Understanding the Use of Knowledge in Practical Action: A Learning Perspective

1. Understanding the Use of Knowledgein Practical Action:A Learning Perspective Per-Erik Ellström Linköping University www.liu.se/helix

2. HELIX Centre of Excellence Managing Mobility for Learning, Health, and Innovation • A multi-disciplinary research program • An interactive research approach • A partnership of research, companies, public sector and labor market organizations

3. Purpose To present a theoretical framework on individual learning in organizational contexts. 2. To explore some implications of this framework for understanding and facilitating knowledge utilization and organizational development.

4. Some Theoretical • Points of Departure • a ”theory-knitting” approach, i.e. the use of alternative theoretical perspectives in an attempt to integrate their strongest features with one’s own ideas about a certain problem or phenomenon (Kalmar & Sternberg, 1988); • a critical, social realist framework (Archer, Bashkar); • an understanding of learning as an interplay between actors and structures within a framework of: • - analytical dualism (Archer); • - cognitive theories of action (e.g. Frese, Norman); • - neo-institutional organizational theory (e.g. Feldman, Scott).

5. Knowledge Utilization Four Classical Conceptions • An instrumental use of knowledge: To give input in decision-making processes, to improve the performance of a certain practice or to give “solutions” to specific problems • A conceptual use of knowledge (“the enlightenment model”): To help people conceptualize, (re-)define, or critically reflect on their reality • A political use of knowledge: To provide arguments (“political ammunition”) pro or contra a certain course of action • A symbolic use: To legitimate a certain course of action through the symbolic value of scientific knowledge

6. A Fifth Conception: Knowledge Utilization as a Learning Process Specifically, KU as an interplay between: adaptive and developmental (innovative) learning 2. individual and organizational learning

7. Working Assumption I: On the Duality of Knowledge Use Knowledge (evidence, ideas) get reinterpreted and acquire new meaning during use, and the use of a certain idea in a new context is at the same time an act of knowledge creation.

8. Working Assumption II:On “Non-Technological” Practices • A learning perspective is assumed to be relevant not least with respect to the many practices that are: • highly skilled, • but not highly articulated or codified, • and therefore difficult to disseminate as standardized “best practices”

9. The Concept of Learning • The concept of learning as used here refers to: • a continuous process starting from and building on previous learning • that is sometimes deliberate and conscious (e.g. formal learning), but often incidental or unconscious (implicit) on the part of the learning subject (an individual or a collective) • resulting in long-lasting changes in competence (“behavioral potential”)

10. The Concept of Competence • Defined here as: • the potential capacity of an individual (or a • collective) • to successfully handle certain tasks or situations • according to certain formal or informal criteria, • set by oneself or by somebody else

11. On the Duality of Learning Adaptive (mastery) learning: a process of getting knowledge into practice, i.e. a process of adopting/mastering given knowledge to handle certain problems or cases, resulting in increased performance competence 2. Developmental (innovative) learning: a process of getting knowledge out of practice, i.e. a process of creating new solutions to handle emerging problems or searching for ways to understand a new case, resulting in increased developmental competence

12. Understanding Learning and Knowledge Use: A Cognitive Action-Theory Framework • A focus on action as mediating between the individual (the learning subject) and her/his environment • There is a continuous interaction between the learning subject and the pre-existing environment (social, material and cultural) • Social, material and cultural aspects of the environment is assumed to enable and constrain individual action, interaction and learning - in this sense we can talk about learning conditions • Learning is not just about change, but also about stability and the maintenance and preservation of an individual’s competence or an organization’s practices

13. The Concept of Action • The concept of action as used here refers to: • intentional behaviors that are carried out on the basis of, implicit or explicit, knowledge or rules in order to perform a certain task; • a distinction can be made between different levels of action on the basis of their degree of cognitive control and on their knowledge base.

14. Levels of Action and Knowledge Use • Level of Action: Characteristics: Knowledge Base: Level I: Skill-based action Automatic processing Tacit (implicit) knowledge routinization Level II: Rule-based action Higher degree of attention Procedural knowledge and conscious control Level III: Knowledge-based Conscious control of actions Declarative knowledge action to handle novel or unfamiliar tasks. Problem-solving. Level IV: Reflective action Critical reflection on tasks, Meta-cognitive knowledge goals, and other conditions.

15. The Action-Learning Cycle Level IV Goal/Task Reflection Evaluation Level III Knowledge Mental Model Level II Individual Plan of Action Interpretation Level I Execution Perception Consequences/Effects Environment Other People Things/Tools Information Social Environment Physical-Material Environment Cultural-Symbolic Environment

16. Learning as an Interplay Between Levels of Action Adaptive/ Mastery Learning Developmental/ Innovative Learning Reflective Action (Level IV) Knowledge-Based Action (Level III) Rule-Based Action (Level II) Skill-Based Action (Level I)

17. Organizational Development Through Individual and Organizational Learning Explicit Work Processes • tasks/routines as officially prescribed • on the basis of explicit knowledge (ideas, evidence, theories, models) The Logic of Implementation: The Logic of Development: • Adaptive Learning: • Internalization • Routinization • Standardization • Developmental • Learning: • Transformation/ • Improvement • Codification • Articulation Implicit Work Processes • tasks/routines as redefined and performed in practice • on the basis of implicit (“tacit) knowledge • characterized by variation and improvisation

18. Four Dimensions of Tasks and Work Processes (WP) • the task/WP as prescribed (e.g. in guidelines); • the task/WP as perceived and redefined; • the task/WP as performed in practice; • the task/WP as reconstructed

19. Two Logics of Learning • The Logic of Development: • reflection, alternative thinking, experimentation, risk taking; • tolerance of ambiguity, variation, and mistakes; • critical analysis and transformation of routines and structures; • developmental (innovative) learning • The Logic of Implementation: • implementation of prescribed routines and structures; • reduction of variation, consensus, and stability; • routinization and standardization of effective actions; • adaptive learning

20. Implications for Research and Practice I • Once established routinized actions are difficult to change, i.e. to unlearn” and “relearn”, through planned change interventions. • This is especially true, if one primarily relies on intellectual and verbal forms of instruction (e.g. written guidelines). • At the same time, individuals as well as organizations learn and change continually in response to emerging problems, unexpected events and daily contingencies.Thus, in this sense problems are driving forces for developmental learning and change.

21. Implications for Research and Practice II • Ongoing variation and improvisation in implicit work processes represent potentials for learning and practice-based innovations. • In order to realize these potentials, it is necessary - but not sufficient - to externalize (“make visible”) ongoing variation in the implicit work process. That, is to carry out interventions that facilitate articulation and codification of what’s going on in the “tacit dimension”. • Through externalization it is possible to explore, test and debate strengths and weaknesses of potential innovations, and possibly to select them for tentative inclusion - and more systematic tests - in the explicit work process.

22. Interactive Research Theories and concepts Data collection and analysis Problems/ issues Research System Conceptualization and interpretation of the research object Practice System Organizational action Problems/ issues Local theories

23. References • Ellström, P.-E. (2006). The Meaning and Role of Reflection in Informal Learning at Work. In: D. Boud, P. Cressey, & P. Docherty (Eds.), Productive Reflection. An Anthology on Reflection and Learning at Work. London: Routledge. • Ellström, P.-E. (2002). Time and the Logics of Learning. Lifelong Learning in Europe, 2, 86–93. • Ellström, P.-E. (2001). Integrating Learning and Work: Conceptual Issues and Critical Conditions. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 12, 4, 421–435.