We are covering learning, growth, and change in organizations.
Chris Argyris expressed some meaningful thoughts related to these topics.
Then I would like to share some reflections related to my experience in Organizations.
Chris Argyris thinking could be summarized as follows.
He describes learning in the Organizations and defines single loop learning, and double loop learning.
I’ll explain.
Single Loop learning takes place when you consider as given some elements in the Organization and its strategy. The thermostat example may be helpful. I set the temperature at 27 degrees. When needed, the system intervenes and adjusts the temperature such as to keep it at the set value. Corrections take place based on the assumption that the temperature must be 27°.
Double Loop Learning
Why should the temperature be set at 27 degrees? Are we sure that this setting is the most suitable for the goals we are pursuing?
Double Loop Learning is based on reasoning that doubts strategical and organizational choices that are assumed to be unquestionable.
Why should they be?
Let’s use another example, coming from Organizations’ real life. A middle manager operates according to guidelines defined by some executives (eg. a combination of prices and distribution tactics). Hence if he/she doesn’t comply with those guidelines he should correct his/her actions accordingly (single loop learning). But (double loop learning), are we sure that those guidelines are actually the most valuable in order to ensure the achievement of the Organization’s goals?
We should better be not too sure. Too often we produce great, but useless, efforts in order to carry out inadequate strategies.
Too often great amounts of resources (€ or $, do I have your attention?) are wasted in useless efforts based on ideas that must be questioned and revised.
Do you think all this is quite simple? Yes it is. But where is the difficulty then?
Let’s just start adapt our thinking to the double loop learning principle and commence to question strategies, organizational settings that are showing some flaws!
Not very easy.
In fact some dynamics obstacle this approach causing important wastes of time and resources.
Individual defensive reasoning, and Organizational defensive routines.
Individual defensive reasoning
In simple words, we have all developed mental models that drive us to protect our actions.
Many times we refuse to think according to the double loop model (question our initiatives), simply because we want to defend what we have done. We don’t want our conduct to be questioned.
Organizational Defensive routines.
When our doings are doubted some discomfort takes place. It determines behaviors that protect existing routines, avoiding debate, and actually renouncing to improve. These consistent behaviors determine/coincide with organizational defensive routines. One typical example is a manager that does not question or talk about his colleague behavior in order not to embarrass him.
Dysfunctional situations drag themselves for years with no solution.
This type of stagnation can be devastating … people don’t face issues. How do people expect issues to solve themselves?
How is it possible to solve problems with the same reasoning that created them?
Organizational defensive routines prevent to deal with problems, and to solve them with cost effective approaches.
This is very frequent in groups within organizations. A great part of what I do is about unfreezing frozen situations.
I gently, but firmly lead reasonings (double loop ones) that safely allow leaders and their people to express their full potential.
The process is shared and we build practical awareness of goals and ways to achieve them.
The organization solves its problems, and, most of all, gains inspiration and capabilities on how to deal with them effectively in the future.
And what do you think yourselves?
Italiano
English
