Search results

One of the defining characteristics of higher education is the expectation that undergraduates will exercise some responsibility for the management of their learning. In the UK and elsewhere student self‐managed learning has become more salient due to resource constraints and the increasing emphasis on equipping students with what they need to become lifelong learners. At the same time, as a result of widening access policies, developments in compulsory education systems and changing lifestyles, undergraduates appear less well prepared to cope with the demands of self‐managed learning than might have been the case in the past. The problem is further compounded by the diversity of view amongst academic staff concerning the extent and nature of the support, which they should provide in this respect. Although the need for support will vary between institutions, all are faced, to a greater or lesser extent, with the challenge of ensuring that their learning and teaching strategies take account of the contingencies of self‐managed learning

Examines the use of Guglielmino′s Self‐directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) by two major corporations to assess the appropriateness of self‐managed learning systems for a given population of employees. Provides a recommendation for an improved methodology for companies which are considering self‐managed learning systems.

Three consultants in ICL′s corporate HRD unit speak from their experience of self‐managed learning. They ask “Can self‐development provide people with sufficient confidence in their own future to engender a positive attitude to corporate change?” Three key points are illustrated with examples taken from their own experience in ICL: develop yourself to develop others; help others learn the values of self‐managed learning – don′t tell them; be flexible at all times, including the design of solutions. Concludes that self development has a lot to offer – real, relevant, individual development dovetailed into the business needs of the developing organization. There is still much to learn, but their experience in ICL is positive and encouraging. They believe it is right for these “empowering” times, and can indeed help people develop sufficient confidence in their own future to engender a positive attitude towards the inevitable and essential corporate change.

This study aims to explore a self-managed action learning (SMAL) initiative undertaken by social work assessors in England, which led to insights into the practice of SMAL.

The paper draws upon the experience of the authors in relation to an actual SMAL intervention in a social care context in England.

The paper suggests that, in contrast to extant literature, it is not the absence of an “expert” facilitator, which has proved to be most challenging but rather dealing with the practicalities of managing inter-organisational sets online. Specific individual and inter-organisational learning came about as a result of the SMAL initiative, including the implementation of inter-organisational networking to support isolated assessors.

The ideas and perspectives discussed in this paper will be explored through further empirical research.

The paper illustrates how SMAL can be implemented and suggests how it can facilitate organisational and individual learning.

The paper discusses an initiative with the aim of better supporting assessors of newly qualified social workers; a task of enormous importance to the future of social work practice in England.

The paper contributes to a limited literature on the practice of SMAL. The uniqueness comes from both the multi-organisational aspect of the programme, that it is self-managed and delivered virtually.

This chapter explores the nature of learning required for effective leaders. The case is made that learning is not all one process and the difference between Learning 1 and Learning 2, as proposed by Bateson, is favoured as a model. Put simply learning, for instance, lots of facts (Learning 1) does not necessarily help the leader become more courageous, more self-confidant and more driven by deep values and beliefs. A case study of a Self Managed Learning programme for school heads is used to show the importance of Learning 2 and a way to focus development at this level. There is also a case study of a company that was seen as the best in its field folding due to the emphasis on Learning 1 (particularly technical skill) and lack of attention to Learning 2 qualities.

This study aims to focus on key approaches to education for sustainability (EfS) leadership development in the context of Malaysian and Japanese universities. The authors identify key indicators of effective EfS leadership development approaches using both descriptive and inferential analyses, identify and compare the preferred leadership learning methods of academics and examine the impact of marital status, country of residence and administrative position on the three EfS leadership development approaches.

The study is quantitative in approach and survey in design. Data were collected from 664 academics and analysed using the efficient partial least squares (PLSe2) methodology. To provide higher education researchers with more analytical insights, the authors re-estimated the models based on the maximum likelihood methodology and compared the results across the two methods.

The inferential results underscored the significance of four EfS leadership learning methods, namely, “Involvement in professional leadership groups or associations, including those concerned with EfS”, “Being involved in a formal mentoring/coaching program”, “Completing formal leadership programs provided by my institution” and “Participating in higher education leadership seminars”. Additionally, the authors noted a significant impact of country of residence on the three approaches to EfS leadership development. Furthermore, although marital status emerged as a predictor for self-managed learning and formal leadership development (with little practical relevance), administrative position did not exhibit any influence on the three approaches.

In addition to the theoretical and methodological implications drawn from the findings, the authors emphasize a number of practical implications, namely, exploring the applicability of the results to other East Asian countries, the adaptation of current higher education leadership development programmes focused on the key challenges faced by successful leaders in similar roles, and the consideration of a range of independent variables including marital status, administrative position and country of residence in the formulation of policies related to EfS leadership development.

This study represents an inaugural international comparative analysis that specifically examines EfS leadership learning methods. The investigation uses the research approach and conceptual framework used in the international Turnaround Leadership for Sustainability in Higher Education initiative and uses the PLSe2 methodology to inferentially pinpoint key learning methods and test the formulated hypotheses.

This is the first in a series of three articles which evaluate the use of self‐managed learning (SML) in management development processes in health care settings. This first article, being more general, outlines SML′s philosophical origins, strategic design, and current practice. SML represents a strategic approach to individual and organizational learning, which offers a new synthesis of previous ideas and approaches. Its proven benefits relate to the way in which the process of learning is designed to mirror the process of managing. The second article focuses specifically on a regional NHS case study of the application of SML, while the third provides a complementary US case study in a health care provider organization, where SML has been adopted for a leadership development programme.

The challenges we face in our organisations and our societies cannot be effectively addressed without wise, hearted, courageous leadership; leadership that is not focussed on a thirst for your own power, control and success. Leadership that is instead dispersed, moving to the person or persons best able to assist others in taking appropriate decisions and action.

As a practical example of how to nurture these forms of leadership, this chapter outlines the Self Managed Learning (SML) framework and describes how programmes might typically run. It explains the process by which leaders truly take responsibility for their own learning and commit to others to support them in theirs, developing both the leadership capability and social capital of the organisation(s) involved.

This chapter also illustrates how SML enables leaders to support and challenge one another to deal more effectively with the complex, fast-moving maelstrom of real opportunities and challenges of they and their teams face. It highlights how the creation of psychological safety allows leaders to develop the personal courage to be open and, therefore, vulnerable to explore their assumptions and to accept others as they are.

Throughout this chapter the impact of SML, often transformational, is evidenced through the testimony of those who have experienced it.

The purpose of this viewpoint is to argue a case for self‐managed learning in organizations.

The piece is based on research carried out by Strategic Developments International on organizational learning.

The paper discovers standard assumptions by many trainers about what they need to do are shown to be faulty.

Organizations can look at their own practice and assess if they are responding to knowledge about learning.Originality/valueThe use of Quantum Theory as an exemplar of a paradigm shift is unique in the context of articles on organizational learning. The value of the paper is also apparent in its challenge to misguided organizational practices.

Discusses critically some of the misconceptions of self‐managed learning enshrined in arguments propounded by traditionalist management educators unsympathetic to current trends in strategic learning. Offers a rationale for extending strategic approaches to learning in terms of “pragmatic maturity” in response to an increasingly complex world.