8878
An investigation of social learning constructs of human resource developers using Argyris’ action mapping
Karen E. Watkins University of Texas
Abstract
This research examined the beliefs of human resource developers about their own learning and training practices. Using Argyris’s theory of action framework and mapping technique, potential dysfunctional, unintended consequences of these beliefs were identified. Interviews with 47 human resource developers at three separate sites revealed similar patterns of beliefs which are depicted in terms of Freire’s stages of consciousness.
Introduction and statement of the problem
Research on the practice of human resource developers has been largely prescriptions for competencies, descriptions of roles or status reports of activities. Research sponsored by the American Society for Training and Development[1] led to the identification of ten human resource development roles and 35 core competencies for trainers. Using a delphi process, individuals nominated as experts by the Society’s members identified competencies, ranked them and listed behavioural indicators for each of the competencies. Since individuals were asked to describe current practice, this pivotal study is limited by the lack of corroborating observations of current practice and by the lack of a model for ideal practice. This perceptual data is also more likely to be espoused theories about practice than actual practice[2].
In addition to several studies of the competencies of human resource developers, others have emphasised roles[3] or training methods[4]. Yet, since individuals’ beliefs lead to their actions[5], it is appropriate to determine their beliefs about human resource development, examples of what they do as educators and as learners and to reflect on the consequences of these actions. This study examined these beliefs through accounts of critical incidents in human resource developers’ own workplace learning and teaching. Through these accounts, possible contradictions between what they do for themselves and what they do for others may be identified. An examination of the reasoning of these individuals regarding their practice of adult education in the workplace yields rich information from which to redesign graduate programmes and to improve practice.
Research questions
1.What are the causal patterns of reasoning about learning and about their practice that characterise human resource developers in three different organisational settings?
2.Are these patterns consistent across all three sites?
Theoretical perspective
A theory of action perspective was used to examine the beliefs of human resource developers about their learning and about their practice. According to Argyris and Schön, a theory of practice consists of a set of interrelated theories of action that specify what actions, given a particular situation, will yield desired results. They distinguish between espoused theories or intentions and theories-in-use or actions. The process of learning one’s dysfunctional theories-in-use (those which are inconsistent with espoused theories or ineffective) is a process they see in terms of George Kelly’s Psychology of Personal Constructs (1955). Kelly sees learning as the ‘psychological reconstruing of life’[6]. As Argyris and Schön phrase it, ‘behavioural learning involves the experience-based modification of some elements of theories-in-use governing variables, action strategies, or assumptions’[7]. This leads to their idea that there are two kinds of behavioural learning: changing action strategies or single-loop learning and changing governing variables or double-loop learning. Kelly’s reconstrual would be most like double-loop learning since it involves a reframing of one’s personal constructs or ways of seeing the world. Kelly’s theory rests on the fundamental assumption that ‘A person’s processes are psychologically channelised by the ways in which he anticipates events’[8]. An individual’s frame on an event will predict how he or she will psychologically experience it. Determining an individual’s expectations and retrospective rationalisations about events may provide a window into that individual’s ‘constructs’ of the world - or their theories of action.
Argyris and Schön engage practitioners in reflection on their theories of action in terms of overall internal consistency (the absence of self-contradiction), the congruence between espoused theories and theories-in-use, the effectiveness of the action strategies individuals produce to implement their theories, and whether or not they value the behavioural world created by their theories and actions. In order for practitioners to alter their behaviour, they will first have to identify the deep structures which currently hold them paralysed in inconsistency or in double binds[9] and confront the defensive routines which enable them to remain blind to their own inconsistency[10]. The intervention theory and method originally developed by Argyris to enable individuals to do this is now called action science.
Action science is a science of interpersonal action which produces knowledge which is disconfirmable, actionable, and critical or normative in that it offers alternatives to what is in terms of values actors may freely choose to adopt[11]. It is a theory, a type of intervention or practice, and a research approach. In this study, neither action science interventions nor research were conducted. Rather, the theory of action perspective was used as a theoretical framework through which espoused theories and theories-in-use could be identified with the aim of illuminating an alternative theory through which ultimately to transform human resource development practice. What human resource developers do when confronted with recurring problems in their practice and their reasoning about these problems were identified. An adaptation of Freire’s[12] stages of conscientizacao was used to characterise the resulting framing orientations with the first two stages from Freire (magical and naive) like Argyris’s control orientation and the final stage (critical consciousness) like Argyris’s learning orientation.
Methodology
As part of a larger study of the learning practices of human resource developers, data collected by Watkins and Wiswell[13] from interviews with 47 human resource developers were transcribed and analysed. The sample was drawn almost equally from three different types of organisations: a research hospital, a high technology corporation, and a government agency.
For this portion of the study, the research procedure involved 30-60 minute interviews based on five open-ended questions with extensive probing for critical incidents reported in retrospective accounts. To the extent that it was possible, individuals were asked to recapture actual dialogue to illustrate key events following the critical incident technique of Flanagan[14]. Questions accessed individuals’ beliefs and perceptions about the barriers to their learning in the organisation, a critical incident which illustrates a recurring problem in their practice and another of a learning project, and the characteristics of exemplary learners in their organisation. These questions are especially concerned with the meaning system of individuals, what Harré[15] describes as an ethogenic approach. The data was analysed in terms of possible contradictions and double binds. This took the form of noting when individuals said two things that were inconsistent; when they said one thing and did another; when they described an event that was later described differently by other individuals; and when the group as a whole appeared to be in contradiction with either their own espoused theory or that of the field. This portion of the data analysis led to a list of possible double binds-incompatible beliefs which impeded competent action.
From these, themes were identified and depicted in theory of action maps[16]. These maps sparsely identify governing values or framing orientations, the action strategies which actors have described which fit these frames or values, and predict consequences from these strategies. Embedded in the maps may also be a suggestion of an alternative course of action. Argyris’s action maps are intended as a form of data display which may be disconfirmed by respondents. Key features of these maps are that they must portray the interdependence and self-reinforcing quality of the variables individuals identify as relevant; they illustrate a causal theory of learning on which learning proceeds from governing variables or values to action strategies which yield intended and unintended consequences; the maps describe repetitive patterns that recur over time which means that these patterns also depict social systems. The maps show a pattern that is highly unlikely to change unless individuals' theories of action, their reasoning about the pattern, is altered which in turn can alter the organisational norms supporting their current reasoning. Argyris further notes that the maps transcend individual demographics to describe a system so culturally reinforced that most individuals in the system will either act consistently with the map or describe themselves as ‘bucking the system’.
One of the constraints and therefore limitations of this study was the inability to develop this map in dialogue with all of the participants. The first version of the map was presented to the first site for discussion. Their comments were tape recorded and reviewed for potentially disconfirming data. Results indicated strong confirmation on the accuracy of the themes and the double binds. Consistent with the theory, individuals became even more convinced that ‘the constraints were insurmountable and the people intractable’[17]. This version of the map offers an alternative to the current situation in order to catalyse transformation of practice.
Results
Two recurring dilemmas encountered in practice by human resource developers were identified in all three sites though one site, the governmental agency, predictably had the most instances of references to the theme of ‘training is political’. Figure 1 presents the composite action map from all three sites. Maps are accompanied by quotations and anecdotes from the data which dramatise how the theme depicted appears in the organisation with an interpretation of how these beliefs may lead to undesirable consequences or an undermining of the individuals' intentions. Two anecdotes follow.
The idea that training is art can be seen in the many instances when trainers were asked to develop courses within time-frames they knew to be pedagogically unsound. One individual reported to the training director that many more training programmes had been requested by her department than she could possibly develop and schedule within the needed time-frames. In addition, influential members of the department had complained to the training director that this trainer did not listen or pay attention to their needs. The training director suggested that she listen attentively to their requests, nod empathetically, then continue as before. On the one hand, this strategy may convey that trainers are empathic, but by not clarifying the limits of training, it may also inadvertently encourage the department to believe that the training department can do anything they ask which might increase their demands both in terms of quantity and in terms of a lack of realism regarding the purpose and outcomes of training.
Political influences on training could be seen in the well-developed argument of one trainer that time management training was a waste of time because it did not lead to any real behaviour change and thus not only did not increase productivity, but also took people away from their work for five full days, thereby lowering their productivity. Contrasting this view was that of numerous other respondents whose perception was that time management training had been very effective for them. When the new training director eliminated this training they were left without any training at all, feeling devalued. Thus, this trainer’s value of training for behaviour change and increased productivity may have conflicted with learners’ value of training as a reward. In cancelling the training, the trainer may have inadvertently undermined the goal of increasing productivity if learners begin to feel devalued enough to leave, slow down, or sabotage their work.
Educational/scientific importance of this research
From an educational perspective, the findings from this study can alert current and future practitioners to unconscious beliefs they may hold that will impede their effectiveness. Developing awareness of such beliefs and acquiring skill in reflecting on one's practice are competencies that this study suggests would enhance the curricula of graduate adult education and human resource development programmes. Further, mapping social learning constructs is a unique method of presenting data that only help individuals transform their perspective on their practice. Limitations of this study include the potential for subjectivity in both subjects and interviewers, and the lack of corroboration of the findings by some of the subjects. As in most qualitative data, this research has limited generalisability due to the small size of the sample and lack of control for representativeness of the sample. Additional research questions suggested by the findings from this study include: What other strategies are suggested by these themes? What strategies transform practice? To what extent do maps depict generalisable, testable data about professionals’ theories of action?
Figure 1
Framing OrientationsAction Strategies / Beliefs of Trainers/ Action Strategies
Magical
‘You’re born with talent or you're not’ / ‘Training is Art’ / - support the idea that trainers who ‘have it’ don’t need training; those who don’t couldn’t learn anyway;
- hold excellent trainers in awe and discount personal capacity to emulate them;
- discount technology of training by emphasising technical expertise over training expertise when choosing own learning activities;
- minimise clarifying of outcomes, purposes, time needed for different outcomes and purposes, and cost justification of training;
- avoid seeking valid information about performance
Naive
‘We can’t do it because we're oppressed’ / ‘Training is political’ / - assume training is a negotiable benefit for self; blame others for holding the same assumption;
- delegate determining training needs and modality to supervisors who will enact personal cultural norms about how best to learn;
- remain unaware of implicit priority setting in bending rules/compromising educational goals/setting budgets.
Critical Consciousness
‘We’re colluding with our oppressors. We need to break out of the system that oppresses’ / ‘Training is learning’ / - [18]Trainers actively engage in learning about learning;
- trainers encourage different views about training and design ways to test them;
- trainers and learners publicly share and test their understandings of human resource development problems;
- trainers jointly design and implement solutions with learners;
- trainers and learners publicly reflect on results.
Figure 1 continued
Consequences for the Training Function / Consequences for LearnersAlmost no one can do it ‘artfully’, so few achieve high level of professionalism
Training will not be professional work / ‘Culture of Silence’
Managers have little solid information about how to use training
Training will become expendable
Training is part of the reward and punishment system rather than the task accomplishment system
Trainers are vulnerable and personally responsible / ‘Culture of Sabotage’[19]
Training is expendable
Learners and trainers will experience less defensiveness, more trust
Learners and trainers will feel mutually responsible for results / ‘Culture of Empowerment’
Learners and trainers will feel freer to experiment, to take risks
[1] McLagan, P. (1983) Models for excellence. Washington, DC: ASTD
[2] Argyris, C. and Schön, D. (1974) Theory in practice: increasing professional effectiv