Aesthetic-based competences lead to a sustainable learning practice

Introduction

Sustainable learning concepts are necessary for organisations to benefit from the economic and social resources they use in management learning and leadership education. However, there is a missing link, when managers attend leadership education, away and separated from their daily practice, because the new competences leaders achieve seem to be difficult to integrate as a part of daily life in the organisation, which is limited by organizational habits and devastating paradigms in the form of social dramas that fill everyday life (McKenzie 2001, Schechner 1988/2003, Turner 1985, Ladkin and Taylor 2010a, 2010b, Coleman and Ringrose 2013, Schedlitzki and Edwards 2014, Schön 1983, Mezirow 1992, 2009).

The reason for this is that management learning is often based on abstract, instrumental and disembodied methods without practical interventions (Dey and Steyaert, 2007; Gray, 2007; Helth, 2012; Vince, 2002; Zundel, 2013). The outcome of this kind of management learning is analysis and reflections that are often evaluated through exams, where theoretical knowledge has higher value than practical experience.

Learning methods should instead include explicit ways of learning that activate sensory perceptions and aesthetic awareness in leaders’ organisational practice (Gagliardi, 2006; Mack, 2012, 2015; Strati, 2007, 2009; Taylor and Hansen, 2005; Vince and Reynolds, 2007). First, when the competences are bodily embedded and the leaders practise their leadership without thinking about what they do, they can respond to challenges in the organisation in a well-integrated way. Leaders learn to transform their practice when they sense that they have to change their behaviour and activities, and thus evolve into what we can call sustainable leadership competences.

This article suggests that educational processes can use aesthetic-based interventions to enhance sustainable learning, understood as a matter of a learning practice that is integrated in both an organisational practice and in leadership education. The methods presented in this article are based on action research (McNiff and Whitehead, 2011) and auto-ethnographic studies (Van Maanen, 2011), which involve leaders’ ability to learn from their own practice in a professional way (Schön, 1983).

Sustainable learning can be developed through learning processes where the managers feel they can transform their organisational practice, when they move a problem arising from a social drama, and transpose it into an art-based expression in an aesthetic drama, instead of being stuck with the problem in the social drama (Schechner,1988/2003). All in all, the paper will show how transformations occur when managers experience the following:

That the problem observed as a social drama can be changed in new ways through an aesthetic drama, because the social drama now appears in a new form, e.g. through a drawing or a body figure of their situation: The new focus will change the leaders’ thoughts and attitudes

The article will first describe the theoretical concept, specially three core concepts, which have informed the action research process. Second, one case from the empirical research will be unfolded and then analysed. Third, the article will discuss the potential for sustainable learning in leaders’ practice in organisations. The methods and impacts are based on a study in 10 Danish companies, including 80 managers (Helth, 2018).

The theoretical concept of studying leaders’ learning in practice

A challenge we often see in leadership education is that teaching in theoretical terms is more dominant than the development of learning methods in practice. This has the consequence that leaders, even after successful management education, often lack tools for developing leadership in their organisational practice (Mack, 2012, 2015; Strati, 2007, 2009; Taylor and Hansen, 2005; Vince and Reynolds, 2007).

The theoretical knowledge may be interesting, but it is not sufficient as a change factor in relation to the everyday problems in leaders’ organisation. There is a need for practice-based learning methods if leaders have to transform practice, and then a need for more acting than analysing.

In addition, leaders can work on the notion of ‘aesthetic rationality’ instead of ‘instrumental rationality’. Rationality is a highly valued quality in organisational decision-making, but often limited to an ‘instrumental’ rationality. However, Shrivastava et al. (2017) stress that organisations regularly exhibit not only an ‘instrumental rationality’ but also need an ‘aesthetic rationality’, which is manifested in organisational processes. They argue that promoting creative and sustainable behaviours among managers can be facilitated by enabling a deeper understanding of ‘aesthetic rationality’, which leads to a more comprehensive picture of how rationality operates in organisational settings (Shrivastava et al., 2017). When aesthetic performance is integrated in leadership, managers will be better at changing problems in the organisation than when they solely work with an instrumental rationality.

Three core methods

To be able to get an overview of aesthetic-based learning, the article presents three methods, unfolded in figure 1.

Aesthetic performance in leadership

Leaders, who want to solve their problems and change their practice and behaviour because of a problem they experience as a social drama, can learn to perform through aesthetic performance, which will affect them and other participants in the performance (Schechner, 2013). The performance will be aesthetic and not instrumental. According to Schechner (1988/2003), the aesthetic drama imposes the social drama in a way whereby everybody involved in the play recognises the actions as a ‘playing with’, which is better than trying to change the social drama as a ‘real doing of’.

In short, it is better to make ‘the real’ problem visible in an aesthetic form than trying to make everything real and hiding the problem in the social drama. ‘Playing with’ problems, especially in collectives of leaders, makes transformation possible (Schechner, 2013), as we will explore in a discussion later in the article. When the leaders play with a problem, instead of being stuck with negative feelings in the social drama, they may experience a change, which means that the social drama is changed into an aesthetic context. When this happens, the leaders also experience a change in the social drama; their experience might even be that the problem is solved permanently (Schechner, 2013).

Schedlitzki and Edwards (2014) have also studied how the aesthetics transform the practice of leadership through a focus on sensory experiences that lead to an embodied sense of management and leadership. They refer to Strati (1992), who was among the first societal researchers to argue that aesthetics, as emphatic knowledge, feeling and intuition, were central to management science (Schedlitzki and Edwards, 2014: 254).

Taylor and Hansen (2005) and Taylor and Ladkin (2009) have described the impact of artistic impulses. The connection between aesthetic performance and leadership is justified in studies by Taylor (2013: 70), who says that the world desperately needs to address complex problems in a way that creates the basis for using arts-based methods. As an example of artistic impulses, Ladkin (2008) has analysed a situation from a concert in the Royal Albert Hall, where a famous vocalist, McFerrin, used a gentle, playful and non-aggressive performance through inclusive and open body language. The micromovements in the conducting are an example of how aesthetic performance affects both the orchestra and the audience in ways which cannot be observed directly, but can only be perceived through the senses. The example underlines that it is important to work with more than what you can see and think.

2. From role to performative action

Artistic impulses that can move leaders and make them capable of changing their practice have to be trained and reflected through aesthetic-based performative actions. These impulses are dynamic and work in the presence of other people, as in the ‘living theatre’, where the performers mirror each other and do not play a certain pre-cast role (Schechner, 1988/2003). The play in ‘the living theatre’ is based on the bodily senses that inform the performer of important new things, which thoughts by themselves cannot do (Winther, 2012).

One example of this way of performing are ‘happenings’, in which the performers tend to be nobody but themselves; everybody is seen as an actor (Kirby, 1987 in Schechner, 2013: 175). The happening is an experiment, and an important basis for the study of leaders’ experiments in practice with an open and spontaneous aesthetic performance. If leaders have to be released from their stiff roles and expected behaviour in a hierarchy of rules, they need to sense and observe atmosphere, culture and develop bodily embedded actions in the present, to be able to respond to problems different from the normal role-playing (McKenzie, 2001).

3. From individual to collective learning

We need to understand why leadership in practice, where learning processes are integrated, can lead to transformation of leaders’ behaviour. The question of which learning methods would be the most fruitful in exploring leadership in the organisational context is important to answer, if learning in practice has to be an integrated part of leadership education.

The methods for collective learning, which seem to be appropriate for leaders’ learning in practice, derive among others from the following theorists (Darso, 2004; Ladkin and Taylor, 2010b; Springborg, 2010, Strati, 1992, 1999; Woodward and Funk, 2010). These theories can be combined with theories about performance at theatres (Schechner, 2013). Together, these theories can be the basis for learning processes, where leaders train and rehearse their competences in groups, as collective learning seems to contribute to much more potential for transformation than individualised learning.

Moreover, we can rely on studies in which leaders’ problems seem to be relevant for leadership and management, when they occur in the presence of other people, as they do in the notion of the aesthetic drama (McKenzie, 2001; Scharmer, 2009, 2013; Schedlitzki and Edwards, 2014). The collective learning based on aesthetic performance will add a new and useful methodology to learning processes in organisations and lead to competences, which have to be trained and understood through interventions in leaders’ practice. The learning has to be based on practice and will not be adequate if solely based on theoretical notions pondered in the abstract.

Analysis of a case study of leaders’ learning in practice

Now the question is: what happens in the learning process and how does the learning process affect the mangers? How can we observe changes? We have analysed the case as described below.

The purpose of the process with aesthetic performance was to invite leaders from a municipality to experiment with new creative forms of their leadership practice, in order to train their sensing based on a bodily embedded approach. This approach was a part of a learning process with a specific focus on transformative learning. For this management group, as well as for many other groups, the learning process takes place through a number of sessions, often three to five.

The group of leaders in the case were not familiar with aesthetic performance in the beginning. However, after a while, they were able to work with the material in a creative way. The leaders accepted the rules of the play as an aesthetic performance, although they were not familiar with this kind of communication. The toys we used were equipment that could be used to explore leadership in practice. The event was an example of the aesthetic drama.

When we asked the leaders in the case to reflect on the potential of their experiment, they were able to go beyond their normal assumptions of how things work. Then, it was not only a simple reflection of what they sensed, observed and felt, but it was also the perspectives of the experiment that raised new thoughts and ideas.

During the actual session in the case, leaders were asked to build their future leadership in common. The performance always has to have a purpose. The leaders used different physical equipment, and

we (action researchers) observed that they preferred materials that made sense to them when building. They were not allowed to talk when they were building. The silence seemed to activate their senses. The leaders were only invited to talk and reflect on their performance after they had finished the building process.

The group members seemed to help each other during the building process. We observed a deep concentration. What was going on looked like a flow, in which nobody disturbed the others; there was room to do what every person wanted to do. Their bodies showed how seriously they were working on the job, as we asked them to do. The process went on for 30 minutes.

Our observation, as action researchers, was that the aesthetic performance:

Opens leaders’ senses and make them more creative when they perform in silence with tools that open their creativity

The four leaders in the setting came from different parts of the organisation. They were not from the same management group. Therefore, we expected they would fight for their own perspectives on future leadership. However, there was no fighting. We assume they were more preoccupied with building a sustainable common figure than focusing on a separate right to win. The aesthetic performance gave an opportunity to look at the bigger picture. The managers in the group were affected because of the performance, a reaction we do not believe a discussion would have led to.

It surprised the leaders how the potential of the play emerged without talking, based only on creative tools as in the case. This became clear when they reflected on how they were touched by the experiment. The leaders became aware of how the physical experiment, combined with reflexive processes, led to new insight into their daily problems, in a way they had never before experienced. The leaders felt they were equal human beings, because the performing changed their roles, because the aesthetic performance offers a potential to change practice, as a normal discussion and arguing would not.

As action researchers we learned, from the reflections in this and other groups of leaders, that we had to frame, conduct and add new methods to the ongoing learning process in the group. Thus, it was through the reflection that the leaders acknowledged that they had learned to see leadership in new ways. The physical process opened their senses and moved their thoughts, emphasised by the learning process in the group.

The conclusions of the case study are that:

Aesthetic performance, completed through group-based learning processes, leads to organisational transformation and greater equality among leaders

Finally, the leaders told us that the impact can remain in daily life, if leaders continue to practice the learning process, and if they train aesthetic performance in collective learning sessions. This impact became clear after a couple of sessions in the group in the case, as we had also observed in other groups.

The leaders emphasise that learning processes, in which they share their thoughts in a group, create trust and can lead to sustainable changes in the organisation. They support each other in continuing the learning processes in practice, unlike the situation when they have to fight with changes on an individual basis.

Discussion and perspectives

The need for integration of aesthetic performance as part of learning processes in leaders’ organisational practice has been a continuous theme unfolded in the article. The conclusion is that learning processes organised in groups, framed and guided by action researchers, can lead to sustainable changes in the organisation. This means that both organisations and units for leadership education need to focus on learning in practice, if they want to promote sustainable changes as an effect of management learning.

The methods of leaders’ learning in practice, based on aesthetic performance, that have the best impact on transformation of the organisational practice seem to be training and rehearsal in groups. This can lead to the benefit of collective learning, where the learning is based on training in groups. In addition, Antonacopoulou (2001) has analysed the impact of training related to learning. She stresses that training is a learning event whereas learning is ongoing, and that the effectiveness of training as learning is a question of what individuals bring to it and with what attitude and mindset they train (Antonacopoulou, 2001: 340).

However, our study of leaders’ transformation of practice has found a different result. This can be surprising, if we suppose that learning is an automatically integrated part of education and based on individuals.

Our main concern is that learning will not be completed if there is not a framing of the learning process, and furthermore a process that takes place in groups.

When learning is organised as collective learning based on aesthetic performance, the result will occur as a potential of transformation of the organisational practice. This is why the training is dependent on aesthetic performance and clearly framed as a part of a process based on a learning design. There is close connection between aesthetic-based training and affective learning processes, as shown in Figure 2. The potential for transformation of the organisational practice is a relation between training and learning processes through collective learning.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Action research based on three core concepts.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 2.

Design for collective learning.

When engaging in aesthetic performance, leaders may not think of the consequences in relation to the organisation. However, the impact of a learning process based on aesthetic performance seems to contain a potential for sustainable organisational transformation, which will sometimes provoke or, at least, be met by surprise. In general, leaders in the study (Helth, 2018) experienced the aesthetic performance as joyful; however, some leaders also experienced dilemmas, when they did aesthetic performance in their organisational context.

The leaders’ experiences were playful experiments going on for a limited period of time and in a physically defined place. Leaders learned to prevent major problems when they started to do aesthetic performance in their daily practice. We could therefore also state that the learning is sustainable. The bodily embedded learning that leaders gain, through the learning processes described in the article, has potential to provide a sustainable background for learning in everyday life in organisations.

This is similar to learning to drive a car, where the practical driving test is a prerequisite for understanding what it means to drive.

There are three prerequisites for collective learning in relation to aesthetic performance, which we will discuss in order to strengthen the value of the learning process in leaders’ organisational practice. First, we will argue for collective learning, second, bodily embedded learning and third, consciousness of a dialectic view of aesthetic performance, as an impact of sustainable changes in the organisational context.

1. Collective-based learning

In the learning process, it is important to be aware of the difference between being a single leader and a collective of leaders. Engeström and Sannino (2011) underline that there will be potential for getting out of the locked situation if leaders work in groups of leaders. The individual leader is vulnerable, and harsh realities are typically experiences that an individual leader cannot easily solve without a collective-based reflection.

If dilemmas have to enhance potentials in the organisation, this presupposes learning as collective processes. The processes complete events based on aesthetic performance integrated in framed learning processes, in the organisational context. This is apparently because the transition from individual to collective is loaded with a sense of commitment, which occurs when leaders share the bodily sensing and open their minds, when they reflect on each other’s experiences.

2. Bodily embedded reflection as a new learning practice

An important question in leaders’ learning in practice is how leaders learn leadership in their own practice. As Zundel (2013) states, we live in a world where experiences, although practically based, often are abstractly theorised. This leads to difficulties that often result in a disengaged position, bearing no relation to leaders’ organisational practice. Leadership development should then advocate an alternative approach to reflection, which emphasises learning as seeing and listening, without imposing pre-fixed interpretations (Zundel, 2013: 122).

Leaders’ reflective practice (Sutherland, 2013) may reveal the potential in dilemmas, when this reflexivity is based on affective reflections, and leaders’ bodies touched by sensing in the aesthetic drama. The negative feeling of dilemmas will probably remain negative without the bodily embedded learning that occurs when leaders reflect on their bodily sensations.

The methods used to enhance different senses, thoughts and emotions, when leaders are confronted with critical experiences, are mostly cognitive. By contrast, the aesthetic-based learning methods can reveal a broad potential in transformative learning, when learning processes are based on sense moving in an aesthetic performance.

3. Conscious learning

The aesthetic performance and the learning process together may transcend the standalone aesthetic experience and transform it into a new condition through collective learning processes. This seems to create a new condition for transformation of leaders’ practice, emerging when leaders learn to do aesthetic performance as a conscious learning process in groups. Then, leaders are also equipped to meet dilemmas and problems as a normal reaction in the organisation, when they strive to perform aesthetically in their practice.

Finally, the prerequisites for sustainable learning in practice seem to be that (a) aesthetically based events, formed as a coherent process, train leaders to integrate aesthetic performance in learning processes; (b) groups of leaders can seemingly resist pressure from the organisation better than individual leaders; and (c) collective learning gives leaders the capacity to meet dilemmas and handle harsh realities in a productive way. Thus, dilemmas are not neglected, but, on the contrary, encourage leaders to integrate learning processes through aesthetic performance. As such, collective-based learning may lead to sustainable changes in the organisation, when leaders learn to carry out changes, when problems occur as everyday social dramas.

In order to be open to future perspectives, it is necessary to work with collective learning both in the organisational practice and in leadership education, which covers a framed learning process based on aesthetic performance. If we ignore learning in practice, the daily problems and dilemmas of everyday life can be overwhelming and will dominate our view on solutions. We need to develop lasting and sustainable learning methods, whereby our bodies remember the aesthetic interventions and remind us of the potential we have to transform our practice as collectives.