Understand the E-learner
Any organization that commits to undertaking an e-learning component as part of their learning and development strategy must make an effort to understand their learners. Unfortunately, it seems that many organizational leaders are sold on new e-learning technology as a way to reduce the investment in their training budget while frequently the needs of the learner seem to be ignored.
It would be foolhardy and potentially costly to overlook the fundamentals of adult learners as advanced by Malcolm Knowles, namely:
- Adults need to know why they are learning something; they must believe it will have a personal benefit;
- Adults have lifetime experiences that should be tapped and built upon;
- Adults learn best from hands-on, problem-solving approaches to learning; and
- Adults will expect to apply new knowledge and skills immediately, which will aid retention.
Understanding your corporate learners is important if you are to effectively work with Knowles’ fundamentals.
The process to start understanding learners can be accomplished by having prospective e-learners complete a short questionnaire or even through a one-on-one interview setting with an organizational e-learning champion. If the survey option is used, follow up with those that self-identify through their responses that they would be at risk in an e-learning environment. Questions requesting information about age, educational background, organizational tenure, and familiarity and comfort with computers and e-learning should be asked. Understanding the employees that will be participating in a company sponsored e-learning curriculum is no different than taking the time to understand employees that will be participating in in-class, on-the-job, or other training avenues. As a training leader (facilitator of learning), it is your responsibility to play a key role in delivering a positive LROI (Learning Return on Investment). In this case you can do that by making the effort to understand the e-learner.
This is post 2 of 7 of the E-learning Success Model … view the others by following these links:
- A Model for E-learning Success
- Understand the E-learner
- Onsite E-learning Champions
- In-Class Orientation for E-learners
- Support from the E-learner’s Manager
- Provided time to E-learners during Work Hours
- Let E-learners Have a Role in Choosing their E-learning Courses
A Model for E-learning Success
Frequently, discussions about e-learning in corporate training environments attract the attention of executives interested in addressing escalating training costs and in using technology to train employees. The implied E-learning promise is that training efficiencies will go straight to the bottom line while revenue growth resulting from training will go straight to the top line.
While true that training efficiencies can be realized from the use of e-learning in corporate environments, it is also true that there can be significant up-front investments required of organizations wanting to pursue custom E-learning initiatives. The price of failure could be high, and as a result, future training initiatives could be given a rough ride.
If employees do not perceive E-learning as a positive development, a consequence is that they may disengage from the learning process. If the bottom line investment in E-learning initiatives is high, the cost of learner disengagement to an organization has the potential to be significantly higher.
Over the next few blog posts, I am going to explore an E-learning Success Model that can be used by organizations considering E-learning as a component of their overall learning and development strategy.
The six strategies of the model that will be discussed individually are:
- Understand the e-learner
- Have an on site e-learning champion
- Provide an in-class orientation for all e-learners
- Support from the e-learner’s manager
- Time provided to e-learners during working hours
- Learners should play a role in choosing their own e-learning courses
This is post 1 of 7 of the E-learning Success Model … view the others by following these links:
- A Model for E-learning Success
- Understand the E-learner
- Onsite E-learning Champions
- In-Class Orientation for E-learners
- Support from the E-learner’s Manager
- Provided time to E-learners during Work Hours
- Let E-learners Have a Role in Choosing their E-learning Courses
External or Internal Trainers?
When looking at different training initiatives for your organization, it can be very tempting to go with an exclusively internal solution … especially if the focus is on the bottom line cost and not the learning-return-on-investment (LROI). While cost should play a role in ultimately determining which way you will go, too frequently it disproportionately outweighs all others.
When looking at different training initiatives for your organization, it can be very tempting to go with an exclusively external solution … especially if the focus is on the bottom line cost and not the LROI. While cost should play a role in ultimately determining which way you will go, too frequently it disproportionately outweighs all others.
Do I hear an echo in here?
Clearly the same argument can be made for either internal or external resources, especially if the focus is exclusively on the bottom line (and in your experience, you may well have heard it used both ways). So what other factors should be considered in the LROI equation? There are two that I think should sit at or near the top of the list
1. Cultural connection
It is important that the organization’s culture be understood and respected. Depending on the purpose of the training, the cultural connection could possibly be best addressed using internal resources … or it may best be left to external resources (e.g. implementing a program that will result in a cultural shift). There’s no short answer here, just a need to be aware of this key consideration.
2. Expertise
Here is where taking advantage of subject matter experts (SMEs) comes into play. If you are in an environment that is unique, with little external subject matter expertise available, then clearly your internal SMEs will be playing a significant role. Or perhaps there is a requirement to engage with external sources because your needs/gap analysis has revealed that the required knowledge or skill sets don’t exist internally.
So what is the bottom line here? Focusing exclusively on your bottom line cost when designing and/or delivering training programs could end up costing you more in the long run. At the very least, the three key factors mentioned above, (bottom line, cultural connection, expertise), should be considered when attempting to maximize your LROI.
What other factors do you feel should be considered in creating a positive LROI equation?
Don’t Train for the Sake of Training
Have ever heard the statement, “if you don’t know where you are going, any road will get you there?” You could also say it this way, “if you don’t know where you are, and you don’t know where you are going, pick a road.”
When it comes to learning and development in the workplace, the same principles apply. Have you considered what outcomes you are looking for? Do you know the current capabilities of those who will be participating as learners? So as easy as it might be to consider that offer from the nice learning company account representative that paid you a visit earlier today, hyping the special rates available on their super-duper-training-course, be sure that you are first clear about where you want your organization to be going.
In other words, know where it is that you want to go (let’s say Montreal), know where you are (let’s say Toronto), and then determine the most effective way to get there. Could it be flying? Perhaps driving? What about the train or bus? There are many factors that will consider into this decision, including time, money, and possibly personal considerations like a fear of flying. Some factors are qualitative, some quantitative; some may be based on anecdotal feedback from others that have taken the trip previously.
A little effort will put you in control of determining what training initiatives are truly necessary (if at all) for your organization. That means identifying the goals and objectives of the organization, determining where your employees skill sets currently fit, and their ability to accomplish the goals set out using those skill sets. From these determinations, and if necessary, you can develop an organizational training plan.
The bottom line is don’t train for the sake of training. If that is your intention, then by all means take advantage of the latest super-duper-training-course that the nice learning company account representative presented to you … after all, any road/training will get you to your destination … won’t it?
Let the Learner Play a Role in your Program Design
A few years ago I was charged with the task of developing an orientation and professional development curriculum for newly hired sales people. Given that no program had previously existed, I was required to build one from the ground up … an exciting and challenging prospect.
Joseph Schwab, an educator who developed a program design approach based on curriculum deliberations, believed that the lead curriculum-making specialist required input from subject matter experts, learner representatives, milieu residents (e.g. customers), and instructor-facilitators. And he cautioned that subject matter experts typically want to either control the curriculum making process or will discount input from others (learners, milieu residents, teacher-facilitators, and of course, the curriculum-making specialist). My previous experiences have only reinforced this perspective for me.
If you find yourself taking on the role of curriculum-making specialist, it is important to ensure that any one party in the process (e.g. subject matter experts) doesn’t take over; it is your responsibility to have the wherewithal to guide this process. In particular, you must ensure that learners are involved, heard, and active in the design process. It is after all the learner that is expected to benefit from the program.
The earlier the learner becomes involved in the process, the more likelihood that you will have a successful outcome. Wouldn’t you rather have the learner involved at the beginning of the process than simply as a passive recipient of training? Wouldn’t you rather ensure that your program avoids common or potential pitfalls before rolling it out? Wouldn’t you rather minimize potential missteps that could cost you unnecessary money, money that could be used elsewhere in your training budget?
I’m not suggesting that the learner should be designing your program, just that you should consider using the learner as a key resource on your design team … in addition to subject matter experts, instructor-facilitators, and milieu residents.
Understand your organization’s leadership orientation
Trust. Responsibility. Respect. Focus. All terms that should be used when describing the leadership orientation of an organization; or at least in describing an organization that wants to survive and thrive. The science of leadership (or is it a practiced art?) within organizations today has been studied, documented, and discussed by both those in the know and those who don’t know but think they do.
My intent is not to run through a list of what I consider the do’s and don’ts of effective leadership, but rather to suggest that if you are going to be involved in designing and/or delivering training and development initiatives for your organization, you need to take the time to understand what kind of leadership orientation or practice exists within the organization.
How much latitude is there at different levels within the organization when it comes to taking responsibility for making decisions? Is leadership centralized or devolved? Does the organization have a self-leadership model that is encouraged and capitalized on? Do those who are required to take on the role of follower understand what it means to be an effective follower?
Some of these questions are easier to answer than others. Regardless, it’s important to take the time necessary to answer them. If you are preparing any type of training program that touches on understanding the culture of the organization or in developing leadership skills to help the organization succeed, it needs to be consistent with, and reinforce how the organization sees and presents itself to the world. If these questions cannot be answered because there clearly is a lack of trust, responsibility, respect, and focus when it comes to organizational leadership, then you may want to suggest that the place to start is with the C-level leadership team itself.
Know Your Audience
Public speakers, sales people, and marketers live by the mantra of “know your audience.” And so taking a page from their book, when it comes to designing and/or delivering training, know your audience. I’m not talking about making assumptions based on stereotypes, (an approach fraught with pitfalls at best and dangerous at worst). I’m suggesting that it is important to put some effort in to know and understand your audience … the learner. Success in training hinges on helping the learner to make the necessary connections and in experiencing those “A-ha” moments.
What is it helpful to know about, and why?
Background
Who are they (as individuals and as a group)? Where have they come from? What is their working history? This is where knowing a history and understanding the culture of the organization is also extremely helpful.
Competencies
What does their competency map look like? (more on competency maps in another post) This should include competencies directly related to the work environment … and those that are not; the lived experiences that learners bring to the organization shouldn’t be overlooked.
Education
What is the educational background of each individual and the group as a whole? When building and/or delivering programs, it is important to work with learners … not around, below, or beyond them.
And how do find out about backgrounds, competencies, and education?
Ask
Enough said.
Survey
If the organization is large, learners are dispersed, or time is a limiting factor, consider using a survey tool to collect some of this information for you. Online tools like SurveyMonkey will allow you design, distribute, collect, and analyze data for no charge (there are limitations of course, but have a look).
Assessments
In some cases, pre-course assessments are important to ensure that the learner is being matched up with the correct course level, or if you are designing a program, that you are designing it to the right level. Web based survey tools can also be used for this, as can paper based instruments.
If you are aware of any other online tools that can be used for surveys and assessments, please feel free to share.
Where would organizations be without their people?
Picture: The Learner
Have you ever found yourself commenting under your breath about yet another policy being pushed down from above? Do your experiences at work find you wondering if you really are just another number in the cog of industry? Does the organization that you are a part of pay lip service to how valuable their people are, yet their actions really seem to indicate otherwise?
Ok, enough of the negative questions.
Are you fortunate enough to be part of an organization that values the insight and opinions of all employees? Do the organization’s leaders consult with employees before implementing policies that will affect those same employees? Do leaders within the organization understand the practiced art of listening? Does the organization that you are a part of demonstrate every day how valuable their people are, through both words and actions?
Now it’s a fact that learning and development initiatives will continue to take place in either type of organization implied above (or in an organization that falls somewhere in between the two extremes). The issue to consider is what type of organization is likely to see success from training initiatives. One that sees and believes that they have automatons collecting pay every two weeks? Or one that sees people and opportunities, (in short, an organization that believes the heart is as important as the brain)?
How the organizational leadership views their employees is an important component of any training and development program; if they view them as the former (automatons with no hearts), then perhaps an attitude adjustment is required first. After all, if the organization is to succeed over the long term then its people must also.
Or am I living in too idealistic a world?
What does it really mean to be a “Learning Organization”?
Peter Senge did a lot of work through the late 1980’s and early 90’s considering the concept of the learning organization. In two seminal books* that have stood the test of time, he defined and honed in on five “learning disciplines” that are common in learning organizations:
- Personal Mastery
- Mental Modes
- Shared Vision
- Team Learning
- Systems Thinking
I don’t want to rehash his work here, just point out that the concept of the learning organization has been around for quite some time. Clearly valuing the contributions of all employees and finding ways to capitalize on and communicate the depth of organizational knowledge that they have are the benefits of operating in an environment that considers itself a learning one.
What I think is important to consider is the changes that having taken place on the technological front since Senge penned his theories. Consider that the widespread use of computers and all that means for learning (e.g. e-learning, online learning, LMS’s, Wiki’s, blogs, etc.), just didn’t exist in the late 80’s and early 90’s; the learning landscape has changed significantly, but the fundamentals are still the fundamentals.
A question that I would like to throw out there is:
What role do you feel that technology has played in enhancing (or not) learning organizations?
* Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. New York: Currency Doubleday.
* Senge, P. (1994). The fifth discipline fieldbook. New York: Currency Doubleday.
Designing Training Programs; Internal and External Resources
Picture: The Company (continued)
In this post, let’s discuss design and the leveraging of internal and external resources.
Design – where does the organization turn when designing training programs?
There are three separate responses to this, or as is more probably the truth in many organizations, a combination of two or possibly all three. Many organizations rely on internal resources exclusively to design training initiatives. If the organization is large and profitable enough, they may actually have the resources required to hire or develop certified learning and development professionals. While it’s tempting to suggest that this is the ideal scenario, it may not necessarily be so. Having the required internal resource may be a point of pride for an organization, but if the return-on-investment required is not being met, there are other alternatives. One of those alternatives is using external resources to design and deliver proprietary programs; the other alternative is the use off-the-shelf programs that can be easily customized to fit the organization’s needs and culture.
Leveraging Internal Resources
For many organizations, subject matter experts (SMEs) are the most common turn-to-when-required internal resource when it comes to developing training programs. The logic behind this is self evident. The challenge with this is not with the depth of knowledge that the SME brings to the table, but rather with the assumption that just because someone has the requisite knowledge, they must therefore be a good instructional designer and facilitator. How often have you sat through a one way, long, difficult to follow, information intensive slide presentation from a SME with the expectation that you will internalized all of the required knowledge and then be capable of using it in the workplace? Unfortunately this scenario is all too common. SMEs are important, but teaming them up with an individual that understands fundamental instructional design and delivery is just as important if you are to capture the value that you are looking for (remember ROI?). One way to leverage a SME’s knowledge could be through the application of a train-the-trainer program (TtT). The SME provides the knowledge, and then those within the organization who have an aptitude for presenting content effectively can be taken through a TtT program. All of this though rests with the final key component. Do the training initiatives being undertaken have the support of the organization? This means more than just lip service, it means the financial and resource support necessary to ensure that the design and delivery of the program won’t be hindered by lack of resources and ultimately lead to questions being asked that result in the answer, “we didn’t have the support we needed to benefit from this.”
External Resources
As mentioned, sometimes using external resources could actually lead to a significantly greater ROI than relying exclusively on internal resources. This can mean everything from sourcing external consultants to do all of the design work for you, to reaching for easily customized, off-the-shelf solutions. An off-the-shelf solution, or program in a box, is often as good as or better than internally designed initiatives. This is of course contingent on the context (i.e. technical in nature, proprietary to the organization, focused on fundamental leadership or office efficiencies).
When looking at the “P”icture of the company, it’s important to know how ingrained in the culture these issues are. The next post will discuss expectations, leadership orientation, and what it means to be a learning organization. After that, “P”icture will move onto The Learner.
