[6][7] Formative influences for Revan included his time working as a physicist at the University of Cambridge, wherein he noted the importance of each scientist describing their own ignorance, sharing experiences, and communally reflecting in order to learn.
[9] From these experiences Regev felt that conventional instructional methods were largely ineffective, and that individuals needed to be aware of their lack of relevant knowledge and be prepared to explore that ignorance with suitable questions and help from other people in similar positions.
Although questioning is considered the cornerstone of the method, more relaxed formulations have enabled Action Learning to gain use in many countries all over the world, including the United States, Canada, Latin America, the Middle East, Africa, and Asia-Pacific.
The Action Learning process, which primarily uses a questioning approach, can be more helpful than offering advice because it assumes that each person has the capacity to find their own answers.
[15] Robert Kramer pioneered the use of Action Learning for officials in the United States government, and at the European Commission in Brussels and Luxembourg.
He also introduced Action Learning to scientists at the European Environment Agency in Copenhagen, to officials of the Estonian government at the State Chancellery in Tallinn, Estonia, and to students of communication and media studies at Corvinus University of Budapest.
[16] The influence of Revans's Action Learning Formula can be seen today in many leadership and organization development initiatives in corporate training and executive education institutes.
As with other pedagogical approaches, practitioners have built on Revans' original work and adapted tenets to accommodate their specific needs.
The main differences between Revans' approach to action learning and the 'MiL Model' in the 1980s are: The MiL model and ARL evolved as practitioners responded to diverse needs and restrictions—MiL practitioners varied the number and duration of the sessions, the type of project selected, the role of the Learning Coach and the style of their interventions.
The World Institute for Action Learning (WIAL) model was developed by Michael Marquardt, Skipton Leonard, Bea Carson and Arthur Freedman.
The model starts with two simple "ground rules" that ensure that statements are related to questions, and grant authority to the coach in order to promote learning.
The EAL model differs from the traditional organizational training methods by shifting the focus from professor-led, general knowledge memorization and presentations to executive-led and project-based experiential reflection and problem-solving as the major learning tool.
[20] Robert Kramer applies the theory of art, creativity and "unlearning" of the psychologist Otto Rank to his practice of Action Learning.
In Kramer's work, Action Learning questions allow group members to "step out of the frame of the prevailing ideology,"[21] reflect on their assumptions and beliefs, and re-frame their choices.
Nevertheless, later in his development of the Action Learning method, Revans experimented with including a role that he described as a "supernumerary" that had many similarities to that of a facilitator or coach.
It has been noted that self-managing teams (such as task forces) seldom take the time to reflect on what they are doing or make efforts to identify key lessons learned from the process.
[28] Without reflection, team members are likely to import organizational or sub-unit cultural norms and familiar problem solving practices into the problem-solving process without explicitly testing their validity and utility.
Team members employ assumptions, mental models, and beliefs about methods or processes that are seldom openly challenged, much less tested.
In addition, team members often "leap" from the initial problem statement to some form of brainstorming that they assume will produce a viable solution.