New technologies present real opportunities for learning, and they get cleverer and cheaper all the time. The ‘traditional’ approach can be labelled ‘Big’ e-learning. This involves the design and delivery of large-scale software applications to replace traditional classroom-based training events and programmes. Such applications are intensively thought-out in advance, to ensure that e-learners have all possible questions answered and all possible approaches met. They need to be exhaustively tested and debugged to be robust in working environments. Big e-learning companies often employ experienced and expert ‘learning designers’ (not just trainers) and web designers, analysts and programmers, as well other specialists who would be just as much at home in a video games company or a film production organisation. All this means that big e-learning has high design and set-up (fixed) costs, although these can be balanced by very low delivery (variable) costs. This makes big e-learning good only for training very large groups (100+).
Recently, Podcasts and Blogs have begun to be used as a cheaper and quicker-to-implement 'Small' alternative to big e-learning. All anybody needs is the ideas they want to get across, a video camera and/or a decent microphone, some simple to use editing software and Internet access, and short video, sound or text training materials can be prepared and delivered to learners by the web. This is resulting phenomenon of ‘Just-in-time’ small e-learning, where for example, a hassled manager can go to YouTube or download a short Podcast on ‘10 important things to do in performance management’(or whatever) immediately before they run an appraisal meeting with a member of their staff.
Links to live-action lectures and presentations (TEDTalks set the standard), simulations and role plays with animation, graphics and sound (like computer games) can all be built into blogs, offering a much more involving and challenging learning experience than traditional book learning. Introvert e-learners can take part in interactive activities without having to present publicly or talk to strangers. And online tests and quizzes can be built into the applications, giving e-learners immediate feedback and giving us Learning Professionals the means to assess, evaluate and manage the learning.
Google, Wikipedia and social networking websites are proving to be invaluable e-learning resources. ‘Google’ is already used as a verb, meaning ‘find out about’. Wikipedia presents information that is ‘self-created’ and ‘peer reviewed’, a little like the contents of an academic journal. Users of Twitter and LinkedIn seem to solve many business problems by seeking and getting input from their networks through ‘crowd-sourcing’. Ning, software that enables the creation of in-company and ‘behind-your-firewall’ social networks that work like Facebook or LinkedIn, can keep colleagues continuously and automatically up-to-date on each other’s activities without the chore of writing weekly or monthly reports.
The advantages of all new technologies mean that e-learning is not tied to particular times or places. E-learners can learn at their workstations, at home, while commuting… anywhere or anywhen they need it. As such it is increasingly replacing book learning: PCs are approaching the portability of paperback books, MP3 players are smaller and lighter, and iPhones, iPads and book readers like Kindle are all blurring the lines between all these machines.
The disadvantages of new technologies seem to be how they can encroach on the work-life balance of workers. Not everyone wants to be listening to learning Podcasts or searching Wikipedia for the solutions to business problems in evenings or at weekends. And working through e-learning applications and assessments at your workstation does not give the same thrill or reward as staying in a four star hotel to attend a training workshop.
But, there are a lot of benefits to be found in new technology learning resources. They can influence knowledge and attitudes. Carefully designed big e-learning and just-in-time small e-learning can also influence behaviour and skills. Like traditional book learning, new technologies tend to be preferred by Reflectors and Theorists, but with careful management the strengths of these e-learning tools mean that they can be useful to all learners and to the organisations that need people to learn. Go on: do a search for what’s already freely available. Maybe even try recording and uploading your own!
Monday, 27 December 2010
Monday, 20 December 2010
Class-room based training
Classroom-based training is what most people think of when you say ‘training’. It’s been around forever and is (at least thought to be) familiar to everyone from their days in school or college. It is still occasionally called ‘chalk and talk’ learning, reminding us of blackboards, hard chairs and desks, exercise books and detentions.
But this link in people’s minds to their own past lives seems to put off about as many people as it attracts. If there is a continuum running from formal education at one end, through teaching, training and learning to development at the other end, classroom-based training often looks trapped closer to the formal and abstract end rather the practical and business-focussed end. However, most classroom-based training must be practical if it is to be cost-effective.
Trainers often report that the people they see to train are those that like training rather than those that need training. The people who need training most are sometimes those who work hardest to avoid it. And often these ‘training avoiders’ are the more senior staff and managers, who feel that their seniority and experience means that they don’t need training, that they don’t need to learn what’s on offer. Good senior management teams take classroom-based training very seriously: they ‘lead from the front’ by taking an active part in the work of the training room, both as participants and as training providers.
Classroom-based training can have relatively low design or set-up (fixed) costs. The content of training events and programmes is often already available and accessible within the organisation. Content can also be found in the literature or online, or bought from larger and well-established training organizations like Oakwood International. Even ‘bespoke’ training events or programmes usually involve at least some standard ‘off-the-shelf’ elements, and careful web searching can find complete agendas and training plans, ice-breakers, exercises, games, presentations, handouts and role plays. Intellectual property law precludes the wholesale reproduction of these online resources, but the ideas that underlie them are not copyright, so as long as the ideas are reformulated into new training plans, the training designer need not fear legal action.
The greatest cost in the design of training is usually the salary or fee of the trainer. Most freelance trainers charge fees for design of training at somewhat below those they charge for delivery, although this will vary depending on the complexity of material to be trained and on the regularity and frequency of delivery – and on whether the designers will be doing the delivery themselves. If the designer is spending a great deal of time designing an event or programme they will only deliver once, they will seek to charge more for the design than if they are guaranteed to get ongoing delivery fees.
Classroom-based training has relatively high delivery (variable) costs. In a one-day or longer event or programme, one trainer can probably only deal with a maximum of about twelve participants at a time. Between four and eight participants is often judged as more practical.
So, in order to train a small group of people in a day, the costs could break down as:
• Trainers fees and expenses (travel, accommodation and subsistence)
• Participant expenses
• Participant lost-opportunity costs (work that is being missed while participants attend the training)
• Materials costs (participant manuals, handouts, case studies and exercises, copies of slides, folders, writing paper, pens, name cards or stickers, flip chart paper and marker pens, Blu Tack or tape)
• Room, facilities and equipment costs (including hardware and new technology where needed)
• Refreshment costs (lunch, water cooler and glasses, tea and coffee, sweets and biscuits)
If a single event or programme training ten people costs $6000 to deliver, then ten such events, training 100 people, can cost $60,000, as there are few economies of scale in classroom-based training. But there may be other ways to meet the learning objectives. For example, an e-learning application to meet the same learning objectives may cost $60,000 to design, but almost nothing to deliver. Many more than 100 people can hit the learning objectives, at no additional cost.
All this means that if large numbers of people (say more than 100) are required to learn the same material, other kinds of learning opportunities and interventions need to be considered. E-learning is often favoured for delivering very high volumes of training.
However, Classroom-based training is good for smaller numbers of participants, to obtain buy-in, build team spirit and practice behaviour change. It needs to do so in order to avoid the charge of it being too abstract, formal and unfocussed on business needs. It is especially good for Activists. It can strongly influence knowledge, skills and attitudes but, as it takes place away from the workplace, trainers need to make action plans explicit to translate learning back into the workplace.
It is easy to measure learners’ immediate reactions to Classroom-based training, through assessment/evaluation forms or ‘happy sheets’. Harder-to-measure longer-term changes to learning, behaviour and results need to be examined through the organization’s performance management processes.
But this link in people’s minds to their own past lives seems to put off about as many people as it attracts. If there is a continuum running from formal education at one end, through teaching, training and learning to development at the other end, classroom-based training often looks trapped closer to the formal and abstract end rather the practical and business-focussed end. However, most classroom-based training must be practical if it is to be cost-effective.
Trainers often report that the people they see to train are those that like training rather than those that need training. The people who need training most are sometimes those who work hardest to avoid it. And often these ‘training avoiders’ are the more senior staff and managers, who feel that their seniority and experience means that they don’t need training, that they don’t need to learn what’s on offer. Good senior management teams take classroom-based training very seriously: they ‘lead from the front’ by taking an active part in the work of the training room, both as participants and as training providers.
Classroom-based training can have relatively low design or set-up (fixed) costs. The content of training events and programmes is often already available and accessible within the organisation. Content can also be found in the literature or online, or bought from larger and well-established training organizations like Oakwood International. Even ‘bespoke’ training events or programmes usually involve at least some standard ‘off-the-shelf’ elements, and careful web searching can find complete agendas and training plans, ice-breakers, exercises, games, presentations, handouts and role plays. Intellectual property law precludes the wholesale reproduction of these online resources, but the ideas that underlie them are not copyright, so as long as the ideas are reformulated into new training plans, the training designer need not fear legal action.
The greatest cost in the design of training is usually the salary or fee of the trainer. Most freelance trainers charge fees for design of training at somewhat below those they charge for delivery, although this will vary depending on the complexity of material to be trained and on the regularity and frequency of delivery – and on whether the designers will be doing the delivery themselves. If the designer is spending a great deal of time designing an event or programme they will only deliver once, they will seek to charge more for the design than if they are guaranteed to get ongoing delivery fees.
Classroom-based training has relatively high delivery (variable) costs. In a one-day or longer event or programme, one trainer can probably only deal with a maximum of about twelve participants at a time. Between four and eight participants is often judged as more practical.
So, in order to train a small group of people in a day, the costs could break down as:
• Trainers fees and expenses (travel, accommodation and subsistence)
• Participant expenses
• Participant lost-opportunity costs (work that is being missed while participants attend the training)
• Materials costs (participant manuals, handouts, case studies and exercises, copies of slides, folders, writing paper, pens, name cards or stickers, flip chart paper and marker pens, Blu Tack or tape)
• Room, facilities and equipment costs (including hardware and new technology where needed)
• Refreshment costs (lunch, water cooler and glasses, tea and coffee, sweets and biscuits)
If a single event or programme training ten people costs $6000 to deliver, then ten such events, training 100 people, can cost $60,000, as there are few economies of scale in classroom-based training. But there may be other ways to meet the learning objectives. For example, an e-learning application to meet the same learning objectives may cost $60,000 to design, but almost nothing to deliver. Many more than 100 people can hit the learning objectives, at no additional cost.
All this means that if large numbers of people (say more than 100) are required to learn the same material, other kinds of learning opportunities and interventions need to be considered. E-learning is often favoured for delivering very high volumes of training.
However, Classroom-based training is good for smaller numbers of participants, to obtain buy-in, build team spirit and practice behaviour change. It needs to do so in order to avoid the charge of it being too abstract, formal and unfocussed on business needs. It is especially good for Activists. It can strongly influence knowledge, skills and attitudes but, as it takes place away from the workplace, trainers need to make action plans explicit to translate learning back into the workplace.
It is easy to measure learners’ immediate reactions to Classroom-based training, through assessment/evaluation forms or ‘happy sheets’. Harder-to-measure longer-term changes to learning, behaviour and results need to be examined through the organization’s performance management processes.
Sunday, 12 December 2010
On-the-job (OTJ) learning
The importance of OTJ learning cannot be overstated: it is the most common kind of learning at work and very possibly the most effective. It happens to everybody at work, anyway, whether HR, Learning Professionals and line managers like it or not.
Examples of OTJ learning include:
• Delegation
• Trial and error
• Research and projects
• ‘Sitting with Nellie’(being shown a task by someone who already does it)
• Work shadowing and placement
• Secondments
• Observation
• Questions and listening
• Networking
OTJ learning needs no special or additional facilities to those already made available to staff. It has a direct, immediate and relevant relationship to actual work because it IS actual work. Its relevance makes it particularly good for Pragmatists. Activists can also benefit from it, as they are required to DO the work rather than just think or talk about it. Reflectors and Theorists can benefit, but will need time to process and consider tasks (Reflectors) and will need to be given reasons and background behind tasks (Theorists).
OTJ learning is powerful as it can influence the knowledge, skills and attitudes of employees. However, this power is completely dependent upon the quality of line management provided to employees. Good managers and leaders see the roles of delegator, coach, mentor and monitor-evaluator all as part of what they do every day. Bad or inexperienced managers and leaders get lost in the implementation of tasks and fail to concentrate on the OTJ learning of their staff. They forget the old adage ‘Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and eats for a lifetime.’
Even good managers often forget to plan, record, evaluate or celebrate the results of OTJ learning. As it happens anyway, they don’t always see the benefit of managing the process. The costs and benefits of OTJ learning can remain hidden.
But if HR and Learning Professionals can work with line managers to demonstrate the costs and benefits of OTJ learning, line managers can be won over and start to manage the process. So start singing the praises of OTJ learning: the HR professional’s little gem.
Examples of OTJ learning include:
• Delegation
• Trial and error
• Research and projects
• ‘Sitting with Nellie’(being shown a task by someone who already does it)
• Work shadowing and placement
• Secondments
• Observation
• Questions and listening
• Networking
OTJ learning needs no special or additional facilities to those already made available to staff. It has a direct, immediate and relevant relationship to actual work because it IS actual work. Its relevance makes it particularly good for Pragmatists. Activists can also benefit from it, as they are required to DO the work rather than just think or talk about it. Reflectors and Theorists can benefit, but will need time to process and consider tasks (Reflectors) and will need to be given reasons and background behind tasks (Theorists).
OTJ learning is powerful as it can influence the knowledge, skills and attitudes of employees. However, this power is completely dependent upon the quality of line management provided to employees. Good managers and leaders see the roles of delegator, coach, mentor and monitor-evaluator all as part of what they do every day. Bad or inexperienced managers and leaders get lost in the implementation of tasks and fail to concentrate on the OTJ learning of their staff. They forget the old adage ‘Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and eats for a lifetime.’
Even good managers often forget to plan, record, evaluate or celebrate the results of OTJ learning. As it happens anyway, they don’t always see the benefit of managing the process. The costs and benefits of OTJ learning can remain hidden.
But if HR and Learning Professionals can work with line managers to demonstrate the costs and benefits of OTJ learning, line managers can be won over and start to manage the process. So start singing the praises of OTJ learning: the HR professional’s little gem.
Wednesday, 8 December 2010
Self-managed learning
In Self-managed learning, groups and individuals set their own learning objectives, choose the methods by which they will learn and the assessment and evaluation criteria they will apply to their learning. Examples of self-managed learning can include syndicates, forums, study groups and action sets, which can be created within or outside of the learners’ places of work.
The quality of Self-managed learning is dependent upon the motivation and ability of those involved and, for groups happening within organisations, the trust and support of their line managers, their HR managers and the wider organisation. As everything is decided by the people involved, costs and facilities can be unpredictable, so the organisation and its management must be committed to the process for the long term.
There is good evidence that Self-managed learning works for committed Activists, Reflectors, Theorists and Pragmatists. And the freedoms provided by Self-managed learning make it ideal for high potential staff and management, but these same freedoms can make it hard to monitor. Because of this, Self-managed learning is best evaluated through performance management.
The quality of Self-managed learning is dependent upon the motivation and ability of those involved and, for groups happening within organisations, the trust and support of their line managers, their HR managers and the wider organisation. As everything is decided by the people involved, costs and facilities can be unpredictable, so the organisation and its management must be committed to the process for the long term.
There is good evidence that Self-managed learning works for committed Activists, Reflectors, Theorists and Pragmatists. And the freedoms provided by Self-managed learning make it ideal for high potential staff and management, but these same freedoms can make it hard to monitor. Because of this, Self-managed learning is best evaluated through performance management.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)