Learn about the trainee's typical day
Before you design any training program, ask the requestor to tell you about the audience's typical day and overall job responsibilities. Ideally, you would like to observe the future-trainees in their day-to-day routine so that you can get the "big picture" of the work that they do and the environment in which they do it. If that is not possible, then ask for a thorough description of the future-trainee's typical work day and job responsibilities.
Very often, with this information, you can spot work-process breakdowns that are contributing to the symptoms which precipitated the request for training. Also, you are able to redirect the training or include elements which would not have been addressed had you not had the big picture of work responsibilities.
For example: A manufacturing organization was seeking to cross-train shop-floor workers in order to offset the downtime associated with machine breakdown. Because the organization had only one maintenance person, when a machine would break down, it could take a few hours for the technician to turn his attention to that machine. The intent of the request for cross-training was to be better able to utilize the machine operators during their idle time, while they were waiting for their primary machine to be repaired.
Gaining a better understanding of their overall job responsibilities, however, highlighted the fact that most machine operators refused to complete preventative maintenance and did not follow the start-up protocol which included oiling and gauge adjustments, etc., and simply switched their equipment on.
A more strict enforcement of start-up procedures, or having the maintenance technician come in an hour earlier each day to start the machines properly, was the primary solution to the machine breakdown dilemma. Without this understanding of the worker's typical day the company may have spent tens of thousands of dollars cross training their workers in order to compensate for the down-time created by the machine breakdowns.
The ultimate solution was to minimize the downtime by following company protocol, NOT providing training.
Case Study: Bite-sized Instructor Led Training
telephone
When we think of bite-sized learning, we often think of something that is self-paced, just-in-time, mobile or e-Learning.
We recently visited with a client that is providing bite-sized learning (10 minutes or less) delivered by live instructors. Picture this: a room of 40 trainers who sit in cubicles wearing headsets, at desks with two computer monitors. The trainees call the trainers when they are ready for their lesson. The trainees go in to a queue and any trainer can pick up the call and teach any topic thanks to a script that pops up on one screen. On the other screen they document the learner, the lesson, and the advice / next steps prescribed for that learner.
In a 10-minute-or-so conversation, the trainer and trainee discuss how the last lesson has been working for the learner, practice a read-through of the new lesson, role-play the new lesson, audio-record the new lesson and listen-back for a self-critique as well as a trainer critique.
Lessons are meted out, one-per-week, for a period of weeks depending on the topic. The learner is expected to practice one minute technique during the week and then the next technique is introduced, the following week.
Bite-sized learning? More like crumb-sized learning! And SUPER effective. Just ask their 850 clients!
What's Your Problem?
What is the problem you are experiencing?
Very often you'll get a request from a business unit for a specific type of training, for instance "My sales team needs team-building training."
Do not accept the requester's interpretation of the skills that are needed because they usually:
1 - have a myopic view of the situation (a sales manager will only see problems related to sales), and
2 - they usually do not have an understanding of how poor-performance can be manifested in different ways and that an entirely different approach might solve the presenting problem
For instance, we worked with a financial firm with salespeople throughout the United States and a sales-support staff that was centrally located. One of the problems the salesforce was experiencing, according to a regional vice president, was a lack of teamwork. His interpretation was that the support staff was not sufficiently invested in the success of their assigned salesperson(s).After a brief period of investigation, two factors came to light: 1 - the salespeople and their support person had never met, and 2 - the support staff didn't have a clear picture of the sales cycle and when they could expect requests for support (at the proposal stage, during negotiation, making presentations, etc.).
The salespeople had attended numerous training programs and the support people had attended none. So only one-half of the team had an idea of the process and expectations. The reason team training was requested was because the regional vice president of sales believed the two groups were at odds based on numerous complaints from the sales staff lamenting a lack of timely support.
So while training was indeed one of the solutions, what was delivered to this group was not what was originally requested. Why? Team building would have addressed the first problem (the "teams" didn't know one another) but would not have addressed the second (the support staff didn't understand the sales cycle and their role in it).
Always ask questions before agreeing to design, deliver or procure training. It will save time, money and your reputation!
Next month we'll look at a different question to ask.
Interview with Author Yael Hellman - Learning for Leadership
Yael
What motivated you to write this book?
In my years of teaching leadership, I noticed a huge gap between leadership theory and how my students, from all walks of life, actually turn into leaders. I saw that by respecting their varied life experiences, abilities, and learning preferences, I inspired them to value those qualities in themselves AND in those they would lead.
I also saw that traditional lecturing and assignments didn't produce the self-reflection and emotional intelligence leaders need. So I created a participant-centered group environment safe enough to contain and ignite individuals' unique energies and openness to experience. Turned out, this facilitative approach (which decades of research on leadership teaching supports) actually cultivates deep, lasting leadership skills through immediate, hands-on practice. I wanted to share what I learned training leaders in business, public service, and academic settings.
So Learning for Leadership; A Facilitative Approach for Training Leaders culls my best techniques, resources, and lesson plans. Perhaps most important, it presents real-life accounts of the pitfalls and potentials of facilitative leadership teaching to inform and encourage other instructors.
If you could distill your message down to just one - what would it be?
Leadership teaching-like leadership itself--is not for the faint of heart. You must be a lifelong learner to know yourself, your triggers, and your dynamic, and then to recognize those in others in order to reach and to motivate them.
How can trainers use this book to assist them in the work that they do?
Learning for Leadership; A Facilitative Approach for Training Leaders briefly outlines how adults learn so trainers can approach them appropriately and effectively. The book offers on-the-ground activities and projects that let participants experience-and so truly learn--the instructor's points. Its concrete tips facilitate the learning AND the teaching of leadership by helping trainers meet the intellectual and emotional demands of an experiential, participant-centered group. Its clear theory and tried-and-true practices let instructors in business or any context develop profound, practical executive wisdom in their trainees.
Do you have a personal motto that you live by?
Know yourself, and know your trainees. Only then will you see when to lead and when to follow, and be able to transform learners into leaders." (Hellman, p. xii)
Big Data - Little Data
little data 2
Google "employee training" and "data analytics" and you'll find a wealth of articles and resources to assist you in analyzing the "big data" associated with managing a workforce of individuals.
This month The Training Doctor had an interesting experience with "little data." Rather than having thousands of data points and crunching the numbers in oh, so many ways, we analyzed a finite period of time (one week), across three organizations, for one specific job-task in under 4 hours, to determine:
There was a training need for the population
That need was NOT what we thought it originally to be
Management needed to be aware that the lack-of-skills in this area / population was rippling throughout the organization and causing "poor performance" in other areas
With this very specific look at the data we were able to pinpoint a problem - and solution - in a matter of hours.
Another interesting "ah-ha" moment was that analyzing the data was NOT the original approach (nor even the second approach) we attempted to conduct the analysis. This is when you need to be chummy with your IT department. Ask them - what kind of information do we collect in X area? How can we access it? What does it show us?
The data WE analyzed showed us things we weren't even looking for or expecting to find; but seeing the repetitive nature of the data made it quite apparent where the process breakdown was occurring. It was also helpful to see that same data across three organizations to "prove" that it wasn't an anomoly at one organization. The data gave us the 30,000-foot view we needed to see the "big picture" (not the big data).
Great Work Everyone! Here's an Avocado for your Efforts!
Do you regularly give out candy as a reward during your F2F training sessions? Well, you're not doing your learners any favors. Instead put out piles of beans, eggs, fish, berries and, ok, dark chocolate.
In this fascinating article (and quick read) by Jeremy Teitelbaum, he challenges us to think about our "tried and true" methods of delivering training and learning, using what we know from 25 years of brain research. Suggestions include:
Stop forcing people to multitask.
He cites research by Stanford University which determined that even when people claim they are multi-tasking, they really are not processing more than one piece of information at once.
Feed the mind to teach the mind.
The author makes an interesting point: In recent years physical fitness training has included the mind and the way it thinks about fitness, body image, health, eating habits and the like; but the opposite hasn't proven true. Nobody training the mind thinks about what the body needs to enable the mind to be successful. Hmmmm
You are unique - just like everyone else.
Brain research focuses on generalizations based on small samples of "brains." This might cause us to categorize people, types of learning, or personality factors.
Hard and Soft Skills Aren't as Important as Emotion
All learning has an emotional component - something most of us in training simply ignore as we 'get down to business.'
Resources for Graphics to Enhance Your Instructional Design Efforts
Well-designed instruction is quite reliant on well-designed visual representation (in our humble opinion). Given that premise, here are some excellent resources for you to check out:
123rd.com - royalty free photos and music/sound effects. You must pay, but very affordable. (This is our preferred site).
Morguefile.com - completely free photos. Lots of great nature scenes; not business oriented but great for backgrounds or accents.
Pixabay.com - photos, illustrations and vector graphics. You are able to browse by category such as Business or Industry. Completely free.
eLearningArt.com - is very unique for two reasons: 1 - you can download "character packs" which are anywhere from 50 - 75 photos of one individual in many poses. Super helpful when you want a consistent character in your learning, and 2 - "cut out people" which provides thousands of photos of just people - no backgrounds.
Training Design Basics, by Saul Carlinger - Interview with the author
cover--training-design-basics
An interview with our friend and colleague Saul Carlinger, on the publishing of the 2nd edition of his book Training Design Basics (ATD)
What motivated you to write this book?
The motivations behind the two editions differed a lot. ATD (then ASTD) asked me to write the first edition. Although I was flattered, I had my concerns. First, I had just finished Designing e-Learning and was concerned about too much overlap between the books: both were about instructional design. But the distinction between the two was clear: one focused solely on e-learning and the other focused on more traditional forms of training-classroom and workbook-based programs, both of which were still dominant at the time.
My second concern was more fundamental; with so many books on the market about instructional design, what could I add? But as I looked at most textbooks, I realized that most focused on analysis, writing objectives, and evaluation. Those are all important, but I remember from my own time as an instructional designer that the majority of the work is focused on design and development. I covered analysis, objectives, and evaluation, but decided to emphasize the daily reality of most instructional designers: design and development.
Fast forward to 2011. Designing e-Learning was increasingly out of date, so I contacted ASTD to see if they would be interested in a revision. At the time, they had not made a long-term decision about that particular series of books on e-learning, but said they were looking for someone to write a book on informal learning. That interested me because I had explored that topic for my dissertation. Within 90 minutes, I had an outline for the book that would eventually become Informal Learning Basics: not the book I had planned to write when I called my editor but one I was delighted to write.
When that book was published, I suggested revising Training Design Basics and expanding its scope to include all training media, including e-learning. So the second edition of Training Design Basics is essentially a single book that updates both Training Design Basics and Designing e-Learning.
Part of the motivation was practical. The only way to integrate e-learning into the mainstream is to treat its design along the design of other types of programs. I also wanted to update Training Design Basics to address issues that arose when I used it in the classroom.
In addition, I wanted to address a general misunderstanding about ADDIE in this edition: that it is a linear one-size-fits-all process. Part of that is addressed in language about ADDIE (each part is described as an activity rather than a step in a process). Part of that is addressed by describing how the "full" approach is adjusted for revisions and lower-impact projects.
If you could distill your message down to just one - what would it be?
Given that my publisher always has to cut sizeable chunks of my original manuscripts to meet page limits, the real issue is whether I'm capable of distilling my message. (ATD's wonderful editors make this a learning experience more than anything else and the resulting versions are much tighter, stronger, and focused than the originals.)
But I'll try: Effective instructional design is problem solving. The better that trainers define the problem up-front and the tighter the alignment among the objectives, assessment of learning, and the course material, the more likely that designated learners will be able to develop the intended skills with the materials prepared for the learners.
How can business/ HR / training use this book to assist them in the work that they do?
Use this book to guide a training project. For example, suppose someone is starting their first training project or trying to improve their design technique. Read the first three chapters before starting a needs assessment. Then use the book to complete an entire chapter, reading one chapter at a time and using the worksheets at the ends of the chapters to apply the content in their work.
Do you have a personal motto that you live by (related to your book)?
Focus!
You can learn more about the book at Saul's website: https://designingelearning.wordpress.com/
10 Challenges When Creating A Blend
More than 60 individuals responded to a survey regarding the challenges they experienced when implementing a blended learning curriculum in their organization. Being aware of theses common challenges will help you to manage them in your own design.
1. Ensuring participants can be successful using the technology.
2. Overcoming the idea that online learning cannot be as effective as classroom training (convincing stakeholders).
3. Keeping online offerings interactive rather than just "talking at" them (keeping the attention of the learners).
4. Ensuring participant commitment and follow-through during "non-live" elements (accountability).
5. Matching the best delivery medium to the objective(s)- arriving at the right blend.
6. Readjusting facilitator roles.
7. Looking at how to teach content- not what to teach.
8. Resisting the urge to use technology simply because it is available.
9. Ensuring all the elements of the blend are coordinated.
10. Managing and monitoring participant progress.
Adults need time for Observation and Reflection
How often do we allow trainees to contemplate what they have just learned and how it will affect them or how they might implement it on the job? Not often. Reflection takes time and these days we aren't even offered enough time to do the teaching, much less allow for observation and reflection. (Our usual requests sound something like this: Can you take this 6 hour class and cut it down to 3 hours?
No one ever asks, once the teaching is done - how much additional time would be needed for the learners to reflect on what they've learned and how they can best implement it on the job?)
Here is a great case study of one company that "gets it”.
Background: New-hire orientation of a select 300 people per year.
Curriculum design: 12-week program which includes self-study, virtual classes, in-person sessions, group case study and individual assignment.
Time for observation and reflection: The entire final class meeting (2 hours) is dedicated to ensuring observation and reflection. The participants are reminded of each phase of the training and the intended learning outcomes. They are then asked reflective questions:- What did you learn most from this segment of the curriculum?- What are you already using on-the-job?- What do you intend to start doing, as a result of your learning?
They are also put in small groups to compare and contrast their responses, which helps to further their awareness of what they have learned (oh yeah! I forgot about that. How are you going to do it on the job?)
Next they are asked "What more would you like to learn?" Once they have completed the "prescribed curriculum" they are often aware of what they don't know about the organization or their field. By giving thought to what more they would like to learn, the organization is able to direct them to further professional development.
Finally, (and our favorite) they are asked: How can you take what you've learned and pay it forward? Since they are in a select group of 300 enrolled in the curriculum, they have become privy to information, approaches or perspectives that not everyone in the organization would have. They are tasked with taking the initiative to coach others in the organization and share what they have learned in constructive ways.
This formal approach to observation and reflection ensures the learners have thought-through what they have learned, identified the value of the learning for themselves and how they will change their behaviors on-the-job as a result of their learning. It also makes them good "corporate citizens" by tasking them with sharing what they've learned with the rest of the organization.
Are Participant Training Materials "Necessary?"
We recently had a lively discussion with a group of trainers regarding this statement: Participant "materials" (workbooks, job aids, infographics, etc.) are "nice to haves" but people rarely use them back on the job. The group unanimously agreed that rarely do participants use these items on the job, and, more often than not, they are left behind "in the classroom."
This lack of respect for training materials is quite detrimental to adult learning for a number of reasons:
Most people are visual learners
80% of Americans are visual learners, which means they "understand" information better (and retain it longer) if it is presented in a visual manner. If 80% of your audience spoke "in another language" wouldn't you present in that language? And yet, we often completely ignore providing tangible, visual elements that complement our training offerings.
Seven-to-ten days after training, people remember only 10 - 20% of what was taught them in a training class.
If your "training" consists of providing information, with no reference materials, how can anyone be expected to remember what was taught? Back on the job, it would be helpful to have a job-aid or infographic to refer to in order to do one's job or refresh one's memory about the proper process / sequence / tasks.
Temporal contiguity
Brain research tells us that it is better to present concepts in both words and pictures than solely in text format. Typically, about three days later, text-only information is recalled at a rate of just 15%, but the same information, when presented in both text and visual (a'la an infographic) is recalled at a whopping 65%!
Muscle memory
Muscle memory is not a memory stored in your muscles, of course, but memories stored in your brain (although its origin is related to physical fitness). Providing workbooks or worksheets in which participants actually work (answer questions, complete diagrams, underline pertinent facts in a case study) aid in retention because the body is also physically involved in the learning process.
Solution?
The "problem" is not that participant's don't see the value in the learning materials you provide, but rather, the problem lies with us trainers who do not show people how to use these materials while they are in the training. The solution is to utilize the training materials at the time of teaching. Don't teach a process and then say "Here is a job-aid to take back to your desk," but rather teach the process as participants follow along using their job aid.
The solution to participant materials being "left behind" is to utilize them during the training process so that their usage becomes part of the learner's muscle memory.
Thinking Through Instructional Design Choices (Tailored Learning book excerpt)
Depending on the delivery method, designers must consider how these choices influence design, desired impact on the job, and any assessment plan.
Design Implications
Different delivery methods will change the design of the course. A classroom-based course can be very interactive and can include group activities in the design. However, an asynchronous would determine whether the interaction or activity is crucial to the learning, and if not, then determine how the same learning outcome could be achieved by an independent learner.
Impact on the Job
Ultimately, any training program should enable participants to return to their jobs and implement what they have learned during the training. To accomplish this, the learning must be designed in a way that is immediately applicable on the job, and the participant must be motivated to use the new knowledge and skills.
For example, in a classroom-based training course, a follow-on activity might be for the facilitators to check in with the participants once a week to see what kind of success they are having implementing their new knowledge and skills back on the job, as well as to offer support and coaching. However, if the training course is designed to be offered asynchronously, the coaching may have to be offered by the participant's sales manager or more senior salesperson in the office. While the same objective can be met, the methodology for meeting that objective might be quite different.
The Assessment Plan
If the ultimate goal is to have an individual return to the job prepared to implement new knowledge and skills, then there should be some way of assessing whether the training has been successful in accomplishing that goal. Similar to on-the-job considerations, assessment approaches might differ depending on how the training is delivered. Therefore, the assessment for each objective will be defined once the training approach has been determined.
No, You Cannot Replicate Your F2F Class Online...
What most organizations don't appreciate is that it is impossible to take a classroom-based class and replicate it online as it currently exists. They are two different delivery mediums which require two different instructional design techniques.
Too often organizations simply strive to replicate the classroom experience; so they use the same participant guides, the same slides and the same activities, which fall flat and/or fail to support the learning experience in an online class.
The 4 Learning Outcomes all Training is Trying to Achieve
The Four Levels of Learning
While this month's topic is not directly related to adult learning theory, it is important to understand in terms of designing learning for adults.
Learning progresses "up a ladder" of difficulty from knowledge -which is the easiest way to design and transmit learning - to changed behavior on the job, which is the hardest to achieve through a learning process.
Knowledge is firmly rooted in education. It involves reading, lectures, and rote memorization. It is helpful for providing baseline information, such as facts and rules, and is easy to design because it is simply a collection of information. A learner often can partake of knowledge without any professional intervention.
Psychomotor skills are a bit more complex because they involve teaching someone to physically manipulate something such as a cash register or a fork lift. This type of instruction requires hands-on practice and a skilled instructor to demonstrate or coach appropriate behavior. This type of training takes longer to design because it includes both information and skill, and it takes longer to teach because an instructor is often required, and practice time should be included.
Proceeding up the ladder of difficulty, critical thinking skills are significantly harder to teach because they require teaching someone to think in a different way. For instance, teaching a loan officer how to determine if someone is eligible for a loan, includes both facts and rules (knowledge) - and applying those to some type of standard -in order to make a decision. Often, when teaching critical thinking, numerous scenarios must being practiced in order to have confidence that the learner will make the right decision no matter the variable stimuli.
Teaching critical thinking - within itself, can have many degrees of difficulty; from "easy" decision making - such as whether or not to grant a loan, to life or death decision making such as performing surgery. This type of learning process requires multiple exposures to information and situations (in other words, it takes longer to teach thinking skills) and is difficult to design in order to ensure that the trainee changes their thinking process permanently.
Finally, ultimately, the goal of training in the workplace is to get people to change their behavior on the job. This requires actually leaving the training and helping people to transition their new knowledge and skills to their on-the-job responsibilities. That can take a few days to a few months - especially if you're organization intends to do a level three evaluation in order to determine if changed behavior actually has occurred.
Before designing any training program, assess what your desired outcome is (from the four categories above) and invest the appropriate amount of time necessary for both the design and the successful completion of the training.
Blended Learning Uses the Best of all Training Methodologies
Organizations have displayed an increased interest in blended learning, which takes the best of all training methodologies from the perspectives of demographics, economics, and instruction.
Demographics
For the most part, the demographic factors affect learning in the workplace and concern the population of learners. Especially in today's globally diverse work environments, organizations need to make adjustments for multiple languages, various time zones, multiple generations, and cultural differences. While the content of the learning program may be the same (basic selling skills, for example), the design or delivery may have to be altered to accommodate varying demographics of the audience.
Economics
Often, training delivery options are dictated by the economics involved. For example, classroom-based training will require travel expenses, maintaining or renting classroom space, and the printing and reproduction of materials. Computer-based training options are more economical in many ways; however, they require their own set of economic decisions such as adequate server space, the hosting of a web site, and secure access and record keeping.
Instruction
The design of the actual instruction can vary greatly based on things such as individual learning styles, how immediate the need is for the training, or what access learners have to instructional methodologies. Do they have individual computer workstations? Are they able to leave their jobs to attend a 4 hour or 8 hour training class?
Want to learn more? Order your own copy here !
Collective Differences equal Better Learning Outcomes
Research now tells us that what makes a group truly intelligent and innovative is the combination of different ages, skills, disciplines, and working and thinking styles that members bring to the table.
Scott E Page, professor and director of the center of the Study of Complex Systems at the University of Michigan has demonstrated that groups displaying a range of perspectives and skill levels outperform like-minded experts. He concludes that "progress depends as much on our collective differences as it does on our individual IQ scores."
Source: Institute for the Future for the University of Phoenix Research Instituted and Scott E Page, "The Difference," published by Princeton Press
What's the Difference between Gaming and Gamification?
Game-based learning is the use of a game to teach. Gamification, on the other hand, only uses a few elements of games. A learning game is a self-contained unit. There is a definitive start, game play and ending to the game. In a learning game, the learners know they are engaged in a game activity and at the end there is a “win state.”
Source: www.trainingindustry.com/magazine Training Industry Magazine-Spring 2014
Here is a sample of a "game" we use to teach overcoming objections in a sales curriculum - feel free to copy!
Step 1 - Divide your group in to three: Team A, Team B, Team C
Step 2 - Each team is given 5 minutes to discuss among themselves and come up with the 5 "hardest" objections they have encountered when selling "x" (this assumes a group that is already selling a product or service and you are enhancing their abilities).
Step 3 - Conducted as a round robin. Team A "announces" one of their Top 5 Hardest objections. Team B has a few moments to discuss among themselves and come up with what they believe to be an appropriate response. Team C also discusses among themselves because they have the ability to "challenge" Team B's answer
Team B then provides their answer to Team A. If Team C thinks their answer is better, they can say "we would like to challenge that" and provide THEIR answer to Team A. Team A then decides "the winner" and a point is awarded.
The process then repeats with Team B providing one of their objections to Team C and Team A having the ability to challenge.
This should take about 45 minutes to conduct. The Team with the most points "wins" and everyone wins by having at least 2 great rebuttals to all the tough objections.