1 Accepted version of Boud, D. and Rooney, D. (2018). The potential and paradox of informal learning. In Messmann, G., Segers, M. and Dochy, P. (Eds.) Informal Learning at Work: Triggers, Antecedents and Consequences. London: Routledge, 134-152. ISBN: 9781138216600, 9781138216594, 9781315441962 The potential and paradox of informal learning David Boud, Deakin University, Geelong; University of Technology Sydney and Middlesex University, London and Donna Rooney, University of Technology Sydney Abstract Through reflection on a lengthy series of research studies of diverse workplace learning conducted in Australia over the past decade, this chapter seeks to position discussion of informal learning as part of everyday working life. It uses a practice theory perspective to show how learning can be understood as a key feature of working and how it is implicated in the normal ebb and flow of work practices. It elucidates some of the tensions that such a view generates and points to the paradox in how promoting informal learning can effectively inhibit it. 1. Introduction Informal learning at work has attracted growing interest over the past two decades. Interest comes from multiple sources, including modern organizations that generally accept the promise of positive effects on productivity. Organizations have a vested interest in recognizing and harnessing informal learning—not least because of apparent cost efficiencies. For example, little or no training related costs, nor backfill costs to replace workers that are attending training. Researchers coming from a range of disciplines are also attracted to informal learning at work (Fenwick 2008). Various researchers (ourselves included) seek to capture, name, and ultimately understand more about it. Interesting research questions arise when we understand that learning occurs without the infrastructure of curriculum, structured training activities or the intervention of training personnel: what forms can it take and what are the effects on organizations? From our background in adult education research, our own concern is that in order to understand informal workplace learning, we need new and different perspectives to view it: perspectives that go beyond both conventional understandings of training derived the vocational education and training literature, as well as from those arising from organizational theory. Informal learning in and for work is an important feature of working life, and as such requires a new set of understandings not located in either of these two areas. To this end, this chapter makes use of practice-based theorizations. In particular, it draws on the work of Theodore Schatzki (2001, 2012) and Stephen Kemmis (2000; 2005, 2010). This approach means that the activities or practices of workers, rather than individual workers, constitute the unit of analysis. This enables everyday work practices, undertaken with no thought to learning as such and often overlooked in other studies, to be examined in terms of learning. Understanding informal learning as