Escape the Learning Time Warp & Embrace the Revolution!
When I look at Learning and Development I sometimes wonder if we are stuck in a time warp. Let me explain.
Fads come and go. Technologies change. But the way people are learning has really stayed the same throughout history. We transitioned through the talk and chalk of the seventies and eighties to the modern adult learning principles of facilitation and learner led learning.
Isn’t it time for a fresh look at modern day learning?
Are you ready for a revolution?
I believe the biggest win for learning will be when we, as a profession, take ownership for behavioural change post learning. Currently in most organisations the L&D team supply the content and the facilitation to enable the skills to be demonstrated. Whether they are used or not back in the job on a regular basis is up to the manager to deliver. This idea of management responsibility was introduced by Broad and Newstrom(1992), who suggested that after the training, the manager was the top element critical to successful learning transfer. It was also touched upon by Huczynski& Lewis (1980), who found that the “the management style and attitudes of the trainee’s boss were found to be the single most important factor in management training transfer.”
But haven’t we been trying to get that model working since the nineties with very limited success? This is the timewarp where we have an opportunity to revolutionise modern day learning.
McKinsey& Company are prolific reviewers in the area of training and learning and they wrote an interesting article in 2010 where they found that only 25% of managers surveyed felt training programs measurably improved business results.
This was followed up in 2014 by McKinsey who looked into ‘Why leadership-development programs fail’. Clearly their research is showing us that we have a problem.
As Learning and Development professionals it is essential that we contribute to business results to remain relevant.
I question that if as an industry we aren’t creating positive business changes post learning then what are we doing? And why should we have an increased budget? ‘Enter-train-ment’ certainly isn’t the field I aspire to be making a difference in.
Many organisations have tried for years to get a higher level of manager engagement to the learning process – some have succeeded, many have not. Interestingly it’s almost a chicken and egg scenario – until learning contributes towards business outcomes the managers don’t want to engage and yet we believe until managers get involved, learning can’t contribute to business outcomes. The level that managers can contribute and embed the learning all depends on the maturity and current capability of the organisation. But, immaturity and capability are not reasons to not get the post learning change happening regardless.
The belief that “it is the managers role to work with the participant post learning to create change and deliver outcomes” is a myth that limits our thinking.
Let us embrace new thinking as Learning and Development professionals, and own the behavioural change post learning. And hey, let’s own or share the success of the business outcomes that will come with it too.
How?
By creating a robust learning transfer process.
The cry is “I don’t have the resources! How can I – as a single person – do that?”
Some simple analytics will help you build your case as to ‘the who’ (and whether that is you, the manager, an internal team or external specialists) that supports the process.
• How many people need to change post the learning initiative?
• What time per person needs to be invested in learning transfer (not additional content!) POST the content?
• What numbers do we need to track with in this?
• Who in the organisation has the time and the resources?
Once you start to show a change of initiatives the business will start to sit up and take notice and then you can work closer within the business for future programs.
What’s needed within a robust Learning Transfer process:
The fundamental requirement is self-reflection. While this sounds soft and fluffy (and a luxury for many) you must dig deeper and ensure the reflection has three key elements:
• Specific – to the individual, not as a group, it’s about them being honest with themselves and their context.
• Structured – focusing on the actions they have committed to implementing post learning. Self-rating on a scale of 1-10 is an easy way to capture information as a start point and to help structure the reflection.
• Accountable – supporting the individuals to hold themselves accountable to themselves prioritising their learning and implementation of changes for long term gains and business outcomes.
The most important of those three is accountability. In today’s complex adaptive systems that many organisations are, where people are moving away from the old command and control style of leadership, accountability has become a bit of a dirty word. I feel there is need for a fresh look at how we view accountability. Let’s focus on holding the individuals accountable to themselves. This will create the most profound, powerful and sustainable change. It is essential and fundamental to the Learning Transfer process.
As we talk more and more about Learning Transfer the discussion will come up of internal vs. external, face-to-face vs. phone vs. online… time for a whole new article! My preference is that whoever delivers it; it is by phone – even if it’s internal.
I could say so much more on the subject! And often do. Feel free to comment below or contact me. I’m happy to engage in conversations and share our experience. Most importantly – I encourage you as a Learning professional to be bold and step up to the ownership of change post learning. When the results start to come in you’ll be delighted and proud you did.