Welcome to week 7, a week just like the previous weeks where finding something to write about is becoming an even greater challenge. I could start by identifying the problems that existed this week like having to go to a CEO meeting about the laggards in our market of whom which are diminishing the economic growth of our market or that we as a team are still trying to break the fourth wall on the simulation which many of the other teams are seemingly able to do. What I can say for sure this week is that I am finding no refuge in this week’s readings. I usually find that I scrape together a journal that meets all the requirements, has all the models and cites the importance of incorporating the key concepts from the readings in the week into that of our team and/or our strategy, however I just cannot do it this week, and not for a mere lack of trying.
Firstly let’s start with the term coined double loop learning. What is double loop learning you may ask? The answer to world hunger and the evolution of the human race? I think not. Once again academic scholars have created an illustrious term that is meant to revolutionise how we see the world and how we approach situations, to a group of people that have experienced and developed these skills from birth. Double loop learning: I means of taking an even further step back from a scenario to remove oneself from the limitations and filters to critically analyse a situation (Argyris, 1991). I can understand how this may be revolutionary to some, but for most of us, this has been a common tool that we have used to evaluate and reflect upon most of our lives. So what relevance does this have now for our team and the simulation when we have actively been utilising this tool from day one in first understanding the limitations and then pushing the limitations of the simulation, when understanding the team context and the norms and filters that govern interactions, the strategy and the outcomes. This week I am going to have to give a swing and a miss on integrating this illustrious learning tool into my practices for the simulation as it has always been there. It is like integrating the concept of closing your eyes to help you get to sleep better. This however is just the case I find myself in, and honestly I am getting tired of being fed resources and information that are common sense. I do understand that common sense is not so common anymore, and that this is valuable to some, and I have no problem with that, nor with its use to help people who don’t already utilise these concepts, but I would like something more in-depth, more ground breaking, more sophisticated than merely taking a further step back from a situation to evaluate it.
I am not attacking he value of these learning journals as I have found them a valuable source of learning and reflection, and that have allowed for what might suggest is the double loop learning to be utilised, but if you are reading this Peter, please maybe rethink some of the resources and concepts you are applying in some of the weeks, I did not find this helpful and I can on presume that I am not the only one in this boat.
So to conclude, yes we have problems that we are already on top of, no I didn’t find this week’s readings useful, and I am very sorry for anyone reading this that is wondering what I am on about, or why I have broken the convention of the standardised journal. As a final statement, rather than doing the same old peer review, tell me what you think? I would learn much more from what you believe on the subject.