Lots of noise on the topic of L&D being more like the marketing department. This seems to mean using new broadcast tools to interrupt busy workers and try to convince them they should do what L&D thinks is good for them. For L&D teams determined to lead real change, it can be helpful to apply some marketing 'brand building' rigour to sharpen the focus: In four simple statements, define: The current context of work and learning in your organisation; The current problems for employees and managers that need to be solved and why; How the L&D strategy helps to provide solutions to their problems; The impact of successfully implementing the strategy (and not) for the success of the organisation Hone this until it is unmistakably clear and sharp for everyone who needs to understand it (Next, what and who needs to be aligned in your organisation for your L&D strategy to start to drive change?) Paul helps L&D teams to connect the disconnecte...

True - to support today's disrupted world of work. But the basis of 'L&D' comes from the traditional, industrialised model of work: Success in the 'Build > Sell > Cut costs > Build cheaper' era required efficiency, compliance and conformity; Stakeholders and leaders needed certainty of output and results; "Training" and measurement fast tracked the idea of control in the system; Responsibility for "Training" could easily be sub-contracted out to a "Business Support" function; (whilst leaders got on with the really important stuff...). Much current L&D focus and investment still links back to this industrial mindset of driving efficiency and standardisation across an organisation. I believe this is revealed by: 'L&D's ongoing battle to demonstrate 'value' to senior people The need to find acceptance from the organisation The need to create and manage 'resources' that provide ...

It's a truism that you get what you measure in a team or a business. When L&D acts as just an optional support function, it's "success measures" include: Number of participant days Number of courses / new courses per year Course rating evaluations Number of 'visits' to 'it's' 'platforms' Number of 'log ins' and 'page views' Number of 'training days' invested per employee Average investment cost per 'learning resource' Average 'training investment' cost per employee These measures reinforce a primary role to serve only speed to compliance and control over training. When L&D chooses to lead the culture and capability to solve problems in an organisation, it's value could be measured by: The alignment of business goals and performance expectations in the organisation How deeply the L&D team is embedded across the organisation Their contributions to progress on the busines...

There is a familiar cycle for the way that many L&D teams operate in corporate organisations. The common recipe includes: 1. The organisation hasn't defined the role and priority of 'learning'; (i.e. to accelerate change, move the work culture, improve individual and team performance, enable the business strategy) 2. The L&D team (who are unable to influence the'Why?') get stuck as reactive training order takers 3. Ideas get watered down through rounds of 'pleasing the teacher' meetings resulting in 'Learning programs' and 'Learning solutions'; (interchangeable words for ease of political passage) 4. 'Learning programs' are a drain on time / costs / interest for everyone; (especially for 'busy people' on the 'front line' doing the 'real work') 5. Measurement of benefits from 'Learning programs' is difficult / negligible / hard to keep people's attention on 6. As the work performance i...

Much of L&D's time continues to be focused on 3 things: 1. Bringing control; (of 'content', 'delivery' and admin.) 2. Creating 'programs'; (which only help with the diminishing business problem of speed to compliance ) 3. Demonstrating a useful identity; (not just interrupting busy workers...) I believe there are 3 new things that L&D should focus on instead: 1. Bringing clarity ; helping leaders and teams to understand a learning culture and how they can contribute through their own work 2. Creating connections ; developing the conditions for individuals and teams to move their knowledge, experiences and ideas easily across the organisation 3. Demonstrating confidence ; providing a new leadership blueprint for the organisation to follow: curiosity, adaptability, reflection, failure tolerance, better questions, problem solving, horizon scanning and communication. Paul helps L&D teams to step up and do more of the important work that...

The need to be seen and respected. This is a perennial L&D question that surfaces every year usually around February or March. Coincidentally, the Havard Business Review released a report this February entitled 'The Leaders Guide to Corporate Culture'. Here they interviewed 1,300 senior executives to understand their leadership styles and analysed the cultures in 230 companies across a range of industries. Corporate culture types were grouped into eight different flavours. 89% of executives ranked a "Results culture" as their first or second placed aim for their organisation. By "Results culture" they defined consciously creating an environment where targets, execution and delivery is the focus for everyone. (In the 'Industrial economy' value in a business was created by producing faster and cheaper than the competition. Employees were viewed by leaders as simply interchangeable parts of the system). Just 7 ( seven ) % of the executives...

It's a sellers market. So, I've put together a list of 10 (possibly new) questions for L&D teams to use in your 'Learning Technology' vendor discussions: 1. What is the big change your business is trying to make / facilitate / accelerate in the world of work? 2. What is your 'worldview' of the role of learning in business settings today? 3. Who exactly is your proposition for and, not for?: (i.e. which work contexts and cultures does your 'solution' best support and why?). 4. Describe how your organisation interprets the terms 'training', 'learning', 'learner', 'learning culture' and 'digital transformation'. 5. What is currently the biggest challenge for leaders of teams in organisations from your perspective? 6. How do we balance support for both productive and generative learning in your opinion? 7. According to the Havard Business Review "Leaders Guide to Corporate Culture" report...

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 ...

The 'Art' and the 'Science' of L&D There are two different conversations in what continues to be called 'L&D'. I don't believe one is any more right than the other. I do believe that they need to happen in the right order: The 'Art' of L&D L&D teams working alongside the organisations' leadership team to agree: How work gets done today and what needs to be different in the future for the organisation to prosper The environment needed to create this way work of working; (the stop, start, continues) If compliance and efficiency are important? (because this organisation will thrive through it's processes) If new ideas and practices are important? (because this organisation will thrive through it's adaptability and innovation) If sharing knowledge and experience quickly and openly is a priority? What is meant by 'high performance' for individuals and teams? How high performance will be measured and ...

For decades the music business had the perfect model. You had to go to a record shop to buy their products. When the old record wore out you had to spend money on a replacement. The record companies were in complete control of the artists and of production. Their products were spread by a free sampling tool - the radio. It was the ultimate centralised, hierarchical, money making machine. With the internet everything changed. The record company's monopoly on production and content ended. Every record ever made was available for free. Control was now in the hands of the artists who could create, share and market for themselves. Communities of fans could come together on new digital platforms to engage directly with each other. Fast, open, two-way and connected. Reliance on the old model where the record companies decided who got signed and what music was made (and for who) soon collapsed. There are parallels here for the work of L&D teams in the new knowledge economy. L...

I'm a big fan of the '4Es'. In my experience they provide a helpful way to unpack the "702010" bundle and, to diffuse the wrangling over which three numbers should sum to one hundred. The idea covers these elements of a continuous learning approach in an organisation: Creating the learning Environment : Developing performance support opportunities, available at the exact time an employee needs to learn something new. Enabling Exposure to learning opportunities: Building networks of peers and fellow professionals, supporting mentoring and coaching (formal or not), encouraging joining social networks and associations and following though leaders through social media. Providing access to Education resources (where required): Necessary / mandatory / process / procedure 'knowledge transfer' provision (AKA training). and Facilitating learning Experiences : Opportunities including job rotations, structured shadowing and stretch goals. These expe...

Most senior people in large organisations only have one job. That is to keep their job. This is not a criticism, because it's inevitable. It is how hierarchy businesses have evolved over 100 years. The majority of senior people's time and capacity is spent assessing requests from stakeholders and processing how much risk they present. In a hierarchy business, where achievement equals status, this risk radar becomes honed. A bias towards short term thinking, about 'hard' stuff (risk, money, data, profit, reputation) often prevails. Understanding this status game is a new challenge for L&D professionals who want to lead a change away from the old rules. Most corporate training is still based on the idea of knowledge transfer (regardless of the latest fad or technology). The objective of knowledge transfer is to scale understanding of the (one) way that things get done around here. This dates back to Henry Ford and the birth of industrialisation. Mass production...