What the article I’m referencing and comments I read made clear illustrate the gyrations we are heading into now with this “new” micro-learning approach. It will be easy to become distracted, so don’t get all raked up in a pile over what we call it…or how long it should be. It’s about what it can facilitate at the moment of need to get the DO done.
Category: Rants, Random Thoughts, & Ramblings
A colleague of mine described adopting a Performance Paradigm where Performance Support is fully integrated as “the project that never dies” and that’s not a bad thing, because if the paradigm dies, so do the performance benefits…and those benefits are tied directly to tangible, measurable business results.
Is there a difference between your onboarding process and the process of waterboarding? One uses water…and the other holds the new hire down and administers enough information at a continuous pace so they get the overwhelming sensation of drowning. Which one do you put your new hires through?
My grandfather had the reputation of being a good storyteller. I remember sitting at his feet with my sister as he would spin one of his yarns. His specialty was ghost stories, and I can hear them even now after so many years. I truly believe I’ve been blessed with the art of storytelling as well, though none so good as his. Actually, most of my training conference breakout sessions are built around stories, but none like I’ll share with you right now. Take a short break from corporate L&D and enjoy!
Is it 70:20:10 or is it 85:12:3? To answer this question I offer another question – “Who gives a rip?” – as long as the end-game drives sustained workforce capability. The correct ratio is only correct if the end-game is reached.
Sorry, but this had to happen sooner than later, and I don’t expect a tidal wave of agreement…a few ripples will do. Even early warning signs of a tsunami are as subtle as the tide slowly receding from the shore. Yeah, this is about Performance Support…you expected something different from me? Ain’t happenin’! I’m done filling sandbags to protect the institution of training. You’ll find me on a board swimming out to catch the wave of root causes.
Just-in-time is important and becoming more so, but is the just-in-time need we are trying to address with mobile technology based upon pushing Training content to an already overloaded workforce? Is it really? That’s just old school training methods pumped through a really cool new technology…and we’ve been down this road before.
More emphasis is needed in the downstream, post-training work context where Performers confront moments of need that do not conform to what we build storyboards to address. Transferring knowledge through linear learning is great for raising awareness, but sustained capability in the form of consistent performance results happens downstream at the point of work. That’s where the rules of engagement have changed.
With all the recent press performance support is getting…make that positive press…I’m noticing that we could easily slip into a best practice of admiring the problem of what to do about it. To be a bit less sarcastic, I must clarify that admiration of the problem is NOT a best practice, but it often seems like we manage to do it best.
Plucking is good. It’s happening at an ever-increasing pace. A technology savvy user population is asking for it by their actions. Isn’t that reason enough to shift our content design, development, and delivery models to match the need for the population that pays the rent on our training cost center? Methinks it is, and our [Training’s] paradigm is way over due for an evolutionary step toward the new ground zero for learning @ the point of work.