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?
Tag: sustained capability
Leading Change to full adoption implies that we not only manage Change to deployment, we must continue to lead Change through implementation…and beyond to the desired goal of full adoption.
If your organization recognizes that true business results are won…or lost…@ the Point-of-Work, and a bold decision is under consideration to head up the mountain, meet me at base camp, and let’s kick around some ideas regarding the “climb” that lies ahead!
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.
Successful implementation does not equal full adoption. My point is simply this – being ready to deploy any manner of change is not the same as being at a state of readiness to implement effectively and ensure sustainable adoption across the user population. Both of those examples from my own experiences flash back when I think about the prospects of integrating EPS in any organization.
When a Performer confronts a “Do I cut the red wire or the blue wire” moment of need; logging into the LMS and searching for the reference knowledge buried in the “How to Disarm a Chorizo Sausage” eLearning course is not an option…especially when the fully-armed chorizo sausage they’re facing has a ticking timer attached. They simply need to know which wire to cut…NOW! That ain’t training!
STEP CHANGE is what we have left as an option when all the innovation that got us to where we are today has run its course. Sustained capability is the ultimate outcome we seek, and sustained capability is at the heart of a Performance Paradigm.
Implementing Embedded Performer Support [EPS] can be as daunting a task as eating an entire elephant. Not sure I’d ever want to eat an elephant, but if I did, it would be one bite at a time versus scarfing down the whole thing. One bite at a time rings true for implementing EPS as well. Keep in mind that EPS is not a technology [though technology may well be part of the effort]; EPS is a discipline.
I fear the L&D function…or Training…if you choose by another name, are locked into a paralysis of tradition. Tradition yields comfort and familiarity. Comfort and familiarity yield resistance to change…and in some cases even recognition that there could actually be a “change” that offers a viable alternative. There is no denying that some form of knowledge transfer is a requirement…no doubt about it, but the question I am so vocal about follows…and is outside of that field of vision, “Transfer to where?”
The point of work is a different, evolving venue for the consumption of learning assets, especially when we could consider mentor/mentee or apprentice/master craftsman relationships as “learning assets”. These different venues can be as “social” as they are downloadable asset-equipped. This evolution is a full 1,600-meter race, and the evolving venue has a ton of implications on the design, development, delivery, and/or accessibility of these assets. In fact, ADDIE needs to shed a few pounds and become more agile…producing content that is a little more nimble…a little more downstream-thinking in order to address the where, when, and how learning assets may be consumed.