and not have a vested interest in the team’s initiative. The coaches are responsible for team building, intervention, conflict resolution, and encouraging reflection that builds a bridge between action and learning.
Implementation. Typically, the Action Learning process works best when classroom work alternates with applied problem-solving activity, and when teams are responsible for implementing their solutions. Dotlich (1998, p. 16) eloquently describes Action Learning as a “parallel universe” in which learning and action “that might take months or even years to happen in the real business world occur in a matter of weeks. Learning and action are compressed in intensive workshops and field experiences…Action Learning forces people not only to think out of the box, but to think about who they are—as managers, leaders, and individuals. This change enables the participants to re-examine their company in a new light. The juxtaposition of who they are and what they need to do is always highlighted.”
There are some key pitfalls to be avoided in the Action Learning process. The single most common cause of failure is selecting the wrong problem—something that is too small, simple or unimportant; something that is overwhelmingly large and complex; or something that is beyond the Action Learning team’s purview. Other pitfalls include lack of organizational support, lack of time, a poor mix of team members, too much or too little structure, poor problem framing, poor facilitation, and unequal commitments to learning and results.
Addressing Business Challenges & Improving
Results
Action Learning teams often come up with better solutions and
recommendations than traditional business problem-solving methods.
The group dynamic makes Action Learning intense, confrontational
and creative. The composition of the groups often brings new
perspectives to old problems, resulting in great ideas.
Research has shown that small groups containing a diverse set of viewpoints are more creative than individuals acting on their own, and more willing to take risks. In addition, Action Learning team members are likely to work long and hard to see their solutions implemented because the process gives them a strong sense of ownership. Finally, the issues and problems that Action Learning teams deal with typically require the very things that Action Learning is capable of producing: a concerted collective effort, and cultural or behavioral change.
Leading companies and organizations that have used Action Learning include Exxon, CIGNA, Ford, General Motors, Marriott, the U.S. Army, Procter and Gamble, Digital Equipment, and British Airways. Some of GE’s results have been particularly impressive. According to Garvin (2000, p. 135), GE Supply used Action Learning to help roll out a new quality improvement program to 120 work sites, increasing sales by $16 million while boosting its rate of “promises kept” from 65 percent to 95 percent. Even more dramatic, GE Plastics Japan turned around a string of losses incurred from 1989 through 1993, broke even in 1994, and produced $18 million in net income in 1995.
Effectively Training & Developing Leaders
Beyond its demonstrated impact on the bottom line, Action Learning
is effective in developing an
organization’s emerging leaders due to
several factors:
Assessment and developmental goal-setting happen early in the
process.
Team members take responsibility for their own learning.
Participants learn within their existing work context and
culture.
Participants can apply learning immediately to real-time
situations, a method that research has shown to be more effective
than traditional classroom learning.
Openness and trust are encouraged.
The Action Learning process facilitates new and different
relationships between individuals and parts of the
organization.
At Tennant Company, MDA’s Action Learning model was applied during 2002 to key initiatives ranging from product launches to restructuring a division's profitability targets. According to Patricia Edman, Tennant’s Director of Human Resources, success of the company’s Action Learning program was measured by both business results and personal growth/development. In evaluating business results for the six initiatives, three of the initiatives met or exceeded expectations, two were moderately successful, and one initiative derailed. In evaluating personal growth and development, all the individuals met or exceeded expectations, and two individuals were promoted as a result of their expanded knowledge and experience. “There's no question that the process was effective and that we achieved results that we would not have achieved had we not used MDA’s Action Learning model.” said Edman.
Action Learning is a powerful tool for organizations that increasingly need both broad-based learning and behavioral change to address their real-time, real-world problems. It is a method that helps organizations solve these problems while addressing their often equally pressing needs for individual training and development, organizational learning and team building.
I encourage you to perform some Action Learning magic in your organization. If you select appropriate issues and participants, design your program well, and provide the needed support, you can maximize the return on your investment in learning and go a long way toward securing the leaders-in-training who will ensure your organization’s survival and success in the future.
If You Want to Read More:
Dotlich, David L. and Noel, James L., Action Learning: How the World’s Top Companies Are Re-Creating Their Leaders & Themselves, 1998, pp. 13-34.
Garvin, David, Learning in Action: A Guide to Putting the Learning Organization to Work, 2000, pp. 125-137.
Rothwell, William J., The Action Learning Guidebook: A Real-Time
Strategy for Problem Solving, Training, Design, & Employee
Development, 1998, pp. 3-25.