Blog

Training Magazine’s Leadership Summit

94% of human resources professionals do not feel their personnel are adequately prepared to meet their companies’ future goals according to the State of the Global Talent Nation.  That number was 86% in 2007 and 64% in 2006…so it’s moving in the wrong direction.  The study was conducted by Softscape and discussed in CLO (Chief Learning Officer) Magazine.  A copy of the report is available by request through Softscape’s site.

The report looks at a variety of areas relating to human capital management.  I grabbed the following notable quotes that IMO reinforce the sense of urgency for reform in how learning and development is executed by most organizations:

1. Many HR professionals (35%) indicate that the majority of their employees have complex multi-function roles. This is also driving the need for more real-time employee development.
2. Most HR professionals (81%) say the lack of regular employee development opportunities is impacting overall employee retention.
3. Strategic HR functions are becoming more integrated and increasingly outsourced (41%). This includes functions for performance, compensation, succession, learning, and recruiting.

My thoughts…

#1  In an age of “complex multi-function roles” things change fast and formal training can’t carry the entire load.  With the pace that many organizations run and adapt, content is often obsolete upon receipt if it’s produced and distributed within the traditional timeline. 

This supports my belief that a change in how we define learning and development is needed before we can make significant strides in improving them.  First and foremost I see the two (learning and development) as two separate strategies with different definitions and distinct methodologies for executing successfully.

In the age of the knowledge worker, learning is more about providing easy access to necessary information than it is presenting content and hoping that it sticks around until the time it’s needed.  This is accomplished through incorporating social network analyses, communities of practice, a learning supply chain that can quickly distribute content on-demand (i.e. rapid elearning + SME), etc. into a diversified learning portfolio.  These more informal approaches better mimic how today’s workforce gets what they need - through their network and at the moment they need it. 

Development defined below…

#2  Development is long-term changes in mindset and/or behavior.  Many companies fall short of acheiving true development in their workforce because their tools consist of workshops and not much else.  Some companies tack on a personality assessment (i.e. DiSC, MBTI) but usually without any direct connection to how that information can be applied.  For true development to occur people must be given the opportunity to play with concepts, make decisions according to their new learning…they have to see the impact of their decisions and actions in order to drive new behavior.

Development programs rooted in action learning contain the elements needed for lasting change but they’re rare.  For the organizations that do leverage the power of action learning, they are not only exposing their teams to the best type of development possible, they’re also grooming leaders to perform at their best within the unique conditions of that organization and none other.

It’s these types of projects where participants feel real value and development - and therefore are more inclined to stick around.  If they feel the development they’re getting at your organization is better than what they would get elsewhere, you have a powerful retention tool.

#3  Another item mentioned in the report was the rise in learning outsourcing.  I take this as a sign that organizations are more and more seeing learning and development as strategic imperatives for success.  Expectations of learning and development have changed to the degree that traditional, formal training programs are no longer adequate on their own. 

Of course I’m biased but I do believe deeply that partnering with an external organization that is an expert in a service that isn’t your core function is a good idea in many scenarios.  This includes payroll, benefits, IT and of course…learning and development.  Outsourcing allows an organization to focus on their strengths while leveraging the core strengths of experts in fields that support their operation. 

Finally… 

The great news is that we’re watching an industry evolve.  Learning and development programs will look drastically different in just 10 years.  As workers that grew up on Facebook and MySpace enter the workforce they’ll have unique demands as we transition even further into becoming a knowledge workforce.     But we’re not there yet.

When I read that 94% of HR professionals felt they’re workforce wasn’t prepared to meet the company’s goals I was shocked at how high the number truly had gotten but, ultimately, wasn’t phased for too long.  We’re addressing 21st century challenges with a 20th century method and it’s not a fair fight.  The pace of business isn’t predicted to slow or revert anytime soon so guess who gets to adapt?

Corporate University Xchange has released a video interview of two OD practitioners from Health Net talking about their experience implementing a talent management system and process. 

The video is brief and high-level but shows an inside look at some of the discoveries, challenges and successes of such an approach.  If you are a fellow practitioner you will probably be modding your head in agreement with many of the messages - if you’re new to the field you may learn a few nuggets without having to endure the pain normally associated with those lessons.

I recently returned from my honeymoon in New Zealand.  Everywhere we went the toilets I encountered had two buttons on the top of them to instigate flushing instead of the one lever I am accustomed to seeing in the USA.  The two buttons were always distinct by way of some type of unique drawing or design on them - I didn’t know what they meant but someone was trying to tell me something.

Having ample opportunities for experimentation on a three week trip I tried them both on various occasions.  Sometimes the left one and sometimes the right.  Both flushed the toilet and without a noticeable difference.  My new wife and I had a couple quick conversations about the differences but, not being the ideal honeymoon conversation, I didn’t pursue it in much depth.  I did intend to ask natives about the differences, though, and never remembered at an appropriate time.

After three weeks you can imagine that I returned to a substantial mail pile.  After sorting through the requisite bills and junkmail, I was able to relax with my coveted arrivals…my magazines.  One of these was the Dec/Jan issue of Fast Company.

In an article titled “Feeding the Beast:  Sustainability is about more than eco-friendly burger boxes” John Ehrenfeld writes the following:

Such products exist today. My favorite example is the two-button toilet, still a rarity in the United States but increasingly popular in Northern Europe and New Zealand. In place of the usual single lever or button, the toilet offers two buttons or levers, one small and one large, actuating a smaller or larger flush volume. Beyond its obvious “green” credentials, this toilet actually forces users to engage with it on more than a utilitarian level, and to make a choice. It creates presence in place of mindlessness.

The timing was unbelievable.  After I got over the shock of coincidence, I was able to fully absorb John’s message.  Companies that simply give us ‘green’, although well intentioned, may not be having the impact they appear to be having.  Take cars that are more fuel-efficient - they’ve been shown to promote more consumption.  In order to make real progress we must involve people in the process.

Providing products that themselves are more efficient is only addressing one part of the problem - we must create points for interaction that force people to participate, allow them to make decisions and show them the impact of their choice.  This is a systems issue, where addressing one part of the problem won’t make it go away - the entire system that it operates in must be addressed.

This is the value of including elements of systems thinking and action learning in leadership/employee development programs.  In many development courses participants are just given tools - tools that have been successful with their peers or with other companies as ‘best practices.’

Programs that provide tools and then force participants to analyze the situation, scrutinize the tools, predict their impact and monitor results (a la action learning) are proven to make sustainable changes in people’s behavior and mindsets.  Including pieces on systems thinking forces participants to think through the potential results of a variety of actions.

It is only through these comprehensive methods that companies will enjoy lasting development.  So whether you’re trying to save the world or just improve the abilities of your workforce keep in mind that giving people the tools to do it isn’t enough - they need the chance to interact, make choices and see the impact of their choice - whether it’s a flush or a change in strategy.

I just realized that I tend to favor topics around learning in my posts when in my role I focus just as much on development.  For us at Orbital RPM we see learning and development as related but distinct.  Development is about changing mindsets and behaviors while learning is giving people access to the information they need to perform.

Years ago I was a ‘Leadership Development Consultant’ with a national consulting firm.  Our services offered to clients were basically workshops on various topics and our flagship ‘Leadership Institute.’ 

Once a month, the Leadership Institute hosted approximately 35 leaders for a 5-day retreat in the mountains of Colorado.  The participants that attended were usually very high-level and accomplished in their roles.  It was not uncommon for their expressions and body-language on Day 1 to be screaming, “You can’t change me.”

By the end of Day 5 it was often these initial nay-sayers that were crying in the closing circle about how powerful the week was for them.  After conducting countless follow-ups with participants when they returned to their role, though, it was apparent to me that their first reaction was accurate - we didn’t change them.

This is not a reflection on the design of the Leadership Institute.  I really do believe it was a powerful event for participants.  The problem was that it was just an event.  Without a process to sustain the learning, most new concepts will dissipate within a few days or maybe even weeks if the person was really moved.

Enter the concept of action learning.  Developed by Reg Revans back in the 1940’s, Action Learning begins with exposing participants to some fundamental concepts (as the Leadership Institute did) but that is just the beginning of a process.  Small groups of cross-functional participants are then charged with solving issues in their own organization.  As the workgroups go through the process of their assigned issue, a coach is present to ask questions and guide them back to the concepts they learned in the initial workshop or event.  It is through this process of application and reflection that the concepts in the intial workshop are embedded in participants.

General Electric uses action learning extensively at it’s famed Crotonville but why hasn’t it caught on to the masses?  I still see companies that take people on rafts, ropes and racecars in an attempt at leadership development.  I advise clients to see these activities as what they are…fun.  Nothing wrong with that but don’t expect people to come back a better leader. 

Where I believe there is value in these fun activities is as the kick-off to an action learning project.  It congeals participants and lets them get to know each other before embarking on their problem-solving and personal growth journey.

Don’t have the money for this much fun?  No problem.  Any group activity will do.  A conservation expert in Leadville, CO I met over the weekend told me that companies are starting to send groups to him that tackle a restoration project for a couple days.  It’s win-win because CO is that much more beautiful, the participants get the feeling of accomplishment and they’re tighter as a group.  The perfect ingredients to tackle a project back at the office.

If you’re in the market for a development program, do your homework.  The term ‘action learning’ has become diluted in much of the marketing literature that makes its way to my desk.  It seems that if an activity involves physical movement of any kind, someone will label it action learning.  Know what you’re buying - if it’s conducted all in a classroom and is over in a few days, there may be lots of action but expect little learning.