Last week [October 25th] I had the distinct privilege of sitting in on the Tin Can API break-out session that was presented by Aaron Silvers of ADL. I’m not sure of his exact title, but his role was in a leadership capacity on the Tin Can API project. His business card says “the Beard”…and while that was accurate, I still don’t know his real title. Given ADL was also the birth mother of SCORM, I walked in and sat down with a preconception or two that this was SCORM in a new dress. Wow, was I wrong!
Tag: EPSS
Have you ever explained something to someone who is either hearing it for the first time or is still trying to get their head wrapped around the concept? You know how they will nod slowly in seeming agreement while looking off into the ether and saying dreamily, “Yeah…” really, really slowly?” That far-off look is confirmation that they are indeed interested and yet remain clueless for the most part. The room was full of those folks in the Tin Can break out session where I heard this new sound bite. I must confess now knowing enough to be dangerous and yet confident in the implications to the point of being way too excited to sit down.
When Einstein defined insanity as “Continuing to do what we’ve always done and expecting different results”, he was on the money. We continue to train with hopes that some form it…some technology enhanced venue of it…some exotic blend of it…is going to produce sustained capability that produces tangible business outcomes. Does training contribute to results? Sure it does, but does it sustain them? No, it cannot. It was never chartered nor was it scoped to do so.
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.
Paradigm shift? Methinks this evolution is going to make more noise than a dramatic shift of thinking. My only hope is that training organizations hear the noise and embrace the implications of new skills and integration of learning @ the point of work before they hear another sound – the firing squad blasting away at their training budget.
A recent post “Evolving Training Into the Perfect Hole” brought a comment to me that I could really identify with as being a key challenge – justification for seriously considering learning @ the point of work. I find it stunning that the concept of learning @ the point of work is such a hard sell, especially when you consider that opportunities to learn and moments of potential failure happen at the same time…and very often in the same place – @ the point of work. Better training…or more training…have little-to-nothing to do with justification. What could you possible justify in the absence of real risk?
Having been a Sales Trainer, Sales Training Manager, and Director Sale Training in a couple of previous lives, I nearly jumped out of my chair when I read a blog post by a new networking contact, David Brock. Dave authors a blog, Partners in Excellence, and his post of December 7th “Let’s Put an End to Product Training” triggered a wee bit of a dance…not really, but I did unleash a couple mental fist-pumps. First-hand experience and many many road miles confirm how wasteful product training can be. I must add, it is not “What we train” as much as it is ‘How we train it.” Sales reps certainly need product knowledge, but the ability to spew features and promise of intangible benefits at a prospect is a waste of time and energy to both parties.
When do you abandon a vision? How many times can you run into a wall before deciding to stop trying to get over, under, or around it? Have you ever reached a level of frustration that caused you to ask yourself questions like these? Attempting to usher in Change, especially the kind that smacks of innovation can prompt these questions if the Change is not properly positioned. Innovation can feel threatening when introduced as new technology or new methodology. Selling Change successfully redirects emphasis from the solution to the impact anticipated from it.
There’s no denying, that for some businesses LMSs are essential, but they cannot singularly represent holistic technology solutions that hope to sustain dynamic learning ecosystems. Any learning technology solution [LMS or not] should support continuous learning and workforce performance in the “work context”. Establishing learning continuum methodology is foundational to both clarify and plot implementation road maps that define discrete technology solutions. Doing anything less is equivalent to re-arranging deck furniture on the Titanic.
Sunday morning I stumbled over a post in one of the community groups I follow on LinkedIn. The question put to the community asked about the use of performance support. The author referenced hearing a lot of buzz lately about performance support, but there was not much evidence of success stories short of application to computer systems training. I had to agree, and I believe there is a purely business reason for that – it is called protecting competitive business advantage.