I have been researching some new ideas as part of the effort of Makai University. One concept I have is Double Loop Learning. The Wikipedia post describes this as

Double-loop learning entails the modification of goals or decision-making rules in the light of experience. The first loop uses the goals or decision-making rules, the second loop enables their modification, hence "double-loop". Double-loop learning recognises that the way a problem is defined and solved can be a source of the problem.[1] This type of learning can be useful in organizational learning since it can drive creativity and innovation, going beyond adapting to change to anticipating or being ahead of change.[2]

But this loses most of you. What I like better is the 1991 Harvard Business Review paper that introduces the double loop learning concept where the author discusses “Teaching Smart People How to Learn.”

First, most people de􏰜ne learning too narrowly as mere ‘‘problem solving,’’ so they focus on identifying and correcting errors in the external environment. Solving problems is important. But if learning is to persist, managers and employees must also look inward. They need to re􏰝ect critically on their own behavior, identify the ways they often inad- vertently contribute to the organization’s problems, and then change how they act. In particular, they must learn how the very way they go about de􏰜 ning and solving problems can be a source of problems in its own right.
I have coined the terms ‘‘single loop’’ and ‘‘double loop’’ learning to capture this crucial distinction. To give a simple analogy: a thermostat that automatically turns on the heat whenever the temperature in a room drops below 68 degrees is a good example of single-loop learning. A thermostat that could ask, ‘‘Why am I set at 68 degrees?’’ and then explore whether or not some other temperature might more economically achieve the goal of heating the room would be engaging in double-loop learning.

One

Professionals embody the learning dilemma: they are enthusiastic about continuous improvement—and often the biggest obstacle to its success.

This paper is over 28 years old, but it still applies well to challenges of why it is so hard for smart people to listen and learn when they are in their professional life.