"Anything that keeps the focus on unquestioning execution, on rewarding individual contributors and punishing scapegoats, and not improving underlying systems. Charles Lambdin There are a host of unchallenged rituals in the world of 'organisational' 'development' that are well worth examining, because: The contribution of individual workers is a tiny factor in the overall success of an organisation 'Skills' are a tiny factor in the performance of an individual worker  Generic 'skills' definitions that are not tied to the  specific performance standards required in the work - won't change the performance of individuals or teams Access to generic content libraries has no impact on performance (as they are out of context to the 'real' work and it's challenges in the organisation) Formal learning (training courses and programs) have the least impact on performance (but still receive the most focus and investment) The level of access ...

"Most change within an organisation stops and a power boundary / locus that is unwilling to change itself." Matt Barcomb The systemic separation between 'the work' and 'learning' persists because it enables leaders to continue with their current preoccupations and resulting status.  If we consider some characteristics of a deliberately 'learning' organisation: Learning is understood as continual, and outside of (just) centralised, formal, 'learning activities' An intense focus on critical thinking, feedback, connections, and reflection A deliberate sense of curiosity and embracing of new and different ideas and possibilities High levels of autonomy and accountability designed to flourish as low as possible in the organisation's structures Supporting leadership systems that enable everyone's ongoing development and creates the safety to 'speak up' as part of this intent. The implications for leaders from choosing to design for t...

"It's difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it'" Upton Sinclair For industrial leaders the answer to every 'problem' is simple - apply more control. So (almost) every corporate 'transformation' is built around: 'Being a simpler organisation' 'Driving more alignment' 'Driving cost rationalisation' 'Driving performance' 'Investing in the leaders we now need' 'All living our new values' 'Attending the new training courses we're providing' 'Having the plans to deliver what we've agreed' 'Governing the plans more effectively' The connecting theme is a focus on administrative competence, 'better' bureaucracy, and maintaining the safety of specific individuals.

"In my opinion you begin with performance, not learning. What exceptional performance looks like and what's hindering or helping it. If we start with a learning focus, we start with the intention to create and / or add something new (i.e. content) when we should start by understanding what barriers exist to exceptional performance and how to remove them." Mark Britz If your work is to create 'learning' (education) and make it more 'effective' (which you measure by completions / visits / ratings), then it's hard to be open to the idea of stopping creating 'learning'. Isn't it?

"Evidence suggests focus on 'skills-building' at the expense of carrying out a systemic analysis analysis to determine the real underlying issues is not only wasting huge amounts of money, but also inhibiting our ability to develop high performing individuals, teams and organisations." Tulser Here are some common systemic blockers to performance that someone / a team could enable leaders to acknowledge and focus on: 1. Not defining the characteristics of 'high performance' for individuals, teams, and the organisation as a whole 2. Not gaining agreement on the 'gap' versus performance today 3. Social structures that prevent collaborative problem acknowledgement and problem solving  4. Inability to define and agree the capacity (space, time, resource) and capabilities (worldviews, systems thinking, resources) needed to thrive in a changed world 5. Intent to challenge and support leaders raised on a diet of process compliance and 'efficiency' meas...

"Most of today's leaders don't 'put anything in place'. They simply adapt what's already in place without question. Hence, the holding over of the industrial model when the nature of work has changed. No skepticism about traditions or curiosity about future models." @SySTEMHabits In control based organisations, 'L&D' teams (inevitably) adopt these preoccupations, priorities and routines: 1. A fundamental focus on 'learning' over enabling (new) performance 2. Creating centralised, 'learning' 'content' 3. Scaling access to and 'delivery' of the 'learning' 'content'  4. Skills definition and standardisation (focused on 'topics' over 'tasks') 5. Ensuring project and programme consistency 6. Optimising for 'content' consumption and 'course completions' (see points one to five above).

"In complex domains, increased procedural efficiency does not equate to increased productivity." Doc Norton  In 2024 the common drivers for new 'learning' investments are inevitably still the same inside bureaucratic organisations: 1. Business reacting to external events 2. Cost reduction initiatives 3. 'Digitisation' (cost optimisation) of existing business processes 4. Process standardisation projects 5. Responding to compliance audit risks.

"I think people in power have a vested interest to oppose critical thinking." Carl Sagen The current system in most organisations forms the cultural norm that "learning" (only) equates to "getting training". Most senior leaders are passive on this as they continue to benefit.  Here's my list of reasons that ensure training is still favoured - over proactively creating environments that enable continual learning: 1. Control 2. Easy to separate from the 'real work' (and so deprioritise) 3. Easy to devolve responsibility down (which L&D teams gladly accept) 4. Easy to manage as a project checklist item (safety in the familiar plan / budget / delivery zone) 5. Fits with the 'just get people to execute!' mantra 6. Leaders can maintain their own behaviour as-is ('do as we say not what we do').

"Most corporate 'L&D' is performative theatre. Events management. Investing £s into trying to improve the performance of individuals, without a focus on systems change is just a cargo cult. The status quo persists as Execs, L&D leaders and vendors all have to much to lose." Paul Jocelyn This my 48th and final blog post for 2023. Over 9,000 people have viewed my blog this year, with the most read post from 2023 being ' Barriers to progress '.  I'm grateful for everyone who has taken time to read my posts this year, and I hope they challenged you - to reflect, re-think or choose a new approach. (That's the reason I write). Writing this blog is definitely the most rewarding thing I've done in a thirty four year corporate career (as an employee, freelancer, and contractor). Choosing the discipline to write what I think and publish into the world with no expectations has been an entirely positive experience and I can't imagine stopping. It ...

"The most common leadership failure stems from attempting to apply technical solutions to adaptive challenges." Ron Heifetz  The 'Head of Learning & Development' job persists and it's easy to be confused. In reality it's not just one job, it's at least five: Program management: The core work of planning, coordinating, communicating and reporting on a set of formal learning collateral. This is inevitably process oriented, 'governance' oriented, and administration heavy. IT systems management: This is the work of procuring, testing, deploying, and maintaining the choice of 'learning technology(ies)' that enable access to the formal learning offer.    Mandatory learning management: This is the work of developing, maintaining, tracking, and reporting 'completions' of an annual circular program of 'mandatory learning'. 'Marketing' management: This is the work of broadcasting the content in the program to encourage pe...

"We do not rise to the level of our goals. We fall to the levels of our systems." James Clear We know 'performance' in complex systems is interdependent, emergent, and connected.  This is a problem for the regular kind of corporate Learning & Development which is based on separation, compliance and a focus on individuals.

"What you see depends on what you thought before you looked." Myron Tribus Many organisations are running towards the ' Skills ' gold rush. In reality these ' Skills ' are still just a list of topics . This is inevitable as the L&D status quo is built around providing non contextual resources and courses which are managed as a separate entity to people's 'real' work. (The status quo persists because it still suits all parties). The missed opportunity when aligning around ' Skills ' is to break these into tasks - what people will do   better - when they can apply the ' Skill ' in practice . This opens the opportunity for the L&D team to refocus on enabling people to develop task competence that can improve their performance in context. This approach also bridges the ' too busy working to go and learn! ' stand off - as the shared focus (for L&D, managers, team members) is only on what's required to perform ...