Self Managed Learning in Organisations more

Self Managed Learning in Organisations 30 October 1987 Self Managed Learning in Organisations Paper for the second conference on: Applying Self Development in Organisations Pembroke Hotel, Blackpool 13 - 15 May 1987 to be included as a chapter in: John Burgoyne, Mike Pedler and Tom Boydell Applying Self Development in Organisations McGraw Hill (late 1987) Alan Mossman consultant & Senior Lecturer, North East London Polytechnic & Rory Stewart Learning Systems Adviser, Shell Internationale Petroleum Mij. B.V. © Alan Mossman and Rory Stewart 1987 19 Whitehall STROUD GL5 1HA 01453 765611 © Alan Mossman & Rory Stewart 1987 page 1 01453 765611 Self Managed Learning in Organisations Self Managed Learning in Organisations An organisational and an individual example For some years now British Airways has had a Mission Statement for the Business as a whole. Each manager has his or her own Key Results which contribute to achieving that Mission. BA's Young Professionals' Programme is designed to enable the Airline's top graduate entry to: • specify, agree and revise as appropriate their key results • sort out what they need to achieve these • enable them to satisfy those needs • review and assess their performance and learning as they work on their key results. _____________________ Three years ago Pat Russell (not her real name) was Acting Head of Residential Care for the Elderly in a Local Authority Social Services Department. Her former boss, an autocrat, had just retired early on medical grounds. Pat had just started a management course which allowed her to design her own curriculum. She chose to develop two things: • the autonomy of the heads of homes who reported to her; and • the quality of the dignity and respect experienced by the elderly in those homes. Working on these areas required her to develop a range of related skills and knowledge - in her learning contract she committed herself to developing a more participative management style and improving her budgeting, delegation, team building, training, liaison with other departments, relations with the trade union and marketing. During the course Pat also worked on disciplinary issues and acted as a consultant to other managers in her Learning Set on topics such as interviewing, time management, micro-politics and the management of change. Pat was appointed Head after she had been acting in that role for a year and her staff threw a party to celebrate her appointment. At the end of her course she and her Learning set had to agree whether or not she should get a Post Graduate Diploma. Prior to that stage she chose to involve her boss and other senior officers, her admin officer, heads of homes, as well as a trade union rep in assessing appropriate parts of her learning so as to provide evidence to her Set of the progress she had made. Both the British Airways Programme and Pat's course use the principles of Self Managed Learning1 developed by Ian Cunningham and his colleagues at North East London Polytechnic. Pat was on the Post Graduate Diploma in Management (by SML) at NELP. The PGDip has been running since 1980 and SML principles have been explicitly used as the basis for In-house programmes in both the public and private sector since 1983. 1 We will use the following abbreviations throughout the paper: Self Managed Learning = SML; North East London Polytechnic = NELP; Post Graduate Diploma in Management by SML = PGDip page 2 01453 765611 © Alan Mossman & Rory Stewart 1987 Self Managed Learning in Organisations Our purpose in this paper is to give our view of what Self Managed Learning is and to outline some of the problems and some of the advantages associated with running SML programmes `in-house'. As SML can be used to enable a wide variety of people to learn new skills, knowledge or ways of being, in this chapter we shall generally refer to Learners rather than Managers, participants, professionals or other traditional titles. This is because SML is "content free" - there is no prescribed curriculum for the Learner to follow. Instead SML offers Learners a structure and a process with which to pursue whatever it is they need to learn or develop. We perceive the need in many organisations for people to relearn how to be creative, independent and inter-dependant. To do this people need to develop their ability to learn from experience , to survive in the existing environment and to grow. We recognise that this process may be difficult for both the individual and the organisation to manage in the short term and yet we feel that the rewards are likely to far outweigh the costs. We believe such people will be likely to be more fulfilled in their jobs and from the organisation viewpoint to be more entrepreneurial (or intra-preneurial), to set higher standards when appropriate and be generally more effective. We see SML as one of a number of initiatives which an organisation might take to develop itself as a Learning System. What is SML ? Self Managed Learning (SML) is an approach to management development which enables managers to be more aware of: • how they achieve key results using live work issues... • while controlling the content, processes and pace of their own learning... • with a group of other managers who are collectively responsible for assessing their own progress ... • within a structured programme facilitated by an Adviser. Principles The approach is based on a number of principles. These are expressed as an agreement between Learner and trainer (or Set Adviser): Learners: • • • • Set Advisers: • are responsible for helping the Learners realise their individual responsibility for their own learning. • are responsible for providing access to the available learning resources. are responsible for their own learning have the right to and are responsible for identifying their own learning needs, and for changing them over time. have the right to and are responsible for negotiating how they meet their learning needs within the available learning resources. are responsible for evaluating and assessing their own learning. © Alan Mossman & Rory Stewart 1987 page 3 01453 765611 Self Managed Learning in Organisations • have the right to and are responsible for determining their own personal involvement in the provision of learning resources (referral is acceptable). • have the right to and are responsible for evaluating the whole programme and their own effectiveness. These principles give rise to the process of Self Managed Learning through which the Learner personally works out what is to be learnt and how it is to be learnt, in conjunction with others. Applications SML has been used with Board level managers as well as recent graduates; with ad hoc groups and existing teams. What is important is that they volunteer, they understand the processes involved and they are committed to the process before starting. Evolved over the last decade, its roots are in humanistic psychology, self development, action learning, and independent study. Box 1 : Organisational Applications of SML referred to during the paper NELP North East London Polytechnic where it all started back in 1979. Since 1980 the Poly has offered a Post-graduate Diploma in Management (by SML) run along these lines (see NELP 1980, 1986, 1987 and Cunningham 1986). This programme is included because a major part of the learning goes on at work and as the original and longest running SML programme it is a useful source of comparisons. XPC Xylem Polymer Corporation (not its real name) - the first attempt to run a totally in-house programme. The one XPC set ran for 12 months with the six sales and service managers of one division who worked from 4 locations from Strathclyde to Surrey. The Software Engineering division of one of the GEC companies has run a number of SML type groups beginning while the Training Manager was on the NELP PGDip. Sarawak Shell Berhad is a Shell operating company in East Malaysia (Borneo). SSB's first set (Satu Tenaga) began in 1984 as a self development group and has now spawned two more sets. Satu Tenaga celebrated its 100th meeting in October 1986. The Aberleigh Borough Council (not its real name) set involved all six members of the top finance team - Director, Deputy and 4 Assistant Directors. British Airways Young Professional's Programme is aimed at new graduates recruited into the airline. The 6 month YPP is their induction course. Their focus for the first six months is the airline and how they can operate effectively within it. The London Borough of Newham's Housing Department have combined with two other London Borough Housing Departments to offer SML style sets for Housing Managers. GEC SSB ABC BA LBN © Alan Mossman & Rory Stewart 1987 page 4 01453 765611 Self Managed Learning in Organisations MEHA Mid-Essex Health Authority are currently (April '87) setting up a joint programme with Essex County Council Social Services and involving Housing and Voluntary Organisation staff who need to work together. The focus for the first programme (24 managers working in 3 sets and starting in April 1987) is `Joint Care Planning', management and personal development. (There are also two other SML initiatives currently being pursued in NE Thames Regional Health Authority) Issues for in-house SML programmes Running SML programmes in a single organisation raises a number of issues in relation to this approach to developing managers and the consequences of it. On the PG Diploma programme the Managers come from a wide variety of corporate cultures. This is valuable as each cultural perspective tends to throw up a different range of questions and challenges. In addition the different backgrounds of managers has lead to some interesting cross-fertilisation of ideas such as Local Government Officers like Pat Russell using a marketing perspective to help them think about what they are doing. On an inhouse programme these effects are likely to be muted unless it is decided to open the programme up to managers from other local organisations with different cultures and objectives. One of the things that excites us is the recent crop of multi-organisation Inhouse SML programmes (eg MEHA, LBN). The comments which follow are based on our experience in organisations of different sizes and cultures. We shall group our comments under four headings: • • • • Getting in - negotiating the programme Getting started - the initial meetings of sets and contract forming Getting on - subsequent meetings, resources and so on Getting out - assessing achievements, celebrating the group's successes and winding it up A Map of the Process of SML Box 2: source: based on NELP 1986, 13 page 5 © Alan Mossman & Rory Stewart 1987 01453 765611 Self Managed Learning in Organisations Getting in Access to run an In-house SML programme is likely to be negotiated like any other approach to developing managers. From some there will be demand, from others resistance and from most indifference. The resistance is likely to come from those senior managers who prefer to use their personal or organisational power to get things done. They will perceive, we think correctly, that this particular approach is likely to develop staff who know their own minds and are prepared to stand up for what they believe in. Others will recognise that it might show up their own weaknesses. The demand will come from managers who want to develop the autonomy, initiative and flexibility of their staff (for whatever reason). Finding Set Advisers could be a problem in some organisations, at least initially. Working as a Set Adviser (SA) on an SML programme requires a very different set of attitudes and skills from those required of a traditional lecturer or trainer and is not something everyone can do (see Box 11). It is very difficult for those who are used to `telling' or lecturing to stop doing that and to allow managers to muddle through, to wallow, etc - in other words to allow and enable people to learn from their own mistakes. Box 3: Training Set Advisers Alan and his colleagues at NELP have been running workshops for Set Advisers for some years now. They have noticed that some line managers can often learn to be Set Advisers more easily than many college tutors. Such line managers are generally among the more competent and sensitive in the organisation. They: • • • • find it easier to avoid being trapped in their `subject', are less likely to try to manipulate the problem to fit their particular subject speciality, are less threatened by not having any subject expertise and are motivated by the realisation that set facilitation skills can help them back on the job as well as in the set. Experience at NELP suggests that being a Self Managed Learner is a good way to start learning how to set advise. This has provided a good experience base for getting the most out of a Set Advisor training workshop. Before starting sets in their own organisations some Learners have become Co-set Advisors with an experienced staff member. On two occasions Alan has worked with pre-existing teams trying to use SML principles. In one case (ABC) there was a reasonable degree of openness and they got through a significant amount of business. In the meetings they tended to work on corporate issues in preference to personal ones though the boundary between the two was somewhat blurred. That team subsequently reported that they could operate more effectively even though they lost two out of six members for a period. In the second case (XPC) improved team working was reported as the prime benefit. This group reported to a general manager whom they perceived as autocratic and who they felt had insisted on their participation in the programme. There was very little personal development apparent from this group. It is not clear to what extent their perceptions of the divisional culture influenced this. We outline another explanation in Box 4 below. XPC set members were happiest working on collective problems. This was the first inhouse programme Alan ran and he chose not to insist on formal contracts. Alan now feels © Alan Mossman & Rory Stewart 1987 page 6 01453 765611 Self Managed Learning in Organisations that contracts would have helped him to clarify what were personal and what collective issues. He could then insist that the agenda be related to individual learning goals so that any topic is fully `owned' by at least one set member and covered by a learning task in that Manager's contract. Getting started An important part of getting started is defining the needs, setting a bench-mark and writing the contract. A number of things can make that process more difficult. Having the members of a set all from one organisation may lead to problems around self disclosure, trust and confidentiality. All three are important to successful SML. Box 4: Confidentiality at XPC At XPC at least one member, Jo, did not feel safe to talk about issues in her territory because of the presence of someone else from the same territory. She believed that this person given half a chance, would sabotage ideas which he didn't like, so she didn't talk about any ideas she was developing that might be jeopardised in this way. It was only at the end of the programme that Alan learned that other members of the set knew of this situation and refrained from raising similar issues so as not to put their colleague under pressure. It seems that the group members used the confidentiality ground rule to block any discussion of what went on in the group with outsiders including their General Manager - this was not helpful. In our experience SML has not worked very well where there has appeared to be an element of compulsion to attend the programme. For a start there is likely to be far less self disclosure by those who feel compelled and this could affect the degree to which the volunteers are willing to risk disclosing things about themselves. One of the key ideas underlying SML is that people learn in different ways - and it is important to remember that there are many other ways to learn than SML and that some people may prefer them. Others may well prefer to work only on cosmetic changes rather than deep ones affecting their personal attitudes and beliefs. There are various ways to begin the process of working towards a contract: Box 5: Three beginnings 1. Beginning with biography. The opening residential of the MEHA programme will have a strong focus on content - `Joint Care Planning'. To counter this and to establish the emphasis in the sets on individual learner centred programmes, some detailed biography work based on the ideas of Malcolm Leary and others (1986) is being used as part of the contract development phase. Self-disclosure. In SSB the key `icebreaker' was the `Coat of Arms' exercise. This worked much better than the Woodcock and Francis `Blockages Questionnaire' with a predominantly Malaysian group. Self-rating. Working with fairly homogeneous groups of Software Engineers in GEC, Libby Arnold had participants list the skills and knowledge required in their type of job. When these were typed up, set members were page 7 01453 765611 2. 3. © Alan Mossman & Rory Stewart 1987 Self Managed Learning in Organisations asked to rate the items in terms of importance for their own job and in terms of the extent to which they had the relevant skill and knowledge. This has worked well as the basis for discussion and for individual contracts. As the GEC sets have tended to be existing work groups set members have been able to get significant feedback on their self assessments. Many Learners have found the following five questions a useful next step from their starting point: • • • • • Where have I come from ? Where am I now ? Where do I want to get to ? How will I know if I have arrived ? How will I get there ? These five questions use a journey metaphor which might not be right for everyone and it is quite easy to reinterpret them in terms of a different metaphor - working with an architectural practice a design metaphor might be appropriate. Managers seem to like to start by focusing their attention on learning `hard' skills and on work tasks - focussing on the `skin' in the diagram in Box 6. This is not surprising as it is what most other courses and programmes claim to do; it fits their expectations and they feel safer. Then, as their feelings of trust and safety in the group develop, they revise their learning tasks so that they review and involve an increasing proportion of their personal `core' so as to promote congruity between themselves as people and their managerial selves. It is in this way that SML is, in Pedler's terms, "whole life and job related" (see below). Box 6: The person as manager - two distinct types of learning activity: In addition to the gradual shift of focus as illustrated in Box 6, sets have to learn how to operate effectively together. They have to learn what works for them. To some degree the Set Adviser can help them choose the right direction though it is often important for the set members to discover some things for themselves. © Alan Mossman & Rory Stewart 1987 page 8 01453 765611 Self Managed Learning in Organisations Box 7: Learning in SSB Early in the life of the first SSB set members spent a lot of time choosing what they wanted to do and, through this, learning how valuable such a focus could be. Halfway through this process Fred Yong discovered the acronym `SMART' as a way of testing objectives: Specific, Measurable, Achievable (ie `Can I do it?'), Reasonable (`Should I do it?') and Timely (`Have I both got time enough to plan it and will it happen soon enough to stimulate me?') When Fred Yong used SMART to test his own objectives he realised how unfocused he was. His experience encouraged others in the set to sharpen up their own objectives and gave them a mechanism for challenging each others'. This has been used by the group ever since. The SMART model has now been developed into an even more powerful tool - APM Getting on One key role for the Set Adviser at this stage is to get the set members to recognise both the progress they have made and, most importantly, the processes they used to get there. This helps them become more aware of how they learn and gives them an opportunity to do it more effectively. As they transfer these learning skills to other situations their awareness increases and they become increasingly independent of the Set Adviser. Running an SML programme within a smaller organisation is likely to lead to resourcing problems. It may be possible to deal with these through an arrangement with a local management centre, but we do not believe that it is possible to rely on a local public library alone. They are very unlikely to have an adequate range of audio-visual material. BA's idea for `mentoring' younger managers could well be used in other and smaller organisations. Box 8: Mentors in BA. Each of the Young Professionals has a mentor - an older more experienced person in the organisation to whom the Learner can turn for advice, counselling and so forth. BA mentors are chosen specifically because they are likely to provide a good role model. The mentor's specialism is the organisation, what makes it tick and how to make that happen. (This has similarities with the specialist tutor notion.) In BA it is intended that the relationship between the mentor and the Young Professional should continue well after the YPP and probably into their early 30s. During an SML Programme some sort of monitoring assessment helps set members to keep track of their own and each others' progress. It is a way for the Learner to get feedback on work in progress so that `mid-course' adjustments can be made in good time. It also increases the likelihood that projects will be completed successfully. In programmes with a qualifying assessment stage, monitoring assessment provides an opportunity for a set to develop, experiment with and fine tune its assessment process. © Alan Mossman & Rory Stewart 1987 page 9 01453 765611 Self Managed Learning in Organisations In SSB wives of set members (Yeo Wei is the only woman involved) have also started to meeting in their own Self Development groups. This developed following a joint weekend meeting facilitated by Rory and his wife Diana and has contributed to the development within the parallel sets as husbands and wives are able to grow and develop at the same rate. We find this development interesting as it emphasises the `whole life and job related' nature of SML. Getting out: Assessment and closure "How am I doing ?" is a question frequently asked by managers, particularly younger ones. It seems to us that more mature managers are generally better able to answer this question for themselves and we feel that the ability to evaluate one's own performance is an important step towards personal (not just managerial) maturity. Assessment is likely to be problematic in most contexts - we think it will be particularly so in smaller organisations bearing in mind the comments we have made about confidentiality. There could be particular problems if promotion is tied to the assessment. Assessment in SML, as we have seen with Pat Russell, is managed by the Learners in the context of the set. This makes for a longer process in which learning continues to occur In our experience a great deal of learning and very fast. Box 9: Managing Assessment in-house. BA's experience suggests how this might be done. The YPP sets agree their assessment process with the Airline's Management Development Manager who was in effect the `external examiner'. He has monitored the process and in the event of sets failing to agree assessments he would be asked to arbitrate. This is in a large company and the Learners are newly qualified graduates whose future in the Airline depends on their own self assessment and that of their peers (set adviser and other Young Professionals) in the set. As in the NELP PGDip the requirement is for concensus within the set so that all set members have equal power (in theory at least). When more senior managers are involved the confidentiality issues may be more significant. It will be interesting to observe what happens at MEHA. Three further differences between SML and `traditional' programmes become apparent in the final phase of a programme. Firstclosure is not prescribed as it usually is on more traditional courses, second closure may be more like ending one Chapter and starting another, and finally within the holistic framework closure is typically more explicit. Closure is important because, in our experience, many managers live predominantly firefighting jobs and rarely experience explicit closure, let alone celebration of accomplishments. This final step in the SML process therefore provides an important model for project completion/celebration/ closure with direct managerial and organisational applicability; – – – At the Organisation level it signals progress and opportunities for organisational learning, At the managerial level it allows focus by minimising the number of `unfinished' items around, giving the chance to move on to the next challenges with minimum distractions, At the individual level it provides positive recognition so frequently missing from managers' motivational styles. page 10 01453 765611 © Alan Mossman & Rory Stewart 1987 Self Managed Learning in Organisations For any SML group planning its own ending the key tasks can be summarised: • Looking back - reviewing achievements, growth and development • Looking forwards - thinking about what comes next and relating past learning to it • Being here - being in touch with the feelings associated with the `wake' For example: Learners may develop new contracts with themselves. Returning to the journey metaphor they might ask: `where am I now compared to when I started ?' (beinghereandlookingback); `where do I want to get to from now ?' (looking forward); `how will I get there ?' (looking forward); `who and what has helped me to get here ?' (a summary of the key learning (beinghereandlookingback) and particularly useful when planning similar tasks in the future). Decisions on any continuing meetings. One NELP Set has continued for nearly five years since they got their Diplomas with the Set Adviser now a full set member and the XPC group continued to meet as a self development group after the programme. (Looking forward) Feedback to each other based on the substantial knowledge and insight built up over time in the group. (Looking back and Being here) A time for appreciations for all group members. And a time to recognise and celebrate the `movement' and progress that individuals have made. (Looking back and Being here) Box 10: Closure at SSB SSB celebrated the closure marked by the departure of an early member on transfer, and built on this experience to mark their next transition on Rory's departure. They did three things for closure and reincarnation: • far, • • – Deciding on the issue of continuing with another Set Adviser, – Deciding how to manage the closure. Held a farewell party with partners, Ran the two final meetings, with the new Set Adviser, giving a round of feedback and appreciation from each member to every other. They also gave Rory a memorial gift. Worked on the business issues in the group by: – Completing a questionnaire about the progress in the group so We believe that it is useful, from very near the start, to negotiate some criteria for ending. These may include dates, events, group membership etc., and are as open to review during the set meetings as are the learning contracts. Realising the organisational benefits — and where they come from • Managers work on issues, problems, and opportunities particular to their situation and their employing organisation. These are both the starting point for deciding what they want to learn, and the acid test of their success. page 11 01453 765611 © Alan Mossman & Rory Stewart 1987 Self Managed Learning in Organisations • Offers managers opportunities to explore and take considered risks with the support and challenge of their set. This follows from the first benefit and from the climate developed in the Set. The set members will compare the manager's outcomes with her progress to date, and one frequent discussion centres on helping her to identify areas where she can take risks, but manage the level of risk appropriately. Learning and working are integrated - a lot of learning goes on on-the-job and a lot of work gets done in the set. One of the Set Adviser's roles is to make the connection between work and learning visible, and to assist set members to explore the learning available to them in commonplace or unusual work situations. Managers review their own progress and can change direction as they develop, or as their organisation itself changes and develops. This comes out of the previous point and from the focus on setting and reviewing outcomes against which to measure progress. Managers meet at mutually convenient times. Unlike conventional "timetabled" training, the Set is responsible for agreeing their own meeting times, duration and frequency. Managers learn more about how they learn so they are able to go on learning new things and developing their flexibility after the course. Because they improve their skills both at spotting learning opportunities at work and at generalising that learning to wider contexts. Learning is long term, broad based and at a variety of levels as it tends to take place over a number of iterations of a do-review-adjust cycle which requires the Learner to consider a variety of initially peripheral issues connected with the successful implementation. This stems from the emphasis on reviewing and challenging in the group, and from discovering that the original outcomes either need to be reset, or cannot be achieved without taking the peripheral issues into account. Learning is often shared with the manager's staff and other colleagues. Being used to discussing learning in the set, the manager will feel freer to talk with others. He is also much more likely to now see his staff's difficulties, problems or mistakes as opportunities for mutual learning rather than recrimination. Managers develop consultancy and meeting management skills which they can use back on the job and particularly in the development of their own people. The need to advise and challenge other set members builds these interactive skills. Managers are generally better able to integrate their home and work lives. The Holistic approach in the set, the "getting started" activities, and the extension of the set over a substantial time, make it OK to raise and work on these issues. • • • • • • • • © Alan Mossman & Rory Stewart 1987 page 12 01453 765611 Self Managed Learning in Organisations An issue for trainers to recognise is that SML programmes may result in a small number of managers deciding that they do not fit in the organisation and leaving2. It may well be that the people who do this are good at their jobs, yet they come to realise that they could be more fulfilled elsewhere. At one level that is a loss to the organisation. At another the organisation has an opportunity to promote someone who is suited and committed. It is not yet clear whether the SML approach is more likely to lead to this outcome than other programmes. On the face of it, it would seem that the holistic emphasis within the programme is more likely to encourage people to review their life and work together. The structural elements of SML An SML programme offers individual Learners a clearly articulated structure designed to help them learn, become conscious of their own learning processes and to assess their progress and effectiveness. They do this while dealing with current responsibilities at work. We believe that to be successful the necessary elements of that structure are: • Sets - groups of four to six Learners with a Set Advisor. Sets meet regularly say every two or three weeks (less frequently and continuity is lost) - to develop individual Learning Contracts (or Key Results) and then to review learning and assess progress against the criteria set out in contracts. the Set Adviser - a trained facilitator who provides the initial structure for the set and helps the set members learn how to support and confront one another and how to be advisors or consultants to each other. Box 11: Role and Skills of the Set Adviser The key role of the Set Adviser is to assist the Learner. Set Advisers are likely to: • offer set members a degree of structure (eg frequency and duration of meetings, groundrules for working within the meetings); • offer ideas about how to begin the process of identifying learning needs (eg diagnostic exercises); • do some personal disclosing in the early part of the programme as a way of modelling behaviour which is generally helpful in the context of SML; • provide support to set members if others in the set are not doing that; and • offer supportive confrontation if that is not forthcoming from others. Set Advisers will not normally direct the set. Rather they will make clear that the Learners can take leadership roles in the set, take the initiative and above all take responsibility for managing their own learning. Often course members who themselves want to be Set Advisers serve an apprenticeship as a co-set adviser working alongside an experienced Set Adviser. This is generally valuable for both parties. • 2By the same token organisations who recruit people who have been involved in SML programmes are likely encounter people who know more about who they are, where they are going and how to manage the synergy between their personal and their work lives. © Alan Mossman & Rory Stewart 1987 page 13 01453 765611 Self Managed Learning in Organisations • the Learning Contract - in which the individual Learner specifies his or her own learning "task(s)". Learning tasks can range from conventional study, research and/or personal growth work to `action learning' style projects. It is common for Learners to set out with one goal in mind and then to learn that they need to change goals and hence to change their contract. Resources - workbooks, films, colleagues and specialists in the workplace, courses, study guides, books, technology, etc which the Learners can use to help them achieve whatever they have specified. Every Self Managed Learner has access to their own personal and organisational networks. Different organisations have supplemented these resources in various ways, ranging from providing personal budgets to contacts with Educational or Training institutes. Assessment - Learning contracts will usually specify the criteria for the assessment of each topic, task or item. In addition to this, each set can develop its own criteria and standards for assessing its members overall performance. Overall (or Qualifying) Assessment is important part of the NELP, BA and MEHA programmes. It is externally refereed and, among other things, helps the Learners to sharpen and develop their personal criteria for success (and as we have seen with Pat Russell this can involve reference to others). Ian Cunningham has argued that some form of overall assessment is necessary for effective Self Managed Learning as it focuses the mind and creates closure. • • The above will be features whether there is just one set or many. There are advantages for the Learners and the Set Advisers if there are a number of sets linked into a `Learning Community' - a community of people who temporarily work together to further mutual learning. In that case some additional structure will help to promote the Learning Community and to enhance the learning opportunities for Learners, Set Advisers and others. These additional features include Community meetings, Special interest groups, Networking, Residentials and Specialist tutorial (or mentor) support. Almost all of these features contribute to the cross-fertilisation of ideas between course members and between sets. Box 12: Networking in SSB One of the critical learnings in Satu Tenaga, the original SSB set, was the value of asking for help. This is most clearly evidenced in what happened when the MD asked Selva, Chair of the Malaysian Senior Staff Council (and a member of the set), for ideas on how to reduce costs (SSB had a directive from Head Office to reduce costs by at least 17%). Selva used Satu Tenaga to Brainstorm ideas and then to help him make a presentation to the Management Team. The Presentation team `fishbowled' their presentation with the rest of the set and then used four groups of outsiders to critique their presentation as they developed it. Conclusions In this chapter we have outlined the process and key features of SML and connected it to current thinking about Management Development. We have provided some specific examples of its application -totally in-house, in multi-organisation SML and via the NELP © Alan Mossman & Rory Stewart 1987 page 14 01453 765611 Self Managed Learning in Organisations PGDip(all of these involve substantial learning on-the-job and for our purposes are "inhouse")-to illustrate some of the issues involved in running in-house SML. We have particularly focussed on the need for and role of Set Advisers, the principles which support their agreement with the Learners and the ability that SML offers to each Learner to tackle almost any topic, opportunity, problem or experience. What we have said seems to add up to two things: First that SML "reaches those parts that other programmes cannot reach"; and Second that the approach is one way to enable the "organisation" to reflect on and learn from its own development; organisation members (the Learners) do this and feed the information back into the organisation. Bibliography Cunningham, Ian (1986) "Self Managed Learning" in Alan Mumford (1986, 145-162): Handbook of Management Development (2nd Ed) Aldershot: Gower Leary, Malcolm et al (1986) The Qualities of Managing: a report on a project sponsored by the Manpower Services Commission. Sheffield, Manpower Services Commission NELP (1980) Post Graduate Diploma in Management (by Self Managed Learning) Course Submission London: North East London Polytechnic NELP (1986) (SML Handbook) Manage your own learning: Post Graduate Diploma in Management (by Self Managed Learning) Handbook London: North East London Polytechnic NELP (1987) Writing about SML - articles and letters about the Self managed Learning Programme at NELP. London: North East London Polytechnic Woodcock, Mike and Dave Francis (1982) The Unblocked Manager Gower/Wildwood House © Alan Mossman & Rory Stewart 1987 page 15 01453 765611