Dave Pollard asks,
(a) How do you motivate and reward Continuous Learning in organizations?
(the "I'm to busy to learn about that" problem)
(b) Since everyone learns differently, how do you develop curricula that are
robust and flexible enough to serve at least most people?
(c) How do you deal with irascible senior executives who think that, because
they have been successful (by traditional short-focus measures) in business,
they don't need to learn new things (like how to use computers)?
(d) How do you strike the magic balance between specialized learning
(necessary to develop distinctive competencies) and generalist learning
(necessary to creativity, innovation and idea cross-pollination)?
== end quote ==
We are in the early stages of an experiment on learning within our
department. So far it seems quite successful. In the early stages, the
training program was met with a lot of skepticism. Our plan was to
present a short learning program Monday morning first thing. The learning
would be closely relevant to work being done by the learners during that
week. The environement is far too complex for that to be strictly true,
but it is close enough. As a consequence of the way the training is being
executed, the skepticism has been replaced with real enthusiasm. At lest
in the short term we seem to have successfully accomplished (a), (b), and
(d). It is far too soon to claim success, but here is what we have done.
First of all, management is very actively participating in the training.
It is not optional for anyone in the department. Managers are presenting,
they are leading small groups in discussion, and as managers they are
following up that very week to ensure the new skills are being tested. A
one-on-one follow-up discussion with every employee is required. This is
the maanger's chance to provide detailed assistance and to ascertain the
level of understanding achieved by the learner.
The training itself occurs at several levels, in this way appealing to
different learning styles. First, there is a short -- 30 minutes --
lecture and large group participation. Then 15-30 minutes for questions.
Then 45-60 minutes for small group discussion. The small groups are
organized very specifically to mix together experts with neophytes, and
people from all levels. Managers are interspersed, and are also paired
up, experts with neophytes.
At the training, individual experts are identified, people who have
volunteered to help people who need one-on-one training. Names and phone
numbers are posted. Throughout the week, managers meet individually and
with their own staffs as a group to discuss the learnings and how best to
use them. If the manager identifies someone who does not yet 'get it'
additional training is implemented with an expert or two.
Several things are particularly important. Management is actively
participating. They learn along with everyone else, and in many cases,
they provide the training. This ends up being a pretty powerful
demonstration that management knows the work that needs to be done, and it
helps solidify their credibility. New people don't have the history to
know that managers actually came up through the ranks. And that is an
important, subtle message of having managers present the training. We
promote from within. Managers all know how to 'do' because the 'did', and
that is one reason they got promoted.
Another important aspect is that we begin each training by reminding
everyone of the corporate purpose, the departmental purpose, and then
describe how the work that is the subject of the training helps us achieve
the purpose. This does not take long, perhaps 5 minutes, but it provides
the touchstone that validates the work we do. We considered and rejected
the notion of a separate training session on corporate and department
purpose. We decided it would be much more powerful to tie these to action
than to have stand-alone training on purpose.
Another important aspect is the multiple training formats. This really
helps provide the diversity so that people can find a teaching style that
meets their learning style.
The small group discussions provide learning at several levels. Experts
help neophytes, managers bring their perspectives, and people from
different areas get to exchange techniques with each other. This is the
most popular part of the program. This exchange process really facilittes
creativity.
It is short, but every week. It is focused, and it is clearly 'best
practices' to the best of our knowledge. It is for everyone. Even the
experts are learning from this.
This is oriented toward professionals, by the way.
--Rol Fessenden LL Bean, Inc. 76234.3636@compuserve.com
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>