Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
The joint elaboration and evaluation of solutions
The interesting aspect of collective reflective activity is that it constitutes
a space of confrontation between prescribed work (i.e. the task) and real
work (the activity), as well as between the modes in which the activity may
be carried out. In other words, its goal is to analyze variability - not to sup-
press discrepancies between prescribed work and real work, but to better
understand them and manage them in a way that is conscious and reasoned.
However, reflective analysis must also aim to collectively develop
technical solutions (e.g. purchasing equipment) or organizational solu-
tions (allocation of tasks, schedules, training, etc.), some of which may be
the object of experimentation. This involves confronting the logic of the
workers with that of the other agents in the organization, in order to work
on requisite adaptations.
This dual goal of analysis and action is a crucial condition for obtain-
ing the support of the hierarchy and for taking into account real-world
work in organizational evolutions. However, this does imply some
involvement and some commitment on the part of the hierarchy.
The involvement and commitment of the hierarchy
To allow the sustained development of individuals and organizations, col-
lective reflective practice must have a place in the organization, and must
be encouraged and supported within the organization.
It must be a tool for the organization, one that is supported by man-
agement so that material and human resources can be devoted to it
(Detchessahar, 2011) in such a way that the solutions that emerge from
these reflections can be encouraged and experimented on. Giving such a
status to reflective practice implies that the organization should agree to
exhibit its contradictions and disruptions in order to discuss and defeat
them. As Gaillard (2009) has pointed out in the case of some forms of
feedback on experience, this involves 'acknowledging that the error that
has been “called out” is a source of progress … and that such disruptions
also exist close to home. One must be able to bear and discuss this state of
matters' (our translation).
The effective involvement of managers in these spaces constitutes one
of the ways in which some value can be given to the contents of these
exchanges and to the solutions that are constructed at the level of upper
management (Clergeau et al., 2006). In some cases, it may prove useful
and even necessary to train some members of upper management to
the approach of work analysis, so that they are able to host the debates
based on real-world work, and to host the debates based on the reality of
work, and to show the value of the evolutions constructed at the level
of the organization.
