Mentoring as a Leadership Development Tool
Too often companies see mentoring as a “program” that takes away from the “business” of making money. It’s another thing “to do” on one’s already packed list of action items. BUT when done as a normal course of business, it’s not onerous and pays back exponentially.
In fact, a recent study found that 58% of new-hires who had been assigned mentors felt valued by their immediate manager and 68% felt more valued by the organization.
It’s natural to assume that the mentee gains the most benefit from the mentoring relationship since they are the recipient of new knowledge and skills, but in fact benefits abound - to the mentee, the mentor, and the organization itself.
Mentees
Mentees benefit immediately from higher performance and productivity, increased job satisfaction, higher morale, increased visibility with people in higher levels and more insight into a career path. In the long-term, the mentee benefits from having a non-judgmental and unbiased champion in their corner. They get candid feedback without repercussions, insight in to the workings of the organization, and personalized guidance regarding the skills they should develop or the choices they could make to further their career.
Mentors
Mentors also report increased job satisfaction because they feel valued and are able to give back to their organization. Additionally a mentor benefits from fresh perspectives due to new relationships and develops their own leadership skills.
The Organization
Benefits to the organization include enhanced teamwork, communication across vertical and horizontal boundaries, an efficient transmission of knowledge and skills, stronger organizational culture, and being seen as an employer of choice.
Here is an idea for establishing an
absolutely free
mentoring program at your company:
A mentor asks high-gain questions, gives constructive feedback, and helps the more junior associate to recognize and capitalize on their strengths and weaknesses - that's a pretty simple “task” to accomplish over lunch.
Why not monthly mentor lunches? Instead of sitting with one’s normal group of friends at lunch, at least once a month a junior person and more senior person meet up in the cafeteria for lunch. (Twice a month would be ideal.)
Maybe once a year the company can buy the lunch as a reward for those pairs that have continued their relationship throughout the year. A public “mentor appreciation day” will get attention from those not participating - and encourage more participation!
= = = = =
By building relationships and networks within the organization, mentoring strongly impacts retention. An organization that utilizes mentoring is preparing for the future of its people as well as the organization as a whole.
FREE Developmental Assessments
Self Management is Key to Leadership Development
One of the hallmarks of a good leader is the ability to "manage" oneself. In other words - stay grounded, communicate well, use emotion in a positive way, etc. Unfortunately most folks learn self management skills through trial and error - sometimes through life changing and career ending moves, such as Carter Cast's. But it doesn't have to be that way. Developing self awareness can be achieved through various assessments to help one to identify their values, their tendencies and their strengths - in order to mitigate or improve upon them. Here are a few FREE assessments to get you started.
Managing Stress and Burnout
Gretchen Rubin researches what makes people tick, and is a prolific author of her findings. Her assessment The 4 Tendencies helps individuals to understand how they respond to expectations. It explains why we act and why we don't act; and is helpful in managing stress and burnout.
Capitalize on Your Strengths
The High5Test is part Clifton Strengths (formerly Strengths Finder) and part Values in Action. Both assessments, as well as the High5, seek to determine what one is good at and then lead individuals to capitalize on and develop what it is they do well, rather than struggle trying to improve in areas they are weak.
What are your Character Strengths?
Developed by Christopher Peterson and Martin Seligman in 2004, the Values in Action assessment (VIA) seeks to identify one's character strengths. You'll see results in domains such as Wisdom, Tenacity, Courage, Temperance, and more.It is one of the most well-researched personality assessments holding validity over time, cultures and scientific peer review. The website offers two assessments - one personal, to develop self-knowledge and introspection, and one professional, to help you to bring out the best in others.
Core Values / How You View the World
The Core Values Index (CVI) from Taylor Protocols helps individuals to understand the unique perspective from which they view the world. From that they are able to extrapolate how they will respond to life's challenges. Directed inward, the CVI helps an individual to make choices that align with their core values - leading to a sense of mission, purpose, and self-confidence.
Who "Gets" Leadership Development?
Why Not Everyone?
A question we are frequently asked - and frequently wrestle with in conjunction with new clients is - who "gets" to attend thinking skills / leadership development? It's a tough question to answer because on the one hand, the logical answer is "everyone." Why wouldn't you want everyone in the organization to work smarter, make good decisions, understand the vision and mission of your organization, etc.? On the other hand, unless you are a small company of 150 people or less, that would be a prohibitively expensive endeavor. So the tough question is - how do we make the cut? Who makes the cut? Here are some "arguments" - none is "the best."
Argument #1
As stated in the headline - why not everyone? Simple things - not full blown curriculums - could be enmeshed in everyday work responsibilities (much like Google's now defunct 20% time). Sending a business / industry article out each week via email, or leaving copies of it on the lunch tables, can help to ensure everyone has the same industry knowledge. By leaving articles on the lunch tables, spontaneous discussions can begin about the content and merits of the article. Managers can hold short, 20 minute, meetings two days after the articles are issued asking for feedback or questions about the article.
To help managers, the department that issues the article can include 3 or 4 discussion questions they'd like the employees to focus on. This article sharing can be rotated throughout the organization. Much like "it's your week for carpool," it could be "your week for article sharing."
Let's say your company works in manufacturing or healthcare - while there are plenty of articles about the industry itself, there are department-specific articles as well - manufacturing operations, healthcare marketing, etc.
This is just one small and easily do-able activity that can be rolled out throughout the organization. Why not increase the knowledge and capabilities of all your employees?
Argument #2
Focus on leaders in the organization. We've spent so many years making individuals experts (through training) in their fields that they often don't have a big picture view of their organization or their role. Sales Managers often don't appreciate the need for profitability which is a finance-department focus. Charge nurses often don't appreciate customer service which is an operations (and accreditation) focus. By directly impacting the thinking skills and thereby the leadership skills of leaders in an organization there will be an immediate and beneficial impact on the departments that they run and the individuals that they manage.
Argument #3
Include all new hires - starting now. If everyone who joins your organization is indoctrinated into a thinking curriculum from day one, they will grow in to your (smartest) future leaders. Over a planned development process of 3 years, 5 years, or 20 years, you will have an organization chock-full of individuals who not only understand how the organization is run (because they will have had linear exposure to the organization), but they will also be knowledgeable and skilled in critical business topics such as communication, teamwork, risk management, continuous improvement, fiscal management and much, much more.
Because they have been brought-up in cohorts (The Training Doctor's branded design), they will have relationships and the ability to communicate with other departments and individuals in other disciplines.
The choice for every individual company will be different. Increase everyone's skills just a little bit? Deep dive for leaders who will return the most immediate ROI? Or plan a long-tail approach to enmesh employees in "lifetime" development to create a leadership pipeline?
Mea Culpa - Is it really better to ask for forgiveness?
The number of “apology ads” I’ve seen on TV in the last month is astounding. It’s caused me to wonder – as a company, is it really better to ask for forgiveness from your customers than to do the right thing, or behave the right way, to begin with? Is the message we are learning “do your own thing, until you get caught, and then apologize and carry on as usual?”
Wells Fargo is apologizing for violating our trust by opening over 2 million fake accounts in order to hit their sales goals. One of their ads (seen here) begins by saying “We know the value of trust…” later in the commercial they promise they are “holding ourselves accountable to find and fix issues proactively…” Finally, they declare that they are halting the business process (sales goals for branches) that caused the bad-behavior in the first place.
Facebook apologized for unknowingly allowing the personal information of tens of millions of users to be leaked and/or manipulated by advertising; possibly impacting the 2016 US elections. In their apology ads the company says it will do “more” to make you feel safe and protect your privacy.”
In Uber’s apology ad, the new CEO, Dara Khosrowshahi , looks straight in to the camera and says “we have new leadership and a new culture.” He states that as a company, “one of our values is to always do the right thing.” Is that a new thing, which started with you, Dara? Or was that always in place but now you’ll take it seriously?
Apologies that Miss the Mark
Wells Fargo stating it has ended the business process that caused the “problem” is simply addressing the symptom – what is the root cause of an organization that is unethical, views cheating as necessary to maintain one’s job, and has little regard for its customers?
In the case of Facebook and Uber, their ads don’t even really claim responsibility; they simply say “Oops, something went south. We’ll fix it.” And Uber’s “responsible CEO” made no appearance at all – they sent out the new guy to apologize for past transgressions.
Here’s Rolling Stone’s take on the limp apologies:
Hi, America. We were awesome for a long time. Here are some culturally representative shots of people like you smiling and enjoying our services. After repeated denials, we recently had to admit to violating your trust, but the unelucidated bad thing doesn’t have to come between us. We promise: we fixed [all] that. You will now wake up feeling refreshed in 3,2,1…
The Burning Question
What role did leadership play in creating these damages in the first place? And what role could leadership development play to get these companies back on track? Teaching individuals to be better leaders after the fact is not the best approach; what about the future leaders of these companies? When does their development begin? And more broadly, of course, the future leaders of any company, because a scandal or business transgression could indeed happen to any company.
Go Forward
A multi-faceted leadership development curriculum – offered over the long-term, to everyone in the organization – would benefit from a groundswell of workers who understand ethics, risk, team work, communication, self-management and more. If companies are not solely reliant on leaders to set the course, then everyone is a leader. That’s what we need going forward.
Developing the Solid 70
When your organization decides who gets training – who gets chosen? In terms of performance, employees can be classified as A players, B players and C players.
A players are your superstars – and make up only 20% of the typical staff. C players – those whose performance is passable but not great – make up another 10%.
The bulk of employees are B players – the solid 70. B players are the heart and soul of organizations. They do consistently good work. They represent your company – and your success. When a customer has an interaction with your company there is a 70% chance they are dealing with a B player. You want your B players to be the best they can be. Too often companies have such limited availability of training that it goes to the A players.
If you’d like to develop your solid 70, you can find a number of suggestions in this earlier posting. But it doesn’t have to be your responsibility to figure it out! During the next round of performance reviews (assuming your company still does them) ask individuals what they are interested in, what they would like to attempt or test, and what skills they would like to develop.
No matter how good your A players are, they will never make up for the “solid citizen” B players. And the more you can incrementally increase the B player’s skills, the more your organization will benefit.
Can You Develop Emotional Intelligence?
Emotional intelligence (EI) is one of those “sciences” that might be the key to success., or it might be a bunch of hooey. Who’s to know? While it might be hard to define emotional intelligence (although I have below, keep reading) we definitely know when it isn’t being exhibited. A three year old lying on the floor screaming “Nooo” lacks emotional intelligence. So does the forty year old who says “You can’t fire me because I quit!”
In today’s fast paced and tumultuous business climate, emotional intelligence is an important skill to have. We need to be able to accept challenges and frustrations, work with others cooperatively, accomplish assignments independently, participate in activities we might rather not, and so much more.
Talent Smart has been able to equate high performance in the workplace with high EI (and likewise poor performance with low EI [also known as EQ]). John Mayer, professor of psychology at the University of New Hampshire, is one of those who thinks that claim is hooey. But let’s assume that emotional intelligence IS a definable and measurable skill and that we’d like to develop it in our workforce.
Emotional Intelligence Defined
There are five “domains” or competencies of emotional intelligence:
Self-awareness (recognizing emotion and its effect, knowing one’s strengths and limitations)
Self-regulation (conscientiousness, adaptability, comfort with ambiguity)
Self-motivation (goal setting, commitment, optimism)
Social awareness (interest in others, empathy, understanding power relationships)
Social skill (communication, conflict management, leadership, etc.)
Each of these can be further broken down. For instance, conscientiousness can be further defined as keeping promises, fulfilling commitments, and holding oneself accountable.If we believe Talent Smart’s claims, these would be nifty markers on a performance evaluation, don’t you think? Do we assess people on their ability to complete their work correctly and in a timely fashion or are they really being assessed on their conscientiousness? Correcting poor performance would be quite different depending on whether you were assessing the visible output or the EI that underlies it.
Developing Emotional Intelligence
If we want to develop better performers in the workplace, it behooves us to examine whether we can develop emotional intelligence. Many of the things that we do when Teaching Thinking naturally align with increasing emotional intelligence. For instance. being open to and examining different perspectives. Let’s assume your company announced that there will be no bonuses this year. People with poor EI will think “that’s not fair!” while people with higher EI will realize the business climate has changed and the company acted accordingly.
To “teach” this skill we can include higher-order, open-ended questions in our training. Coaching and mentoring also help to develop emotional intelligence because coaches and mentors ask open-ended questions aimed at getting people to self-examine. Questions such as, What would you do differently next time? Who could be an ally? and What did you learn from this? get at examining and developing self-awareness – an important EI skill.
Another way to develop EI is to turn the coaching / mentoring idea around and have your trainees act as a coach / mentor. This assignment requires social awareness and the ability to empathize with others. The coach / mentor doesn’t have to be an expert. For example, providing feedback about an upcoming presentation requires the coach / mentor to consider the developmental needs of the presenter, frame feedback in a constructive way – taking in to consideration the emotions of the other person, and provide emotional support (you can do this!) – all EI skills. These are all great leadership skills too… but I digress.
So whether EI can be developed in others or not may be nebulous, the skills that lead to EI can and should be incorporated in to many aspects of the workplace (training, managing, performance reviews, and more).If you’d like to assess your own Emotional Intelligence, check out this short, on-line assessment.
How Case Studies Aid in Teaching Thinking
What is a Case Study?
Before we jump in to the value of using case studies to teach thinking, it’s prudent to define exactly what it is we are talking about. Case studies are a way to present content in a narrative format, followed by discussion questions, problems or activities. They present readers with an overview of the main issue, background on the organization or industry, and events or individuals involved that lead to the problem or decision presented in the case.
As in real life, there is rarely a specific answer or outcome. Case studies are typically tackled in groups, although they can be an individual assignment. Learners apply course concepts in real-world scenarios, forcing them to utilize higher-order thinking skills such as analysis, synthesis and evaluation.
Case studies are very beneficial in helping learners to bridge the gap between theory and practice. Using case studies puts the responsibility for learning on the learner himself, rather than relying on an instructor or facilitator to guide the learning process. Case studies model more real-world tactics despite the fact that the content is prescribed.
Case studies in a business environment are typically used as an activity to transmit the course content; requiring an hour to a few hours of work as part of the larger course requirements. While business-based case studies are generally focused on teaching business principles, The Training Doctor uses business-based case studies to teach thinking processes.
Case studies pack more experience into each hour of learning than any other instructional approach.
Skills Taught Through Case Study Usage
While numerous studies have concluded that case studies are beneficial to learning simply because they are engaging and participative, there are many social and business skills which are taught through the case study process, as well.
If you are familiar with Bloom’s Taxonomy, you know that the “higher” levels of learning outcomes are analysis and synthesis – which case studies are able to achieve by presenting lots of information pertinent to various aspects of the case, and asking the learner to dissect and/or combine that information to arrive at a well-reasoned opinion or solution.
Additionally, as much work in the 21st century is accomplished via teams, case studies provide an opportunity to learn critical business skills such as communicating, problem-solving, and group work dynamics in general. NOTE: It is wise to ensure learners understand group dynamics, meeting management, group process (such as decision making and conflict resolution) and the like, before sending them off to work as a team.
Often the benefits of the case study approach are lost due to the learner’s inability to manage themselves as a group (which is also an important learning outcome!).
Outcomes of Case Study Learning
In addition to skills learned via case studies, there are business outcomes which are achieved, as well. Real-world business activities are rarely cut and dry. They are dynamic and fluid which can be reflected in a case study much more easily than in the linear presentation of content which typically occurs via lecture.
Case studies prime the learner to look at an issue from multiple perspectives and – when used correctly – from multiple disciplines as well. By extrapolating a business case study to their own work environment, learners are able to grasp connections between topics and real-world application which is often difficult to do in a traditional instructor-led course.
While arriving at an answer or solution may be the stated objective of a case study (what should Fred do next?), a greater outcome is developing the learner’s ability to apply problem-solving (or opportunity revealing) management to disparate information. In organizations with workers who are more tenured, the ability to insert their own experience and knowledge is not only helpful in keeping them engaged but beneficial for younger members of the group to hear.
It is a best-practice, when using case studies in business, to utilize groups from various disciplines within the organization. Different disciplines will bring different insights to the case, allowing for a more thorough discussion. Hearing various perspectives also teaches an appreciation for the “big picture” and demonstrates the importance of gathering all relevant data. For instance, in many of our case studies we ask “Who are the stakeholders and what are their interests?” It is difficult to answer this question if the group is all from the same department or discipline, they simply don’t see the other possibilities.
Additionally, case studies model the reality of business – there will always be incomplete information, time constraints, competing interests and conflicting goals, and one must still make the best decision one can – recognizing that in business no decision is ever “the right one.”
Where Do I Find Case Studies?
You can order case studies from Harvard Business Review or subscribe to The Training Doctor newsletter (right here, at the top of the page) where we release three new case studies each quarter. Additionally, you can always click on the "case studies" category of blog topics, on this page, to view previously published case studies.
Twelve Weeks to Becoming the Manager of the Most Kick-ass Department in Your Company
As organizational development consultants, we are often tasked with creating activities or events that "move an organization forward." Clients ask us to solve problems related to communication, teamwork, poor workmanship, lack of commitment or accountability, and many other issues which stymie output and frustrate individuals.
Every organization is different, of course, but if you are a manager who would like to elevate your profile and your department's reputation, here is an activity that anyone can use to achieve both. All you need to do is commit to one hour per week for three months and follow the process below.
Week 1
This works better if your team is co-located. There is something to be said for looking your colleagues in the eye.) Bring together your team and have each person stand, state their name, their role, and declare how their role interacts with or is enmeshed with another person in attendance and their role. Repeat until everyone has spoken.Be aware: This will be an uncomfortable struggle at first, but by week 6 people will easily rattle off their inter-dependencies and accountabilities.
Weeks 2 - 6
At subsequent weekly 1-hour meetings add one-more-individual to the interdependency declaration. In other words, in week 1 each speaker must choose one other individual and declare how their role interacts with or is enmeshed with that person’s role. In week 2 they'll need to choose two other individuals. In week 3, they'll choose three other individuals, and so on. Slowly your department will begin to recognize how they are dependent on one another. This process works because it is visual, verbal, requires people to think to make the association, and is repeated week after week.
Weeks 4 - 6
Once people have the routine of choosing co-workers and declaring how they work together, "step it up" by having them add something about the other role that is frustrating, confusing or that they always wondered about. This might sound like, "I'm Susan Jones. I schedule the demo-rooms for the sales group. Sean Rhodes is one of my internal customers; he frequently meets with prospective clients in the demo rooms. Sean, I've wondered how far in advance you schedule meetings with prospects that need a demo. Is it usually the same-week or do you have more notice?"
What Susan is really getting at is, "I am tired of Sean always yelling at me that he has a client arriving within the hour and no where to put them." But perhaps Susan doesn't realize that Sean gets little advance notice himself. Or perhaps she just made Sean aware that he needs to schedule the demo rooms with more notice than he has been giving.
Further conversation can happen after your 1-hour meeting, allowing Susan and Sean to come to a solution so that neither of them regularly feels frustrated by the other (without your meeting, and this process, the chance of this conversation happening at all is slim and perhaps the whole "issue" would lead to a major blow-up down the road).
Weeks 7 - 12
Time to step it up again. Now that you've got your team regularly focusing on the way they work with and are dependent upon one another, start bringing in "guests" from other departments (directly upstream and downstream are easiest at the start). Stretch their knowledge of and accountability for other roles and departments. The same process is used, but now each speaker must include someone (the guest) outside your immediate group.
Let's assume you invited a mechanic from the maintenance group. This might sound like, "I'm Susan Jones. I schedule the demo-rooms for the sales group. I also issue a monthly report to maintenance for each machine, which logs how many hours each machine was used during the month."
Susan may or may not know that the hours-used report allows maintenance to conduct preventative maintenance on the demo-machines which are otherwise out-of-sight, out-of-mind for them. Preventative maintenance ensures that a salesperson isn't embarrassed by a demo-machine that fails during a client presentation. If Susan doesn't know that's what her report is used for, she'll learn it during your monthly meeting (by asking "I've often wondered what that report is used for,") and will understand the value and utility of it.
If Susan does know and declares the purpose of her report, the rest of the group will come to learn that this maintenance occurs unbeknownst to them in order to ensure the sales group has the equipment they need to be successful.
In addition to your current group of workers becoming more knowledgeable about, and accountable to, their co-workers and the larger organization, this is a great process for bringing new hires into the fold. They will quickly understand the work processes and outputs of your department and how they are interrelated, which is crucial to doing their own job well and knowing who to ask for help.
In just 12 short weeks you'll have the most highly functioning department in your organization, guaranteed.
Drop us a line and tell us how it went. And don't be stingy! When other managers ask how you created such a high-functioning team - share the process, like we just did for you.
Are You A Slow Thinker? Good for you!
First, a quick tutorial on Fast and Slow thinking – or System 1 and System 2 Thinking as popularized by Nobel Prize winner Danny Kahneman - in case you are not familiar.
Fast / System 1 Thinking
System 1 thinking can be thought of as our “immediate response” to something. When the alarm goes off in the morning – we get up. We don’t stop and ponder – what is that noise? what does it mean? should I get up right now? There is an immediate understanding of the information coming in and an immediate and knowledgeable response to that information. (Caution! This sometimes leads us to applying bias to situations that do in fact require more thought, and System 1 can be manipulated through the use of priming and anchoring.)
System 1 also enables us to do several things at once so long as they are easy and undemanding. System 1 thinking is in charge of what we do most of the time.
However, you want system 2 to be in control.
Slow / System 2 Thinking
System 2 thinking is the kind of thinking that requires you to struggle a bit. In this short (4:22) video featuring Kahneman, he gives the example of being able to answer 2x2 vs. 17x24.
The latter causes you to pause and put more mental energy in to arriving at the answer. If you’d like to try a fun activity to test your slow thinking ability, click here. Or watch the famous Invisible Gorilla video which illustrates that when System 2 is concentrating on one thing (counting the number of passes) it cannot concentrate on another (seeing a gorilla walk through the frame).
With practice System 2 can turn in to System 1 thinking, as in the case of a firefighter or airline pilot. Once sufficient application of System 2 thinking has occurred over an extended period of time and in varying circumstances, it becomes “easy.”
System 1 is all about “knowing” with little effort – as an expert is able to.
System 2 Thinking in Learning
What does System 2 Thinking mean for learning in organizations? Quite a lot, actually.
In a recent blog post by Karl Kapp, in which he describes purposefully causing his students to struggle, he states, “Unfortunately most learning is designed to avoid struggle, to spoon feed learners. This is not good… The act of struggling and manipulating and engaging with content makes it more meaningful and more memorable.”
Another important job of System 2 thinking is that it is in charge of self-control. This is an important skill / quality in the workplace. It allows us to measure the information coming at us and respond appropriately (which means, sometimes, not responding at all). Controlling thoughts and behaviors is difficult and tiring. Unfortunately many people find cognitive effort unpleasant and avoid it as much as possible (so says Kahneman in Thinking Fast and Slow).
Because of this tendency, we need to make teaching thinking skills a priority in workplace learning and development. This could be a challenge. Tim Wu, a professor at Columbia Law School, says that older Americans may be better equipped for serious thinking because they didn’t grow up with smartphones and can “stand to be bored or more than a second.”
And a study conducted at Florida State University determined that a single notification on your phone weakens one’s ability to focus on a task. The ability to focus is crucial not only in completing tasks but in learning new things as well. The ability to focus without distraction and to perform cognitively demanding tasks is THE job skill of the future.
Accelerate Learning through On-the-Job Assignments
Giving individuals assignments that complement their work, or allow them to experience new opportunities, abound inside companies, but we rarely ask workers to do anything outside their normal responsibilities. Here are some ideas to provide individuals with more business insight and experience without a formal learning process:
- Train a new hire or develop an orientation process for new hires to help them to be productive as soon as possible
- Develop a ‘calendar of events’ for your role which would enable someone else to take over in an emergency – what are the things that are required daily, weekly and monthly
- Conduct competitive intelligence
- Organize a lunch and learn with a guest speaker in your industry
- Create a master-mind group for your role / function
- Write a blog article “10 things XXX should know about XXX” (such as 10 things patients should know about the in-hospital pharmacy or 10 things patients should know about dietary restrictions)
- Develop a presentation for other departments within the company that explains your department’s priorities and working processes
- Create a workflow chart for your department and look for opportunities
What are the skills that are developed from these very generic on-the-job assignments? Decision making, interviewing, coaching, writing, facilitating, analyzing, planning, speaking and more. With just a little thought you’ll be able to come up with more personalized learning experiences that will benefit both the individual and the company as a whole.
It Ain't Learning if it's Microlearning
Microlearning is the short-term, focused delivery of content or involvement in an activity. Lately I’ve seen a lot of chatter about best practices for “microlearning.” By most standards microlearning should be less than six minutes and often the suggestion is that it is no more than two minutes.
The thinking is that learners have the “capacity” to sit still and watch an informational tutorial for only so long before they’ll zone out, hit pause, or be interrupted by their work. Companies that create micro learning promote it by touting its ability to quickly close a “skills gap” – a learner can learn a new topic or take advantage of a refresher, in a short snippet that they can apply immediately. About to close a sale? Watch this microlearning video on 5 steps to closing a sale. Need to perform cardiac surgery? Look at this flowchart which will lead you through the process (I’m kidding. I hope.).
Another advantage – per proponents of microlearning – is that the learner himself can control what and when to learn.
Pardon my upcoming capitalization: THIS IS NOT LEARNING. This is performance support. How and when did we get these two terms confused?
Silo’d Learning is Limiting Workplace Learning Potential
For years, possibly decades, we have helped people develop expertise around specific jobs, or how to do their current job better. We've kept them learning "up" a topical trajectory, much like a silo.
What was often neglected was the need to expand knowledge, skills, and abilities overall. What we’ve got now are millions of Americans who are very skilled in a narrow area of expertise, but not well prepared for upper management or executive positions because they lack general business intelligence.
While it might seem obvious to only include salespeople in sales-training, what would be the detriment of including the administrative group that supports the salespeople, or the customer service representatives who support the customer after the sale, or the field service representatives who actually see the customer more frequently than anyone else, or manufacturing who will learn how their product works in the “real world?” Wouldn’t each of them learn more about how to do their job well, and learn more about the business as a whole by participating in a developmental topic that is ancillary to their current work?
Estimates are that by 2030, Baby Boomers will be completely out of the workforce. This presents a call to action and an opportunity, because the generation with the most breadth and depth of work experience will be leaving the workforce. We – as L+D departments and professionals – need to quickly rectify the silos of specialists we’ve created by broadening the role-specific training of the past in order to address the workforce needs of the future.
Our challenge is to develop a new generation of company leaders capable of making well-rounded and well-informed decisions based on their experiences in a multitude of business areas. The focus on job-specific training is a thing of the past. Organizations must focus on developing well-rounded individuals who can take the organization into the future. The future success of our companies depends on the actions we take today to develop our future workforce.
Better Learning Through Interleaving
Interleaving is a largely unheard of technique – outside of neuroscience - which will catapult your learning and training outcomes. The technique has been studied since the late 1990’s but not outside of academia. Still, learning and incorporating the technique will make your training offerings more effective and your learners more productive.
What is it?
Interleaving is a way of learning and studying. Most learning is done in “blocks” – a period of time in which one subject is learned or practiced. Think of high school where each class is roughly an hour and focuses on only one topic (math, history, english, etc.). The typical training catalog is arranged this way, as well. Your organization might offer Negotiation Skills for 4 hours or Beginner Excel for two days. The offering is focused on one specific skill for an intense period of time.
Interleaving, on the other hand, mixes several inter-related skills or topics together. So, rather than learning negotiation skills as a stand-alone topic, those skills would be interleaved with other related topics such as competitive intelligence, writing proposals or understanding profit-margins. One of the keys of interleaving is that the learner is able to see how concepts are related as well as how they differ. This adds to the learner’s ability to conceptualize and think critically, rather than simply relying on rote or working memory.
How Does it Benefit?
Interleaving is hard work. When utilizing interleaving, the brain must constantly assess new information and form a “strategy” for dealing with it. For example, what do I know about my competitor’s offering (competitive intelligence), and how am I able to match or overcome that (negotiation skills)? While the technique is still being studied, it is suspected that it works well in preparing adult learners in the workplace because “work” never comes in a linear, logical or block form. You might change tasks and topics three times in an hour; those tasks may be related or not –the worker needs to be able to discriminate and make correct choices based on how the situation is presented.
Interleaving helps to train the brain to continually focus on searching for different responses, decisions, or actions. While the learning process is more gradual and difficult at first (because there are many different and varied exposures to the content), the increased effort results in longer lasting outcomes.
What’s interesting is that in the short term, it appears that blocking works better. If people study one topic consistently (as one might study for a final exam), they generally do better – in the short term - on a test than those who learned through interleaving.
Again, the only studies that have been done have taken place in academia, but here is an example of the long-term beneficial outcomes of interleaving. In a three-month study (2014) 7th-grade mathematics students learned slope and graph problems were either taught via a blocking strategy or an interleaving strategy. When a test on the topic was conducted immediately following the training, the blocking learners had higher scores. However, one day later, the interleaving students had 25% better scores than the blocking learners and one month later the interleaving students had 76% better scores! Because interleaving doesn’t allow the learner to hold anything in working memory, but instead requires him to constantly retrieve the appropriate approach or response, there is more ability to arrive at a well-reasoned answer and a better test of truly having learned.
How Can You Use Interleaving?
As mentioned earlier, although concentrating on one topic at a time to learn it (blocking) seems effective, it really isn’t because long term understanding and retention suffers. Therefore one must question whether there was actual learning or simply memorization. If your goal is to help your trainees learn, you’ll want to use an interleaving process. Warning: Most companies won’t want to do this because it is a longer and more difficult learning process and the rewards are seen later, as well.
Make Links
The design and development of your curriculum(s) doesn’t need to change at all – simply the process. First, look for links between topics and ideas and then have your learners switch between the topics and ideas during the learning process. For instance, our Teaching Thinking Curriculum does this by linking topics such as Risk, Finance, and Decision Making. While each of those is a distinct topic, there are many areas of overlap. In fact, one doesn’t really make a business decision without considering the risk and the cost or cost/benefit, correct? So why would you teach those topics independent of one another?
Use with Other Learning Strategies
Interleaving isn’t the “miracle” approach to enhanced learning. Terrific outcomes are also achieved through spaced learning, repeated retrieval, practice testing and more. Especially when it comes to critical thinking tasks, judgement requires multiple exposures to problems and situations. Be sure to integrate different types of learning processes in order to maximize the benefit of interleaving.
Integrate Concepts with Real Work
Today’s jobs require people to work on complex tasks with often esoteric outcomes. It’s hard to apply new learning to one’s work when the two occur in separate spheres and the real-world application isn’t immediate. Try to integrate topics to be learned with the work the learner is doing right now. For example, for a course in reading financial reports (cash flow, profit/loss, etc.), rather than simply teaching the concepts with generic examples of the formats, the learners were tasked with bringing the annual report from two of their clients (learners were salespeople). As each type of financial report was taught, the learners looked to real-world examples (that meant something to them) of how to read and interpret those reports.
Ask the Learners to Process
Too often we conclude a training class by reviewing what was covered in the class. Rather than telling the learners what just happened, have them process the concepts themselves. This is easiest to do through a writing activity. You might ask the learners to pause periodically, note what they have learned, link it to something they learned earlier, and align it with their work responsibilities. For instance: I will use my understanding of profit margins and financial risk to thoughtfully reply to a customer’s request for a discount or to confidently walk away from the deal. It’s not about the sale, it’s about the bottom line. The process of writing helps the learner to really think through the concepts just taught and it allows them to go back over their learning in the future to remind themselves of the links they made within the curriculum and between the curriculum and work responsibilities. Interleaving enables your training to be more effective and your learners to be more accomplished and productive.
Why do so Many Companies Get Training Wrong?
Earlier in 2017 I was interviewed by the BBC for an article on workplace training and specifically, why companies get it wrong so often. As one of a few expert sources for the article, my entire response was not included, but I wanted to share it with you here.
WRONG: Cram all the learning in to the shortest amount of time possible
Solution: Mete it Out Over Time
One of the biggest contributors to the lack of training effectiveness is that we simply don’t allow enough time for training. First, companies have cut what used to be an 8-hour training day back to 4 hours, or two hours, in many cases. Sometimes it’s even been turned into a boring PowerPoint self-study (this violates a lot of adult learning principles, but we won’t go there today).
Secondly, in combination with the shorter time allotted for training, we deliver all the content in one “sitting.” While this is a great approach for an overview or introduction to a topic, it never develops into learning and skill. So the first thing we must do to make workplace training better is to mete the content out, over time. Learners need an introductory period, a practice period, a period for reflection and a period for perfection. This process cannot be compressed into 4 hours. The brain doesn’t process new information that way and the body doesn’t develop the muscle memory or finesse it needs to perform a skill this way either. (Here is an interesting article on the benefits of spaced learning in training medical professionals.)
WRONG: Teaching things in "theory"
Solution: Real World Application
This best practice has two angles. The first goes hand-in-hand with the meted content suggested above. If you are going to space the learning out over a period of time, you have the ability to assign real-world activities to the learners. This allows them to put what they’ve learned into practice and develop a better understanding of the concept as well as the muscle memory required to perform it. For example, in a sales training course, if step one is to identify prospects – the assignment should be to return to the next lesson having identified and vetted at least three prospects using the skills taught in lesson one. The assignment after lesson two should be to again start at prospecting and then add step two. This allows the leaners to learn-do-reflect-perfect.
The other angle is to have learners work with real-world concepts during the learning time itself. You could have a training class that teaches learners to read financial statements such as profit and loss, cash flow, etc. in a “vacuum,” or you could have them learn to read these same reports while looking at the annual report for their own company, or their competitor. Rather than learning things in “theory,” have your workers learn the same concepts with real-world benefits.
WRONG: Not including management in the training process
Solution: Management Involvement
Management involvement is crucial for real learning in so many ways. First, it is important that managers understand what their workers are learning so that they can reinforce it (how many of us conduct a manager’s overview or ask for their participation before their workers come to us?). Second managers can assist in the practice/perfection phase of training by allowing their workers extra time to complete their newly learned processes (in other words suspending metrics during the practice phase) and by answering questions or providing coaching. Finally, managers are the best choice for evaluating the true outcomes of training. They are the ones who see if the workers are able to truly implement what they learned on-the-job.
WRONG: Having no real plan for training: who gets trained, in what, and why?
Solution: Make it a Strategy
I can’t decide if this failure is the most damning, or if the way we slice and dice content to cut it back to the most minimal amount of time it will take to transmit it is; so this is either #1 or #2 in terms of what companies do wrong when training their workers. For years now – decades- we have trained people in silos (if you are a salesperson all of your learning will be related to sales, somehow) and we administer training on an as-needed basis. If you are good at what you do, are performing well and aren’t in-line for a promotion – you could go years with no training at all. But in order to develop our workers, and our organizations, training needs to be a strategy. What could we teach someone that would make them that much better of a performer? Some “generic” topics that come to mind are finance, continuous improvement, and project management. There is no person in the workplace that couldn’t benefit from having these three skills; yet, if you aren’t a project manager, you’ll probably never get project management training. Companies are short sighted and tend to compartmentalize training as a “department” rather than utilizing training as a strategy that can make their organization better. If companies developed a strategic plan for employee development – like they do for company initiatives such as product launches or facilities expansion – in no time at all they would reap the rewards of a more capable, productive workforce. What are your thoughts? Why do so many companies get training wrong? You can see the original BBC article here.
Teaching Thinking through Adapted Appreciative Inquiry
If you've been a reader of this blog for any period of time, you know that using questions is something we regularly advocate for in order to change people's thinking and thereby change their behavior on the job.
But what if your learners have no preconceived notions on a topic to begin with? What if we don't want to change their thinking, we simply want to e x p a n d their thinking? That's when Appreciative Inquiry can be an excellent tool for teaching thinking skills.
Appreciative Inquiry, in its purest sense, is used as a change management /problem solving tool. Rather than gathering people (managers, workers, etc.) together and asking "What's going wrong, and how do we fix it?" Appreciative Inquiry instead asks, "What are our strengths? What are we great at? How can we maximize that and build on it to achieve excellence?"
Appreciative inquiry has been around since the late 1980's but hasn't been "in the news" much in the last decade or so. Perhaps it's time to revitalize the approach, with a different spin - let's use it to teach thinking. The way we envision using the technique is through possibility summits which help newer or younger associates within a company to help set the course for the future. Too often, when individuals have been with a company 20, 30 or 40 years, they are set in their ways. Why change? Things are working great.
But organizations that rest on their laurels are organizations that will ultimately fail. Younger associates may have great ideas but no knowledge of how to advocate for them or execute them. Appreciative Inquiry can help individuals and organizations to thrive. Here's how....
Adapted Appreciative Inquiry Process
Allow the "younger generation," if you will, to help envision the future and empower them to create it by utilizing an adapted Appreciative Inquiry Process:
First, craft questions that help to open up future lines of inquiry, such as "What is your vision (not expectation) for our company in five years?" "What do customers love about us?" "What are our strengths in __________ area or department?" Questions should be crafted to get at opportunities, competencies, and business ecosystems (such as working in conjunction with suppliers, competitors or customers). A more inspirational or free-flowing question might be: "It's 2025 and Fortune Magazine has just named us the most _______ company in America. How did we get there?"
Next, assign people who are newer in the organization to interview those with more tenure - using the questions created in the first step. This accomplishes two things: It devoids the idea that those at the top of the organization know best and opens up channels of conversation - It helps to develop relationships between people who might not normally interact in their day-to-day roles (for example, the CEO of the company being interviewed by someone in the shipping department), and the results of that can be amazing, not only for inspiration but for goodwill and long-term relationships.
Third, those who have conducted the interviews report back on what they've learned, and themes (strengths) and actions items are culled from the results.
Finally, the action items are prioritized (what can be done most quickly, what can be done most affordably, what will get us to our ultimate vision for the future, etc.) and assigned. Ideally, multi-tenure teams will be assigned to work on the action items, which helps to establish mentorship even if the company doesn't have a formal mentoring program.
Note: You may choose to focus these steps on a theme in order to keep the process more manageable. The theme might be #1 in Customer Satisfaction and the steps would then focus on that vision for the future. For instance: What is possible, in our billing department, to ensure we are #1 in Customer Satisfaction?
Benefits of Appreciative Inquiry Integrated with a Curriculum
When this type of activity is integrated with a Teaching Thinking curriculum, it exposes those enrolled in the curriculum to new ways of thinking that they simply would not come up with on their own. It also exposes them to real-world experience and capabilities, rather than contrived activities with expected outcomes. Finally, it unites the organization because everyone has a hand in the creation of the future (there are elements of social constructionism in this type of learning activity).Combining vision and experience enables an organization to reach new heights.