Action Learning: a practice-based approach for
leveraging entrepreneurs’ potential, which aim to
launch startups in sustainable development
Dr. Mohamed Yacine
Action Learning Institute, Algeria
Abstract.
In incubators and pre-incubation in universities, entrepreneurship learning grounded in action-
learning approaches may help to develop potential of entrepreneurs, which aim to launch
startups in sustainable development. Theoretical perspectives, such as social learning theory
and action learning theory, are used to evaluate the influence of action learning in the
development of entrepreneurs potential from four factors, naming, (1) self-efficacy; (2)
thinking and describing precisely what their MVP will look like; (3) dealing with various
challenges; and (4) demonstrating Proof Of Concept. For this purpose, the researcher
conducted a research through 2 case studies with 11 incubated entrepreneurs, in an incubator,
for case study A, and 60 pre-incubated entrepreneurs, in university, for case study B. Subjects
of the study were respectively incubated during 6 months and 10 days using a research
methodology that combined several qualitative techniques. Participatory observation, semi-
directive interviews, and analysis of learning deliverables were utilized to examine
differences in entrepreneurs’ potential.
The study provides evidence that entrepreneurship education based on action learning
methods may positively influence the entrepreneurial potential of entrepreneurs, and could
lead to higher levels of entrepreneurs’ mastery of tools which helps to think, act and reflect
entrepreneurially. However, the evidence presented in this case studies, and the actual results
could be reinforced by additional researches to avoid the impact of interpretation bias. Further
large‐scale research is needed to verify or refute the effectiveness of the proposed conclusions.
Research’s findings offer preliminary discussion points on opportunities of successful action
learning projects with incubation and pre-incubation setting. Sustainable development
entrepreneurs were motivated and shaped by identified levers and constraints that could also
be faced by business, or management teams using action learning approaches.
Keywords: Action Learning, sustainable development entrepreneurship, incubation,
entrepreneurs’ potential.
1
,1. Introduction
Action learning has been underpinning an increasing amount of training practice throughout
the world for nearly seven decades, since its genesis in the work of Reg Revans (Zuber-
Skerritt, 2002). Furthermore, action learning has been related to variety of disciplines. These
application’s environments have ranged from private companies (Marquardt, 2004) to public
sector organizations (Blackler and Kennedy, 2004) and in lesser extent to entrepreneurship
development programs, such as startups incubation (Chen and Pan, 2019; Park and Seol,
2014). While action learning is used mainly as a complementary learning approach in parallel
of business and management programs, it is clear that it is necessary to explore the benefits an
challenges of “learning by doing and reflection” in a diverse array of situations.
Marquardt explored in his work on action learning both what leaders, and by extension
entrepreneurs need to learn to be successful in the 21st century, and how action learning is
ideally suited to develop these attributes and skills. He specifically mentions systems thinker,
change agent, innovator and risk-taker, servant and steward, collaborative coordinator,
teacher, mentor, coach and learner visionary, and vision-builder, all skills needed by startups’
entrepreneurs as the leaders of the near future.
Greater collaboration between the academic and business communities has been advocated
for many years. For this closer working relationship, action learning seems to be an effective
connector. The number of multinational corporations who use action learning for managerial,
professional, team and workforce development is diverse, ranging across such well-known
names as Samsung, Dow, GE, Deutsche Bank, Boeing, Sodexho, Novartis, NASA and Nokia
(Marquardt, 2004). This creates a level of acceptance by business leaders for young managers,
educated partly through action-learning methods (Mueller et al. 2006).
Research in entrepreneurship education and startups incubation is fragmented both
conceptually and methodologically. The methods applied in entrepreneurship education
research cluster in two groups: first, quantitative studies of the extent and effect of
entrepreneurship education; and second, qualitative single case studies of different courses
and programs (Blenker et al, 2004). Benefits and shortcomings disconcert both clusters.
Quantitative studies bring objectivity, comparability and generalizability, but show limited
appreciation of the heterogeneity of the education they seek to measure. Qualitative single
case studies are set with contextually profound descriptions and best pedagogical practices,
but suffer from limited comparability and generalizability as well as severe biases of teacher-
learner-researcher conflation. Speaking about entrepreneurship education, it is important to
distinguish various models, indeed, we find entrepreneurship degrees and masters programs in
higher education, pre-incubation, incubation and acceleration, all in higher education or
public as well independent organizations, generally funded by private sector or/ and NGOs.
Entrepreneurs need to develop competencies to think, act, and reflect entrepreneurially, which
will support establishing legitimacy as well reducing uncertainty and ambiguity (Middleton,
2010), they must learn to quickly adapt to rapid changes, deal with diverse and major
responsibilities, perform multiple roles, and resolve complex problems. It is well accepted
that entrepreneurs learn from experience (Lafontaine and Shaw, 2016). Increasing research
has proposed that entrepreneurial experience is important for the development of ventures
(Cope, 2011).
2
, In exploring multiple case studies at different incubation and entrepreneurship programs in
Algeria, with various supporting institutions, naming Orange Corners, an incubation program
of sustainable and social startups supported by the Netherlands; an entrepreneurship-training
workshop for PAUWES (Pan African University Institute of Water and Energy Sciences) a
branch of Pan African University master students, which is supported by GIZ (The German
Agency for International Cooperation) and ENACTUS (ENACTUS is an NGO network of
leaders committed to using business as a catalyst for positive social and environmental
impact), this study points out both the application of action learning within a pre-incubation
and incubation setting, as well the immediate outcomes and benefits for using action learning
as a entrepreneurial teaching approach.
The study makes two important contributions to extending theory and practice of
entrepreneurial learning and experience. First, the study extends existing understanding of
entrepreneurial learning and experience in the light of action learning theory. The study goes
beyond the conventional approaches of conceptualizing entrepreneur’s learning and
experience in terms of quantitative indicators, such as the performance of the venture its self
in term of capital, revenue, number of SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals) covered, etc.,
prior experience to the developmental quality of the entrepreneurial tasks. Second, the study
advances the understanding of the impact of the interface between entrepreneurs, learning
content and learning approach, in the frame of an action-learning background, in which
entrepreneurs are exposed in early stages of development of their startups projects. It is
important to help new ventures better perceive the developmental component of the learning
experience, and take more effective learning behaviors that lead to better venture performance
in a very early stage.
2. Literature
Dilworth, in his review of action learning, "Action Learning in a Nutshell" (Dilworth, 1998),
cites an example of Revans’s work in great technological expertise and an emphasis on
research and development. The important components of the action learning process, as
outlined by Revans, are that fresh eyes brought to problems trigger fresh questions. Revans
used an equation to show that learning was the key to managing change (L ≥ C) holds that, in
any organism, including individuals and organizations, the rate of learning (L) has to be equal
to, or greater than, the rate of change (C). Unless we adapt through learning, we become
extinct. Revans’ second learning equation: L = P + Q. He suggests that we need to turn the
« normal » process of learning on its head. In his Learning Equation, L stands for
« Learning », the P for « Programmed Instruction » (the typical classroom or text book
exercise) and Q for « Questioning insights » (i.e., question-driven inquiry). It is Q factor that
makes action learning so different. That is where you begin. He believed that, in this age of
global turbulence and rapid change, we need to shift much more emphasis to the Q and assign
less to the P. Rather than start with P, as we have usually been programmed to do in both
classroom and our work life, action learning begins with the Q – the asking of question –
rather than immediately rushing to discuss possible solution sets. Michael Marquardt, in
addressing Revans’ Learning equation, apparently takes sequencing of the P before the Q
literally. The action learning model starts with programmed knowledge (i.e., knowledge in
current use, in books, in one’s mind, in the organization’s memory, lectures, case studies,
etc.). To this base is added the process of questioning, which involves recalling, thinking
about, pulling apart, making sense, and trying to understand. Hence the formula L = P + Q +
R, where L = Learning, P = Programmed knowledge, Q = Questioning, and R=Reflection.
(Marquardt, 2000). Reflection and the questioning self-inquiry that drives it occur throughout
3
