On one occasion I was hired to take training courses in a company that was immersed in a process to certify ISO Quality standards. The consultant conducting this process had made changes to the company structure, procedures and work organization, yet the evaluation had not been positive. This led him to think that the problem was that the staff was not properly trained and that is why I was summoned.
After the first day of training and having interacted with the members of the company, I asked the aforementioned consultant for a meeting and proposed a change in strategy. I proposed that before continuing with the training in specific techniques, we had to work on a profound cultural change with the aim of instilling the values and beliefs that constitute the Total Quality philosophy. I suggested that otherwise the training was not going to achieve the expected change.
This diagnosis of the situation and this proposal for action were based on the idea that there are different levels of change and that it is necessary to have a clear awareness of which of them to intervene in order for an effective transformation to take place according to the proposed objective. In this sense, we can say that there are different types of learning that we must make according to the change we want to make.
Robert Dilts, based on the studies of the anthropologist Gregory Bateson, developed the concept of Levels of Learning and Change. The characteristic of these levels is that each of them is more abstract and comprehensive than the one immediately below, and exerts a greater degree of influence on the individual or the organization.
One of the keys to systems thinking is finding the leverage point. This principle is based on economy of resources. It is about finding the place of intervention where we will achieve the transformation in the system with the least possible effort. The purpose of using the Levels of Learning and Change is to have an analysis framework that enables us to organize and interpret the information, in order to identify the best place from which to intervene in order to produce the desired change.
In the example of the company, a change had been made at the level of behaviors, redesigning the structure, work processes and procedures, but despite this, the expected result had not been achieved. The intention was then to operate on the level of capabilities and it is most likely that the objective sought would not have been achieved if previously it had not intervened at the level of collective beliefs and values.
Pfeffer and Sutton, who investigated the difficulty of companies to put knowledge into action, state in their conclusions: “As we discovered, an important reason for the gap between knowing and doing is that companies overestimate the importance of the tangible, concrete and programmatic aspects of what their rivals do, while underestimating that of their underlying guiding philosophy and the reasons for their way of proceeding ”. In other words, many companies introduce changes at the level of behavior, adopting the practices of successful companies, and despite this they do not achieve the same results, since they do not make the changes at the level of corporate philosophy and culture (beliefs and values).
In individuals, the interaction of the levels works in the same way, according to the depth and complexity of the change that is intended to be made.
Many times learning will consist of changing our behavior and adopting a different behavior in a certain situation. It may also happen that it is necessary to change behavior, acquire new skills through a training or training process, and in this case we will have passed to the level of capabilities. And in other circumstances, as much as the person knows of the convenience of carrying out other types of actions and has the capacities to carry them out, it will only be possible if she reviews her mental models, becomes aware of what kind of beliefs and.
There is also a fourth level, situated above beliefs, which is the level of Identity. In this, what is at stake is how we see ourselves, what is the perception and assessment we have, how is our self-esteem. And obviously this level affects all the others.
It is at the levels of beliefs and identity where change is most complex. Their greater degree of depth, which makes them influence the levels of abilities and behaviors, makes their transformation more difficult. Being able to make explicit our belief system and our mental models, and relate them to our behaviors and the effectiveness of our actions, is a task that generally requires the help and assistance of another person who facilitates the way of observing ourselves from another perspective. This is the role that the coach plays when accompanying the change process of an individual or a team.
