Action Learning Groups as the Foundation for Cultural Change
The following paper was published in the Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources 1994
Action Learning Groups as the Foundation for Cultural Change
Dr. John E. Enderby and Dean R. Phelan
Every business would like all of its employees to be motivated, energetic, and highly committed to achieving its goals. Most organizations would like their staff to deliver consistently outstanding customer service. These attributes are generally accepted to be essential ingredients of long-term business success. And yet, few organizations would be able to genuinely claim that they achieve these people goals on a large scale and sustain them over time.
Owners and top management are almost universally unwavering in their desire and commitment to make their enterprise perform to its utmost. Why then can they not seem to pass this on? Why do the majority of employees continue to produce to the same standards regardless of what entreaties are made or training programs run? Excellence is always talked about but collective mediocrity' seems to be the genera] outcome.
These questions are not new. Over past decades, there have been a myriad of techniques tried, concepts rolled down and innovative programs run as attempts to better harness the people power within organizations so there will be better bottom-line results. These have included sensitivity training, skill-based training, effectiveness groups, quality circles, productivity teams, elaborate performance appraisal systems, communication videos, team building, and many many more. They are all generally rated highly by participants and, for a time, 'converts' create pockets of highly successful endeavor. And yet, despite the enthusiasm of those involved, when you step back from it all, the organization seems to remain much the same and bottom-line results seem to click over in much the same way. Regardless of the successions of high-powered consultants, nothing really changes.
On the international scale there have been some celebrated exceptions. Some organizations have 'got it right' and have been analysed closely by others in an attempt to discover the magic formula. The 'new' insights are heralded to all, packaged up and sold to others. Sadly the new programs and interventions never seem to produce the outstanding successes that occurred in the originating source.
WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT CULTURAL CHANGE?
When organizations invest in these programs, most often they want their employees to change so they are "better " - better at service, better at problem solving, better at leading etc. Essentially, they are trying to change the way people behave, i.e. changing the organizational culture or the way people do things at their place.
One of the positive things to come out of the many techniques tried, and our own experiences, is that there are some principles we now know about sustained, self-generating, cultural change
True behaviour change cannot be created by edict. Sustained long-term change only occurs when people's hearts and minds are committed (Senge, 1990)
People commit themselves when they believe in the worthiness of the change goal and when they feel involved and contributing according to their own values (Pedler, 1985)
There must be organization-wide systemic changes consistent with, and in support of, new cultural norms (Morgan, 1986);
Individuals like to belong to a group of people who are similarly committed and to feel needed and appreciated by others in the group (Fessler, 1976);
Commitment starts through interest and involvement. There must be a process whereby experimentation can occur. People need to be able to try things out, reflect on the results and share their experiences with others in a non-threatening environment (Peters & Waterman, 1982);
There must be trust and excitement rather than fear (Rogers, 1969);
The psychological (e.g., recognition, self-esteem) and material rewards for changing must be greater than for maintaining the status quo (Plant, 1987);
When people are either unable or unwilling to cope with the effects of change, they cling to the familiar or to the past (Bridges, 1980);
People cope with change best when they are able to move gradually through a process of endings, transitions, and beginnings. People will not move forward until they have had a chance to deal with any feelings of loss or grief associated with moving from the present (Bridges, 1980).
ACTION LEARNING GROUPS
Given the experiences of many organizations, as touched on in the introduction, the challenge is to create the circumstances whereby what we know about change can be harnessed. We have experimented with a methodology built around Action Learning. Reg Revans, the modern-day father of Action Learning, has made the following points in his writings over the years (see 1971, 1985):
Action Learning is about attacking problems (or opportunities) not puzzles. A problem has no existing solution whereas a puzzle has a solution that isn't presently known e.g., a crossword, how to measure costs, simplify delivery systems etc.
Action Learning poses questions from conditions of ignorance, risk and confusion, when nobody (including the experts) knows what to do next
Action Learning is learning by doing which means experimentation and therefore risk must take place.
The major resources that any manager has are his or her experience and knowledge of the work situation. Learning by managers consists mainly in new perceptions of what they are doing and in their changed interpretations of their past experiences. It is not any fresh program of factual data, of which they were previously ignorant but which they now have at their command, that enables them to surge forward.
Put simply, Action Learning is a process where people try out new ways of doing things (e.g., behaviours, processes, systems) relevant to a specific issue or project. They observe and reflect upon what happens, learn from it and make modifications. It is a continuous and intentional process of learning from actions taken (figure 1).
Figure 1 is our portrayal of a process which many authors have described (see for example, Margerison, 1978; Boddy, 1979; Pedler, 1985). The process seems simple but organizations generally do not operate this way. They certainly observe and act but there is little reflection, questioning or new learning. Problems are solved according to the tried-and-true methods of the past - often spelled out in the policy and procedure manual. This is known as the 'Paradigm Effect' where all issues are interpreted and tackled according to a certain paradigm or view of the world (Covey, 1992). An issue tends not to be looked at afresh. Hence organizations tend to be bound by past learnings rather than to evaluate properly the reality of the present and they rarely intentionally try out new things. They do not create opportunities for reflection and learning as, once the fire has been put out, it is on to the next issue. There are often significant disincentives to take risks.
The idea of forming groups built around the action learning process comes from the need people have for belonging and sharing, as spelled out in the cultural change list.
All properly functioning action learning groups create an opportunity for the members to come together in a supportive environment, to learn together and to encourage each other to make changes in the desired direction. This leads to a paradigm shift - a mind-set, created to support the new direction and a preparedness to try to solve current issues by experimentation and fresh thinking.
The bank we are working in is progressively implementing this process by setting up groups of managers who come together to learn about the new culture. They take ideas back to their branches or units, try them out and come back together to reflect on and share what has happened. The group creates a forum for true action learning to take place and managers learn about the desired culture and learn ways to implement it in their workplace. This helps them find new ways of looking at old problems, thereby assisting them in coping more effectively with a rapidly changing environment
A VISION STATEMENT
The necessary first step in creating the action learning groups was to describe the desired end state-the vision for the role of the branch manager. Today, 'vision' is a familiar concept in corporate circles, but most 'visions' remain a small group's view imposed on the rest of the organization. The vision must certainly be articulated by the leadership but, more importantly, it must be shared and owned by all if it is to have any impact (Block, 1987). A vision is truly shared when each member of the organization has a similar picture of what is to be created and everyone is committed to one another to achieve the goal, all having shared the same picture. It is an emotional undertaking, which connects the group members
The bank's top team constructed a draft vision statement for the managers' role around the core values of service quality, empowerment and leadership. For competitive reasons the company did not want the vision statement to be published in this article. However the following is an example of what appears in the statement: 'managers are customer and service oriented; they insist on and demonstrate by example the highest standards of service'. There is nothing profound about this extract, but it was part of the vision statement that arose from a participative process and attempted to articulate what is to be created. It was handed to the action learning groups so the process of sharing, ownership and implementation could begin. The vision statement set the target for the group so that the action learning process could begin. The process creates the forum for members to achieve commitment. It allows them to try things out, reflect, share, modify, innovate, learn and encourage in a non-threatening environment. By having the vision clearly articulated, managers in the Foundation Groups are able to clearly focus on the role they need to play. It enables them to more easily reflect on their current behaviour and whether their present approach is likely to move them towards the enactment of the vision statement. The commitment comes from meaning, trusting and having more say in what they do and how they do it. The evidence to date, as shown by an increasing number of 'own patch' issues which are being identified and resolved, suggests that members are progressively becoming more committed to the vision and are investing energy into new ways of implementation.
FOUNDATION GROUPS AND HOW THEY WORK
The action learning groups were named Foundation Groups as we hoped they would become the foundation for cultural change. The name signifies the core importance of the groups in supporting the cultural change and gives them an identity. (Science fiction buffs might recall the classic Foundation series by Asimov and how the Foundation Groups were the basis of the new way of doing things.)
Each Foundation Group is made up of about fifteen managers from different branches or units who meet every fortnight for about half a day. They choose where they meet and set their own agendas. A senior line manager creates the groups and outlines the vision and values which sets the direction for the group, but thereafter attends only by invitation of the members. This senior manager acts to protect the group from outside destructive forces, encourages its development and trust levels, and acts as a conduit to the organization for process improvement suggestions which have wider implications beyond the group members' immediate work units.
The basic purpose of a Foundation group is to enable its members to model the culture (its shared vision) initially within the safety of the group. The vision statement describes the culture. The action learning process enables them to make sense of it in practice and to work out how the vision can be implemented in their workplace. Good relationships, co-operation and support are encouraged so that each manager can explore the cultural changes required and develop at his/her own pace. A typical group may concentrate on issues of service quality improvement and leadership, for example. Consideration would then be given to items such as branch layout, staff training and customer service delivery which would be discussed and reflected on in terms of how members can learn and improve their own management style.
The Foundation groups meet on a district basis and each geographical region consists of about four groups. (Administrative groups are formed on a functional basis.) Initially, each group meets for a two-day 'time-out' at which it builds teamwork, learns what service quality is about, clarifies its vision and its values (flowing out of the vision statement), establishes ground rules, and sets an action plan basically coming to grips with what is trying to be achieved.
Each group appoints its own chairperson, or co-ordinator, as well as a secretary and these positions rotate regularly to broaden experience and expertise. A facilitator is appointed by the senior line manager to assist the group with its processes and to act as a link with other Foundation groups. The facilitator must be fully skilled in the action learning methodology, and be an 'outsider' to the group.
The agenda and minutes go out before each meeting to enable members to plan for, and enable participation in, group discussions. An atmosphere of openness is encouraged so group members can talk freely about themselves and their work experience. The facilitator assists managers to reflect on their work experience as well as these key aspects of the service quality journey - service issues, leadership concepts, and organisational barriers. The process used is true action learning.
Some inputs and conceptual tools are introduced to the group, e.g. problem solving tools, leadership models, keeping a diary to learn from their experience, etc. The group is invited to assess these, try them out on the job, and share their learning and experience. From time to time, groups are invited to give feedback to the organization on specific issues, or they can initiate unsolicited feedback. This feedback must be constructive and related in some way to improving the performance of the work unit. There is no 'firing missiles' at the organization.
The senior line manager is him/herself a member of an Executive Foundation Group which operates on similar lines to the district groups. The Executive Foundation Group's role is to provide overall direction and to role model the behaviours expected of the managers within the district groups.
EVALUATION
It is not easy to evaluate human growth. However we are operating on the assumption that the action learning groups will be more effective in their dealings with customers and hence will start to demonstrate better bottom-line performances over time, all other variables being equal.
Preliminary results are shown in figures 2, and 3. Figure 2 illustrates the results obtained from customer surveys of six of the first Foundation Group branches versus six comparable (control group) branches, whose managers had not been involved in the process.
Figure 3 summarizes the survey, taken seven months later, of 107 Foundation Group branches. Our data to date suggest that as a whole, the Foundation Group branches are being rated by customers as giving better service than those branches that have not participated in the action learning process.
The action learning process does seem to be working as far as influencing customer opinions about service. Customers were not made aware of the fact that certain managers were participating in an action-learning group. So, at the very least, we can deduce that managers, exposed to the process, are having some positive effects on their staffs’ ability to influence customer ratings.
We are also in the process of trying to evaluate the leadership behaviours of those managers participating in the Foundation groups. Table 1 shows the employee perceptions of 80 key administrators, holding leadership positions, who are participating in the action learning process. We do not have sufficient comparative data at this stage to make firm statements, but the subjective comments of the managers involved support the hypothesis that the action learning process is helping them to become better leaders. We intend to survey staff again at the end of twelve months to see whether they perceive their managers to be better leaders as a result of their participation in the process.
Whether all this will ultimately translate into improved financial returns for the individual branches concerned remains to be seen. Definitive evaluation is complicated by the many other economic factors that enter into the equation. However, it is generally believed within the banking industry that better customer service will produce dividends. On the basis of the results so far, the bank has seen fit to invest considerable resources in extending the action learning process to well over one hundred branches as at the date of this article.
SUMMARY
Action learning groups are not another program, which if implemented throughout an organization, will transform it into a winner. What we are trying to do is to create an environment within the organization which encourages the fundamentals required for individuals to commit themselves to what the organization is trying to achieve (the vision) and to feel empowered to implement this vision-to tackle obstacles, to think and act on the organization's behalf, to learn and to move forward. We are trying to create an environment where genuine learning can take place.
These are the critical ingredients and they cannot be coerced by any amount of rhetoric, training or glossy literature-although all of these can be useful adjuncts if the core values and process are sound. We reiterate that edict and cascading behaviour training do not work because they do not deal with the essentials of individual enrolment and commitment. Without the critical ingredients, nothing of substance will change. Sustained cultural change will occur if a critical mass can be achieved. Then, and only then, will we witness a very significant leap forward in the marketplace.
Dr John E Enderby (Grad.Dip.Org.Dev; M.Bus., PhD) is an organisation development and management consultant. He is currently involved in cultural change in a large financial organization via action learning groups of front-line manager. He provides a counseling / mentor service to executives, and advises organisations on the planning and implementation of change. His current research interest is using program evaluation methodology to enhance organisation learning.
Dean R. Phelan (BA; Grad.Dip.App.Psych; MA(Hons), MAPsS) is an organisational psychologist. He is Director of Services at Epworth Hospital, Melbourne and in 1992 was elected Chairman (Government & Employers) of the Health and Medical Services Committee, International Labour Organisation, Geneva. He has written and lectured extensively on human resources and organisational change. He is currently working with one of the mainline churches on a large-scale cultural-change program.
References
Block, P. (1987) The Empowered Manager: Positive Political Skills at Work. London: Jossey-
Bass.Boddy, D. (1979) Some Lessons from an Action Learning Programme. Journal of European Industrial Training, 3(3), 17-21
Bridges, W. (1980) Transitions: Making Sense of Life's Changes. Reading, MA. Addison-Wesley
Covey, S. (1982) Principle-Centered Leadership. London. Simon & Schuster
Fessler, D. (1986) Facilitating Community Change La Jolla, Calif: University Associates
Margerison, C. (1978) Action Research and Action Learning in Management Education. Journal of European Industrial Training, 2(6), 22-5
Morgan, G. (1986) Images of Organization. California: Sage
Pedler, M. (1985) Action Learning in Practice. Aldershot, UK. Gower
Peters, T., & Waterman, R. (1982) In Search of Excellence. New York, Harper and Row
Plant, R. (1987) Managing Change and Making It Stick. London: Fontana
Revans, R. (1971) Developing Effective Managers. Praeger Publishers
Revans, R. (1985) Action Learning: Its Origins and Nature. Aldershot, UK. Gower
Rogers, C. (1969) Freedom To Learn. Ohio. Merrill
Senge, P. (1990) The Fifth Discipline-the Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday