Inspecting cases against Revans' ‘gold standard’ of action learning

Verna J. Willis

Action Learning: Research and Practice, 2004, vol. 1, issue 1, 11-27

Abstract: A purposive sampling and analysis of ten case histories of action learning in the US suggests that applications tend to be partial, hierarchical, and leader controlled, thus running counter in several significant ways to the gold standard of Revans' action learning theory and egalitarian rules of engagement. Using critical markers to inspect the cases reveals either significant departures from Revans' theory or, at best, silence about the degrees of attention paid to it. If standards specified are not being met in common practice, then there is reason to question whether what is called action learning may actually be falling short of the mark Revans set.

Date: 2004
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/1476733042000187592 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:alresp:v:1:y:2004:i:1:p:11-27

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CALR20

DOI: 10.1080/1476733042000187592

Access Statistics for this article

Action Learning: Research and Practice is currently edited by Kiran Trehan and Clare Rigg

More articles in Action Learning: Research and Practice from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().