"What characterises corporate cult is the degree of control management exercises over employees' thinking and behaviour. This starts with recruitment, where employees are screened for their "fit". Once in, they then see that on-boarding processes and incentive systems tend to reinforce the need for alignment." Manfred Kets de Vries Some questions for 'L&D' and their corporate inductions: Does the induction set out the context for the organisation and the team the new colleague has joined? Does the induction describe the key challenges for the organisation and the new contributions needed to solve these together? Is the induction practically demonstrating the organisations' commitment as a continuously learning organisation? Does the induction enable and accelerate new connections for the participants? Does the induction help the participants to form a new network(s)? Is the induction encouraging the participants to bring their ...

" Control, stability, and operational efficiency are no longer assets, but liabilities. It makes organizations slow and unresponsive. It commoditizes margins faster than companies can realize profitability. Let that sink in. It will require a massive mental shift. " Rachel Happe However "c ontrol, stability and operational efficiency " continue to be the over-riding focus (and purpose?) for 'L&D'. Consider: Competence Compliance Set repertoires and processes Fixed skills and topics 'Content' 'Learning' as "acquiring knowledge" "Identifying problems" and then "creating solutions" Measurement Reporting and celebrating on "visits and attendees" These approaches and tactics continue to make 'L&D' itself " slow and unresponsive " too... Paul works with L&D teams who are ready to make the mental shift from managing to leading.

"Treating training as the 'encoding' of skills and knowledge in students and employees to create a ready and immediately deployable workforce is a disastrous fit for this VUCA economy..." Heather McGowan Most corporate 'L&D' is built on the centralised, industrial era priority of efficiency through control. The underpinning perspective: "Get given a problem by Management and solve it" . Reacting to the urgent. The immovable mantra? "Let's make the training better" . I believe this mindset is now being further reinforced by the new group-think drama of 'data and analytics'. Showing Management (using their own language) that 'L&D' is a willing ally in the quest to 'drive efficiencies'; (and reduce costs). So I see 'L&D's continuing bureaucratic focus on: 'Topics' ( what we say you need ) 'Content' ( where we say you can find it ) and 'Channels' ( when w...

"Where we all think alike, no-one thinks much at all" Walt Whitman It's interesting to reflect on the the industrial structures and bureaucratic language now adopted by many corporate 'L&D' teams: "Learning solution" "Learning program" "Learning delivery plan" "Learning implementation" "Capability framework" "Learning requirements" "Skills matrices" "Learning deployment activities" "Learning objectives tracking" "Learning measurement framework" This narrative reinforces a view of "learning" which is functionally structured and centrally controlled. I believe L&D's ongoing quest to be accepted as bona fide function has driven this shift in language. The choice to align with what is familiar and expected by senior leaders, in particular Management's apparent interest in only what can be "measured". Here are som...

I was very grateful to be asked to speak at this year's LearnTec Conference as part of Jane Hart's Modern Workplace Learning  track. Here are some of the ideas, assertions and question that I included in my presentation: 1. There remains an amazing, untapped opportunity to help people to work better together in a time of unprecedented change in the world of work. 2. In the 2018 Harvard Business Review study of 1,300 executives only 7% ranked developing a continuous learning culture as their number one strategic priority. This is a systematic leadership failure and, a call to action. 3. 'L&D' is mostly stuck in management mode at a time when organisations and managers need leadership, inspiration and new ideas. 4. 'L&D' only seems to talk about the same three things: a) Controlling 'content' and 'delivery' (tools and tactics) b) Creating 'programs' (for 'speed to compliance') c) Their useful identity... 5. ...

"Learning practitioners are aware they need to overcome new skills to overcome contemporary challenges. However, they seem stuck with old behaviour patterns established decades ago. The research has shown that learning practitioners are so often consumed by the burden of delivering today that they are unable to prepare themselves and their stakeholders for a different future." After fifteen years of research this is a strange place to find ourselves in. Here are my own reflections and questions on the latest annual Towards Maturity ' Transformation Journey " Insights report: "90% of L&D teams want to cultivate 'agility'" (Whilst) "96% of L&D teams want to improve access to 'resources'" This is a strategy oxymoron. These objectives are indicative of two very different organisational cultures and therefore expectations of 'L&D'. "Productivity increased by 14% as a result of 'learning intervent...

" Siloed departments, fixed roles and tasks, hierarchical structures, top down controlled strategies, action plans and funding mechanisms.  Our dominant ways of working aimed at optimisation and efficiency won't promote the adaptation and exploration required to work in complex situations." John Hagel Despite the layers of learning technologies I'd argue 'L&D' is still predominantly supporting the old industrial gods of optimisation and efficiency. Find a management problem. Develop a 'solution' to directly solve it. Measure (something / anything). Tell Management. (Realise Management have moved on to the next fire to fight and aren't that interested anymore). Let's consider what used to be a differentiators in a successful business: An efficient System; (fixed processes and procedures) that could be scaled, repeated and refined; A 'growth strategy' formed from the particular experiences and values of a small leadership...

The basis of "L&D" came from the factory. The industrial era of repeatable work, low tolerance for mistakes and individual skills for fixed jobs. Value was created from this efficiency and compliance. The role of "training" was simple and transactional: "Take what we've agreed workers need to know, to do what we need them to do. Make sure they understand and follow." The status roles were clear in the hierarchy: The process owner - high status; needed to maintain this position so execution and results were always the urgent default The trainer - low status work; reacting to the process owners, dutifully serving by providing the tools and tactics of knowledge transfer programmes. The worker on the line - lowest status work; following orders, an interchangeable cog in the system In so many respects this description of "factory work" sounds far removed from the work we recognise today. Interestingly, this historical model still ...

"Tactics without a strategy is a scrum. What's the long term plan? What builds on what? How do you build assets and leverage instead of merely keeping busy? And how can you tell if its working?" Seth Godin Many organisations need support with leadership, choices, structure and clarity. Here are some examples where "L&D" can choose to step up and ask new questions: How does the organisation uniquely create value in its chosen market? Which "capabilities" enable the organisation to do what it does better than anyone else? What kind of learning environment can support the development of these capabilities? How can L&D help leaders to develop the frameworks and commitment that enables the right kind of learning environment? If these kinds of questions still aren't urgent for L&D now it's safe to say they probably are "too busy...". Paul works with L&D leaders and teams who have chosen to move from ma...

" We know this. The people in these teams need to know this too. When (if) they do, they can do what we need to be done ". And so, the whole "Learning" industry superstructure (tactics, tools, resources, courses, technologies, measurement frameworks, vendors) is still built on this one, industrial hierarchical idea of what we think "Learning" is for. " Just get the workers to do what we need them to do ". Paul helps organisations and L&D teams to realise that what's needed is more leadership (not management).

Learning means change - for individuals, for leaders, for teams and for organisations. Change work is by definition leadership work; shifting the culture, bringing new perspectives, connecting people and their ideas. "L&D" started from a different place of course. "L&D" was a tool for Management, a small cog in the bureaucracy. Maintaining and ensuring the system and reinforcing the status quo. The role and objective of workplace learning was to scale the levels of compliance required to ensure efficiency. Helping the operating model to run, keeping the corporate boat on its predetermined course fuelled by fixed skills and processes. Business leaders and L&D are understandably wrestling with the depth and rate of disruption of these traditional hierarchy led structures. Business models can no longer rely on production and supply chain efficiency as value no longer means only costs and price. The new platforms for business growth and sustainability (...

According to the Havard Business Review 2018 " Leaders Guide to Corporate Culture " only 7% of the 1,300 CEOs interviewed were intentionally developing a culture of continuous learning. The remaining 93% confirmed that a culture of "Results focus" remained their number one or number two objective... This crushing insight presents a stark survival choice for 'L&D' teams stuck in a (supposedly) "Results focus" organisational culture: Option 1 "If you can't convince them, join them" Continue to work to convince busy senior people who are striving their way to the "Results" first culture desired by their boss that L&D are also in fact "all about results, just like you". They can rest assured that we have the "resources", "platforms", and "methodologies" that can definitely "help".  In short, be on hand to take requests for "solutions" that "ensure...