Continuing in his series 'The 20th century learning professional', Paul Kearns asks: How do you keep an organisation moving forwards, continuing to learn? You need a learning system, he says – championed by a strategic, multi-loop-thinking training professional!

It has been said that if you're not part of the solution then you're part of the problem. The perennial problem for learning professionals is how to keep their organisations moving forward by continuing to learn – what this requires is a learning system. We are all used to the phrase 'the learning organisation' and anyone who has read Chris Argyris' or Peter Senge's work will know that systems thinking has to be a key component. Now I know plenty of training managers that claim they work in a learning organisation and yet, when I ask them, 'so where is your learning system?' they often look blank, or worse still, proudly point to a computer screen that tells me how many people logged on to their elearning site this morning, or went on the fire-walking course yesterday and even which ones are now off work with blisters (it's amazing what an integrated IT system can tell you).

"The absence of a genuine learning system marks an organisation out, by definition, as a non-learning organisation - otherwise known as a stupid organisation."

Trainers who think this constitutes a learning system though are most definitely part of the problem. I would even go so far as to say that the absence of a genuine learning system marks an organisation out, by definition, as a non-learning organisation - otherwise known as a stupid organisation.

So how do learning professionals make sure they are part of the solution? Well, first they have to know what a true learning system looks like and what it means in practice. If we refer back to the example in the previous part of this series, about the reactive, sheep-dipping of thousands of civil servants on data handling, we see a classic example of non-strategic, single loop thinking: if data has been mis-handled it must be because staff have not been trained to handle it correctly. Single loops, for those new to the subject, are where a single variable or issue is considered to be the cause of the problem. Most organisations can be accused of single loop thinking at some time – such as sending everyone on a customer service course when customer complaints start to rise.

Yet I also readily acknowledged last time that those who instigate sheep-dip training are not, themselves, stupid in any conventional sense. People who don't know any better are not acting stupidly, only those who do are.

What we have is a situation whereby highly intelligent human beings feel impelled to act, in what can only be described as a rather stupid manner. We can all be perpetrators and victims of organisational wrong-headedness but we usually absolve ourselves of any personal responsibility by saying 'it's not me, it's the system'. Stupid systems are one legacy of a 20th century training mindset and I can only think of one person whose role, whose very raison d'être, is to change the system - and that is the 21st century learning professional.

A true, organisational learning system comprises two core elements:

1. An acceptance, by the organisation, that honest feedback on organisational issues is not just legitimised but positively welcomed and reinforced (no need here for anonymity). That means negative feedback and criticism are equally important and any reference to 'whistle blowing' is a clear indicator of a non-learning culture.

2. Learning solutions must address all of the complex factors and variables that are most likely to have created the problem in the first place. So a lax attitude to data handling has to include the lax attitudes at the highest levels of management. These are the root causes of insecure IT systems and processes, poor security procedures and a failure to manage all stakeholders and external customers effectively (e.g. did the National Audit Office have any right to this data and should they have specified how it was to be despatched?).

Learning organisations have to be fully conscious of, and explicitly adhering to, double-loop (multi-variable) thinking. Some learning specialists even suggest there is a triple loop but creating an organisational learning system is difficult enough as it is without over-complicating it. It will take many years before it is so well established that it becomes the system that drives the organisation's eagerness to learn. The challenge for the Oath-taking learning professional is to be able to articulate what a learning system means and to at least try to establish one.

It is their open declaration of this as their over-arching purpose that is the gold standard indicator of learning professionalism: a standard based on simple criteria that can be readily observed and objectively tested. 21st century learning professionals know exactly what they are doing and where they are heading. 20th Century trainers just keep trying to excuse themselves by blaming the system for their lack of professionalism.

Read Paul Kearn's previous feature</strong. in the 21st century learning professional series
To sign the Training professional's oath, click here

Paul Kearns specialises in measuring the value of the human contribution to organisational success and teaches real evaluation around the world. He is the author of the CIPD's best selling 'Evaluating the ROI from Learning' and has campaigned for many years to raise professional standards. For more information visit www.paulkearns.co.uk

This feature first appeared on site in August 2008