Does reflective practice have relevance for innovation in public relations?

Writers such as Schön and Argyris have been influential in our understanding of how people and organisations learn. They contend that “real” learning only takes place when we challenge assumptions and the taken‐for‐granted aspects of everyday working life, as well as the values on which these assumptions are based. Further, the ability of learning to learn (or “double‐loop learning” as it is sometimes called) at both an individual and an organisational level is regarded by such writers as the key skill in adapting to a fast‐changing world. With this framework in mind, professional courses such as the Advanced Professional Diploma in Public Relations at Leeds Metropolitan University have incorporated the philosophy of “reflective learning” in assessment. The assessment tool of this type of course is typically a reflective learning assignment where individual learners critically reflect on their own working practice in the light of newly acquired knowledge and skills. The assignment, at least in theory, is not an end in itself but the start of a continuous process of self‐reflection and challenging of assumptions underlying practice in everyday working life. It follows, therefore, that such an approach could have a relevance for innovation in individual working practices. This paper seeks to examine whether reflective learning conducted within an academic setting has a relevance for innovation in public relations. It draws on theories and discussion in the fields of organisational learning; reflective learning and reflective practice; a critical analysis of 25 reflective learning assignments; and six telephone interviews with public relations practitioners who have successfully completed the Advanced Professional Diploma in Public Relations at Leeds Metropolitan University. It is followed by a discussion of the link between their reflective learning and organisational learning, and suggests where innovation is most likely to occur. Finally, implications for academics and practitioners are discussed.