Blog

I recently spent a weekend in Washington D.C. to make a vacation out of the inaugural CLO Academy that was being held in Lansdowne, VA.

It was a quick trip in D.C. so we were rushed to see the major sites. We started at the National Archives building where they have on display the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence along with access to countless other historical documents.

While up close and personal with these very elaborate and elegant documents, I wondered what the process would have been had our country been formed when the Founding Fathers had access to some of today’s Web 2.0 tools that we’re now using for learning and collaboration.

Imagine Benjamin Franklin and John Adams developing their ideas for the Constitution on a wiki, Thomas Paine keeping citizens informed about the American Revolution via his blog rather than the pamphlet ‘Common Sense’ or all of the Founding Fathers forming a community of practice that keeps in touch about their progress via an online portal.

What they would have gained in efficiencies back then is perhaps what we would have lost in enjoyment today. It’s tough to imagine throngs of people gathered around and craning their necks to sneak a peek of the final wiki page of the Constitution. Would John Hancock’s digital signature have the same impact as the pen and ink version does?  Probably not.

Don’t mistake my tone, though.  I’m all for these Web 2.0 tools and enjoy the efficiency they bring to offices and homes each day.  It just seems that the more efficient we get, the less that opportunity for nostalgia exists. 

On the other hand, perhaps these advacements will serve to make the historic documents all the more rare as times go by so that in several decades our societies will just appreciate the fact that they’re on paper - let alone written by hand.  If this serves to create more awareness and interest in our history, I say that’s one more benefit of the progress we’re making.

I am part of the inaugural class of both the CLO Academy and the CLO Institute and am summarizing my experiences to date through a comparison and contrast of the two programs for anyone that is considering attending either or both.

As I’ve said before, kudos to the founding members of both for elevating the status and visibility of the Chief Learning Officer role in organizations.  I am of the opinion that we are amidst a transformation in the way that organizations can use learning and development to enhance the performance of their company.  This isn’t done by putting people through more content and more training sessions - it’s done by giving people access to the information they need to succeed or helping develop new skills or mindsets for success.  Chief Learning Officers are the people to make that happen.

I’ll start the review with a bit of background.  The CLO Institute was the first to market.  I received word of it in November of 2005 and attended classes in January of 2006.  I heard of the CLO Academy in May of 2006 and attended the first class in September of 2006.

The CLO Institute was started and is heavily led by Doug Harward - the founder of TrainingOutsourcing.com.  This is an important detail as some of the content is influenced and benefits from his expertise.  The CLO Academy was started by the team at MediaTec Publishing; also the creators of Chief Learning Officer Magazine. 

Format - How the two programs approach the development of learning leaders

• CLO Institute:  The CLO Institute has different Learning Programs for participants to choose from.  They include a Certified Chief Learning Officer (CCLO), a Certified Learning Strategist (CLS) and a Certified Learning Architect (CLA).  Participants take classes according to which Learning Program they select.  Once all classes for a Learning Program are completed, participants must do a real-world project in order to be certified.  Currently all classes are conducted face-to-face although they mentioned that on-line classes will be held in the future.
• CLO Academy:  The CLO Academy also has choices to make.  Theirs are Certification Tracks [cannot embed a direct link] and are called Learning Leadership, Learning Effectiveness and Learning Management.  The CLO Academy begins with a 2.5 day face-to-face session (called a Colloquium) regardless of which Track is selected and then all following Track-specific courses are conducted on-line through a partnership with Capella University.

Content and Style

• CLO Institute:  The CLO Institute classes were that…classes.  We were instructed from 9-5 and then went to our respective hotels to return the next day.  This is not all a complaint, though.  In an environment where people are hungry for the knowledge I don’t think presentations are all that bad.  The classes were small enough that we could ask questions at any point. The advantage of this format is that we received a lot of great information. The CLO Institute helps learning leaders view and analyze learning as an investment; this requires a good deal of foundational content for participants and that’s what they provided.  The CLO Institute is where I was began to apply concepts such as net present value (NPV) and economic value added (EVA) to learning expenditures.  The disadvantage of their format was the lack of informal networking and peer-to-peer collaboration.  To their credit, the CLO Institute has since set-up a place on their site as an on-line resource for the community of past participants.
• CLO Academy:  The CLO Academy Colloquium was a very different experience from the first classes of the CLO Institute.  We were borderline sequestered on the sprawling campus of the Conference Center in VA.  I ate all of my meals with participants and faculty and joined them for drinks and conversation in the late evening.  For the informal learning and relationships between peers and with faculty, the CLO Academy has it nailed. Most of the CLO Academy was in a ‘case-based’ environment.  This was a term I heard there which basically meant we had an in-depth interactive case study that we were put into that mimicked a real company.  As I put in an earlier post, the components of the case study need a little tweaking in order to be completely relevant for a learning executive.  Once these are made I’m sure it will be much more satisfying for participants.  The great part about the case study, though, was that our stellar faculty rotated among teams and gave some insight into their roles and specific methodolgy.  I did take away some nuggets from their informal talks that were not directly related to the case study.The CLO Academy also had three formal lectures from the faculty.  I had many ideas validated in the lectures but the agenda was so tight that we only had time for about two questions total following each of the structured presentations.  Some faculty were available during evening ‘fireside chats’ and meals which provided an opportunity to ask follow-up questions but I would have preferred more time with them in the front of the room for a Q/A. In terms of content and new ideas, I haven’t gotten much (yet) from the CLO Academy.  In their defense, though, the Colloquium was to establish the basics that will be built on by the on-line Capella courses (which for me begin in January due to my vacation).  According to the literature, the purpose of the Colloquium was to “provide a solid foundation for the shift from tactical to strategic thinking.”  I think that the CLO Academy is making a dangerous assumption that all participants are walking in as tactical thinkers.  At least that is how the messages were delivered to participants - that we would make this transition to being strategic thinkers.  Even if this is true for the majority of participants, I don’t know that people want to be told so outright because most people would probably like to think of themselves as strategic. 

 Faculty

• CLO Institute:  The CLO Institute went for variety.  They want to expand the view of learning professionals to include CFOs, COOs, etc. so they brought that expertise into the classroom.  Our presenter for “Level 6: Beyond ROI” was a financial consultant that happened to know about learning expenditures.  She was on a mission to teach us to speak to CFOs and I appreciated that perspective.
• CLO Academy:  The CLO Academy went for star-power.  If you want to interact with and hear from some of the top CLOs and learning executives in the field, this is the place for you.  I had one-on-one conversations with learning executives from Microsoft, General Mills, IBM, EDS, EMC, Delta and Defense Acquisition University.

All in all, I felt that both programs were well worth my time and money.  They were both very different and each had their unique advantages.  I hope that the above review helps anyone trying to determine which to attend.  Please write with any specific questions if you’re still struggling with your decision or are just curious.

Days 2 & 3 of the CLO (Chief Learning Officer) Academywere excellent.  We spent most of our time working through a case study as teams in separate rooms while CLOs and Learning Executives rotated throughout the rooms.  At the end of Day 3 (a half day), all groups presented on their portion of the case as the facilitators observed and then gave their thoughts at the end.

The case study will need some tweaking before the next group of participants arrives but this was the first time it had been conducted - and something as complex as what they assembled is not easy to pull off the first time.  With some slight modifications it will be an outstanding exercise. 

We had another fireside chat on Evening 2.  This time there wasn’t a moderator.  There were several of the facilitators present and they all took turns asking questions and interacting with the group. 

I talked to all fellow participants and most of the faculty one-on-one at some point.  I was able to discuss some very specific topics I had questions about.  As with most conferences, the informal learning that took place between sessions is where I personally got the most value. 

As promised in a past post, I am compiling a compare/contrast look of the CLO Institute and the CLO Academy - it will appear in my next entry.

I have just returned to my room after the first day of the CLO Academy in Lansdowne, VA.  The sessions started at 5pm so I’ve only seen a glimpse of what we’re we will be experiencing but so far so good.

At the orientation session we were told that our time here will largely be playing the role of consultant’s with a fictitious firm.  I don’t know much more about it yet but if I did I wouldn’t write about it - you’ll have to experience it for yourself. 

Following orientation we were introduced to Frank J. Anderson who is the President of Defense Acquisition University.  Frank talked about his experience at DAU and how he has guided this organization (with a budget of $120 billion - yes billion) to be a world-class learning organization.  His stories and examples were amazing yet somehow easily understandable to an audience that cannot comprehend overseeing a budget, staff and responsibility the size of Frank’s.  I was thilled to hear Frank mention terms such as Communities of Practice and Action Learning - he told the group he had not come from a learning and development background but had surrounded himself with people that were experts in it - he clearly selected a talented team.

CLO Academy is really taking advantage of the informal learning opportunities here.  During dinner I ate at a small table with other participants and with a faculty member that is also a learning executive with Microsoft. 

The final activity was a ‘Fireside Chat.’  A voluntary session where we sat in a circle, drank wine and did a freeform exchange of ideas from all of our different sets of experience.  Frank Anderson loosely led the discussion but the group largely set the course of what we talked about. 

More to come from me - but not tonight.  It’s late and I still have my consulting homework to do…

In an e-seminar hosted by CLO Magazine yesterday, presenter Josh Bersin of Bersin and Associates facilitated a talk titled, “Increasing the Strategic Value of Learning Organizations.”  You can find the slides here - the recording should be available here shortly.

Note: If you wish you had known about this e-seminar, we keep an up-to-date calendar on Orbital RPM’s site where you can search for events (big as small) throughout the learning and development field and send reminders directly to your calendar or email.

There are many good nuggets of information contained in Josh’s talk but in the interest of focus I will highlight one.  Bersin and Associates is known for their quantitative research in the field of learning and development and the statistics from one of Josh’s slides was intriguing to me.

The following percentages indicate how much more effective or efficient organizations were (in the areas listed) that have a highly effective Cheif Learning Officer (CLO) in their ranks:

• Partnering with Lines of Business: + 12%
• Measuring the Impact of Learning: + 20%
• Developing Innovative e-Learning: + 14%
• Sharing Best Practices: + 15%
• Making the Most of Resources: +12%
• Developing High Job Satisfaction: +10%

These numbers are compelling.  As the strategic role of learning and development continues its climb up the ranks of organizational credibility, it’s studies like these that will give it a boost.  Everybody loves data and these are numbers that any Executive would like to see.

I stumbled across the site Word Spy today which tells about the first uses of new words or terms.  They list the earliest use of the official term ‘Chief Learning Officer’ as being in 1993 with the following quote:

“So, just as some companies have a vice-president for total quality or an officer in charge of safety, Argyris explains, the CEO decided to have an executive in charge of organizational learning. He divided the HR function into two sets of tasks: record-keeping tasks and other duties that could be placed in a database, and tasks that involved employee education and retraining. The latter functions were to become the purview of a chief learning officer.”
—George F. Kimmerling, “A place at the top for trainers,” Training & Development, March, 1993

I also learned about such terms as ‘wikiality‘, ‘fridge Googling‘ and ‘peoplerazzi.’

Word Spy is worth a peek for a quick brain break.

In a Chief Learning Officer magazine article titled “People, the Neglected Part of Technology”, author David Miller explains his perspective on how learning and knowledge management should be integrated with the implementation of new technologies, such as a new ERP package (i.e. SAP).  He even provides a specific statistic from the Gartner Group that says, “when 17 percent of the total program budget is spent on these initiatives the chances of success go up significantly.”

I found David’s points to be applicable beyond tech implementations and to all of organizational learning.  I like reading articles where I find myself subconsciously nodding my head in agreement as I read and that happened numerous times throughout this article.

David calls on the combination of the usuals for learning such as “telling the learner, showing the learner and letting them try” and adds to that the elements that will support the more informal channels that allow people to build on what was formally designed for them.  He suggests strengthening the network, cultivating communities of practice and providing just-in-time access to information that people can call upon at the moment it is needed. 

Doing the above creates what David calls a “culture of shared experiences” allowing organizations to capture the often elusive tacit knowledge of how work really gets done.  This results in people having access to the information they need as opposed to “sterile, clinical information found in manuals and training courses.”  This concept can be applied to any training, regardless of the topic.

Follow David’s advice and you’ve got the diverse learning and development portfolio that will do more than just allow you to implement technology effectively - it will put you on the fast track to being a true learning organization.  How will you know if you’ve done it correctly?  David advocates the use of a balanced scorecard for establishing and assessing the metrics associated with the learning initiative (nod, nod).

I am officially registered to be part of the first-ever class to attend the CLO Academy. 

The CLO Academy begins with a Colloquium from September 10-12 in Virginia.  They have announced the faculty and I’m intrigued:

Colloquium I: September 10–12, 2006
Frank Anderson, President, Defense Acquisition University
Ted Hoff, Vice President, Learning, IBM
Bob Mosher, Director, Learning & Strategy Evangelism, Microsoft
Chris Hardy, Strategic Planner, Defense Acquisition University
Thomas Clancy, Chief Learning Officer, EMC
Bill Kline, former CLO, Delta Airlines
Kevin Wilde, Vice President/CLO, General Mills
Keith Bridges, Chief Learning Architect/Global Workforce Management/Technical Development, EDS

I’ll be blogging from the event so check back here on those dates if you cannot join us.

A dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow.

This is the basic underpinning to the concept of Net Present Value (NPV) in finance.  Given the option, businesses are going to want their money in their own hands until the last possible second.  The more time a company can hold on to their money, the more of a return the money can generate for the company. 

This is the reason for some magazines offering subcriptions that steadily reduce as the years go on if you pay for them today.  They want that money now!  Even if it’s less than the full subscription you would have paid in three years, they would rather have it today to improve cashflow, invest, etc.

We discussed NPV in the Level 6: Beyond ROI class while I was at the CLO Institute in January.  Ever since then I’ve been playing with the idea of NPV and how it relates to methods of learning that don’t fall under the category of ‘traditional.’ 

I decided to write after reading the July edition of Education Signals.  One section of the report was about the ’Top 20 Companies in the Training Outsourcing Industry’ that is compiled by TrainingOutsourcing.com.  In it, the authors share the following data points:

“The largest percentage of revenue from the leading players came from content development (35%) and training delivery (30%) services.”

Content design/development obviously comes at or near the beginning of a training outsourcing initiative.  That means that over 1/3 of the money of contracts is in the hands of the training supplier soon after the project begins.    

If I were in a position to be hiring a training outsourcing firm, I would look for a deal where the fees weren’t so front-loaded.  I would want to keep my money as long as I could and let it make more money for me. 

Enter informal learning (i.e. communities of practice, blogs, wikis, podcasts, etc.).  As illustrated in this post from Jay Cross, and as others have been preaching, much of learning doesn’t come from ‘content.’  It comes through the informal and unscheduled channels of an organization.

Informal learning may have an additional advantage.  Since there isn’t near the level of design/development required for informal methods as there is for more formal events such as workshops and e-learning modules, a company that was buying these services from an outsourcing company would pay less up front.  This allows them to keep their money longer and let it make more money for them.

Although I’ve only cited one report that I’m basing this post on, I came from the instructional design world.  We charged crazy fees (usually way more than 35% of the total contract) for design/development at my old firm and that was the first thing the client paid for.  I also realize that there is a need for some structured content in a company’s learning and development plans - I just think it should be provided in minimal chunks.

I’m suggesting services that would be a double win for companies purchasing training outsourcing.  With more informal elements in the mix to create a more diverse learning portfolio the client would not only receive more effective learning and development, they would pay less up front and get to make money from the money that they would have spent on instructional design and development fees.

Note:  I’m consciously not addressing the area where training outsourcing firms make the second most amount of money - the 30% from delivery of training services.  Informal learning, by nature, requires less delivery than its traditional counterpart.  For this post, though, I wanted to emphasize the benefits of not paying design/development fees up front.

I have subscribed to Chief Learning Officer Magazine nearly since its inception.  In the July 2006 issue, there was a brochure touting the launch of the CLO Academy.

Back in November of 2005 I received an email from a different organization announcing the launch of the CLO Institute.

If nothing else, it is exciting to see the visibility and credibility that is being given to the strategic role that learning leaders can play in organizations.  Beyond that, though, I’m curious as to how the CLO Academy and the CLO Institute will differ in their approach to developing leaders of strategic learning.

I took the first three classes ever offered by the CLO Institute in January and am currently working on the client project required for certification.  The classes were very insightful and well worth my time. 

The CLO Academy opens its doors in September and I plan to be in attendance.  Check back for a compare and contrast of how these two institutions approach this much needed track for professionals in the learning community.