Why 'Learning Transformation' is a tiny, niche category

"I seem to have conversations along the lines of: 

"we want to hit ourselves on the head with a hammer, how do we make that not hurt?" 

"don't do that" 

"but we bought this hammer and this is the way we want to use it" 

"then it's going to hurt"

"why won't you help us, you're a coach?"

Llewellyn Falco

Organisations actively, and deliberately, choosing to reset the ways they enable learning are still in a tiny, niche category.

When you offer new ideas to people in corporate 'L&D' they won't often embrace them. This is because the problem is not just in strategy but also in implementation. 

The fundamental question is:

How willing are you to change what you do - and the way you do it - to get where you say you want to go?

What (most) people in L&D want to do is (just) do what they are already doing and for it to work better. (If that was going to work differently, it would have already).

If you want to change the outcomes you'll need to change the inputs; which (most) people in L&D still don't want to do. They want the organisation and the people in it ('the system') to bend to their whim.

The second, related question is then:

What would you need to know - or what resources would you need - to be able to make the changes you say you are willing to make? 

What would help you to gain the confidence to make these changes? What are you looking for? proof? reassurance? status?

(NB. Simply 'digitising' the current corporate training curriculum is not a 'Transformation' as there is no paradigm shift. This is just employing new tactics and channels to enable the same old underlying education model. 

However it is a vast, vague, unregulated, generic, and all consuming (seemingly) unstoppable mega category for L&D teams to hide in).