Collecting information

1. PAL Personal Action Learning dossier
of interview partner and/or future facilitator
Please fill in current number. Automatic transfer to Sections 2 and 3 allows for
anonymous evaluation, especially of AL competence by trainer for didactical purposes.
Section 1 Personal data Nr. 0
Date
Interviewer
Person interviewed Name First name
Agency/company Telephone
Address Street and number Fax
Postal code Town
E-mail
Principal activities
of agency
Function of
interviewee

2. Section 2
The Lab Nr. 0
The overall context of the Learning Laboratory (Lab)
For better understanding!
The Learning Lab the eventually selected facilitators may contribute to is 'embedded' in a particular
socio-economic context. In order to manage/facilitate the Lab at best, it may be important to map the
degree of consciousness vis-à-vis the overall context.
3.1. The SMEs context
Have you carried out any kind of
activity/job/project
in favour of (local or not) SMEs? YES NO
If yes,
please provide a short description.
If yes,
which are the main perceived
strenghts and weaknesses?
3.2. The sectoral context
Have you carried out any kind of
activity/job/project
in favour of the sector? YES NO
If yes,
please provide a short description.
If yes,
which are the main perceived
strenghts and weaknesses?
3.3. The 'stakeholder' context
Please identify
the main stakeholders or
intermediate organisations both for
the selected sector and the SME
context.
Have you carried out any kind of
activity/job/project
together with or for them? YES NO
If yes,
please provide a short description.

3. Yes If YES, please go to Section 3 after next question.
Will the interview partner him/herself
participate in the facilitator training? No If NO, the interview can stop after the next question.
Yes If YES, whom?
NameDoes the interview partner
recommend somebody else for the
facilitator training? No
Function

4. Section 3
Competence
in action research and learning methodology
Self-evaluation Nr. 0
For better understanding!
General questions asking for acquaintance with action methodology may not lead to positive results.
Nevertheless, asking for individual chunks of theory, methods and tools may well lead to positive responses
as action research and action learning cannot be understood as hermetically closed concepts. Many of the
methods and tools enumerated below may be known without knowing that they are rooted in action
methodology. Just as well, tools and methods may fit into a methodological approach of action theory without
being part of its original repertoire of methods and tools. Any instrument in tune with the participative,
qualifying and self-organising intentions of action learning may be taken advantage of. Logically, this means
that none of the following lists can be exhaustive, therefore you find an open category at the end of each list.
2.1 Theoretical foundations
Don't
know Heard of Known Practised Expert
How good do you know one of the following concepts? 0 1 2 3 4
Action research (Lewin/Argyris/Raelin)
Action science (Argyris/Schön)
Action learning (Revans, Freire, Senge)
Experiential learning (Kolb)
Systems theory (Luhmann, Parsons)
Constructivism (Förster/Glaserfeld/Watzlawick)
Communities of practice (Lave/Wenger)
Organisational learning (Senge/Argyris/Schön)
Others (please specify)
2.2 Methods, tools, instruments
Don't
know Heard of Known Practised Expert
How good do you know one of the following concepts? 0 1 2 3 4
Moderation and visualisation
SWOT analysis
SMART
ZOPP (Targeted Project Planning)
Creative techniques (brainstorming, mind mapping, etc.)
Stakeholder analysis
Open Space
World Café
Appreciative Inquiry
Case studies
Field book writing
Participative observation
Observative participation
Focus groups
To-do minutes
Ishikawa/fishbone diagram
Others (please specify)

5. 2.3 English
Next to
zero Basic Will do Good Excellent
0 1 2 3 4As part of the training may be in English or based on
documents/materials available only in English we need to
know how you would classify your English.
2.3.a. spoken
2.3.b. reading