WEEK 2 READING + WORKSHOP + “DOUBLE LOOP LEARNING”
doing the reading late due to doing the reading for the following week instead… this weeks reading about double loop/organisational learning was pretty dense subject matter to push through on a sunday night with a pounding headache… basically I grasped – and I am going to make a loosely related analogy here –
sing loop learning is like being in a long-term relationship with a partner that is cheating. you have preconceived ideas about the role of your partner and your own role in the relationship. you are so comfortable with that person and because of the ‘label’ you have on your relationship, you simply assume that your partner is on the same page, and will be completely loyal. you don’t think about consequences when you come home from work every afternoon and instead of spending time with your partner, watch television for hours. when you finally discover that your partner is cheating, you break the relationship off and learn from the lesson.
double loop learning is like a progressive ‘open’ relationship. you have no assumptions about the other person and take each day as it goes, without ‘labelling’ the relationship. you treasure the time you are given with that partner and because there is no assumption that you are ‘together’, you try to make their experience with you as good as possible so they don’t feel the need to see somebody else. you make an effort to get to know the person to ensure you are fully compatible before entering into a relationship (so as to save future heartache by entering into a relationship with somebody whose key values are different).
so this is not the best analogy at all. I don’t know where I was even going with that…I’m sure there was a point somewhere in there about prevention rather than cure. put more simply- single loop learning is like a doctor giving you antibiotics when you are sick, whereas double loop is wearing an extra jacket in the winter or taking vitamins so you never get sick in the first place.
there’s also a point in there somewhere about how mode 2 learning is about not ‘defining’ things because with definition comes constraint. if you put a label on something it instantly loses potential – it can only be what it is said to be, and never something more. I agree with this (especially in reference to my terrible relationship analogy). as soon as you begin to put things in neat little boxes they are unable to expand past that boundary.