SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING MODEL
AMONGST BUSINESS PROFESSIONALS.
Page 2.

- DEBRIEF -

The experiential learning model formalised by Kolb has been strongly supported by this scientific meta-analysis study. Humans are hard-wired to a preferred learning style and individuals naturally over-emphasise the use of that style. There is now little debate on this.

These findings have major implications to how we design learning processes like KM or classroom training. Certain teaching methods only fit certain learning styles. The didactic teaching method existing for over five hundred years where the teacher lectures and the students obediently memorise data by rote is an anthema to certain learning style preferences.Those with strong reflection learning preferences, namely Divergers and Assimilators, are likely to be disadvantaged in curriculum-filling activities. They would rather be given fewer subject areas and explore them in depth. But current curriculum demands do not allow for deeper analysis of fewer subject areas.

So KM leaders must have working knowledge of proven human learning models (see KM Tutorials> Human Learning Model for more). However, since most current KM activities are designed by IT professionals who have little understanding of human development processes, it can only lead to average outcomes at best. Would you agree ?

Let's not blame the IT professional or the Information Manager for the continued chaotic state KM is in. In fact, without them, KM would have remained just a theoretical concept. HR and Training professionals have largely been absent from contributing to this business process to their shame. KM has emerging ever so slowly on the agenda of these latter professional disciplines. If boosting intellectual capital is the unique selling feature of KM then HR and Training/HRD should have been the key protagonists to this newer business field.

Form follows function. If you do not know some of the critical ways your 'constituents' function then your program/initiative/intervention/drive/next big thing/ will produce less than optimal results...everytime.

This study however does not prove Loo's other claim that we should be strongly skilled in the other three learning styles. All agree that we have all four learning styles inside us....otherwise we cannot learn from our experiences. They may not have been developed to mature levels. Even one's preferred learning style may have remained dormant because their working environment may not have encouraged it.

The consensus amongst the learning experts is that ALL FOUR LEARNING STYLES should be developed in each individual. This is also a true standard counselling advice when interpreting findings of other recognised behavioural tools like the Myers Briggs Type Indicator.

The more recognised learning experts, like Peter Honey and Alan Mumford from the UK, affirm through logic that all four learning styles are not only connected to each other in a linear sequence but the less preferred styles should all be developed up to a competent level (again see KM Tutorials> Human Learning Model for clarification). A raw illustration left shows the relationships between the four styles (Acc= Accomodator; Div= Diverger; Ass=Assimilator; Con= Converger) and the sequential approach through the styles one takes to learn from an experience.

So the tantalising question really is......
Where is the scientific evidence to show that the astute knowledge worker shows behavioural strengths (vs attributable strengths) in all four learning styles ? Does the high performing professional show clear signs of all four styles ? Are we close to cracking the code to developing astute knowledge workers as suggested by the following illustration ?

Conclusion

KM leaders in every organisation must be competent in both the theory and practice of human learning. Studies like this one confirm that the key elements to human learning have been generally discovered. NO... human nature is not a complete mystery. There is clear consensus among world psychologists on some universal principles in human nature regardless of differing cultures. We all need to have some sociology/psychology understanding, particularly people who strongly influence the culture of companies, namely Managing Directors and CEOs. KM leaders must design and deliver several validated learning modes/channels to their 'voters/constituents' as this study infers. But those with the predisposition to people development, the HR and the HRD group, do they have the capacity to be genuine partners in the KM journey ? Will KM thrive without them ?

Your Response ?

NewsFlash : September 2004
Australian Business Professor concedes Kolb Learning Model as Gold Standard for Professional Learning.

1  |  2

TOP
Copyright © 2002-2004
Knowledge Management DynamicsPtyLtd.