When the going gets tough the tough get going - applying it to Learning and Development

When recession set's in, training department budgets get slashed and sometimes, severed. The last few years have been challenging for all , except for those who thrive on complexity and uncertainity. Most training managers and professionals have responded in predictible lines - scaling down activity and meeting expense budget. Many chose to deploy technology and evaluated options to use Communication and collaborative tools to prevent non-classroom expenses like travel, board lodging etc. The technology companies have used this cycle to push in their products to highlight importance of trackeability ,measurement and content creation.

Are these examples of real innovation in L&D which can meet the needs of learning, and performance?

Learning manager of a small sized financial company in the USA has chosen to follow a unique approach. His mandate was to make learning and development integral with minimal or no cost. Using creativity, and leadership buy-in, a program was carved out for high potential talent development. The CEO mandate, was to ensure that performing talent especially senior management, is developed and retained. A program was designed for a 18 month duration which covered all subject and domain areas that was considered neccesary to groom these performers. The curricullum was designed by inhouse subject matter experts with executive management group taking lead incharge. Faculty was inhouse developed and the executive managers conducted these sessions (90 minutes duration) on a pre-scheduled calendar. A graduation ceremony concluded the program. Participants were selected by a screening process cmparable to a university admission program involving detailed response on the interest, essay writing and senior management interaction , manager recommendation,and a buzz got evolved. Did this porgram succeeed , the answer is premature for final impact , but some benefits did accrue:-

• The executive buy in was high as they themselves developed and delivered classroom sessions
• Mutual expectations of role and performance got clarified.
• Executives indicated that their line of thinking got clearer
• Potential awareness of people capability through classroom interaction
• Porgram buzz created competition for getting in the program
• People could align learning with everyday performance

ALL OF THIS AT A MARGINAL COST

Who says innovation does not exist ?

The person is Robert Friedman - Dean Learning and Development of Motley Fools

listen to him here

http://www.humanresourcesiq.com/video.cfm?id=348

Proficiency - a real measure of performance

A rough calculation indicates that for every hour of training , the final implementation in performance is less than 10% ,after 3 weeks, if transfer of learning to performance is not taken care of. In essence this is a frightening situation, that for every training dollar invested, the potential leakage is very high. What is the problem ?

Very often, the measures highlight the end result, e.g., Number of calls made, Satisfaction scores, and at higher management, the measures tend to be more summative. Since training, is an intervention for enhanced performance, measures pertaining to observed behaviour change do not get the attention, that it deserves. If a sales person's job is measured in terms of calls made, and the training intervention calls for an enhanced behaviour of pre-call planning for every call, a measure to check and report this behaviour may become more relevant over and above the call quantity report. Likewise , the behavorial competencies of the role may need to be profiled for potential performance.

From the time a person gets trained till the time proficiency sets in , their exists a gap. This can vary from a few months to some years depending on the job complexity. A systemic approach can help save costs and improve productivity. This stage calls for mapping a learning path, best suited for proficiency development. It calls for a blending of training, post training transfer of learning, supported by informal learning which is tailored to suit skill development, supported by a measurement system, which can track and measure the observable behaviour. The concept can draw some parallel with TQM , where, measures such as quality , cost and deilvery are used for measuring a process. Going further, the entire skill development from induction to proficiency can be measured with process control measures to monitor degree of control and variation. A path which can accelerate this capability can also be implemented using the same concept. It is high time that an end to end process that not only measures the results but also tracks the observable skills at various points , is implemented. This calls for taking the first step by getting the L&D folks trained in TQM.