Communications - Single-Loop & Double-Loop Learning - Essay Example

?Communications – Single-loop & Double-loop Learning To start with, the two types of learning include the single-loop learning and the double-loop learning. Both of these come under the aegis of organizational learning. Now how these types of learning help establish the basis of organizational learning is an important one and within the domains of this paper, these shall be studied in depth. Single-loop learning is indeed the repetition of attempts with regards to a problem at hand and there are no other variations in place to tackle the same since the goal behind this is never solicited. On the other hand, double-loop learning is that type of learning which aims to explore the basis of endeavoring to achieve a goal under different circumstances so that the goal becomes modified with respect to the experience that has thus been gained. It is also possible to simply reject the basis of this goal since a great amount of experience has already been gained. It can be undertaken by an individual or even an organization. Learning regimes are helped essentially by the aligning of instruction and assessment methods with theoretical basis. Instruction takes care of the assessment methods and assessments in return discern the exact basis of a student’s repertoire with knowledge. Theories look after the different ways under which strategic basis is manifested. All of these help in jotting down the learning styles which are adopted by different students. It is a need to align the instruction needs and assessment methods in order to reap rich rewards for the students as per their learning regimes. This will essentially make them into learned individuals at the end of the day. Both instruction and assessment methods incorporate the element of learning from a long haul. The different educational paradigms that come into play include the positivist, the constructivist and the critical – all of which support as well as obstruct the alignment process in essence. Supporting the alignment process would mean that the organization is getting the work done in a pretty easy fashion (Garette, 2001). On the other hand, obstructing the alignment process would entail its basis within the critical paradigm of educational discussions. Thus the paradigm basis will manifest the wrongdoings in a person or an entity so to speak. The type of paradigm that an organization uses depends a great deal on its kind of work. The usage of all these three educational paradigms would mean that there is a complete mesh and the organization will reap the benefits in the long run Chris Argyris has provided for a clear cut description of the single-loop and double-loop learning mechanisms which have been instrumental at highlighting how organizational learning has been studied in the time and age of today. This is in light of the ever-changing mechanisms that are closely associated with organizational learning and how employees have been able to shape up their domains on a proactively consistent basis. This comes from the aegis of the organizations themselves where the top management realms play their significant roles. Modifying the goal is important because it tells an individual exactly how to reach the goal and thus achieve his long term objectives and desires. Same is not the case with single-loop learning where there has been witnessed an inability for the goal modification realms (Marsick & Watkins, 1996). These are some of the most discussed aspects that come under the realms of organizational learning and have been depicted in a number of examples in the past as well. One should believe that double-loop learning is much better because it is comprehensive and encloses a number of aspects when one compares the same with single-loop learning. It is a fact that any organization that allows learning to come about in a natural fashion with its folds is an organization that knows how to run its varied processes and carry out relevant tasks in a quantifiable manner. What learning essentially does is to bring in the much touted value and quality for the sake of the organization, and thus the end results are such that success could easily be envisaged from the same. However, if this learning does not play a major part at instilling pride within the employees themselves, there are bound to be serious problems for all and sundry. This organization would not know how to move ahead and what should be the order of the day as far as proper working domains are with respect to the learning quarters. There is a dire need to realize that learning is a consistent activity and should not be given up no matter how difficult it is achieve solid results in the end. The focus must be such that the learning quarters are being run consistently so that success is a part and parcel of the realms of the organization. Moving ahead with the debate of single-loop and double-loop learning, it is important to ascertain where these learning mechanisms will basically be employed. The significance for finding out such details comes about when the employees discern the exact basis of growth and development in the workplace. These mechanisms are given air by the fact that training and development activities are directly seen in the light of bringing positives which will eventually change the course of action for the different business processes, undertakings and behaviors. The single-loop and double-loop learning basis of an organization is useful for it to keep track of what has already been a resource within the auspices of the organization and what fails to remain as such within it. The strengths within the organization will be seen as the major points of advantage that will essentially create a much needed difference towards the eventual gains which come about from a financial standpoint. The single-loop and double-loop learning avenues help the organization achieve success from the fiscal point nonetheless, and it is important to understand such concerns in the most basic sense (Senge, 2006). This will ask for the organizations to make available all the areas which can be deemed as the regions where opportunity within the single-loop and double-loop learning domains is seen as a force to reckon with. Any organization would immensely appreciate the idea of having such learning mechanisms in place, which essentially could bring in more revenues at the end of the day. The element of single-loop and double-loop learning is thus studied from the perspective of whether an employee is completely at home with the training and development activities or he feels uneasy in understanding the intricate details with such training modules. If the latter is the case, it is the duty of the human resources department to help this individual with what is bothering his progress towards learning the training and development activities and processes. Conceivably on the debate of single-loop and double-loop learning, it would be a better fit if the organizational values are told to the employees even before he is recruited within it, because in that case he would be aware of the demands and requirements of the organization. He would get to know beforehand that he has to show a ‘to-do’ attitude towards learning and thus has to be a very important part of the training and development activities which are consistently a part of any business process or organization. The element of s ingle-loop and double-loop learning needs to come in with the premise of bringing about a solid (and positive) change because employees must consistently upgrade their own selves, in line with the needs and requirements of the time and in the manner the organizations are evolving in the time and age of today. Single-loop and double-loop learning plays a very vital role in the acquisition of knowledge management principles and undertakings. Knowledge management for any organization is given significance from day one. This is because knowledge is the most important and potent tool for the sake of any organization. Single-loop and double-loop learning helps in the amalgamation of knowledge management tasks and thus the link between the two if of quintessence for the long term growth and stability of the enterprise. The employees have to understand that their continuous training and development activities will eventually lay the basis for a solid footing as far as achieving positive and outstanding results for the company that they work for. They would have to give their best time and again so that they could win the trust and confidence of their top management and thus be termed as successful employees and workers, contributing endlessly towards the organizational undertakings. What is most important under this tenet is the point that the employees should be motivated to give in their best and have a very receptive attitude which will make them prosper in the long run scheme of things. They would have to find ways through which they could achieve success with each passing day and for this to happen in entirety, it is important that they give their best shot at all times possible. Indeed training and development activities bring out the best in an individual, time and time again, all of which fall under the learning realms. It is correct to state here that an organization which can learn, can understand what its responsibilities are with regards to the society, the environment, its stakeholders and customers, its functions and different processes which have to be looked down upon with legal and ethical perspectives. This means that the organization emancipates its working methodologies in line with its already set values and moral principles. Moreover, it knows what are its obligations and compulsions towards all the above-mentioned. The organization is always willing and eager to learn from its mistakes, ready to bring in newer and fresh processes within its folds and always encouraging its stakeholders and employees to invest more money and time, respectively. Organizations have responsibilities to give back the people what they deserve and not merely run after revenues which would surely come if they play it fair. Managing an organization is indeed an important function which comes under the single-loop and double-loop learning principles. It has case studies and best case scenarios to look up to whenever there is a problem or trouble at hand and it knows who the right person is to contact whenever there is some discrepancies within the system. Add to that the organization tries to keep its contacts, no matter in which capacity they are, at a maximal point and always keeps on increasing so as to become a socially active player within the relevant industry. The management aspect also stems from the fact that its knowledge base is intact and knows what is required of it. This knowledge base has the role of continuously improving the systems and working methodologies. It also has the best available middle management employees who know the technical basis of running the organization and whose potential can largely benefit the sound workings of the company. Thus it is very important to understand that an organization which is willing to place the knowledge base at level with the top management when it comes to calling the shots (taking the decisions), is willing to experiment in a very proactive manner; one that can reap rich dividends in the near future. Such evidences are very apparent within the domains of my organization where emphasis is put on getting the job done through different means. The focus is on the completion of tasks more than anything else without really finding out what are the exact means and ways through which this work has been manifested. I have personally seen within my organization that there is a mixture of single-loop and double-loop learning on display. This has so happened within instances that have involved the higher management as well as the middle tier which has suggested for the incorporation of single-loop and double-loop learning. I am of the view that such realms exhibit a sense of understanding that the goals could be amended as and when required. A learning organization showcases its willingness to reach new heights and allow its employees to understand that success can only be achieved if they have a clear cut objective or goal in mind. This goal could be amended as and when required, and hence there is a dire need to understand that employees shall change their respective stances when they have to achieve either personal goals or organizational objectives, both in the short run as well as in the long term scheme of things. I will personally quote the example of a workplace where I did my internship for a period of about 3 months. I gained quite an important insight into the domains of single-loop and double-loop learning that still there is much understanding that I can derive from thinking about the organizational settings. This organization is one of the most sought after names within the shipping business. I went there as an internee for about 3 months and successfully completed it within the set time period. What I witnessed at the shipping organization was that every organization had set for their own selves some goals and objectives which they were attaining with their hard work and devotion paid to the cause. They were not relinquishing the time dedicated for their professional commitment but were allotting time to these tasks through overtime hours and thus sitting back and completing them to meet the targets. These goals were inherently different and focused on their personal targets which usually changed as and when they did so require. What this meant was the fact that the employees believed that if their missions were not accomplished, they would lag far behind in the race to reach the top, and hence be behind others who were also running to meet their respective goals and targets (Senge, 2008). In essence, there was a rat race going on within the organization to meet their targets, which looked very odd to me. I, however started to comprehend what was going on at the workplace and asked a few employees about the same. They were more than willing to let me know that their goals changed if they thought they will receive some form of help from the end goals and objectives. They also believed that these are important aspects which must be resolved as they faced new horizons and since their business domains shifted from one angle to another. Mr. David was one of the employees who changed his goal whenever there was a dire need to set his sails right. He believed that the goal can change as and when required. This is a classic case of double-loop learning where Mr. David was able to modify his stance and change the basis of the goal so that he could achieve it in a quantifiable manner without much hassle at his end. This helped the basis of understanding that Mr. David could contribute towards the organizational realms in a very positive fashion and that there were no hiccups experienced by just about everyone in the workplace. What is even more interesting is the fact that Mr. David paid heed to the advice of the people who suggested to him about changing his goal with the varying times ahead but he did so at his own understanding so that he would not regret his own decision at the end. His ideology of the subject at hand was most significant than any other individual as he knew the double-loop learning would assist him positively than others would have envisaged for him or would do so in the coming times. Mr. David successfully attained his goals because he changed his position when he direly required the same to happen. He was able to exert his own influence more than any other individual’s and this is one of the most important reasons why double-loop learning can be seen as a successful entity of learning within such an example. Ms. Wendy however, did not apply double-loop learning to her own benefit. She was employed under Mr. David in the organization but did not quite know how to change her goal or modify it so that she could achieve success within her ranks. She followed the age old dictum of single-loop learning whereby her understanding was such that she would achieve success if she stuck on to the myth of reaching her goal by hook or by crook. She did not really care about the pathways as long as she reached the goal at the end. This made her stern in her approach to reach the top, and thus gave her a clear cut picture that her goal was just about everything for her in essence. This did not work to good effect for her own individual self since she lost out on the count of reaching her end goal when the going got really tough. Ms. Wendy lost out on the count of reaching her targets because her understanding of single-loop learning did not quite play the trick for her. Had she taken the advice of Mr. David beforehand the end result would have been different and she would have reached her goal in a very clear manner. But this did not happen since she was unwilling and simply not ready to accept any change in the wake of reaching the end goal and any form of modification was faced with hostility by her own self. In the end, it would be appropriate to suggest that single-loop and double-loop learning mechanisms are important for the sake of any organization and these shall always be dealt with in a number of different ways. This will help the organization to grow as a whole and its most prized resources, i.e. the employees themselves would be able to garner the best potential with regards to their own selves. However what must be understood here is the fact that single-loop and double-loop learning quarters are applied in a manner that is seemingly fit for both of these because these shall ensure success and accomplishment by the individuals at the very end. All said and done, these two types of learning are very quintessential in the time and age of today and these should be treated as such. Works Cited Garette, B. The Learning Organization, Harper Collins, 2001 Marsick & Watkins K. (eds) Creating the Learning Organization, American Society for Training and Development, 1996 Senge, P. M. The Fifth Discipline, 2nd ed, Random House Business, 2006 Senge, P. The Necessary Revolution, Doubleday, pp. 101-118, The Learning Journal, 2008 Read More