Model I and Model II

Argyris and Schön (1974) present two models that describe different theories-in-use. Model I describes the behaviour of a group of professionals that they studied. It is based on the values of unilateral control of the situation, “winning” (proving oneself right), and suppression of any data that does not fit the actor’s assumptions. Such control can produce defensiveness that inhibits communication. Argyris and Schön believe that Model I describes features of a theory-in-use commonly employed by people in difficult situations. They go on to present Model II, “a model of theories-in-use that is free of the dysfunctionalities of model I” (page 85). The following summary draws on a presentation by Absolum (2006), based on the original models proposed by Argyris and Schön.

Model I – what we do	Model II – what we want to do
Guiding principles [governing variables] Achieve the purpose as the actor defines it Win, do not lose Suppress negative feelings Emphasise rationality	Guiding principles [governing variables] Valid information Free and informed choice Internal commitment to the choice and constant monitoring of its implementation
Action strategies Control environment and task unilaterally Protect self and others unilaterally	Action strategies Control environment and task bilaterally Protect self and others bilaterally
Consequences Defensive relationships Low freedom of choice Little public testing of ideas Reduced production of valid information Single-loop learning	Consequences Minimally defensive relationships High freedom of choice Public testing of ideas Increased production of valid information Increased likelihood of double-loop learning

Model II represents a consultative approach in which the participants in learning have “bilateral” control of the process, where winning is not being “right” but rather making better sense of the evidence, and where no dialogue is suppressed, even if it is painful. It requires people to pay close attention to their own behaviour and to the way they interact with others. Argyris and Schön suggest that “In general, Model-II learning tends to facilitate others’ learning, which in turn facilitates one’s own learning” (page 92). They say that in a Model II world, “research activities and learning activities would reinforce each other” (page 93).

The significant features of Model II include the ability to call upon good quality data and to make inferences. It looks to include the views and experiences of participants rather than seeking to impose a view upon the situation. Theories should be made explicit and tested, positions should be reasoned and open to exploration by others. In other words, Model II can be seen as dialogical – and more likely to be found in settings and organizations that look to shared leadership. It looks to:

• Emphasize common goals and mutual influence.
• Encourage open communication, and to publicly test assumptions and beliefs.
• Combine advocacy with inquiry (Argyris and Schön 1996; Bolman and Deal 1997: 147–8).

Smith, 2001, page 9

Fullan (2001b) says that a shift to Model II helps to generate the internal commitment that is essential to change.

Every significant Model II action is evaluated in terms of the degree to which it helps the individuals generate valid and useful information (including relevant feelings), share a problem in ways that lead to productive inquiry, solve the problem such that it remains solved, and do so without reducing the present level of problem-solving effectiveness. (p. 76)

Argyris, 2000, cited in Fullan, 2001b, page 194

Return to top