Search

This paper builds on action learning (AL) theory by decomposing AL method--single, double or triple loop--into three components: argument, action and outcome. This enables AL theory to illuminate the fragmented nature of change. The new framework is applied to a case of gay and lesbian workplace advocacy. The power of the AL framework, we believe, is diminished by this kind of global characterization. Does any substantial change effort happen entirely within a current operating framework, without any challenge to that framework? Can a more radical change effort which takes on the current frame succeed without appealing to some of that Frame's traditional values? Can a change effort bold enough to challenge societal norms happen without transforming individuals? We argue that the interaction of single, double and triple loop methods of change, rather than their independence, should be the focus of analysis. Influenced by postmodern organization approaches (e.g., Boje, 1993, 1995; Cooper and Burrell, 1988; Martin, 1992), we extend the use of AL as an analytic tool by treating change efforts as multi-layered and fragmented. Rather than focusing on single, dominant understandings, we create a framework that listens to local accounts and attends to internal inconsistencies. Instead of using AL to neatly summarize change efforts, we use it to illuminate different and sometimes contradictory facets of a single change effort. To illustrate, we apply our approach to a company's decision to dramatically change its attitude towards its gay and lesbian employees by instituting new policies and institutionalizing an employee network. While a shorthand characterization of this change effort would view it as an unqualified success, our framework will add complexity and nuance to the picture by showing how even such a successful change is rough and unfinished. We start with the story of the change effort, followed by an analysis of the case. As part of the analysis, we su... [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]