Teaching Smart People How to Learn

1. Teaching Smart People How to Learn Emrah Beşe Tümay Karaver Yonca Olgun Olga Shostak

2. Introduction Most successful people are adept at solving problems, but they don’t know really how to learn Able to solve problems and overcome many organizational obstacles Unsuccessful to examine why there are obstacles and looking at the underneath dynamics of the problem

3. Lack of introspection Lack of the ability to see their own part in the problem Result: They are not able to learn from it

4. Mistakes of Companies Definition of learning is wrong Common assumption of getting people to learn is largely a matter of motivation

5. Critical Issue Defensive Behavior inhibits double loop learning Defensive Reasoning: People focus the attention on what the other person or parties have done wrong

6. How Professionals Avoid Learning • 16 years study on management consultants • Managers- highly educated • High job satisfaction • Successful at learning on external factors

7. Self resistance to continuous improvement • Failure to confront self performance • Fear of inadequate performance • Tendency to react defensively • Blaming on the others for low performance

8. An Example Study Performance evaluation meeting • Premier management consultant team • Largely satisfied client • Discussion for performance improvement • Encouragement for frankness, openness and challenging superiors

9. Team Members` Complaints Blaming on client Manager Excessive workload Limited time

10. Observations • Avoiding to look at self performance • Routine self defensive reasoning • Unproductive parallel conversations • Lack of contribution to improvement

11. How To Overcome? • Dynamics of defensive reasoning • Special causes

12. Defensive Reasoning (DR) &The Doom Loop Defensive Reasoning and professionals’ behavior Encourages individuals to keep private “Espoused Theory” (Theory of action) “Theory-in-use” (Real action)

13. Four BasicValues To remain in unilateral control To maximize “winning” and minimize “losing” To suppress negative feelings To be as “rational” as possible

14. The Dynamics & Causes To BecomeASubjectof DR • Dynamics Professional performance Satisfaction Individual • Possible Consequences: • “Brittle” personalities • Low level of further performance • Psychologically devastating • Formidable predisposition againstlearning Unprofessional performance Doom loop of despair with zoom into it

15. Causes • Poor experience of DR before the world of work • Lack of knowledge how to manage DR • “Mr./Mrs. Perfect” – self-pressure • High aspirations equal to High fear of failure • Performance Evaluation

16. Is Performance Evaluation AToolTo EncourageLearning orTo PushProfessionalsIntoThe DoomLoop? • Performance evaluation is a complex of criteria and standards that define the level of professionals’ performance • Subjective judgments • Unclear criteria for minimum performance • Antilearning OR • It can deter persons’ irresponsibility

17. Observations • “Espoused theory” is different from “theory-in-use” • Rules described and explained the professionals’ actions were denied by them

18. Learning How To Reason Productively • Organizations can break out of this vicious cycle by • Using universal human tendencies - strive to produce what is intended - value acting competently - associate self esteem with behaving consistently and performing effectively • Companies can use these human tendencies to teach people how to reason in a new way • Reshape the behavior

19. Learning How To Reason Productively Recognizing the reasoning people use Identification of inconsistencies between ‘espoused’ and ‘actual’ theories of action Confrontation of unconscious action Learning how to identify defensive behavior and how these become a part of the organization’s problem

20. “Tough Reasoning” vs. “Soft Reasoning” “Tough Reasoning” - The way to go to reduce and overcome organizational defenses Analytical and data-driven Objective data It can withstand all kind of critical questions Human resources programs are no longer need to be based on “soft reasoning”

21. Turn This Situation Around First Step: Top managers have to change their own theories in-use Second step: They become aware of their defensive reasoning and its counterproductive consequences. - Top to bottom change Third step: Any educational experience designed to teach senior managers to reason productively has to be connected to real business problems. - Productive reasoning not just in a training session but in all their work relationships

22. Case Study A large organizational-development consulting company CEO- the problems caused by the intense competition among various business functions represented by his four direct reports Disagreement → Fight→Defensiveness→Cost Describe a meeting he intended to have on a paper - Divided the paper in half - On the right hand side of the page: describe what he would say and how subordinates reply - On the left hand of the page: thoughts and feelings that are likely to occur during the meeting but that he wouldn’t express.

23. Case Study-Cont. CEO learnt several things about the way he acted with his management team Counterproductive in the guise of “diplomatic” CEO’s colleagues has also learned about their ineffective behavior. -Examined their own behavior -Unintentional cover ups -Inaccurate attributions and evaluations they did notexpress -Belief of having to hide important ideas and feeling from the CEO in order not to upset anyone was mistaken

24. Observations Issues that have never been addressed before have been willingly addressed. - Payoff: Management teams work more openly and effectively, become more flexible and can better adapt to particular situations When they are trained in new reasoning skills, the senior management have a big impact on the performance of the entire organization - Even when other employees are still reasoningdefensively

25. THANKS FOR LISTENING QUESTIONS?