This paper will critically examine how the two influential pedagogical approaches of action-based learning and constructive alignment relate to each other, and how they may differ in focus and basic assumptions. From the outset, they are based on similar underpinnings, with the student and the learning outcomes in the center. Drawing from experiences of developing an action-based master program in management with the integration of constructive alignment in its curriculum, the purpose is to reflect on what difficulties emerge when adopting both perspectives simultaneously. Constructive alignment works under the premises that the learning goals can and should be decided beforehand in order to align them with learning activities and examination forms. This view brings a challenge for programs where the means of the learning process is provided, while it is much up to the students' own responsibilities to drive the learning toward some self-governing and internalized learning outcomes.