Kolb's experiential learning cycle

Kolb, Rubin and McIntyre (1974) developed the concept of a learning cycle to
reflect the fact that learning is an on-going and continuous process. The previous
models lack the dimension of relating existing knowledge, skills and attitudes to
the development of new knowledge, skills and attitudes, both in respect of entirely
new learning and within the learning process itself.
This approach is now widely used as a means of managing learning. It stresses
the need to learn from practice and feedback, so that the process comprises,
rather than a sequential series of events, a continual series of circular patterns
based on experience.

Experience
Concrete experience is the basis of the cycle. We use experiences that we
have had in the past, or take experiences which are new to us, in order to
further our learning. These experiences may be structured and planned, or
may be "accidental", in that they happen to us in the course of our work or
our everyday living. They may be experiences which happen to us on our
own, or involving others.
Reflection
Having been through an experience, the next stage of the cycle is about
examining it in order to be able to identify what actually happened, what we
became aware of, and how we felt about it. It is at this stage, also, that we
begin to make an attempt to understand what the experience might mean for
us, in terms of its significance, whether good or bad, if the experience seems
to be something which tends to happen to us frequently, and what this
means in terms of our learning to deal with it.
Sometimes you will be able to go through this stage by thinking things
through, consciously or unconsciously, on your own. At other times, you may
find it helpful to talk your ideas over with another person.
Conceptualisation
Having made the experience "coherent" through reflection, we then go into
the phase of conceptualisation. Here we generalise from the individual
experience to start to look at how it can be used in other ways in terms,
perhaps, of principles and trends. Can any of the ideas which emerge be
applied to similar situations?
What common behaviour patterns might we begin to see emerging?
Application
We are now ready to test out our analysis of the experience by applying the
ideas and principles identified. Application is active experimentation by
modifying our behaviour after making decisions about how this might best be
done and, then, in a sense, beginning the learning cycle again, by putting
ourselves in the position of experiencing a situation afresh.
This cyclical process needs to be completed in full for effective learning to take
place. If, for example, one is tempted to jump from stage two to stage four without
 fully analysing and conceptualising the experience, it is unlikely that any new
behaviour will be effective or helpful there will be no true understanding of why
things happened as they did, and no sense will be made of the data which the
experience generated.

The work of Kolb has been refined by Honey and Mumford (1986) to develop four
categories of learning styles:
l The activist
l The reflector
l The theorist
l The pragmatist.

The four styles are described below in terms of the general characteristics associated
with people of each type. Note that these are ideal types generalised statements
applying to persons who might fit the style perfectly. Such ideal types can rarely be
applied to individuals in their entirety. Rather, you will probably find that different aspects
of each apply to you as an individual. The value of this methodology lies in its ability to
develop understanding of behaviours (in this case, learning) by classifying them into
broad groups.
Honey and Mumford also developed a comprehensive "learning styles questionnaire",
designed to enable individuals to identify their preferred natural learning style.However,
even without completing this, it is possible to give careful consideration to the four styles
and to consider yourself in relation to each one.
(a)Activist
Activists absorb themselves fully in new experiences and tend to jump in at the deep
end. They are open minded; enthusiastic; gregarious, flexible and thrive on challenge.
The down side to this approach is that they act first and consider the consequences
afterwards. They have butterfly attention spans, get bored quickly and want to move
on to the next activity.

(b)Reflector
These people like to stand back and take it all in. They may take a minor role in
discussions but will assimilate other peoples ideas readily. They are likely to be
thoughtful and methodical and will demonstrate good listening skills. The weaknesses of
this approach are that they are reluctant to participate, may be cautious and are
endlessly revisiting the past
(c)Theorist
These people are able to integrate their observations into theories or patterns.They will
be logical; rational, objective and disciplined. The disadvantages of this style are that
theorists will have a low tolerance for chaos. They will probably have a tendency
towards perfectionism and an intolerance of intuition and subjectivity.

(d)Pragmatist
Pragmatists like to apply theories and concepts to practice. They like new ideas and
seek them out and test them. These people are likely to be practical and realistic.The
weaknesses could be that these types are task oriented and like to get on with things
without always testing the options.

BELBIN TEAM ROLES

Belbin identified what he called eight team roles that need to be present in groups. By
"team role", he meant the way one individual interacts with another, in order that the
team can become cohesive and effective.
In recognition of the fact that team roles evolve, in 1993 Belbin revised some of the roles
and added a ninth role. The revised roles are as follows:
Co-ordinator (replaced chairperson)
The co-ordinator's role is to ensure participation and action. He or she does this
by controlling activities and objectives, monitoring and deploying resources,
recognising the strengths and weaknesses of each team member and ensuring
that each individual is making the best use of his or her role.
Implementer (replaced company worker)
The implementer's role ensures the organisation's interests and goals are
represented in the group. He or she does this by interpreting plans and
procedures into workable objectives and ensuring that they are adhered to and are
carried out.
Shaper
The shaper's role is to influence the direction of the group by argument and
example in group activities and discussions and to advise on the application of
team effort to achieving tasks.
Plant
The plant's role is to generate new strategies and ideas within the group's remit.
Resource investigator
The resource investigator's role is to investigate and report on new concepts,
developments and ideas that may affect the group. This role also involves making
external contacts and negotiating with them for the good of the group.
Monitor/evaluator
The monitor/evaluator's role is to assess the effectiveness of activities and
contributions, and the extent to which the group is meeting its objectives, and to
facilitate the decision-making process by analysing problems, evaluating
generated ideas and presiding over suggested solutions.
 Team worker
The team worker's role is to facilitate the use of the group's strengths, the use of
good communication techniques and to generate and maintain esprit de corps. He
or she maintains group morale by joking and agreeing.
Completer-finisher
The completer-finisher's role is to ensure that attention is paid to detail, that the
task is completed, that mistakes are not made and that the group maintains its
sense of urgency when dealing with tasks.
Specialist (new role)
The specialist's role is to provide expert advice when it is needed. In reality, the
specialist is not a member of the group, but joins it to provide professional support,
and then leaves.

CONFLICT

Thomas (1977) identified five conflict-handling modes which may be used by managers.
Avoidance ignoring or suppressing the problem in the hope the problem will go
away or not be too disruptive. This is an unassertive response, in that the other
party is avoided to prevent visible conflict, but is also uncooperative with the other
party so it is a winlose or loselose situation. This mode may be used when the
issue is trivial or time is needed for the issue to cool;
Accommodation allowing the other party to win and have his/her/their own way.
This is unassertive and cooperative since self-interest is sacrificed to appease the
other party. This mode may be used because one party is in the wrong or it is
more important to the other;
Competition battling the conflict out in an attempt to win it (with the risk that you
may lose). This involves being assertive, uncooperative and using power to win.
This mode may be used because decisive resolution is required or the
consequences of losing are unpalatable;
Compromise seeking a middle way by bargaining, with both parties giving up
certain desired outcomes to achieve the satisfaction of others; there are no
winners or losers. This mode may be used where time is short and the parties are
equally strong;
Collaboration seeking to satisfy the desired outcomes of both parties by being
assertive and cooperative, often by changing the situation itself. Both parties
must, however, want to participate. This mode may be used where future
relationships are deemed important or both parties are needed for successful
implementation.
Clearly any particular approach is not appropriate in all situations, and the manager will
have to assess the situation to determine the best possible mode of intervention in order
to reduce or resolve the conflict. The following table provides examples of the types of
situation where each approach may be effective.
Note that, whilst it is often deemed that the collaboration mode is the most appropriate
because all parties to the conflict are likely to be satisfied, it should be clear from the
table that there are situations in which the other approaches may be more suitable.
Conflict-Handling Strategies and Appropriate Situations

Strategy Appropriate situation

Avoidance Where the issue is trivial and there are more important ones to be
dealt with
Where the benefits of resolution are outweighed by the potential for
disruption
Where time is needed to let tempers cool
Where time is needed to gather further information
Where others can deal with the issue more effectively
Where other issues are involved

Accommodation When you are wrong and need to show reasonableness

Where the issue is less important to you than to others
Where you want to build credits for facing later issues
In order to minimise loss when facing defeat
In order to maintain harmony and stability

Competition When quick, decisive action is needed

When unpopular actions have to be taken on important issues
When you know you are right on important issues
Where non-competition will be seen as weakness and exploited
Collaboration When both viewpoints are equally valid and important
In order to take advantage of different perspectives
In order to gain commitment through consensus
When there is a need to repair or re-establish damaged
relationships

Compromise When the issue is important, but is not worth the disruption of more
assertive modes
When opponents of equal power are committed to mutually
exclusive actions
In order to resolve complex problems on a temporary basis
When collaboration or competition is unsuccessful