The concept of single and double
loop learning was first described by Agyris and Schön in the
1970s. Originally the work focused on organisational learning but it is
equally applicable to individual learning. Learning in adults was
described by Kolb as cycles of experience, observation and reflection,
abstract conceptualisation or generalisation and active testing which
leads back in to a new cycle of learning (Kolb & Fry (1975)).
Agyris and Schön described learning as occurring in loops
through the detection and correction of errors. They suggested that if
there is a problem people initially try to tweak their existing
strategies rather than question the fundamental assumptions that were
used to develop the strategies. In ‘single loop’
learning an individual (or organisation) becomes increasingly skilled
in an activity in a cycle that might be similar to that described in
Kolb’s learning cycle as illustrated above. This is useful
when you want to make a process more efficient and external elements
remain fairly constant and predictable. ‘Double
loop’ learning occurs where there is a paradigm shift in
understanding. The people involved start to think on a different level
i.e. they start to question the questions that are being asked or the
assumptions behind them. They may ask whether they are the
‘right’ questions and how they could be improved to
more clearly understand the issues. In a double loop people begin to
question their own and others framing of the issues and this can start
to open up new questions for exploration.
Much
work on adaptation, from initial problem framing, engagement of others,
to solution searching and evaluation, addresses only single loop or
incremental change in the system of interest. That is, change that may
increase efficiency but does not fundamentally question the assumptions
underlying the activity or purpose of the organisation. This may be
fine for most circumstances but certain types of decisions, for example
those that have long lasting implications or potential for high
consequence impacts may require second or third order thinking to be
able to identify robust pathways in the light of an uncertain future.
Creating
opportunities for second order thinking allows us to question current
perspectives or frames of reference, and thus usually leads to doing
something different. This level of learning often builds on single-loop
or incremental learning, but goes beyond it encouraging people to be
more open and increasingly self-aware and to ask questions such as:
"What's going on here? What patterns can we see?" How do our actions
impact the system? This creates a shift in the way that people in
organisations see the world. All patterns and systems may come into
question allowing gradual or sudden changes to occur with the potential
for transformation through creating a shift in the context the
organisation operates within.
Cranton (1994)
explore ways in which you can create ‘dissonance’
or events that open up the possibility of double loop learning. This
can be done by presenting opposing views and encouraging people to
explore the perspectives of people who think differently to you. This
could be aided by using stories and metaphors and role playing to help
identify and capture tacit understanding and assumptions. Theatre for
Development, a Nigerian theatre group creates plays with communities as
a way of understanding the key concerns in the community and how
decisions are really made. They say it is a good way to uncover the
disparity between what people say they do and what happens in practice.
If
building adaptive capacity is viewed as an important part of building
the conditions to withstand change it becomes important to be able to
step back from identifying the appropriate actions or activities to
adapt to impacts of climate change to thinking about how adaptive
capacity is evolved and promoted. Pelling and High (2005) contend that
building adaptive capacity within organisations can be enhanced by
recognising and working with the informal system made up of personal
relationships and held together by cultural norms that cut across
formal organisational structures and official rules of conduct. This
has long been recognised as an intangible but important aspect of
organisational life that enables innovation, information transfer and
learning. Finding ways to enhance such connections might be a good way
to support the growth of adaptive capacity within organisations
projects and networks although there is a conflict between this and the
need for transparency and accountability within organisations. Social
learning for change requires shifts in understanding for both
individuals and groups. No one person has the whole answer, we all have
a piece of the truth and there is a pressing need to come up with
imaginative solutions.
