Ed Batista's Double-Loop Learning diagram
Nothing like a Sunday afternoon curled up in a chair with a coffee and a book on monitoring and evaluation… In the latest IDS Bulletin, I came across this graphic, attributed to Ed Batista, a blogger who talks about “Double-Loop Learning”.
I thought that the picture was also quite relevant to our own learning loops within IDE, and the goals of iQ – our internal evaluation and learning initiative (our “organizational intelligence”).
The first loop in the diagram represents our tracking of outputs against targets. We need this loop to work so that managers have their fingers on the pulse of operations.
The second loop is about learning on a more fundamental level – challenging our assumptions and received wisdom about the effectiveness of our work. This is where we – in the words of data visualization guru Hans Rosling – test whether our mindset matches our dataset. Ideally, this process generates a new understanding of our work that drives strategic decision-making and program design.
We are currently working on both learning loops. We are putting the finishing touches on an online database that will – for the first time – provide a common site that staff can visit to get key performance data at project, country and global levels. We are working to bring more clarity to our key indicators and the methods we use to collect, process and report the data. One product will be an Indicator Catalogue that details each indicator in a user-friendly format, with tools and data management guidelines.
We are also developing stronger research partnerships with a range of organizations to deepen and broaden our evidence base. We are currently working with the Iris Center (University of Maryland) on an impact evaluation in Zambia; we are working with the Institute for Fiscal Studies in London (affiliated with the Jameel Poverty Action Lab) on developing a randomized experiment in Ethiopia; we exploring work with the Agriculture Learning and Impacts Network (ALINe) – a multi-faceted research body that is very interested in how we harness business forces to improve smallholder production and income.
Our aim is to develop a vibrant research agenda that addresses our priority questions – and is fully supported by external research grants, not program money.
To do this, we need to be very clear about our top research questions and develop partnerships with leading research groups.
My hope is that we can all be researchers – in the sense that every IDE employee is encouraged and empowered to think critically about what we do and how we can improve. Toyota has implemented numerous improvements as a result of employee insights.
How well are we harnessing feedback and insights from our people to continually improve our work?
Tags: learning, management information, monitoring and evaluation, randomized control trial, research
February 8, 2011 at 12:27 am |
I’m glad you found my image useful, and I agree that double-loop learning is particularly relevant in this context–as it is in any field in which the successful achievement of a target may keep us from asking whether the target was the right goal in the first place.
As I mention in my original post, Chris Argyris orginated the concept of double-loop learning–I merely discuss its relevance to my own fields of executive coaching and experiential learning, and added this illustration.
February 8, 2011 at 8:46 am |
Thanks for your clarification, Ed. As you say, this concept has broad application, and your illustration of it is a simple and useful visual.