Informative learning and transformational learning are two distinct forms of learning. On the other hand, transformative learning is the act of altering one’s thought processes and allowing one to learn new ideas. The phrases “mental model” and “belief system” are used interchangeably within this paper to aid in driving concepts more unquestionably. A simple metaphor may better represent the two types of learning. Assume that you built a swimming hole in your backyard by digging a hole and filling it with water. While it may seem nice with a diving board or rope swing, this is a swimming hole at heart.
According to the analogy, new information is only absorbed if consistent with a swimming hole’s preexisting mental picture. While some people grow fish in their ponds, the concept of expanding the swimming hole to become a fish farm also comes to mind. It is up to you whether or not you want to accept this notion, recognize that various individuals have different requirements, and choose not to eat fish. An example of transformational learning may be found in this simple metaphor: turning your swimming hole into a fish farm/pool. As a result of this, your mental model has shifted.
Stage 1: People from various cultures have completely distinct mental models of life, which is why intercultural engagement serves as a good example of transformative learning. Any new information that does not fit into the person’s mental model is rejected at the rejection stage. Often, the other mental model’s bearer is considered as foolish, incorrect, or at worse, wicked throughout this period. As a result, when confronted with a culture that is far different from their own, the readers may be able to reproduce the myriad of assumptions (many of which were incorrect), sensations, and emotions that went along with it.
Stage 2: It is okay to have other concepts, assumptions, or values in existence, as long as you do not have to utilize or accept them. This is the second level of knowledge. “We agree to differ,” as the saying goes, is probably familiar to the readers. This shows that the parties are aware that the other person has a different point of view, yet they are unwilling even to consider an alternative course of action. In the intercultural example, this is a circumstance when one needs to live in a foreign culture for a brief period, such as while traveling. When it comes to eating, the individual adheres to what she is familiar with and avoids trying new things. She does not go beyond her comfort zone. The alternative mental model may be humorous to the individual, but they do not have to embrace it and do not have to resist it.
Stage 3: When a person is in the third stage, utilizing, they experiment with new behaviors from a different mental model, either by choice or necessity. It would be someone who has to live in another culture for a lengthy period and accepts some practices there. During the time spent in a new culture, the individual encounters new meals, activities, and ways of thinking but does not feel compelled to adopt them permanently.
Stage 4: In the fourth step, known as integration, a new mental model is developed by combining the best features of the old and new mental models while discarding the ineffective ones. They become bilingual, in our example. One’s mental model is an amalgam of ideas and assumptions that function in the context of a new environment. In certain cases, fresh ideas are accepted, while in others, old ideas are discarded.
The Double Loop Learning
When faced with a dilemma, people must reflect on their conduct and identify and confront the underlying beliefs that underlie this behavior. Individuals’ fundamental beliefs, which were previously implicit or unquestioned, are now revealed as a result of this process. While it may seem dangerous at first, people learn by reflecting on the complete belief system that led to the situation, and this learning opens the way to adjustments in their beliefs and actions or to a new mental model. Changing core ideas or assumptions is difficult, and the process may be stressful, but change is achievable. Because the issue stems from how individuals think or believe, addressing it requires a shift in the controlling beliefs (Heorhiadi et al., 2014). For example, if a manager attempts to encourage her work team to work more effectively by micromanaging the job and discovers that this technique fails, the change that is required is in the manager’s perception about the efficacy of micromanagement. The challenge is that it may be difficult to recognize and then modify particular ideas since changing old beliefs requires not only a substantial degree of self-knowledge but also guts and competence. Double-loop learning happens in Argyris’ language when a discrepancy between a person’s conduct and purpose is identified and remedied by first altering one’s underlying values.
Requirements to Engulf Double Loop Learning
While Argyris applied the idea of double-loop learning to companies, it may also be used to individual learning. Some prerequisites must be met before individual double-loop learning may take place. The person must be willing to participate in transformational learning and be at ease with anxiety. These two are inextricably linked—this kind of transformational learning, particularly subjective reframing, may be a difficult emotional process. We must become aware of both the assumptions undergirding our ideas and the emotional reactions to the need for change.
. 
The Substantive Methods of Creating Learning Organizations
Creating a learning organization is, in some ways, an easy process. This duty entails building an environment that promotes openness about ideas, a willingness to question facts and assumptions, and assisting individuals in becoming more self-reflective. Getting there, though, is not easy. Why? Because getting there necessitates safely navigating all four phases of transformational learning and arriving at a point when new actions are guided by a new mental model of being a learning organization. Many firms striving to become learning organizations would only make it to the second or third level of transformational learning. They may have added new artifacts and even altered certain behaviors, but they kept the previous conceptual learning model as a single-loop process.
In modern workplaces, being self-reflective on an individual and organizational level and ready to communicate on this level with others, particularly during times of stress or crisis, is not the norm. Organizations often dislike those who “rock the boat.” Is there, however, a formula for people who want to start a learning organization? The following are tasks that are necessary for the development of a learning organization:
- Create an environment that encourages transformational learning on an individual level and double-loop learning on a group level.
- Nurture and elevate leaders who are committed to the new culture and change.
- Develop and develop leaders that are open to receiving criticism and accepting risks that come with profound self-reflection and transformation.
- Encourage workers to participate in critical self-reflection and use the double-loop learning framework by encouraging and providing chances for them to do so.
References
Heorhiadi, A., La Venture, K., & Conbere, J. P. (2014). What do organizations need to learn to become a learning organization. OD Practitioner, 46(2), 5-9.
