Search results

The purpose of this paper is to introduce a conceptual framework for work-applied learning (WAL) that fosters the development of managers and other professionals as lifelong learners and practitioner researchers – through reflective practice, action research, action learning and action leadership, for positive organisational change.

The theoretical framework is designed from a holistic, affective-socio-cognitive approach to learning, teaching, research and development. It is based on a phenomenological research paradigm and informed by aspects of various theories, including experiential learning theory, strengths-based theory, grounded theory and critical theory/realism.

Based on classical and recent literature and the authors’ extensive experience, the WAL model presented here is an effective and practical approach to management education, research and development. It is useful for present and future requirements of business, industry, government and society at large in this twenty-first century, and in pursuit of a world of equality, social justice, sustainable development and quality of life for all. This is because of the nature of the research paradigm, particularly its collaborative and emancipatory processes.

This paper provides a theoretical, pedagogical and methodological rationalisation for WAL. This model is particularly useful for developing individual, team and organisational learning and for cultivating managers – or professional learners generally – as practitioner researchers. These researchers may act as role models of collaborative action leadership in their organisations with a cascading effect. This paper therefore advances an incipient literature on practitioner researchers as action leaders.

This paper is an edited version of an interview that presents information and insight into the background of ALARPM (action learning, action research and process management) not only as a field but also as a worldwide network association, thus facilitating understanding of the evolution and nature of these three concepts. The interviewee’s responses reflect her personal perspective, informed by both life experience and a theoretical framework that conceives of ALARPM first as a philosophy, a theory of learning and a methodology, and second as a method and technique.

This paper reviews the concept of action learning with reference to the classic texts by Reg Revans and texts that are likely to become classics, such as recent studies from the UK, Germany, Austria, South Africa, Australia, North America and Latin America. Action learning is now an international field and this paper draws widely from this field. The paper focuses on defining the concept of action learning and revealing its underlying philosophical assumptions. The terminology, features and success factors of an action learning program are also considered.

Presents a conceptual framework for process management of groups involved in action learning and action research. Discusses propositional, practical and experiential learning; and the concept of meta‐learning (learning to learn) in relation to the “learning organisation”. Presents a model of process management that concerns people and process, with implications for research in industry, government and higher education.

Action research has been recognised for its breadth as a field of research practice and its depth as a discourse of theoretical insight. It does not have one neat, widely accepted definition. Points to some reasons for the difficulty of formulating a generally accepted definition of action research, and argues why action research should not be confined but should be both clarified for communication and open for development. The discussion stems from a working definition developed with participants in an international symposium that serves as a classic definition of action research. Presents several alternative approaches to resolution and argues for a judicious mix of pragmatism and flexibility in approaching the definition issue.

The aim of this paper is to present an interview and postscript that examine the specific meaning, rationale, conceptual framework, assessment and teaching of critical reflection in and on professional development in management and higher education from an action research perspective.

This article is presented in the new genre of PIP (Zuber-Skerritt, 2009): Preamble – Interview – Postscript. The Preamble (P) sets out the background, purpose, structure and conduct of the interview (I), which addresses six probing questions and is followed by a Postscript (P) that reveals additional comments and reflections on the interview, and identifies learning outcomes and implications.

Reflective practice is essential for a deep approach to learning, research and professional development and it is a driving force to enable learners to be adequately equipped for constant and complex change in today's and tomorrow's turbulent world.

The article is positioned to inspire further R&D in the current debate on urgently needed radical and rapid change in higher education for the twenty-first century.

As well as the article's practical suggestions about why and how to develop reflective learning/practice, the PIP conceptual model applied in this article offers a useful practical approach for researchers to explore self-ethnography through interviews.

Two conceptual models illustrate the essence of this article, providing practical help to academics and other professionals to advance reflective practice in research and learning.

This paper argues that action research is more appropriate than traditional research for improving practice, and professional and organisational learning. Our particular aim is to help postgraduates in the social and human sciences to understand and clarify the difference between core action research and thesis action research; that is, between collaborative, participatory action research in the field (aimed at practical improvement in a learning organisation) and independent action research in preparing the thesis (aimed at making an original contribution to knowledge). We present a model to illustrate the distinction and relationship between thesis research, core research and thesis writing.

Models can be helpful for understanding the essence and/or processes of complex phenomena in a field, because they are simple representations of concept patterns and relationships. This paper presents a generic model for designing action learning programs, including action research projects, within organizations. Core values for action learning programs and explanations for success and potential pitfalls are also discussed. The model has been tested and found useful by many senior managers, academics, postgraduates and consultants in several countries. Readers are encouraged to explore the model in order to apply, refine, adapt it, or to create their own model representing their theoretical framework, concepts, values and systems thinking.

Discusses Australian postgraduate management training needs in the light of the obsolescence of current management development technology. Reports on a pilot study into perceptions within industry and higher education of what is needed for future courses. Academics emphasized content, and managers′ practical and process skills. Advocates a shift from content to process because of the rapidity of change in management′s environment.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate a leadership development program (LDP) for senior academic staff on “qualitative research” after two years to establish the success, limitations and overall impact of the program in terms of personal, professional and organizational benefits.

The paper presents the background, outline of the LDP and evaluation of results through participant feedback: at the end of the program; and after two years, using a “participatory action learning and action research” (PALAR) approach.

All participants were very positive about the design, conduct and learning outcomes of the program in terms of their own and their students’ learning during and after the program. But although the workshop had prepared them, some had not cascaded their learning and skills by conducting similar programs in their department, faculty or university wide, which was one of the main original objectives to achieve a multiplier effect across the institution. The authors discuss various reasons for this shortcoming and develop a process model for positive institutional change management in higher education.

Medium- and long-term effects of an LDP need to be followed up after a timespan of one to three or five years to establish whether the development has been effective and sustainable and to learn from limitations and shortcomings for future R&D activities.

The authors identify the limitations and suggest practical institutional changes that encourage cascading of learning in theory and practice with a multiplier effect.

The paper aims to assist higher education institutions to ensure sustainability in their LDPs.

The process model for leadership development in higher education can be adopted, adapted or further developed by other scholars interested in designing, conducting and evaluating a sustainable LDP in their field and organization.