La implementación de políticas públicas en el Distrito Capital y los planes de desarrollo

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) defines informal learning as one of three forms of learning (Werquin, 2012). The other two are formal and non-formal learning. Informal learning is described by the OECD as: “… never organised, has no set objective in terms of learning outcomes and is never intentional from the learner’s standpoint. Often it is referred to as learning by experience or just as experience”.(Werquin, 2010, p. 1) Formal learning is described as: “… always organised and structured, and has learning objectives. From the learner’s standpoint, it is always intentional: i.e. the learner’s explicit objective is to gain knowledge, skills and/or competences” (Werquin, 2010, p. 1)

The conceptualisation of informal learning may be used as an exemplar for the conception of informal benchmarking. In whichever form benchmarking takes, it will inevitably involve learning. Learning can be defined “as changes in the behavior of an organism that are the

30

idea is in line with the ability of the individual to adapt to his environment during his lifetime (Skinner, 1984).

Malcolm Knowles, who popularised pedagogy, suggests adults learn by adventurous experimentation as they experience real-life situations and are not subjects in an academic curriculum. They need to be self-directed and the process of mutual inquiry with the educator or teacher in any scenario would motivate the adult to learn best (Knowles, 1978).

One of the most effective and increasingly popular approaches to informal learning in a business setting is a technique called “unconferencing”. Typically, they have no designated speakers, high level of learning, high play, very communal, and an appropriate level of structure and control (Cross, 2007, pp. 205-206). I would highlight “structure and control’ are always present in organisations (that’s why they are called “organise”- ations); the question is to what degree or level of appropriateness.

2.6.1 Distinction between Benchmarking & Learning

While (Adebanjo et al., 2010, p. 1144) suggests informal benchmarking as “comparing and

learning from the behaviours and practices of others”, a distinction need to be made between

the definition and purposes of informal benchmarking and informal learning, or simply between learning and benchmarking. A key difference is that benchmarking (must) revolve around learning or the assimilation of information to improve a specific area of practice, function, or process, after a comparison has been done between one’s current state and that of the benchmarked. Learning, on the other hand, may not involve the use of specific comparisons to improve a specific area. It could but it does not have to.

2.6.2 Characteristics of Informal Learning

Unlike formal learning or non-formal learning which usually includes a curriculum and a structured approach (Cameron & Harrison, 2008), informal learning does not involve a curriculum and takes on an unstructured approach. Informal learning happens either incidentally or via socialisation. Objectivity, the intensity of self-directedness, organisation- directedness and level of consciousness (being aware of own learning) fluctuate according to the level of informality (Cofer, 2000) in learning. (Schugurensky, 2000, p. 3) suggests three forms of informal learning (table 2-4). In the socialisation form, it is arguable whether intentionality and awareness are present or not. For example, in a conference, networking with others for the purpose of learning can be very intentional or deliberate. If it is deliberate,

31

the learner would most definitely be aware of his learning experience at the time of learning. The informal benchmarking toolscape may therefore be modified by separating it into two dimensions, the social and non-social dimensions. In the social dimension, there is human interaction but not necessarily face to face. In the non-social dimension, the interaction is predominantly without human interaction but with objects of knowledge. Within each of the dimensions, informal benchmarking may be incidental or deliberate (self-directed or via socialisation). This is illustrated in the toolscape of the preliminary conceptual model of informal benchmarking further on in this chapter.

Table 2-4: Three Forms of Informal Learning

Could a relationship archetype between informal learning and formal learning (Malcolm, Hodkinson, & Colley, 2003) be construed for the relationship between informal benchmarking and formal benchmarking? This has to be examined, along with the level of formality associated with the term “informal” – at which point on the spectrum of formality does benchmarking cross over to being formal or informal (figure 2-7)?

At which point does it become informal?

Figure 2-7: Continuum of Formality

In between the ends (formal and informal), right in the centre of the continuum of learning, is the concept of non-formal learning. Non-formal learning “is rather organised and can have

learning objectives” (Werquin, 2010). This is at best, a vague description but it represents an approach to learning which is composite of both the formal and informal. More modern learning frameworks include learning tools, technology and processes where knowledge is gained via a mixture of formal and informal learning channels combined such as knowledge

Formal Informal

32

portals, podcasts, references, and collaborated upon via blogs, wikis, networks and forums, (Amitabh & Sinha, 2012, p. 12) to create newer knowledge, forming a virtuous cycle of knowledge creation.

Notwithstanding, notions of informality should not stand in silos or be divorced from the holistic terminology “informal benchmarking”. In other words one should not equate ““informal” + “benchmarking” = informal benchmarking”, but realistically interpret its characteristics, typology, and elucidate tools both in the “people connecting to people”, for example, conversing with a colleague or networking in a conference; and in the domain of “people connecting to knowledge assets”, for example, reading a book, browsing a company’s internet page or assimilating from an online forum.