"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 (I’m reflecting if many corporate L&D teams feel they are ‘stuck’ and if not, what might prompt them to reconsider?). I see three common characteristics of L&D teams that have limited impact on changing the organisation: 1. ‘Order taker’ positioning  The basis of the work of most L&D teams is ‘content’. Developing content, managing access to content, curating content, marketing content, tracking consumption of content. Inevitably, the work involves project and program management, reporting, governance and administration. A 'content as the strategy' philosophy and the mindset and infrastructure that grows up around this inevitably reinforces an ‘order taker’ positioning.  2. ‘Tactics first’ default...

"Addiction is finding a quick and dirty solution to the symptom of the problem, which prevents or distracts one from the harder and long-term task of solving the real problem." Donellea H. Meadows The positioning of the 'L&D' function' as a 'provider of branded products and services' limits its value. As business models and their resulting work cultures shift away from bureaucracy, the role of 'L&D' as 'training order taker' and curriculum manager / marketer is increasingly disconnected from how valuable change is enabled. L&D leaders can choose to challenge the entrenched approach and process through which their priorities are defined - and play a more strategic, and impactful role with the organisation. Six alternative framings to replace 'training order taking' might include: 1. Reshape the ratio of focus and investment on (only) developing the potential of individuals vs. developing connected teams vs. the organisat...

  "The major source of performance is human agency: the capacity, ability and willingness for individuals to act." Celine Schillinger In my work I see a pattern of four ingrained systemic barriers to human agency: An entrenched definition of "performance" linked to compliance and 'fit' An over focus on individual performance  "Productivity" only = "deliver and execute" Operational silos limiting exposure to new ideas and connections  

“Leadership conducive to social capital is all too rarely practiced in organisations. Instead, standard corporate practices destroy social capital through internal competition, siloed management, the pressurisation of individuals under an engineering, productivist and short-termist logic” Frederik Anseel New role of the CEO: Identify and remove barriers to organisational learning. Deliberately create the environment needed to achieve the strategy (see above). Enable the organisation and its stakeholders to benefit from the diversity of its employees. Create meaningful jobs that enable employees to bring their full contribution.

“You cannot run a knowledge-based organisation by direct control, pressure, high demands, and micro-management.” Jan Hoglund Without people changing (in particular, leaders changing their collective assumptions and beliefs) ‘Transforming our organisational culture’ has zero chance of delivering on its promises. Leaders raised and rewarded through the industrial management status quo can struggle to describe how and why their organisations now need to work and learn differently. The traditional control based, directing, mandating management model only creates a focus on tactics, plans and logistics. This approach now provides diminishing returns. Sustainable organisations only emerge from a commitment to shared vision, connection, new interactions and psychological safety. So the new question for leadership teams could be: “How are we deliberately creating a new environment (‘the system’) within which our new strategy can be achieved?” The next question - that shapes any organisational ...

“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.

“Leadership has two main functions. One is to see the vision and develop the strategies that lead towards it. The other is to create an environment which makes it possible to implement the strategies." Russell Ackoff I love this quote because it challenges leaders to think about their organisations as connected systems. It can help them to reflect on two questions: Is our direction clear and compelling? and Does the way we currently think and work together (our environment) set us up for success? Here’s my list of some characteristics of dysfunctional work environments; (there are many more). If these are the current outcomes of the way that an organisation thinks and works together, then new success is always less likely: Attempting to go somewhere new via old thinking Doing the wrong things righter Unwillingness to look inward and acknowledge responsibility ‘Leadership’ as only directing, pace setting, mandating ‘Leading’ as enabling doing Administrative competence as the goal A...

"To change performance, we need to change system design. To do that requires a change in our thinking, a change in our assumptions and beliefs.”  Hermanni Hyytiala Some ideas for new thinking, assumptions and beliefs for corporate L&D: The L&D function only exists to enable the organisation to change   ‘Education’ is no longer our default 'L&D' approach - because it is no longer our goal to develop only ‘standardised’ workers Support and challenge the Leadership team to embed learning into the way the business thinks and grows Focus on creating the supportive environment now needed to accelerate learning at all levels of the organisation Ensure clarity and alignment between 'L&D's' goals, their enabling strategies and the appropriate supporting tactics and tools I  work with organisations who want learning to be an enabler of change and growth

"There's a difference between doing things better and doing better things. To change performance, change thinking. Thinking has the greatest leverage on performance." Hermanni Hyytiala  Common drivers for new ‘L&D’ investments inside bureaucracies: 1. Business reacting to external events 2. Cost reduction initiatives  3. Digitisation ( optimisation ) of existing business processes  4. Process standardisation projects 5. Responding to compliance audit risks I work with organisations who want learning to be an enabler of change and growth

"Current performance is, axiomatically , dependant on current thinking. What works is changing thinking." John Seddon The 'L&D' function should (by definition) help leaders to define, enable, accelerate and role model a continuous learning environment. This can help people employees at all levels to shift their thinking, increase their impact  and create new value for the organisation. Where to start - to help create a continuous learning environment: Develop and provide performance support: Checklists, flowcharts, decision trees, pop ups, scripts, graphics and models, job aids Open and widen access to new information sources: Business Strategy, Business Vision, Business Values, Business results, team structures, processes, role descriptions, performance standards, team tasks and priorities, how customer needs link to individual and team tasks and measures Facilitate and accelerate access to new challenges in work: Personal development opportunities, measuring...

"Managers love empowerment in theory, but the command-and-control model is what they trust and know best." Chris Agyris " Order taking " and " No seat at the table " are symptoms for legacy L&D teams. We know that if the work of L&D is positioned, structured and measured in the traditional way then frustration with the lack or resulting influence and authority is inevitable. Some common signs of tactical, 'cost centre' positioning of the L&D function from my experiences include: The 'L&D' team lack understanding of business goals / strategy / brand strategy / commercial differentiation There's no connected, aligned, L&D strategy, tactics and success measures which enable the business goals / differentiation in the market Traditional expectations from 'senior leaders' of the work of the L&D function (training courses / 'solutions' / 'content' / events / programmes / curriculum / complianc...

"Most of us are so stuck on the short-cycles of urgency that it's difficult to even imagine changing our long-term systems." Seth Godin Beware the lure of complicity in the old, entrenched, vanity metrics in corporate learning. These include: Increasing course attendance Increasing course 'satisfaction level' Increasing 'Log ins' Increasing 'Clicks' Increasing 'Views' Increasing 'Likes' Increasing 'Downloads' Increasing the level of centralisation  Increasing the level of standardisation " Leadership team approved " Increasing learning technology spend Increasing level of focus on ' learning goals ' Increasing level of focus on 'teaching what we already know' Scaling formal learning Increasing 'learning topics' focus "High performing" ( really ) meaning "Highly compliant" A focus on 'individual performance change' An increasing level of interaction with the Learni...