A radical alternative to 'Training Needs Analysis'

"I don't spend time anymore on elaborate plans or time lines. I want to use the time formerly spent on detailed planning to create the organisational conditions for people to set a clear intent, to agree on how they are going to work together, and then practice to become better..."

Margaret J Wheatley

An alternative way to agree where to put time and resources to enable an increased rate of continual learning:

1. Define how the organisation creates value - and who for specifically

2. Define what is / will be unique and differentiating (AKA what is the valuable part?)

3. Identify the performance change needed from people to contribute to this; (how to maximise the valuable part)

4. Agree the type of work to be improved - that can have the biggest impact on the valuable part; 

technical work? 

adaptive work? 

repeatable work? 

complex work? 

innovation work? 

5. Align the most appropriate tactics and tools that can enable learning to support the agreed priority work.

NB. Everything else is table stakes / compliance / hiding / internal politics / trading 'squeaky wheel' pet projects / people pleasing / running to stand still.


I work as a thinking partner and advisor with mid sized, value oriented companies going through significant change. I help you to build new capability and mindsets through shifting your approach to organisational development.

Comments

  1. Colin12 June 2023 at 09:40

    Really interesting and thought provoking as I contemplate some large scale change plans. Would be helpful to have a bit more definition around what you mean in your list of "types of work" I point 4.(particluarly adaptive work?l

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Paul Jocelyn 12 June 2023 at 15:23

      Thanks for reading my blog Colin and for taking time to pose a thoughtful question. In point 4 I'm encouraging capability leaders to consider the type(s) of work they are supporting - to ensure the appropriate tools and tactics are aligned and appropriate. The approach to enabling high performance is 'repeatable' work - where standardisation and conformity might be goals, could be different to the approach to supporting performance in adaptive work - where we need colleagues to make local decisions in context, versus the approach to enabling high performance in 'innovation' type settings - where the goal is to bring 'the outside in'... I'd highly recommend Amy C. Edmondson's book called 'teaming' for more on this!

      Delete

Post a Comment

Please let me know your thoughts on this...

Popular posts from this blog

The human stuff is the basis of 'digital learning transformations'...

The human stuff is the basis of 'digital learning transformations'. The technology platforms are secondary. They work best when: They help to simplify or speed up what people have always done while working; (research / answer questions / share / store) They enable people to work in new ways that they have learned are more efficient and effective; (cooperatively / 'out loud' / across different teams) A 'digital mindset' for businesses could include these ideas: Constant change is inescapable - so it's curiosity and adaptability that create value in work teams New possibilities and solutions come from connecting many sources of information People can take responsibility for solving work problems Failing fast is helpful Creating wide and diverse networks of expertise and experience is crucial Customer ('end user') centricity keeps everyone better aligned Silos don't help Flatter, less hierarchical teams move ideas and solutions
Read more

Why organisations resist thinking of themselves as connected 'systems'

“In a world of separation and domination, systems thinking is subversive.” Dr Elizabeth Sawin The key to improving the work of organisations - and the contributions of the people in them - is to look at them as connected 'systems'. (Put another way, because improving the performance of individual silos won’t make the overall performance of the organisation any better). However nobody seems to want to do this. So, who’s resisting systems thinking? Executives don’t want it because means questioning the current mindset and behaviours that have brought them status and ‘results’ Individual managers don’t want it because they assume it threatens their control over their local silos L&D / HR don’t want it because their remit does not extent to the organisation, as its still rooted in the ‘performance’ of individuals (and occasionally, specific teams). And employees don't want it because they often don’t care / need to care about the overall organisation.
Read more

"The future of corporate Learning and Development" debate is five different things

"Pushing fancy new stuff onto your organisation will not change the outcomes if that is not emerging from your system itself, through the ripening of a different worldview." Stelio Verzera The perennial topic  of "The future of corporate Learning and Development" is always everywhere. This ' Shirky Principle ' fuels and sustains the status quo and the players that continue to benefit from it. I'd argue that the discussion is in fact five very   different conversations happening in parallel, but unequally distributed. They are - in current descending order of noise, ambition and opportunity: 1. 'MAKE THE TRAINING BETTER'. The status quo. The economic model. Dependent on maintaining the belief that educating individual workers changes the system through which complex, interconnected organisations perform. This narrative is carefully preserved by (mostly) commercial vendors who have filled the strategy vacuum. New technologies, new (and old) instruc
Read more