Action Learning
Action Learning
What is action learning?
- Small groups solving real work challenges together
- Solving problems and learning at the same time
- The key that turns reflection into learning
Adopting action learning changes the training manager's job first. Instead of choosing lesson plans and instructors, you choose which challenge to hand to whom, and that choice becomes the curriculum. Participants don't apply what they learned someday; months later they have to prove it in front of their sponsor through results they actually delivered. Because the output of learning is change on the ground, not a report, the training budget and business results end up in the same ledger.
There are two main ways to run it. In the single-challenge format, everyone digs into one problem together, which suits company-wide challenges. In the multiple-challenge format, each participant brings a challenge from their own department and the group questions each other, which suits leadership development. Realistic defaults are teams of 4 to 6, a duration of 4 to 6 months, and a workshop about one day per month. Challenge selection comes with conditions: the answer must not already exist, the challenge must be small enough for the team to act on within its authority, and a sponsor executive who will make the decisions must put their name on it. This is where it differs from PBL, which works with hypothetical cases, and from a TFT (task force team), which delivers outputs with no learning design. Action learning without a sponsor turns into a hobby club.
The most common failure on the ground is when management hands down a task with the answer already decided. Given a brief with the conclusion baked in, such as 'study how to adopt a smart factory,' the team spends all four months reverse-engineering the logic an executive is likely to want. If the final presentation earns applause but not a single action follows, participants won't raise their hands when the next cohort is recruited. Another common failure is a facilitator who can't stand the discomfort and starts feeding solutions. At that moment, action learning turns into free consulting and the learning disappears. Put the follow-up check three months after the presentation on the calendar before you set the presentation date itself.
Hwi KimCEO of HRDIST & Talent Development Systems Consultant
John KimJohn Kim, author of B2B Marketing Design and CEO of Nanum ConsultingDeveloped by Reg Revans of the UK between the 1940s and 1970s, this method systematized learning through real problem solving under the philosophy of 'no learning without action.'
Consider a hypothetical case. Company A makes auto parts, with 640 employees and annual revenue of KRW 130 billion (≈ US$97,261,700). It took an average of 12 days for a single design change to reach production, delivery delays recurred every quarter, and the design and production teams blamed each other in every meeting. HR split 16 team-leader candidates into 4 teams and ran a 6-month action learning program.
- The production director who joined the first workshop as sponsor made it clear: 'If your conclusion is to hire more design staff, I'll reject it. Bring me a way to make it work with the people we have now.'
- Team 2 spent three weeks going through the records of the 87 most recent design changes, and found that 7 of the 12 days were spent in 'awaiting approval,' with paperwork sitting idle.
- The facilitator never offered a solution and only asked three times, 'During those 7 days, who was waiting on whom?' Only then did the team arrive at the fact that the approval chain had 5 steps.
- The team proposed cutting the approval chain for changes under KRW 10 million (≈ US$7,480) from 5 steps to 2, and in month 4 piloted it in just one group, Design Team 1.
- Six months later, average lead time had dropped from 12 days to 5.5 days, and 11 of the 16 participants were named team leaders the following year. They now run the same kind of project reviews in their own departments.