According to Argyris human reasoning “is the process that human beings use to move from what they know to what they do; that is from thought to action” (Argyris, 299). Argyris’ work concludes that there are two primary types of reasoning: defensive (tacit explanation, soft data, produced and concluded logic are same) and productive reasoning (explicit inferences, understanding helps initiate change) (Argyris, 1997). Defensive reasoning leads to organizational defensive routines that utilize Model I theories, single-loop learning and focuses on execution as efficiency (Arygris, 2005; Edmundson, 2008). Alternatively, productive reasoning utilizes double-loop learning, Model II theories, and execution as learning (Arygris, 2005; Edmundson, 2008). While defensive reasoning is self-serving and anti-learning, it tends to be used more because productive learning requires the need to “reexamine basic assumptions” which takes significant “time, attention and focus” (Argyris, 300). But Argyris argues that only through productive learning can people discover errors, learn, and initiate change that will persevere.
Argyris focuses on defining and explains the components for the concepts above, while Amy Edmundson focuses on breaking down the characteristics of the environment associated with execution as efficiency (defensive) and execution as learning (productive) practices. She explains that by purely thinking about execution as a means to create efficiency, critical ideas fail to reach the top, peoples lack of time limits the ability to learning, internal unhealthy competition can arise and companies believe that there is evidence in their success and they can “do no harm” (Edmundson, 2008). These theories are a reminder of the practical impact that organizations have on people’s reasoning. So, according to Edmundson, some ways to lay the groundwork for producing a meaningful learning environment through execution, companies need to provide clear guidelines for processes, enable collaborative tools in real-time, see how collected process data unfolds in real-time and finally make reflective practice institutionalized.
References
Argyris, C. (2005). Double-loop learning in organizations: A theory of action perspective. In K. G. Smith & M. A. Hitt (eds.) Great minds in management (pp. 261-279), Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Garvin, D. A., Edmondson, A. C., & Gino, F. (2008). Is yours a learning organization? Harvard Business Review, 86(3), 109-116.
Comments