Espoused Theory Compared with Theory-In-Use

Action science is a strategy utilized by organizations to increase the confidence and skills of individuals in groups and to foster individual and group effectiveness to manage change readily while focusing on reflection, to learn new frameworks and to establish new frameworks. The primary distinction in action science is between theories of action. Patterns, designs, sets of rules, or propositions that people use to design and carry out their actions are the components of theories of action. The governing variables that underlie actions are values, theories, beliefs, concepts, rules, attitudes, routines, policies, practices, and norms. Action science was designed to help minimize the wide gaps that exist between espoused theories and theories-in-use. Espoused theories, theories-in-use, single and double-loop learning, and defensive routines are the four lenses that are used in organizations use to indentify and analyze issues that arise.

Espoused Theory Compared With Theory-In-Use

Espoused theory is the words that individuals use to convey action and thought. It can be elicited by asking what would be done if a situation arises under certain circumstances. Theories-in-use guides an individual's action that can be observed in a particular situation. Human behavior is guided by both espoused theory and theories-in-use which are learned early in life and are shaped by societal and organizational cultures. According to Argyris (1980); "... effectiveness results from developing congruence between theory-in-use and espoused theory." Argyris identified that the actions of people and the theories they espoused were not congruent. Theories-in-use is more powerful in conveying and changing behavior.

All leaders at the research site do not manifest differences between their espoused theory of leadership and their theories-in-use. What is espoused does not align with what is being done. One leader in particular, does exhibit differences between espoused theory and theory-in-use. At the beginning of the 2010 - 2011 school year, it was mutually agreed that discipline would be handled in a particular manner giving administrators and teachers equal authority. The mode of handling discipline changes from week to week and teacher feel that all authority was taken away regarding how to enforce their classroom rules, rewards, and consequences. For example, gum-chewing is not allowed in class. Earlier in the school year, during the morning announcement, ...