Notes on Starting an Action Learning Set

Contents

Stakeholders in Action Learning

Clarity of Purpose and Style

Publicity 

What Existing Skills Help A Set

Technical vs. Personal Issues

Ground Rules

A Process For the Set

Role of the Facilitator

Owning A Personal Response To Another’s Issue

Uses Of Silence

Discouraging Advice Giving

Responses To Difficult Set Members

Appendix 1 - Examples of Process Interventions

Appendix 2 -  Examples of Ground Rules Agreed by Sets

Purpose of Notes 

These notes are written primarily for people who have already been part of an Action Learning Set, with a view to helping them to establish a Set.  Other notes for people with no experience of Action Learning are also available.

Stakeholders in Action Learning

To establish a Set first identify the stakeholders, what each of these will want from Action Learning and what each will need to contribute. The range of Stakeholders, apart from Set Members, will vary depending on the environment. The list below is not exhaustive.

Some Issues for Stakeholders in a Company Setting

 This section illustrates the sort of consideration advised before starting a Set in a largish company or organisation.

 Company Needs

Organiser Needs 

 Facilitator Needs 

Training & Development

Set Members

Managers of Set Members

Clarity of Purpose and Style

If you are considering setting up an Action Learning Set take time to be very clear about what sort of Set would satisfy you? What sort of interactions within the Set would make your personal investment worthwhile? 

Now ask yourself, is this sort of Set likely to attract sufficient support from the organisation and from people willing to join? 

You may need to amend your preferences for the Set and decide whether you are prepared to live with a compromise that is more likely to succeed. 

You need to be ready to answer the following questions before going public with your plans. It may be useful to review these issues with a trusted colleague before approaching others in the organisation. 

 The people you speak to need to understand that for Action Learning to work the Set needs stability and the chance to develop over at least six sessions. They will also need to know about the Set membership restrictions on people who work together. 

Publicity 

For the most part people’s expectations of Action Learning will come either from their previous experience of a Set or from the publicity that you generate. If your type of Set is different from what people have experienced before, they need to know this. Nor do you want people complaining in a Set that they felt misled by your publicity.

 For reasons such as these, take care with materials or activities that describe the Action Learning Set. I recommend stressing that Action Learning varies greatly in nature and style. Check if people have had previous experience of Action Learning and, if this is the case, discuss your own and their experiences of Action Learning.

 A selling point can be made from the flexibility of Action Learning, how it can be used to meet a range of needs in a variety of ways. However, you need to advertise what sorts of people your Set is for. E.g.

In business and service organisations, Action Learning has been used primarily as a means of developing managers. While there are often valid strategic reasons for reserving this form of development for managers, Action Learning has great potential for any employee who needs to develop technical skills, self-understanding and inter-personal skills. If you want non-managers to be considered for your Set, your publicity may need to emphasise this.

Another expectation that needs to be managed concerns the pace of an Action Learning Set. While much is happening, at least “below the surface” of the Set, for those less familiar with group dynamics and reflective learning the activity may seem rather slow. This response is especially likely when an individual’s pace of work is very fast.

To overcome this, emphasise the contribution that reflection makes to people who are always on the go. The busier the person, the more they need time to capture the learning from their experiences.  Action Learning can also be positioned as highly complementary to e-learning which, as yet, has not provided opportunities for shared reflection.

What Existing Skills Help A Set

An Action Learning Set will work with almost any group where there is goodwill, a commitment to learn and experiment and some willingness to be open. However, I recommend for people facilitating a Set for the first time that they look for Set Members who have qualities / prior experience of such things as:

It will be easier for the Facilitator to work with a Set where each person has a certain level of inter-personal skills and a readiness to be open. It may be easier to arrive at such a Set through seeking recommendations from others who understand what you are looking for and/or interviewing people who are interested in joining the Set.

Other skills and qualities that help Sets to work more effectively are listed below. However, these are also skills that Action Learning significantly develops:

 Once a facilitator has gained experience and confidence in running an Action Learning Set, the greater gain for the organisation may be from providing development for people with less rather than more of these talents.

Technical vs. Personal Issues

 It is theoretically possible for a Set to focus purely on technical issues. In practice, though, if the issue is worth raising in a group there is usually a personal response to the issue.

 If only the technical aspects of an issue are dealt with, the Problem Holder may not be so well equipped to deal with an issue in the future that induces the same emotional response.

 The extent to which the Set will work on personal issues will depend on factors such as: 

  Some examples of more personal issues that come up are:

One way of assisting a Set to develop their ability to get more personal learning is for the facilitator to stimulate and contribute to the review of group process. If Set Members are not familiar with process reviews the facilitator needs to develop their understanding. One way of doing this might be to give set members examples of process questions. (see Appendix 1) 

Ground Rules

The Set should understand in advance of the first meeting that it is their responsibility to come up with Ground Rules. Many groups simply given a draft set of rules will accept them with little or no thought.

There are a number of advantages in getting the Set to define the rules. Firstly, it makes clear that it is their Set and that the facilitator is not the final arbiter.  Secondly, taking the time to discuss and list the Ground Rules means people are buying into them; the rules will have greater moral force. Thirdly, this is a “safe” topic and allows the Set to get to know each other without before anyone becomes a Problem Holder.

The facilitator may find it useful to have a copy of Ground Rules from a previous set to hand but generally it is better not to show a draft too soon.

I recommend that a Set takes at least twenty minutes discussing Ground Rules. The Facilitator may need to ensure that some topics are covered and properly defined. E.g. confidentiality must not only be agreed but also clearly understood in detail:

·         what if anything might be shared outside of the set and in what circumstances

·         is it appropriate for two group members to discuss any matters from the set outside of the set

·         how do Set members feel about notes; are there any requirements they wish to place on taking or keeping notes

Make clear that Ground Rules can be revisited at any time.

A Process For the Set

The nature of the Set should make it easy for Problem Holders to share their information and feelings. Having a process for working with a problem holder can help do this and help the Set make better use of time.

 There is no universally accepted Action Learning process and most people who feel confident about facilitating a Group could design their own. Whatever process is chosen, take time to explain it to the Set before Set members begin to use it.

I recommend giving people both a detailed explanation of the process and a simpler one-page key to the stages. Especially in the early Set meetings, the facilitator will need to ensure that people are clear about which stage of the process is current. In most Sets it takes Members some time to get a feel for the process and to appreciate that it is there to help the meeting.  Talking about these issues in advance and making it clear that you expect to intervene frequently about stages in the first meetings may help to reduce of the tensions that enforcing the process leads to.

Role of the Facilitator

With a group that have little or no experience of Action Learning the facilitator at first has to be very active. Over time the aim is to get Set Members to take on more of the work of the facilitator.  People with the relevant qualities and background may be able to do this within a few meetings. At other times it may take a dozen or more meetings for Set Members to feel comfortable about taking on the facilitator role for one Problem Holder or even to begin making process interventions.

Sometimes the Facilitator is also the Organiser of the Set, handling administration like reminders of meetings and collating availability for meetings.  The exact role needs to be agreed and made clear to all concerned.

It is helpful for the facilitator to keep records of any decisions made by the Set, including the Ground Rules.

Owning A Personal Response To Another’s Issue

One thing that people learn from Action Learning is a greater awareness of how their personal or emotional response to someone else’s issue can be an obstacle to providing support. To encourage this learning Facilitators can:

·        talk about their own emotional responses to issues raised

·        ask people to notice what their emotional response to the first description of an issue by a Problem Holder is and

·        think about what may be contributing that response

·        at a later stage, reflect on or share with the Set how useful or appropriate their immediate response was

·        encourage discussion of personal responses in process reviews

Uses Of Silence

Many people begin to feel uncomfortable in a group when there is no one talking. Facilitators may need to help Sets or particular individuals learn to accept silence. Some things that may help this learning are:

·        at the outset telling the Set that Silence is part of the process

·        inviting the Set to stop questioning for a few minutes to reflect on the information already presented and / or the process

·        asking an individual to reflect on a question for a minute to take a minute to think about the best way forward in a line of questioning

·        telling the Set that the Facilitator needs a little quiet time to reflect on information / process

  Discouraging Advice Giving 

Most of us find it all too easy to give advice. One of the hardest disciplines for people new to Action Learning is the effective ban on advice giving.  It is a ban worth enforcing because frequently the feedback from experienced Set Members is that they learned a great deal from being required to question, listen and reflect rather than tell.

 There are other reasons why advice giving should be discouraged. Firstly, the wrong advice (quite probable without sufficient information gathering) may disrupt rapport building. For example, advice may come across as “I know better than you.”

Secondly, it is possible to end up with conflicting advice or at least advice where the Problem Holder needs to make choices. This can take the Problem Holder’s attention from important information such as, “Why is this an issue for me? How did this problem develop?  What can I learn about myself from this?”

Thirdly, sometimes Set Members are avoiding their own feelings by quickly moving to advice.

Responses To Difficult Set Members 

Here are two types of difficult Set Member, the occasional and the chronic. We all have off–days or do stupid things once in a while. The occasional, difficult person is not usually a problem for a facilitator. Perhaps the key question for the facilitator in such a case is to ask , “Is there sufficient issue or learning for the Set / Individual to justify intervening here?”

 The greater problem comes from an individual who is often insensitive, perhaps at times grossly, or does not respond to interventions but continues with inappropriate behaviour such as:

One approach to challenging is to talk about your own feelings in response to the incident or activity.  E.g. 

            Ted, I am feeling concerned about your response to Bibi’s issue. I feel I am not acting appropriately as a facilitator if I don’t raise this issue with you. I am also interested to know how Bibi and anyone else in the group feels about this.

     Jesse, that’s the third time today that you have taken over from the Problem Holder. This is going against both the accepted way of working in Action Learning  and what I feel is needed for the Set to work most effectively.  I want us to take a five minute break and for you to think about how this is happening.

     Alberto, I feel as if you are gunning for me. I would like to discuss this either in  the Set now or just the two of us after the meeting has ended. Do you want a moment to think about what it is you want right now.

Or, preferably using the name of the disruptive person, use shorter interventions like. E.g.

Or you can ask the Problem Holder or interrupted questioner for their response. E.g.

Extending the Life of the Set / New Members 

Sets usually agree to meet for a certain number of times, perhaps 6 to 8 meetings. Two or three meeting before the last scheduled meeting ask if the Group is interested in discussing continuing to meet. People may want time to decide, check out with their manager or it may be useful to have time to discuss possible new members. The discussion may some need time so avoid leaving it till late in meeting.

 Sometimes a Group may decide to split to allow for easier meetings or to make Action Learning available to new people.

New people can join the group at any stage if the facilitator and Set Members are agreed on this. Often it is better to wait for the initial membership to settle down before introducing someone new.

If there are factions in the Set the facilitator needs to be particularly careful with the selection of new people.  There is the risk that either people are brought in to swell he ranks of a faction or others see this as the case.

To avoid this kind of issue, it is usually preferable for the Set to revisit the purpose of the Set and define what sort of person they most want to join. Ensure there is clarity about who and when approaches may be made to prospective Members and the process for confirming a new member.

Resist the idea of new members coming to one or two trial meetings. Each new person to the Group brings some disruption to the Set and these disruptions are best avoided, especially in a relatively young set.  It is also better taking part in several meetings. Seek a commitment to at least three meetings based on a comprehensive briefing about the nature of the Set.

When people leave a Set there is often a sense of loss or “It just isn’t the same”.  Groups can revert to old habits and behaviours when someone leaves or when a new person joins. You may need to become a more active facilitator for a while.

Set Members can keep learning from each other over many years. There is no theoretical reason why an Action Learning Set should stop at a certain point but there may be other demands on time or other forms of development that people want to try.

One option for a mature Set is to meet less frequently, maybe six times rather than 20 times a year. Another option is for the Set to become self-facilitating. This means that the sponsoring organisation/s will not have to fund this part of the cost of the Set.

Frequency of and Length of Meetings

There are tremendous advantages for a Set that meets weekly. There is little or no loss of momentum, people remember more of the details and trust is likely to be more profound than in a Set that has met twice as often but less frequently.

These advantages have to be considered alongside the needs of the sponsoring organisations, managers of Set Members. For a new Set, once every four weeks should be the maximum gap between meetings. However, a very mature Set may be able to sustain itself with meetings once a quarter.

I would see two hours as the minimum for an Action Learning Set and probably only really suitable for a mature Set. For a new set I would like at least two and a half-hours and preferably three. If you can, arrange for an extra hour or half-hour for a first meeting.

Sets that meet less frequently also often benefit from extra time, especially if there is little contact between Members outside of meetings.

Appendix 1   Examples of Process Interventions

1.      Do you want time to think about a follow-on question?

2.      Does anyone want to ask any more questions on that theme before I move onto another line of questioning?

3.      Are we ready to leave X stage and begin Y?

4.      I am wondering if that question might be more appropriate at X stage?

  5.      That’s quite a big question. I am wondering if the problem holder would find it easier if you asked it in two / three parts? Or

6.      That is more than one question. What’s the part you think might be more useful to begin with? Or

7.      (to Problem Holder)  There is more than one question there. Tell us the part you think might be more useful for you to respond to first?

8.      This sounds more like a statement than a question. What’s the question that you think will help focus our thinking / help the Problem Holder?

9.      I think that is a very long question. How about taking a minute to write down what you think the most important part is (and we will come back to you)?

10. How are you feeling?

11. Do you want some time to think about that before you respond?

12.  I am feeling overloaded with information. Can we take a short break to let some of it sink in?

13. I have a sense we are losing our way here. What do other people think?

 Using the Group as a Resource for Questioners

(or Making it Easier for the Group To Help a Questioner)

14. This sounds more like a statement than a question; can anyone help me to turn it around?

15. I am not sure if this is my issue here that I have been asking about. What do others think?

Appendix 2    Examples of Ground Rules Agreed by Sets

Example 1

Basic  Meeting Rules  

1.      Start and finish on time.

2.      Open and honest

3.      Share responsibility for meeting objectives

4.      Strive for consensus decisions

5.      Make discussion additive

6.      One person speaks at a time; no side conversations

7.      Review achievement of objectives and adherence to rules.

Confidentiality 

Anything said within the Group is confidential to the Group. In particular, nothing may be repeated or used outside of the group that could be attributed to, or disadvantage, an individual. 

Notes may be taken during the group provided that these are for personal use only and due care is taken to keep them private.

It is acceptable for a member of the group to ask a Problem Holder if s/he is willing to discuss matters relating to the problem outside of the group.

  Example 2

1.     Everything is confidential - matters raised stay within the four walls. But it is OK for someone to choose to work on an issue raised in the Set, outside of the Set.

2.      The topics for the Set are work-related issues and, on a case by case basis, other issues from that impact on work.

3.      Everyone must have a commitment to attend meetings but we accept things will happen. If they do, advance notice as far as possible.

4.      Start and finish on time.

 (Example 2 may have fewer words than Example 1 but the time taken to agree   2 was longer.)

Appendix 3     Example of an Agenda Distributed in Advance of First Meeting

   1.      Welcome / Introductions (Name, role, any personal objectives for joining the set)

  2.      Any questions you may have about the nature of this Action Learning

  3.      Facilitator’s role

  4.      Agree the Ground Rules of this Set

  5.      Review availability for meetings

  6.      Bids to be the Problem Holder at this meeting

  7.      Select bid / bids to be work on

  8.      Work through bid 

9.      Process review 

There will be a 10 to 15 minute break approximately half way through the meeting.

People must attend the first meeting so that all members are equally responsible for the Ground Rules and to avoid disruption.

Paul Burns  August 2001