Challenge - A Learning Approach to Teams

Learning teams need practice fields that allow them to practice together and develop their collective learning skills. Practice provides the ability to control time as in an orchestral rehearsal or play practice. Consequences of all actions can be examined and studied for their effect, and the only consequence of their actions during practice is learning.

Effective team learning requires practice fields for teams to simulate decision-making and take action without fear of consequences. Sports and the performing arts are good examples of how a practice field works (courts and rehearsal halls) because one of the benefits of practice is that time can be controlled for preparation of "real time" work. Most teams lack practice while many resemble a basketball team trying to practice on a football field. Practice provides a way of slowing things down where team members can examine and explore processes and make decisions without fear of consequences. Practice is needed in situations that are as close to real work situations as possible (Senge, 1990a).

Educational leaders need to focus on their assumptions and the learning that takes place when changing assumptions instead of only fixing problems. The mindset of many managers is to identify and fix problems. Instead, people need to frustrate the system by looking at their thinking. Use the "left hand column" techniques for placing the focus on the thinking and on what is felt. With "left hand column" techniques there is an examination of what is not said as much, if not more, as of what is said (Senge, 1990a, and Senge et al., 1994). "Left hand column" techniques and methods examine what is not said and compare it to what is said during communication. It is common to not say many things that come to mind with people because of the fear of insulting someone or because of fear of making oneself vulnerable. These types of fears in communication contribute to organizational "learning disabilities" and inhibit individual as well as organizational learning.

Another example of how difficulties arise from the fixing problems mindset is in how educational leaders respond to a lack of trust. When there is fear or mistrust, educational leaders react to human things in a manner that resembles an attempt to fix trust. With problem-solving approaches educational leaders attempt to fix things such as the lack of trust the same way that they would fix a broken object. Correcting a lack of trust requires much more than identifying a problem and applying a solution. The problem may be the result of something distantly related where the effect is far removed from the cause.

Educational leaders need to focus on key issues and on understanding them. There are corrective processes that work from the interdependent left to the vicious cycles on the right, and educational leaders need to look for these corrective processes. One example is the lack of communication and trust and the difficulties in seeing how the two are related. Decisions made that effect people negatively can result in a lack of trust, but if it is communicated to people how and why the decision was made, communication becomes a corrective process. Another example is that people are trained to not tell that there is a problem unless there is a solution (usually because there is a lack of trust). Many problems grow into bigger ones because of the lack of trust and the lack of willingness to acknowledge to others that there is a problem (Dee, 1995; DePree, 1989; Gouillart and Kelly, 1995; Senge, 1990b).

A focus on interrelatedness and systems thinking can positively effect processes. Examining systems from within is difficult because of natural tendencies to not realize consequences that are not immediate. Flexibility in people's thinking is required for examining and understanding systems. Flexibility in thinking allows team members to "suspend " their assumptions and beliefs for looking deeper into the system as a team. As the team examines and develops an understanding of issues, the process provides a collective intelligence that is needed to identify problems within systems (Senge, 1995).

$I am my position. This is a focus on one's position that leads to a denial of responsibility for results produced by the team.

$The enemy is out there. The delusion that it is someone else's fault when things go wrong. With teams, the blame is placed both inside and outside of the team.

$The illusion of taking charge. A lack of systemic thinking and an inability to see how people contribute to their own problems. Reacting to things and problems with a "fix it" mentality in the name of "proactiveness."

$The fixation on events. The habit of seeing only events and believing that problems come from sudden events instead of seeing that problems come from slow, gradual processes.

$The parable of the boiled frog. Instead of systemic thinking, survival is geared to sudden changes in environment instead of slow, gradual change. Learning to see slow, gradual processes requires systemic thinking and slowing down processes so that the subtle changes can be examined.

$The delusion of learning from experience. Most consequences of our actions are never realized without systemic thinking because of the time delay between cause and effect within systems.

$The myth of the management team. Often management teams are teams in name only. They have a focus and a direction, but there's someone with a whip in case there is any deviation. Much like the dog team metaphor.

Adapted from Bailey, G. D., Ross, T. & Bailey, G. L. 1997; Senge, 1990a; and Senge et al., 1994.