Author:
De Loo Ivo,Verstegen Bernard
Abstract
In theory, action learning programs should lead to personal growth, and thereby also to organizational growth. Especially the occurrence of organizational growth can be questioned however. Three explanations are offered to explain the lack of organizational growth that seems to result when action learning programs are evaluated in practice: differences in perspectives, group problems, and hold‐up effects. They all turn out to serve as valuable explanations.
Subject
Development,General Business, Management and Accounting,Education
Reference22 articles.
1. Bowerman, J. and Peters, J. (1999), “Design and evaluation of an action learning program a bilateral view”, Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 11, pp. 131‐9.
2. Casey, D. and Pearce, D. (Ed.) (1977), More than Management Development: Action Learning at GEC, Gower Press, Farnborough.
3. Coles, M. and Malcomson, J.M. (1989), “Contract theory and incentive compatibility”, in Hey, J.D. (Ed.),Current Issues in Microeconomics, Macmillan, Basingstoke, Ch. 5.
4. Cunningham, J.B. (1993), Action Research and Organizational Development, Praeger Publishers, Westport, CT.
5. Datar, S.M. and Rajan, M.V. (1995), “Optimal incentive schemes in bottleneck constrained production environments”, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 33, pp. 33‐57.
Cited by
12 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献