D17- Single-Loop Learning versus Double-Loop Learning

According to Chris Argyris and Donald Schon, who originated the terms, “single-loop learning” is correcting an action to solve or avoid a mistake, while “double-loop learning” is correcting also the underlying causes behind the problematic action. Underlying causes may be an organization’s norms and policies, individuals’ motives and assumptions, and informal and ingrained practices that block inquiry on these causes. Double-loop learning requires the skills of self-awareness and self-management, and the willingness to candidly inquire into why what went wrong did so, without sliding into defensiveness, blaming others, making excuses, trying to be “nice and positive” to each other, protecting each other’s egos, and other automatic or unconscious patterns of behavior that block honest feedback, inquiry and learning. Single-loop learning looks at technical or external causes; double-loop learning also looks at cultural, personal or internal causes.

A sample problem: delays in completion of work.

Sample questions that lead to single-loop learning:

  • Which step suffers most from delays, and what delays that step?
  • How can the work process be simplified to reduce completion time?
  • What better technology can be used to reduce delays?

Sample questions that lead to double-loop learning:

  • What are the bases for setting the standard or expected completion time, and are these bases still valid in this situation?
  • If the delay had been noted earlier or it has been recurring or persistent, what prevented those who noted them from reporting or doing something about it? What prevented them from taking the initiative?
  • Does it happen often that employees notice a delay but hesitate for some reasons to do something about it? If so, what are those reasons? If it is difficult for employees to talk about those reasons, why so?
  • Does it happen that a delay occurs so often that employees tend to no longer notice or talk about it? Why? Or, what led to this pattern of unspoken group behavior?
  • If the delay often occurs with a specific employee, what prevented his manager or colleagues from doing something about it earlier? Is there an unwritten agreement or practice to avoid embarrassing co-employees, or to always “be nice and positive” to each other?
  • Were there people who believe that some potential root causes of a delay or problem were not considered or were too easily dismissed by colleagues or by managers? Why didn’t these people speak out, and if they did, why were they not fully listened to?
  • Is problem recognition, problem analysis or problem solving often dominated only by certain employees, and if so, why does this practice persist?

Double-loop learning requires three skills: self-awareness to recognize what is often unconscious or habitual, honesty or candor to admit mistakes and discuss with colleagues to discover and validate causes, and taking responsibility to act appropriately on what is learned. According to Argyris, “today, facing competitive pressures an earlier generation could hardly have imagined…leaders and subordinates alike…must all begin struggling with a new level of self-awareness, candor, and responsibility” (from Argyris: Good Communication that Blocks Learning, in: Harvard Business Review on Organizational Learning, 1994).

Footnote: read what I wrote more recently on this topic: “Practicing internal watchfulness (hint #11)”

=>Back to main page of Apin Talisayon’s Weblog
=>Jump to Clickable Master Index

free counters

Tags: , , , ,

7 Responses to “D17- Single-Loop Learning versus Double-Loop Learning”

  1. Philip Penaflor Says:

    Hi Apin, kumusta? Interesting materials/works you have here. It’s a wealth of info. On single loop/double loop learning, there’s yet a third loop when we begin to question our own assumptions of why we need to do the kind of things we do. Or do we really need to do it? If not, can we abandon our theories? Or if it’s connected with our organization, does our organization need to do this? Or, is our organization still relevant? The idea is not mine. I read it somewhere else when I was still at IIRR and we have this course on organizational learning.

  2. apintalisayon Says:

    Hi Philip,

    Some people call “triple loop learning” what you described – the process of questioning the organizational assumptions behind an action.

    For simplicity I decided to lump questioning of all assumptions into one category (see the bottom paragraph in my blog “Practice Internal Watchfulness -Hint #11)

  3. tess Says:

    this is great!cheers

  4. eTOM and Organizational Capability for Performance Improvement « Astimen's Blog of KM Telecom Says:

    […] … Read internal analysis pdf … Read Implementation of VRIO Framework doc … Read single loop and double loop learning by Apin Talisayon Blog… GA_googleAddAttr("AdOpt", "1"); GA_googleAddAttr("Origin", "other"); GA_googleAddAttr("theme_bg", […]

  5. astimen Says:

    Hi Apin, thanks a lot for easy understand about single loop and double loop learning that help people to create knowledge and generative learning. I put this blog as reference link for my blog astimen.wordpress.com

  6. apintalisayon Says:

    Yes, I did read your blog post. Thanks too, Astimen.

  7. organization theory Says:


    […]D17- Single-Loop Learning versus Double-Loop Learning « Apin Talisayon’s Weblog[…]…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: