Yes, I tend to take a hard line on “performance” in the flow of work versus “learning” in the flow or work, but isn’t performance the ultimate outcome we seek? Learning is not the end game…it’s a by-product of enabling performance…while learning at the Point-of-Work and during moments of need. If I’m mistaken on this bent of mine, why is there a “70” in 70:20:10?
<Rant Warning> Here’s an icebreaker for the next C-suite pow-wow in your organization. With all the CXO roles present around the table, and each having a single sheet of paper, ask them to complete this sentence with one or two words. “I would characterize our organization as one operating in a culture of ___________.” Have […]
Performance support is anything that enables and/or accelerates speed-to-sustainable-performance, or speed-to-impact, or speed-to-productivity, or speed-to-competence, or speed-to-actionable-insight, or speed-to-any-damn-thing-that-drives-measurable-business-value.
Have we lost sight of the end-game? This old dog was raised with the notion pounded into his head that if L&D does not produce measurable BUSINESS IMPACT, our jobs were at risk for being active participants as expenses in a cost center. Being viewed as an “expense” is not a safe place to be when decisions are made as to who goes and who stays. Trust me, if the choice falls between a department generating positive business impact with one that is contributing expenses to the bottom-line, the decision is easily made.
Intentionality is borne out of perspective and scope, where in the traditional L&D sense…solution scope shapes perspective and/or limits relevance, effectiveness, and applicability at the Point of Work. Methinks that fact alone is enough to spark a step-change in L&D.
There is urgency to this step-change requirement that needs to address Moments of Need at the Point of Work when they manifest and where they manifest. Productivity and profitability are hard-wired into this mission-critical capability. These requirements are currently out of scope of the Training Paradigm regardless of the new training system technology implemented.
We cannot begin the effort by looking through a “training solution lens”. I can always build training IF NECESSARY. BUT…if emphasis is not first laser-focused on what solution output closes the performance gap(s) at Point-of-Work, the traditional default training solution may well be the wrong output.
My recent post “70:20:10 – Myth or Legend?” roused a few readers to offer up some really solid comments, and there were a few that left me feeling like I was at a NASCAR race and just shouted “Ford Rules!” Now if you’ve never been to a NASCAR race, let me tell you this about […]
As redundant as this next statement sounds, it represents the core of my position on this…
Performance support supports performance @ Point-of-Work…not training courses!
Enable learning and support within the workflow. Keep things moving; breaking the chain of concentration to launch a fire safety course in the LMS while my hair is on fire makes no sense. Give me 90-seconds of Stop Drop & Roll and then let’s get on with it.