An Exploration of Differences in Content and Processes Underlying Reflection on Challenging Experiences at Work

• Author: Dina M. Leheta,Thomas A. Conklin,Todd J. Maurer
• Date: 01 September 2017
• Published date: 01 September 2017
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21283

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY, vol. 28, no. 3, Fall 2017 © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/hrdq.21283 337

MIXED METHODS STUDY

An Exploration of Differences

in Content and Processes

Underlying Reflection on

Challenging Experiences at Work

Todd J. Maurer , Dina M. Leheta , Thomas A. Conklin

While the use of structured reflection in some form is common in

management, education, the military, and health care, little is known

about existing differences in reflection. We collected exploratory data

around the nature of differences in the content and process of reflection. By

asking management students about their reflections on challenging work

experiences, we focused this conversation at the intersection of workplace

behavior and education, a high-value space for discovery by scholars and

educators in human resource development. Respondents participated in

surveys and interviews that asked about the types of experiences at work

they reflect upon and why; how they reflect including the mode, content,

and process of their reflections; and the consequences or outcomes of their

reflections. We present detailed data on the observed differences, which

suggest that there may be multiple distinctions underlying the notion of

reflection and that such differences are not systematically and meaningfully

addressed in theory, research, or practice. We also offer a framework to

help scholars, instructors, coaches, and students more readily explore

variations in reflection tendencies and to pursue the possible meaning of

these variations for research and practice.

Key Words: challenging work experiences , content , management education ,

process , refl ection

This study was supported by a U.S. Army Research Institute research contract W5J9CQ-

12-C-0029 in which the first author served as PI. The view, opinions, and/or findings contained

in this paper are those of the authors and should not be construed as an official Department of

the Army position, policy, or decision. An earlier version of this article was presented at the 2014

(November) Annual Conference of the Southern Management Association, Savannah, GA.

338 Maurer, Leheta, Conklin

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/hrdq

Reflection, or the process of drawing insights, learning, and meaning from

past experiences or events, has been the focus of much literature relevant to

HRD and education. It is a process that can increase effectiveness and out-

comes in a variety of ways, so it is not surprising that extensive literature

has addressed matters such as tactics to coach or promote reflection within

organizations, education, leader development, and employee development (cf.

Boud & Knights, 1996 ; Boud & Walker, 1998 ; Cotter, 2014 ; De Déa Roglio &

Light, 2009 ; Gray, 2007 ; Nesbitt, 2012 ; Petriglieri, Wood, & Petriglieri, 2011 ;

Rigano & Edwards, 1998 ; Schmidt-Wilk, 2009 ). This literature includes pro-

grams such as After Action Reviews or After Event Reviews (Baird, Holland,

& Deacon, 1999 ; DeRue, Nahrgang, Hollenbeck & Workman, 2012 ), reflec-

tive writing, and diary keeping (cf. Lengelle, Meijers, Poell, & Post, 2014 ;

Travers, 2011 ) as well as informal learning and development in organizations

(Tannenbaum, Beard, McNall & Salas, 2010 ). The literature offers sugges-

tions and examples to show how reflection can enhance the value drawn from

educational or work-related experiences. By guiding or inducing some type

of reflection, researchers and practitioners have observed enhancements in

outcomes in learning, performance or other outcomes.

This practice presupposes an understanding of the content and processes

underlying unstructured reflection and the value of introducing specific tactics

to increase certain reflection content and processes. However, do we really

know what underlies people tactics to increase certain reflection content and

processes outcomes in learning, predicting interventions that will shift them

into a more productive mode of learning? The central question of this article

is: What is the nature of the underlying content and process tendencies of

reflection, and how might an understanding of these underlying constructs

and their potential differences across people influence the approach that schol-

ars and practitioners take to study and influence reflection? At this point in the

evolution of the research literature, we should ask whether a detailed explora-

tion of the content and processes underlying reflection might be worthwhile.

While potentially data rich, such fundamental exploratory and descrip-

tive undertakings are rare in the literature, yet they can offer theoretical and

practical payoff. For example, just as a training needs analysis helps to identify

baseline behavior and gaps relative to desired behavior by employees (Moore

& Dutton, 1978 ), a more detailed understanding of the content and processes

of unstructured reflection could help to further inform research and relevant

interventions designed to induce or bring about change in reflection. More

detailed “baseline” data about existing differences in reflection might help to

determine how interventions should optimally attempt to influence it. Like-

wise, greater insight into the underlying aspects of reflection can facilitate the

ability for research to specify, measure, and research reflection as a construct.

Interestingly, although there is obviously existing theory and practice in the

literature, HRD research has generally not pursued a detailed, exploratory

and descriptive understanding of underlying differences in reflection. While

Reflection on Challenging Experiences 339

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/hrdq

we are agnostic regarding the causes of the existing differences, we do offer

ideas regarding future research to better understand the nature of any existing

differences. The opportunity for further discovery in this potentially complex

and practically useful construct space seems significant.

In the present study, we collected exploratory data to examine the nature

of underlying tendencies in reflection. By asking students about their reflec-

tions on challenging experiences at work, we were able to focus this conver-

sation at the intersection of workplace behavior and education, a high value

space for discovery by human resource development scholars, educators and

practitioners. The purposes of this article are to: (a) empirically identify nota-

ble differences in the content and processes underlying the notion of reflection

on challenging work experiences; (b) introduce a perspective that suggests

future theorizing, instrumentation, and practice should be more intentional

toward understanding and addressing the underlying differences in how peo-

ple reflect; and (c) offer an initial, general framework based on the paper to

help scholars, instructors, and students consider reflection tendencies and

their possible implications. An initial understanding of the content and pro-

cesses of unstructured reflection could help to inform future research and

related interventions.

In gathering data on tendencies in how students engage in reflection

about challenging experiences at work, the questions used in this project gen-

erally followed from the research and practice literature on reflection. These

questions include: What types of challenging experiences at work do people

reflect upon and why; how do they reflect, that is, what is the mode, content,

and process of their reflections; and what are the consequences or outcomes

of their reflections?

We first provide a general overview of reflection ’ s role in human

resource development and then review the literature to provide an organizing

framework around the “What/Why, How, and Consequences” of reflection.

We follow this with a description of the method and results from the study

and a discussion of the research and practical implications; we conclude by

offering a general framework based on the present article to help scholars,

instructors, and students comprehend possible reflection differences and

their implications.

Overview of Reflection and Its Role in Drawing Value

From Experience

Dewey ( 1938 ) defined reflection as “active, persistent and careful consider-

ation of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds

that support it and the further conclusion to which it tends” (p. 9). Dewey ’ s

view of reflective learning had two main ideas: “(1) a state of doubt, hesita-

tion, perplexity, mental difficulty, in which thinking originates, and (2) an act

of searching, hunting, inquiring, to find material that will resolve the doubt,