Experiential learning is the most sustainable form of learning there is. In this context, sustainable means that memories formed through experiential learning can be recalled particularly well in the right context and integrated into new thinking or action. How can organizations take advantage of this when it comes to making innovative progress on topics and in their organizational structure?
Experiential learning is a term that has regained relevance since around 2006 through university research on organizational learning and in human resources development, and organizations have also put it into practice in the form of experiential team development.
I first encountered the many dimensions of experiential learning in a wide range of areas while studying education, and they have accompanied me throughout my professional life ever since. First in the psychology lecture, where we were taught that emotions are a major factor in forming memories. The stronger the emotion, the stronger the memory and the easier it is to recall (trauma excepted). Sensory impressions also support memory formation – the more senses are involved, the more intense the storage and the faster the recall. (Huber & Krause, 2018)
“Tell me, and I will forget. Show me, and I may remember. Let me do it, and I will be able to do it.” This is how vividly Confucius described experiential learning. Building on this, learning through role models is a very positive factor in experiential learning.
We first use learning by example as babies, by imitating our caregivers. It is often observed that younger siblings develop faster because they have a role model close in age whom they can emulate by watching and then imitating. The little ones’ will to learn never ceases to amaze me, because babies and toddlers in particular are rarely distracted from their goal of learning and trying something out once they have set their minds to it. They have an incredible capacity to be curious, to try things out, to fail, to be frustrated, to rejoice in even the smallest successes, and to keep trying until it works. I see this ability to tirelessly seek out experiences as one of the great driving forces of innovation and progress.
Later in life, organized or institutional learning is added. Children go to kindergarten, then to school, where they are confronted both with the demand to absorb knowledge (they have to, because there is a clear, tested performance requirement) and with the chance to learn from experience, e.g., in sequences where they can try things out, such as chemistry, shop class, or sports.
Later still, experiential learning in group and organizational processes comes into play, along with their effect on experiential learning. How do groups form and how do they interact? How do teams work together? How do error culture and organizational structures affect experiential learning?
Important terms in experiential learning are formal and informal learning (Frost, 2018), two categories of the broad term “learning.” Formal learning takes place in ordered structures and follows a plan, e.g., at school, in continuing education, training courses, at university, or in vocational training, and is mostly used to impart knowledge. Informal learning happens in everyday life, whether it’s the best way to clean a dirty grill or at work, when I have to find the right solution to a problem in a situation that is new to me. This can happen, for example, by watching others, doing your own research, trying things out, or informally asking colleagues for advice. Experiential learning mostly belongs to informal learning and, in a nutshell, can be described as the “interplay of operational adaptive learning, strategic exploratory learning, and normative identity learning […]” (Müller, 2010, p. 12).
The big question for organizations and researchers is how experiential learning – which is mostly informal learning – can be institutionalized. Institutionalizing means that the organization sets up measures with a specific goal and, ideally, the results can be validly evaluated. There are many approaches and methods for such measures that also fit the concept of experiential learning. Everyone knows the following example: classic vocational training, in which relevant tasks are practiced hands-on, first by way of example at vocational school and later in the company and in everyday work. Mentoring and peer coaching are also important elements of guided experiential learning at work, rooted, among other things, in learning by example.
The challenge we face in experiential learning is the human factor. The definition of experiential knowledge used here comes from Böhle et al. (2004): experiential knowledge is a specific form of knowledge that can be acquired through practical action and is tied to people and situations. In experiential learning, you learn all the time, whenever you gain experience – only the “what” cannot necessarily be controlled from outside. This means experiential learning cannot be equated with the classic concept of “success,” since a person may also fail and learn from it, or, in another situation, the lesson may not be stored in the long term. As Böhle found, experiential learning therefore depends a great deal on the learners’ commitment and motivation as well as on the circumstances in which they learn. An example: one of the major proponents of guided experiential learning is the experiential education mentioned above. It takes advantage of the fact that connections are created on a meta level from the experiences gained (e.g., team trainings in climbing parks or the famous manager survival camp). After the exercises, what has been “experienced” is transferred to situations in everyday work, which can promote emotional memory storage. The ability of participants and facilitators to connect these experiences with everyday work during the reflection phases and to develop possible problem-solving scenarios that can then be applied is crucial to the success of such a seminar. Success depends both on this ability and on personal preference for or against this kind of learning.
The same applies in organizations, e.g., to institutionalized mentoring and peer coaching. If those involved find a fruitful level of exchange, a great deal can be learned. If the match is poor (personally or professionally), the measure may remain ineffective or even cause financial damage to the organization, since the working time is lost for other tasks (Rademacher & Weber, 2017). The problem for the organization is that learning is supposed to be effective with regard to organizational goals, but it is not always clear what members need and want – and, of course, how costs and benefits can be measured and kept in check. Since experiential learning is not an exactly calculable discipline like math (1 + 1 can be 4 here, or 0.5), an organization is more likely to measure its success in experiential learning through so-called “soft factors.” How flexibly do members of the organization respond to problems? How quickly do new members get up to speed? How strong is the willingness to change and the enthusiasm for innovation? How satisfied are the members?
But how can an organization support experiential learning? Experiential learning in and for organizations needs several components:
- First of all, it is very important to recognize that experiential learning exists. It is complex to influence, and yet it takes place in the organization in one way or another at all times. Moreover, successful experiential learning usually cannot be prescribed or closely controlled, only encouraged.
- Because it requires the will and interest of the individual members. They need to feel the necessity or interest to try new things, to work in a solution-oriented way, or to acquire and apply knowledge. Studies have shown that many people also engage with work-related topics in their free time.
- The most important thing is to have time: time to acquire knowledge or try things out in order to master a new task. Members who rush from one meeting to the next have no time to devote themselves to a topic or think up improvements, because they often can’t keep up with their regular tasks. At first, this sounds natural, but members are often also expected to acquire and apply new knowledge and skills quickly and flawlessly, or to already bring the knowledge for a particular job with them when they are hired.
- This brings us straight to the next keywords: error culture and talent development. Development helps unlock potential and encourages people to break new ground. Having support in the process and knowing that mistakes are normal is very helpful for growth. Success and failure in particular are emotionally charged and help us store successful strategies or knowledge of what we would do differently next time – and these experiences can be passed on, too.
- Organizational culture connects all of these keywords. Is experiential learning valued? Is there time and space for experiential learning? Is the organization open to new ideas and even unusual paths that members take with the aim of moving the organization forward? A famous example of this explicit encouragement is Google, which grants its employees a fixed amount of working time for their own projects.
If the organization keeps these components in view, the question remains what it can do in concrete terms to promote experiential learning. Here are a few thoughts:
Imagine a new project is being set up in a department. There are project schedules to be met, but a problem arises that nobody expected and that takes time to solve. With regard to experiential learning, it is possible to address clearly who has the problem, what it involves, who would like (and has the time) to tackle it, and what those people need to do so. Project managers can help out with time (and budget), but also with advice and decisions in the process of finding a solution, e.g., when support from within the network or from outside may be useful. Knowledge should be seen as a resource to be shared that can accelerate experiential learning. Project managers also have to decide when the experience matters to the organization and when the process takes too long and/or is too resource-intensive.
Other examples we already know are Google’s time for personal projects mentioned above. When it comes to implementation, I can well understand from the organization’s point of view if these projects are expected to relate to everyday work or the organization’s needs – a cooking class for a computer scientist would take some very good arguments! Another example is giving members of an organization the opportunity to submit or even implement suggestions for improvement. This promotes and values experiential learning and making it explicit for the benefit of the organization. Mentoring and peer coaching, already mentioned in this text, are further examples. In times of demographic change, knowledge transfer formats also help keep knowledge and experience within the company. Then there is granting members learning time when knowledge or experience for tasks is not yet (sufficiently) available. The rule here: this learning time is highly individual, i.e., it cannot be predicted. Managers have to be clear about how much time they want to invest in learning time. In addition, experiential learning and the will to innovate are supported by an organizational culture that sees itself as a network whose members support each other, are happy to share knowledge, and make their own time available for it. Experiential learning can therefore be promoted (institutionalized) through measures taken by the organization.
In certain situations, it therefore makes sense to bring in outside experts, e.g., when topics lie outside the expertise of the organization’s members and/or new experiential knowledge is to be built up in this area. It can also potentially foster a more open learning culture if the facilitator comes from outside the organization’s own context and hierarchy, or it may simply be easier and more cost-effective to implement a one-off concept for a specific purpose.
This is where the learning journey method could come in. Say a company wants to build up new knowledge in a particular area to strengthen its own capacity for innovation. Research and seminars can gather a lot of information, but the momentum that innovation needs – in the sense of desire and enthusiasm (and possibly pressure to change) to drive change – can be made far more tangible through successful examples and real experiences from other organizations. A learning journey includes carefully selected stops that allow participants to learn from experience by example, and with this support they can develop new ideas, motivation, approaches to action, and paths to innovation – tailored to their own company.
My conclusion: for me, experiential learning is the most effective form of learning there is. In my opinion, it is not institutionalized directly but through offers and programs that members of the organization can choose to take part in. What matters is that, especially in the informal form of experiential learning, success cannot be traced back directly to a measure or measured, but is rather reflected in employee satisfaction, goals achieved, and the flexibility of the organization. Innovation and change need space, time, and a reasonable margin for failure. In my view, experiential learning in all its facets is one of the paths that is often forgotten as a root of innovation and is therefore less recognized or promoted. Reviving the concept of experiential learning would be a great asset for companies for which learning and innovation in the organization are vital to survival.
References/sources
Frost, J. (2018). Wissensmanagement: Definition. Retrieved from Gabler Wirtschaftslexikon, revision of “Wissensmanagement” dated February 14, 2018: https://wirtschaftslexikon.gabler.de/definition/wissensmanagement-47468/version-270732.
Huber, M., & Krause, S. (Eds.) (2018). Bildung und Emotion. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Müller, B. (2010). Organisationspädagogik als Erfahrungslernen von Kindern. In M. Göhlich (Ed.), Organisation und Pädagogik. Organisation und Erfahrung (pp. 251–263). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.
Rademacher, U., & Weber, U. (Eds.) (2017). Mentoring im Talent Management: Win-win-Programme für Mitarbeiter und Unternehmen. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
