"Busyness is a major problem in business. Everyone is busy. Oddly, we also have a problem of conservatism and lack of ambition." Simon Terry Here are some ambitions that L&D could adopt for the organisations they seek to change: Purpose, autonomy, mastery, empathy, safety, belonging, clarity, connections, reflective, diversity of thinking, responsibility, relationships, latitude, confidence, participation, enrolment. Paul helps L&D to contribute to adaptable, human, future ready organisations

" Over the past several decades, the business world has relentlessly pursued efficiency-driven business process re-engineering, seeking to integrate, standardise, and automate tasks in ways that can reduce costs, increase speed, and deliver more profitable outcomes.  As the landscape shifts, perhaps it's time for organisations to expand their focus beyond business process re-engineering to pursue business practice re-design, help front line work groups to learn faster and accelerate performance improvement, especially in environments that are shaped by increasing uncertainty and unexpected events." John Hagel   Much corporate L&D 'practise' continues to focus on maintaining control. Farming of fixed skills for fixed roles, predetermined capabilities and catch all learning programs remain the goals. These entrenched approaches are driven by a narrow focus on executing process. As a result, "learning solutions" are inevitably shaped by: Reac...

Maintaining bureaucracy? "Leaders say they want transformation, engagement, innovation, creativity and agility ... but their actions and the environments they create say otherwise: what they actually value are the status quo, sameness, safety, certainty, busyness and consensus." Sonja Blignaut Max Weber (1864 - 1920) developed the theory of bureaucracy. He described an ideal bureaucracy as containing six central elements: 1. A clearly defined division of labour and authority 2. Hierarchical structures and offices 3. Written guidelines prescribing performance criteria 4. Recruitment to offices based on specialisation and expertise 5. Office holding as a career or vocation 6. Duties and authority attached to positions, no persons Sound familiar? The challenges for businesses and workers are now to complex to be addressed by the old bureaucracy model. The new leadership formula for success in the digital era means mastering context, communication and enro...

"The frogs that fell into the well now think that's the universe" Jim Harrison I was grateful to spend the day at a brilliantly organised event for L&D leaders in London last week. This annual gathering reinforced some well-worn themes for this audience: The "future of work" is already here for many organisations - just unevenly distributed A "seat at the table" always was (and still is) the wrong goal for 'L&D' "Learning" and "performance" are two completely different things Change is slow... These themes reflect much of my own work to support L&D leaders facing new challenges and shifting priorities, which I'd summarise as follows: The role, priority and focus of workplace learning still needs to shift from the industrial mindset of producing standardised workers to fit specific roles. This change is urgent because the 'bureaucracy model' no longer guarantees businesses stability and...

"When someone proposes something like "redesign the Files section" that's a grab-bag, not a project." Jason Yip Much L&D time continues to focus on the latest 'grab-bags' and not the real projects. A real project is redefining what now constitutes 'high performance' and why for leaders and workers in the digital era. A real project is helping leaders to stop describing everything using just industrial era metaphors. A real project is coaching leaders to start to keep score of what really creates value for workers today. A real project is actively helping to break down barriers that hold back organisations: i.   A lack of understanding of context ; (how are we creating value, for who and and why?); ii.  Inconsistent communication ; iii. The barriers to connection and participation . These real projects present a new opportunity for L&D to step up, to step forward and to change the conversation . (Meanwhile L&D...

"Don't define your success using the measures preferred by the system you're trying to change." Jason Yip Assuming 'L&D' are trying to lead change? Most organisations have lots of infrastructure around problem identification and cost management but very little around continuous learning. Set repertoires and processes. Short term fixes. Tools and solutions. Content. How can 'L&D' shift from only identifying problems, creating 'solutions' and a focus on 'proof measurement', to enabling the evolution of the organisation and improving the quality of interaction and learning throughout? Paul works with L&D teams who seek to redefine the success measures in the organisations they serve

"You evolve your operating model from enabling flow to enabling hypotheses to enabling learning. At scale. The evolving control systems for this journey need to be necessarily human centred. For that will define your brand." Sudhir Kesavan Three real world challenges for 'L&D' to enable change in an organisation: How to develop teams who can live with (and remove) complexity; How to identify and break down unhelpful silos; How to role model an alternative to bureaucracy. Paul works with human centred L&D teams who are trying to look beyond tools and tactics

" Command-and-control managers like to buy change by training and projects, unaware that change really requires changing the system and unaware that that means first being prepared to change the way they think about the design and management of work. " John Seddon Most corporate 'L&D' continues to collaborate with "command-and-control" managers. Often 'L&D' are engaged in "capability and culture change initiatives" however the result of most of their efforts is keeping the work system in their organisations consistent, standardised and scalable. This includes: 'Training in' fixed, predetermined skills lists; Compliance and mandated 'learning'; Developing 'content' that links to Management approved 'capability frameworks'; 'High potentials schemes'; Designing 'interventions' to support standardised job descriptions. So, some new questions for corporate 'L&D' ...

"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...