The facilitator/coach in action learning

Many practitioners of action learning believe that having someone act as a facilitator or a coach for an action learning group is often necessary to ensure that the group finds a helpful balance between solving the immediate problems that face them and genuine learning, not just about the problem, but also about themselves as members of the group and about the group as a dynamic unit (Marquardt et al. 2018). Several organizations offer training or certification programs to develop action learning facilitators or coaches.

This view of the value of a facilitator or coach is contrary to the position taken by the originator of action learning, Reg Revans, who argued that an action learning group may need someone to initiate its first meeting and help it get established, but he was opposed to the idea of this person continuing to work with the group as a facilitator or coach, as he felt that they might, consciously or unconsciously, disempower group members (Revans 1998). He argued that the action learning group itself should be able to manage its own learning, rather than relying on someone to carry out this specialized role. However, Revans’ view on this has been described as controversial and ‘at odds with much current practice’ (Pedler and Abbott 2008, 187).

For this special issue we invited papers on the use of facilitators and coaches in action learning groups, and on experiences where groups have been self-managing. There are different views about how facilitation should take place in the work of action learning groups, and we sought to attract a collection of papers that illustrates the range of practices that facilitators and coaches have applied in action learning processes.

The special issue has been developed in partnership with the World Institute for Action Learning (https://wial.org). WIAL was set up in 2007 and is working through more than 20 affiliates – country-specific subsidiaries - in countries around the world. WIAL has developed a flagship certification program that equips graduates with the skills and mindset to play the role of an action learning coach. WIAL has around 500 active coaches who include action learning in their programs to help organizations solve complex problems, develop leaders and teams, and lay the foundations of organizational learning.

There are 11 papers in this issue:

Michael Marquardt is the co-founder and first President of the World Institute for Action Learning. Based on his 30 years of experience of leading action-learning programs, Michael has identified five key mindsets of effective action-learning coaches. For this paper, he consulted with 19 highly experienced WIAL action learning coaches on how they recognize and apply these mindsets in their practice.

The paper by Chandana Sanyal is based on a detailed analysis of the behaviors of action learning facilitators on a UK postgraduate leadership development program for mid-level managers. Chandana’s analysis presents a model of the pedagogy of facilitation that includes the art, craft and apparatus of the facilitator’s role, embracing the why, what and how of what facilitators need to undertake.

Gary Shepherd’s paper explores ideas from person-centred counseling literature that could be of value to action learning facilitators. He argues that certain elements of the person-centred approach can be of particular benefit to facilitators seeking new ways to work with their groups, and can introduce a more humanistic approach to working with group members.

Virtual action learning (VAL) has been practised for over 15 years, but the COVID pandemic and recent advances in technology have led to it becoming much more common in recent times. Jean-Anne Stewart’s paper inquires into the role of the facilitator in VAL, compared with their role in face-to-face groups, based on analysis of the use of VAL in a two-year Masters in Leadership program in a UK business school.

There are seven Accounts of Practice papers in this issue.

Verieux Mourillon uses examples from his own experience in action learning to illustrate three key benefits that an action learning coach can provide: enabling a group to grow and to achieve outstanding results; helping group members to work well together while protecting their diversity; and ensuring that learning takes place at individual, group and organizational levels.

The paper by Shannon Banks explains how she designed and implemented a large-scale program for BNP Paribas using self-facilitated peer coaching action learning groups. The positive outcomes of the program show that, with appropriate initiation and support, action learning groups can achieve the same rich learning and development as groups with specialized coaches.

Nidhipon Tritiptawin provides accounts of three cases of change and development, and explains the benefits in each case of the presence of a trained and certified action learning coach, including asking thought-provoking questions to stimulate new insights, encouraging learning from actions, and maintaining a safe and effective learning environment.

The paper by Fiona Scrase and George Boak focuses on a short training program for action learning facilitators, developed and provided over many years by Fiona’s organization. The paper explains how the learning processes within the program are structured and enabled, and shares examples of practical models that are used to support learning.

Paulina Chu’s paper emphasizes the role of intuition in coaching action learning groups. The paper focuses on a particular action learning session where Paulina used unconventional techniques to help a group member address a complex issue. Paulina argues that mindfulness, compassion, and post-session reflection can amplify intuitive responses, resilience, and self-awareness.

Bea Carson’s paper gives insightful examples of how an action learning coach can enable a group to achieve and maintain a learning mindset even when disruptions occur that threaten to derail learning processes. She describes how she used awareness, team queries and collaborative decision-making in particular cases, and promotes the value of a coach encouraging groups to engage in constant questioning.

The paper by Robert Groen offers a number of analytical tools that he developed or adopted when he facilitated action learning groups in a complex large-scale change project in the Netherlands. The tools helped the groups to analyze and priortize the issues they were asked to tackle, and to develop plans and monitor progress.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Peter Cauwelier

Guest Editor Peter Cauwelier, PhD, is a WIAL Master Action Learning coach, the former President of WIAL and runs WIAL’s affiliate in Thailand.

George Boak

George Boak is an Associate Professor of Leadership and Innovation at York St John University. He has been a co-editor of the journal since 2021.