Deutero‐learning: implications for managing public health change

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to apply an allied health subculture model to clarify key contextual factors that can emerge in the evolution of an allied health subculture as a consequence of deutero‐learning.

Design/methodology/approach

Two case studies are compared to illustrate these two extreme variations in deutero‐learning.

Findings

The first case – characterised by pathological deutero‐learning – operated within the classical medical model. A learning pathology that developed in this situation was a fractured, divisive, self absorbed work culture. A second case – characterised by positive deutero‐learning – operated within a divisional structure characterized by integrated decentralization. What was learned as a result of operating within this alternative organisational structure is that effective management of allied health recognizes two governance arenas: governance required for managing professionals and governing principles for delivering clinical services. Positive deutero‐learning occurred in this situation rather than the reinforcement of existing learning pathologies.

Research limitations/implications

There are clearly implications of the two structural models for self‐fulfilling prophecies, interpersonal interaction, climate formation and learning pathologies.

Practical implications

During a period of major reform differing outcomes in deutero‐learning in these two cases emphasize the importance of the evolution of appropriate organisational structures in developing a leadership‐driven learning process and creating an environment in which learning can occur.

Originality/value

The added value of this application of deuteron learning is that it unpacks the nature of variations in deutoro learning that can emerge during a period of major reform in the evolution of an allied health subculture.

Citation

Rowe, P.A. and Boyce, R.A. (2009), "Deutero‐learning: implications for managing public health change", The Learning Organization, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 298-310. https://doi.org/10.1108/09696470910960392