Integrating Mental Modeling Coaching with Shared Mental Models

Integrating Mental Modeling Coaching with Shared Mental Models:

A 3S–FORM and Triple-Loop Learning Perspective

 

Sukjae Lee, Ph.D. 
Creator of the Effectiveness Coaching Methodology 
January 28, 2026

 

 

1. Positioning This Study in Existing Research

Research on shared mental models (SMMs) has consistently shown that team effectiveness depends not only on individual competence, but on the degree to which team members share aligned representations of tasks, roles, and performance logic (Cannon-Bowers, Salas, & Converse, 1993; Mohammed, Ferzandi, & Hamilton, 2010).

However, two limitations remain in much of the literature:

1. Static focus – Shared mental models are often measured as states, not processes.
2. Weak linkage to coaching practice – Few studies explain how shared mental models are intentionally reshaped through leadership or coaching interventions.

This article addresses these gaps by applying mental modeling coaching within the 3S–FORM architecture and interpreting the case through a triple-loop learning lens.

 

2. Mapping 3S–FORM to Shared Mental Model Restructuring (Team Level)

Below is a journal-ready conceptual mapping table that explicitly links:

• individual inner processes (3S),
• coaching interaction structure (FORM),
• and team-level shared mental model restructuring.

Table 1. 3S–FORM × Shared Mental Model Restructuring

Level	Component	Function in Coaching	Contribution to Shared Mental Models	Related Research
Individual (Leader)	Self-Awareness	Recognizing implicit assumptions about performance and people	Leader identifies the existing dominant mental model guiding team interpretation	Argyris & Schön (1978): uncovering governing variables
Individual (Leader)	Self-Talk	Internal narrative shifts from blame to system logic	Leader reframes performance as a capability–outcome relationship	Mezirow (1991): meaning perspective transformation
Individual (Leader)	Self-Reflection	Evaluating impact of leadership assumptions	Leader validates new mental model through reflection	Schön (1983): reflection-in-action
Interaction (Coach–Leader)	Feedback	Making mental models explicit and discussable	Provides cognitive clarity and shared language	Cannon-Bowers et al. (1993): shared understanding
Interaction (Team Context)	Opportunity	Applying new framing in meetings and 1:1s	Repeated exposure aligns team interpretation	Weick (1995): sensemaking through enactment
Interaction (Team Context)	Restructure	Rebuilding performance logic collectively	Old shared assumptions replaced by new collective schema	Fiol & O’Connor (2017): collective cognition change
Action (Team)	Move Forward	Consistent leadership behaviors reinforce model	New shared mental model stabilizes in routines	Senge (1990): shared vision & learning
Team (Collective)	Shared Mental Model	Common performance logic emerges	Team coordinates action with less friction	Mohammed et al. (2010): team cognition & performance

 

Key Contribution

This table demonstrates that 3S–FORM is not merely a coaching conversation flow, but a mental model transmission architecture—connecting inner cognitive shifts to team-level shared meaning systems. 

 

3. Triple-Loop Learning Interpretation

3.1 Single-Loop Learning: Behavioral Adjustment

What changed?

• Team meetings improved.
• One-on-one conversations became more focused.
• Training became more targeted.

Argyris (1977) – correcting errors without altering underlying assumptions.

 

3.2 Double-Loop Learning: Mental Model Restructuring

What assumptions changed?

• Performance ≠ effort alone.
• Development ≠ generic training.
• Leadership ≠ uniform treatment.

The Performance–Capability Matrix enabled the team to question why performance differed and how capability should be developed.

:
Argyris & Schön (1978) – questioning governing variables.

 

3.3 Triple-Loop Learning: Reconstructing “How We Think Together”

At the team level, the most significant change was not behavioral or cognitive alone, but ontological:

“Performance discussions are not evaluations—we use them to think together.”

This reflects triple-loop learning, where teams reconfigure:

• how learning itself occurs,
• how meaning is co-created,
• and what leadership is for.

Bateson (1972): Learning III

Tosey, Visser, & Saunders (2012): levels of learning clarified

Nicolini (2012): practice-based knowing

 

4. Shared Mental Models as the Missing Link in Coaching Effectiveness

Many coaching outcome studies focus on:

• coachee satisfaction,
• leader behavior change,
• or short-term performance indicators.

This case suggests a deeper mechanism:

Coaching becomes scalable and sustainable when it restructures shared mental models.

This aligns with OD research emphasizing that:

• culture is embedded in everyday sensemaking (Weick, 1995),
• and leadership is enacted through repeated interpretive acts (Smircich & Morgan, 1982).

 

5. Implications for HR / OD Research and Practice

5.1 For Research

• Move beyond individual-level coaching outcomes.
• Measure shared mental model alignment longitudinally.
• Explore mental modeling coaching as a bridge between coaching and OD.

5.2 For Practice

• Equip leaders with mental model carriers (e.g., matrices, frameworks).
• Design coaching programs that explicitly target team cognition, not only behavior.
• Evaluate coaching impact at interaction pattern and sensemaking levels.

 

References

• Argyris, C. (1977). Double loop learning in organizations. Harvard Business Review.
• Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning. Addison-Wesley.
• Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. Chandler.
• Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Salas, E., & Converse, S. (1993). Shared mental models in expert team decision making. Individual and Team Decision Making.
• Fiol, C. M., & O’Connor, E. J. (2017). Unlearning established organizational routines. Organization Science.
• Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass.
• Mohammed, S., Ferzandi, L., & Hamilton, K. (2010). Metaphor no more: A 15-year review of shared mental model research. Journal of Management.
• Nicolini, D. (2012). Practice theory, work, and organization. Oxford University Press.
• Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. Basic Books.
• Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline. Doubleday.
• Smircich, L., & Morgan, G. (1982). Leadership as the management of meaning. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science.
• Tosey, P., Visser, M., & Saunders, M. (2012). The origins and conceptualizations of ‘triple-loop’ learning. Management Learning.
• Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Sage.