Informal Learning and Leadership

I have updated my Informal Learning page. A lot of the updates are from my recent blog postings on informal learning, social media, etc. It seems like a lot of the concepts can be tied to Leadership. I have to think it over (reflect) and see what I can come up with. Perhaps something similar to what I did with AARs

Performance and ADDIE Models

Clark Quinn has an informative post where he discusses the need for Performance Analysis, Learner Experience Design, and ADDIE. I think I have it somewhat summed up in this chart I created for my web site (note that clicking the chart will bring up a larger image that has clickable links):

Performance Design Concept Map

Click chart for a larger image & a clickable map that will take you to the various parts

Performance

ADDIE and other ISD and ID models were never designed to to discover performance problems, thus when confronted with such problems you need to discover the actual cause. Note the some managers will present every performance problem as a “training” problem, which means you need to ensure the problem is training related or requires some other performance solution.

The Performance Analysis Quadrant (PAQ) is a tool to help in the identification. By discovering the answer to two questions, “Does the employee have adequate job knowledge?” and “does the employee have the proper attitude (desire) to perform the job?” and assigning a numerical rating between 1 and 10 for each answer, will place the employee in 1 of 4 performance quadrants:

Performance Analysis Quadrant (PAQ)

1. Quadrant A (Motivation): If the employee has sufficient job knowledge but has an improper attitude, this may be classed as motivational problem. The consequences (rewards) of the person's behavior will have to be adjusted. This is not always bad as the employee just might not realize the consequence of his or her actions.
2. Quadrant B (Resource/Process/Environment): If the employee has both job knowledge and a favorable attitude, but performance is unsatisfactory, then the problem may be out of control of the employee. i.e. lack of resources or time, task needs process improvement, the work station is not ergonomically designed, etc.
3. Quadrant C (Selection): If the employee lacks both job knowledge and a favorable attitude, that person may be improperly placed in the position. This may imply a problem with employee selection or promotion, and suggest that a transfer or discharge be considered.
4. Quadrant D (Training and or Coaching): If the employee desires to perform, but lacks the requisite job knowledge or skills, then some type of learning solution is required, such as training or coaching.

Learner Experience Design

Not only must you always use a tool, such as the one above to discover the true solution to a performance problem, ADDIE should almost never be used as a stand-alone solution. Being part of the ISD family, it is very broad in nature, thus it does not go into a lot of details. You need to use it as a plug and play solution — while Clark wrote of Learner Experience Design, you can add any additional components to it on an as-needed, such as Action Mapping, 4C/ID, and Prototyping.

ADDIE

Clark noted in his post that one of ADDIE's failures was being a waterfall method, but as I noted in a past post, ADDIE evolved into a dynamic method in the mid-eighties. ADDIE does make a good checklist; however, use it wisely. If you blindly follow it, then it is nothing more than a process model. However, if you use it in a more creative fashion, then it becomes a true ISD model that enhances the design of the learning process.

ADDIE and the 5 Rules of Zen

As I noted in my last post, we often go astray with our learning initiatives because we fail to properly orient ourselves to the learning/performance environment. While ADDIE or ISD might look like an overblown, time-wasting toolkit, we need to realize that we do not need every tool within that kit. Every project requires a different set of tools. However, there are a few basic ones that will give you direct intuitive insight into the problem at hand. While there are several Zen rules that govern the aesthetics of Japanese gardens and other art forms in Japan, five of them can be directly applied to ADDIE to aid you in creating an energized, but calm learning platform (inspired by a Presentation Zen post).

Analysis = Shizen (自然)

Shizen means naturalness in that it avoids artificial construction. This means analysis must be sought for and expressed in a plain, simple, and natural manner. To get to its natural roots, describe the business need in terms of the performance desired and where they are now. Everything between their present state and desired performance is the performance gap. This gap must be bridged by identifying the skills and knowledge that enable the learners to perform.

Shizen also applies to the learners. Learning becomes difficult when we have to learn new concepts because we have no relationship to them, thus we construct artificial backgrounds. However, when we relate to a new concept naturally by linking it to an experience that is familiar to us, then we learn much faster and deeper. This is why we need to capture the present performance of the learners so that we can create “Advance Organizers” that will link the learner's new knowledge to this present performance or knowledge level. Learners who are given Advance Organizers at the beginning of a learning process have been shown to increase transfer of training.

Design = Shibui/Shibumi (渋味)

Shibui is coolness and beauty through a clear design and nothing more. Think of design as minimalist that articulates brevity. If you decorate or carry it beyond what it was meant to be, then it becomes gauche rather than deco. Think lean by identify the minimal steps and activities that will enable the learners to master the performance rather than rather than overdoing it by including every possibility. To help transform the learning from an activity to a process and reduce the complexity of training; determine the support, such as tools and performance aids, they will need to enable their performance in the workplace.

Development = Fukinsei (均整)

Fukinsei means asymmetry or irregularity. Controlling balance through the use of irregularity and asymmetry is a central belief in Zen aesthetics. For example, the enso or Zen circle is often incomplete to symbolize the asymmetry. Too often we try so hard to create the perfect learning platform by filling in all the blanks that it fails to draw the learners in — we tend to be drawn in more when we can fill in some of the blanks on our own. Designers also tend to carry it to the extreme by adding too much content — it overwhelms the learners with too much information. Thus we need to strive for some incompleteness, irregularity, and/or asymmetry in order to draw the soon-to-be performers into the learning process.

Fukinsei design also implies a deductive approach. That is, rather than being presented with a complete set of concepts, rules, and strategies, that explicitly instructs the learners, they must explore and experiment with the task to infer and learn the rules, principles, and strategies for effective performance (discovery or experimental learning). This approach has been shown to build “Adaptive Expertise” — becoming more adaptable in order to solve unstructured and ill-defined problems. Also closely related to this is “Error-based Learning” to allow for more control processing.

 

“Nature itself is full of beauty and harmonious
relationships that are asymmetrical yet balanced.
This is a dynamic beauty that attracts and engages.”
- Garr Reynolds

Implement = Kanso (簡素)

Kanso means simplicity by eliminating the unneeded things (clutter) to find the clear structure. Clear structure does not necessarily mean a linear list, but rather a choice of options. However, when it comes to practicing the skills, ensure it includes whole-task practice that will help to carry performance to the workplace.

A Kanso style choice of options is also critical as providing learner control has been shown to also build “Adaptive Expertise.”

Evaluation = Seijaku (静寂)

Seijaku is tranquility or an energized calm. An effective learning platform should bring a sense of peace to the organization by eliminating the gap between the present performance and the desired performance identified in the analysis phase. The use of iterations will allow you to quickly lower the unintentional noise and disturbance. Continue iterating until the disturbance has been transformed into the desired state of tranquility.

Seijaku should also be carried one step farther — having the learners participate by monitoring and evaluating in order to help them increase their metacognitive skills.

Picture Credits

deco by Ohad. enso circle by Vibhav. bamboo/rocks and dock by istock. pods and bento by me.

Creating a Learning Platform for Boyd's OODA Loop

In my last post I talked about getting more out of AARs by incorporating them with informal learning and social media tools and then pushing it with formal learning in order to capture lessons learned. This approach allows you to set up a learning strategy that is a real process rather than a one time event. Similar approaches can be done with the OODA loop.

Although originally developed for fighter pilots and then adapted by the Armed Forces, Boyd's OODA Loop is now used by organizations as a decision-making tool that a person or team cycles through as rapidly as possible to help them to stay ahead of their competitors.

It is composed of four actions (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act).

Observe

In this part of the action loop the observer scans the environment in order to gather information and learn about it. However, in this day of abundant information, think more of applying the right filters to gather the information that will be most useful to you. As Clay Shirky notes, “It's Not Information Overload. It's Filter Failure:”

While we are still far from having the perfect filters, we are at least heading in the right direction. For example, I have a list of some of the resources that I use, to include on-line publications, discussion groups, web sites, and blogs that provide me with information about the learning industry. The ones with RSS feeds provide the most value as they feed into my primary browser (Safari) and its is set up so that I only get a small portion of the content. Thus I can quickly scan the latest feeds and then click on them if I determine they have information that interests me. Organizations can help their workers by setting up master portals of relevant links and feeds for each of their various workgroups, and then using a learning platform to help the workers to select the ones that pertain to them the most so they can build their own personal learning environment (PLE) for scanning their environment.

Another useful tool is the ones that belong in the microblogging category, such as Twitter or Yammer, that not only allows our network to send us relevant information and vice-versa, but also allows us to ask for help when we are trying to find information. This may also require a learning platform that will help the workers to learn to send useful information without flooding their coworkers with useless information.

In addition, organizational blogs allow the workers to easily publish their observations so that others may benefit from them. An added benefit is that the readers can provide comments so that the observer/writer receives feedback as discussed in the next part of the action loop — Orient.

Orient

The second part of the action loop is synthesizing the data and information gathered during "observing" into a mental image of the circumstances. As more information is received, you "deconstruct" old images and "create" new images. Within this part of the action loop you have to question past beliefs to see if they still hold true when compared to the new information.

This is perhaps the hardest part of the four actions because we basically fail to ask the right questions and to question our beliefs. For example, Chris Argyris discovered that even highly educated adults stick with Single-Loop Learning rather than using Double-Loop Learning by questioning underlying assumptions:

Another example is the Army, who is best known for creating teams rather than groups, having to create a special environment (AAR) so that the troops could learn from their mistake rather than playing the blame game.

Boyd also noticed this phenomenon in that he spent most of his time emphasizing orient in the OODA loop.

The learning profession also shows this trait of failing to orient themselves in that they rush through the analysis part of a project so fast they fail to properly align the learning platform with real business needs. Secondly, they fail to scan the environment far enough ahead, so rather than designing learning processes, they end up with a learning event that fails to transfer to the workplace. And finally, they fail to evaluate their original beliefs, thus rather than capturing lessons learned, they are doomed to a cycle of repeating their mistakes. No wonder we always hear the old mantra, “ADDIE must die!” — we would rather rush ahead with ill-designed rapid development programs that simply concentrate on development and delivery, rather than properly orientating ourselves to the present environment.

Not only do we fail to question our beliefs, but when we ask others for feedback, they normally evaluate before trying to fully understand. Carl Rogers discovered five main categories of feedback. They are listed below in the order in which they occur most frequently in daily conversations:

1. Evaluative: Making a judgment about the worth, goodness, or appropriateness of the other person's statement.
2. Interpretive: Paraphrasing - attempting to explain what the other person's statement means.
3. Supportive: Attempting to assist or bolster the other communicator.
4. Probing: Attempting to gain additional information, continue the discussion, or clarify a point.
5. Understanding: Attempting to discover completely what the other communicator means by her statements.

Notice that we often make judgments more often than we try to understand.

Thus a formal learning strategy is needed to help the workers develop skills that allow them to question their beliefs and asking probing questions to see if their beliefs are still valid. In addition, this needs to stretch in the other direction so that when others ask for our opinions, we use the five categories of feedback in the proper direction — we gain a level of understanding by using probing, supportive, and interpretive feedback before we provide an evaluation.

Secondly, the microblogging tools mentioned in the Observing portion of the action loop can be used just as effective, if not more, to get the a broader range of opinions from others.

In addition, the use of wikis or other social editing tools, allow teams performing the OODA Loop to rapidly edit group documents as they reorient themselves.

Decide

The use of PLEs with RSS feeds, blogs, microblogging tools, and wikis in the OODA loop allows the workers to consider all the options and select a subsequent course of action.

Act

This is where you carry out the conceived decision. Once the result of the action is observed, you start over. However, before you do, capture lessons learned by using an AAR so that learning becomes part of the natural process:

Note that in combat (or when competing against your competitors), you want to cycle through the four action steps faster and better than the enemy, hence, it is a loop.

Formalizing the Informal: Been there, done that

@Ecollab asks, “Can we formalize informal learning?” My answer, “We've been there, done that.” Except for perhaps compliance learning programs, formal learning processes are designed to do exactly that. For example:

When we put in place a training platform (learning to do a present job) we are ensuring the workers learn a certain process that should not be left to chance. By chance I mean that the workers MIGHT discover a process that they should be following so that your product and/or service is delivered to the customers correctly, thus they learn it informally. Whenever we initiate a training program we are saying that this process is too important to be left to chance (informal learning).

When we put in place an education program (learning to do a future job) we are ensuring that we have in place a critical position that we cannot do without. Most workers learn to do their coworker's job through informal learning. However, some positions are vital to a critical process, thus we cannot leave it to chance (informal learning).

Whenever we develop workers (helping them to grow so that the organization grows), we are helping them to learn certain skills that would otherwise would have to be left to chance (informal learning). For example, in my last post, Driving the Informal with the Formal, I discussed how to capture lessons learned with an AAR and social media.

Note: If you are lost with the three terms (training, education, and development), see The Three Words Your Customer Must Know.

I think this 80/20 informal/formal thingy is kind of going in the wrong way. We should be spending the majority of our time on 20% of the learning taking place within our organization — remember the Pareto principle? Thus you should be asking:

• What processes are critical for delivering our product/service and do we need to ensure that our workers learn them correctly?
• What tasks are so vital to a processes that we have to ensure we educate someone to be a backup?
• How can we best develop our workers so that we continue to grow as a company? What we think of as the "informal" will most often fall into this category.

The 80/20 rule is exactly what we should be doing; however, ensure that the 20% that you are spending most of your time on is the RIGHT 20%.

Driving the Informal with the Formal

There has been some discussion recently that as the world gets more complex, formal learning becomes less relevant. However, complex environments imply an "emerging practice," which in turn implies a customary way of operation or performance. Yes, they may be still emerging, but unless these emerging practices are dealt with in a manner that ensures they do indeed become a customary way of doing things, they will soon turn to chaos if left to chance.

For example, I used to work in a manufacturing environment in which our products had a relative firm foothold in our section of the food industry. Mostly because it was new. Thus with little competition we could take our sweet time in how we dealt with growing and moving forward. However, as we become more successful, other companies, both large and small, soon moved into our niche. Thus in order to stay ahead of them we had to produce faster, cheaper, and with more variety; all while still maintaining the quality that our products were known for. Almost every other month we were moving onto something new, such as Lean and Just-in-Time on the manufacturing side and engagement and communication theories on the OD side in order to ward off the increasing intense competition. Basically we would at first embrace the entire concept for a short while and then examine what worked best for us and what had little or negative impacts, and then shed the unworthy ones.

All of this required some sort of formal learning so that we could produce quality products consistently. This process worked similar to Boyd's OODA Loop:

• Observe — What best or emerging practice can best help us?
• Orient — Test it out to get the proper context.
• Decide — What parts work best (shed the mediocre)?
• Act — Establish it as a practice (normally with the help of formal learning)

Of course the training we provided had to be created and implemented rapidly and was often done through the use of small chunks. Anything less would only lead to chaos.

The other part of a complex environment is providing better means of informal learning as all this learning taking place would be quite inefficient if placed in a formal learning platform. This means that you must not only support the formal learning though faster and smaller learning chunks, but also support the ever increasing informal learning. One way of accomplishing this is through the use of a three-prong process: 1) capture the Lessons Learned, 2) store it in a social site for easy retrieval, and 3) provide a microblogging tool to help others to learn about recent lessons learned.

AAR

As noted in my last post, informal learning can be just as expensive as formal learning, thus the need to get more bang for your bucks. Part of its inefficiency is capturing lessons learned. That is, while a person or small group may learn something new, that learning is rarely or never passed on to others in the organization. Thus while there may be a lot of informal learning occurring, a lot of it are repeats. One of the best means for combating this is through After Action Reviews (AAR). You can help "push" AARs into the working environment through formal learning, such as:

• Classroom — Having the learners discovering which of their projects make good candidate for running through an AAR.
• eLearning — Once their projects are nearing their completion, then they receive some just-in-time training for:
• Questioning Techniques — Using scenarios, such as, rather than asking, “Robert, why did your equipment operators remove the safety guards from the equipment?,” they select, “Robert, can you tell us about your recent safety inspection?”
• Using the four basic steps of an AAR:



• Capturing the results of the four steps through mind maps that keep the steps aligned and use a visual mode that allows other learners to more easily understand them.

Wikis

Once the learners have learned to capture Lessons Learned and then actually put it to practice, they need to move them to a storage site, such as a wiki or SharePoint so others may learn from them. Throughout my travels I have noted that some of the most barren social media sites are often corporate wikis. This is because most were implemented in the same manner as the old Knowledge Management systems were — write your knowledge down and then put it in the wiki. Yet, as we soon learned, people don't want to waste their time creating content that someone MIGHT use. But fortunately, using a wiki as a site for Lessons Learned is the perfect vehicle as the content have already been created through the AAR process and what the participants have learned will more than likely be needed by others.

Microblogging

In addition, we need one more tool for carry the Lessons Learned forward — a microblogging tool such as Twitter, Yammer, Present.ly, Socialcast, or Socialwok. While some of the lessons learned may require formal learning techniques, the majority do not. However, simply putting them in a wiki or SharePoint is not enough as people who have done similar projects in the past and are about to start a new project do not normally go digging through sites to see if something new has been learned. Thus such microblogging tools are invaluable for:

• People completing a project — they can send a tweet to broadcast the highlights of Lessons Learned that put others in the loop.
• People starting a new project — they can announce their new project and ask if there is something has recently been learned about implementing such projects.

Now while some people and indeed, entire groups or teams will naturally take to such microblogging tools, others will not. Thus you have to know your learners — do they need help with learning the new technology? Don't stop with just a class. Ensure you push the learning into the workplace by requiring them to complete x number of tweets per week, or asking x number of questions and tweeting x number of recent learnings.

Hopefully this three step process will be useful in your quest to support informal learning by capturing the Lessons Learned through the use of an AAR, storing it in a social site, such as a wiki or SharePoint for easy retrieval, and then providing a microblogging tool, such or Twitter or Yammer, to help others to learn about recent lessons learned.

How do you plan on supporting the informal?

The True Cost of Informal Learning

Before I start I want to note that in a very few instances I've been accused of not helping the cause when I question some of the research on informal/formal learning. My position is that I'm neither fer er or agin it, but rather discovering the truth so that we can make logical decisions in our performance efforts. For example, late last year I blogged a post defending informal learning. With that being said...

I'm sure most of you are familiar with this chart in which we are told that 20% of the learning is formal and 70% is informal, yet paradoxical we spend 80% of our training budget on the formal and only 30% on the informal:

Chart 1

The trouble with this chart is that while the percentage of learning is basically correct, the amount we spend on each is based on weak research. Even if all the numbers are correct, it does not matter what the Learning department spends, but rather what the organization spends. In addition, if informal learning was really all that efficient, why does it need it need our support?

One ASTD research project supported by the U.S. Department of Labor reported that the amount of employer investments in workplace training hovers around $210 billion annually and of that, $30 billion is spent on formal training, while the remainder, $180 billion, is spent on informal and on-the-job training (Carnevale, Gainer & Villet, 1990). Thus, informal learning gets 86% of all learning investments, while formal learning programs get 14% of the total investment.

Now if we chart those numbers out, it would look like chart 2 below; however, note that it is NOT correct either:

Chart 2

The reason it is wrong is that expenditure for training/learning departments do not count the learners time (hourly wage) spent in formal training, while informal learning expenditure count the workers hourly wages. To get a more accurate cost we need to add the learner' wages to formal learning's cost. Thus we need to add about 36 billion to the formal learning side, which would give us a chart similar to this:

Chart 3

As we start to get the truer cost of informal learning, we discover that rather than being this highly efficient learning machine, it is probably just about as efficient as formal learning. And if you really think about, it makes sense — just because I'm informally learning does not mean my brain starts working 3 or 4 times faster than when I'm in a formal environment. In addition, formal learning would get the edge if you have a lot of people learning a particular task because because rather than each one of them "building" their own learning package, you have one designer doing the initial legwork for everyone.

Thus rather than being this highly efficient learning machine that we can ignore, it may require just as much of our attention as the formal side of learning.

References

Carnevale, A., Gainer, L., & Villet, J. (1990). Training in America: The Organization and Strategic Role of Training. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

The Three Words Your Customer Must Know

Before I dive into the three words I need to clear up two more misconceptions about training first. Why? Because its one of the words.

Jay includes "training" in his of 8 Dirty Words and gives the following reason, "Training is something you do to someone. Learning is something people do for themselves."

Some of the roughest, toughest people in the training profession are U.S. Marine Drill Sergeants. One of their mottos is that they will not give up un a new recruit as long as he or she does not give up on themselves. Even though their training is some of the best in the world, it is not a one-size-fit-all solution, and they realize they can't "do it" to others; but rather the learners must be willing to learn it themselves. They adjust as long as the learners are willing to learn. I cannot "do it" to you; you must be willing to learn yourself.

Daniel Spira commenting on Jay's post (How Not To Sell Learning / Performance / Training & Development Projects), writes

On the flip side, the term “training” does suggest a strong one-way orientation, as in, “Here is the process.  Follow it.”  and in that way, appears to presuppose how a given solution will be delivered, which may or may not fit with the client’s needs. 

Just because I offer training as one solution, does that mean it is the only solution I am allowed to offer? If I am presented with a performance problem and if it is decided that learning is part of the solution and if the learning meets certain requirements, then yes, training just might be the solution.

OK, on to the three words, Training, Education, Development. These three words are important because they tell the customer when they are going to see a payoff (impact or result) and what must be done to achieve the payoff.

Training

Training is learning that is provided in order to improve performance on the present job. This means training is orientated towards the present. And workplace performance is the only measure to determine its success.

Why must your customer know this? If it is decided that training is the solution, then it has to be carried over to the workplace. It does not require fancy ROI's or other fancy measurements but rather that the agreed upon performance is actually being accomplished once the training is performed. This means there must be an immediate impact once the training has occurred and if this impact is not seen then the training failed. Two quick examples.

I trained forklift operations in manufacturing and distribution centers. Note that these forklifts operate differently than cars in that they have no steering wheel but rather joysticks, their braking system is backwards in that you step on it to make it go and release it to make it stop, etc. Once we have completed the training in a safe place the learners are then certified in the actual workplace. I ascertain that the performance is carried over to the workplace. If I don't ensure the impact occurs then that means I did an half-a** job. Its that simple.

I have also trained SQL on AS/400 systems. The training is important because if they fail to do it correctly they can not only get an incorrect solution but may also bring the system to a crawl. Once we have completed the classroom training, the learners return to the workplace and within a set period of time they are required to build three SQL solutions. Before running each solution they send it to the instructional staff to ensure it is correct. If they fail to complete the assignment their SQL privileges are revoked. We ensure performance carries over to the workplace.

Education

Education in organizations differ from education in schools so don't let the following definition confuse you. Education is training people to do a different job. It is often given to people who have been identified as being promotable, being considered for a new job either lateral or upwards, or to increase their potential. Unlike training, which can be fully evaluated immediately upon the learners returning to work, education can only be evaluated when the learners move on to their future jobs or tasks.

Why must your customer know this term? Since there is a delay between the learning solution and the actual performance, then reinforcement has to occur. If no reinforcement is provided then there is a very good chance that performance will decline (we loose what we do not use). Learning professionals and their customers often get themselves into trouble when they provided training solutions to educational learning problems.

For example, an organization is implementing a new system. Sixty-four days before the new system is to be implemented the learners receive their "training." On the day of the new system implemention things turn into a disaster because the workers forgot what they had learned. The only way a training solution would work is if for example the learners are trained on a weekend and the new system is implemented on Monday. Another method is to provide a performance support solution. If it is decided that the only solution is classroom learning and for some reason the learners will not be able to put their new skills and knowledge to immediate use, then it has to be treated as educational learning, which means reinforcement must be be provided during the delay.

Development

Development is training people to acquire new horizons, technologies, or viewpoints. It enables leaders to guide their organizations onto new expectations by being proactive rather than reactive. It enables workers to create better products, faster services, and more competitive organizations. It is learning for growth of the individual, but not related to a specific present or future job.

Why must your customer know this term? Most development solutions require a lot of involvement from everyone involved, to include the leaders and the learning specialists. In addition the payoff (impact or result) is normally not going to be seen for some time.

For example, during my talks with my last three customers (all large organizations) I discovered that they all had wikis, but that that they were all basically barren wastelands. And they all implemented them in basically the same way — a training solution was provided. Again, wrong learning solution for the problem. Development solutions that get solved with training solutions is probably the biggest reason that training gets it bad reputation. For example, in my last post I noted that such programs as spirit-building, inculcation of company history and philosophy, and individual growth were identified as training, thus they failed to provide the proper impact when measured against Kirkpatrick's Four-Levels of Evaluation. The reason they failed does not mean they are bad programs, but rather they were treated as training problems rather than development opportunities.

So do yourself and your customers a favor — know the three terms and know when to use them

How Learning Professionals Made Training a Dirty Word

"Training is what you do to dogs."

Yea. Right. Tell that to the U.S. Armed Forces who used it correctly to become the finest warriors the world has ever seen.

An author writing for a training magazine pens, "How many times have you heard training directors say: "I need to find a way to assure that what I teach in the classroom is effectively used on the job?" "I would estimate that only 10 percent of content which is presented in the classroom is reflected in behavioral change on the job." Shortly after his article appeared, a peer-reviewed journal cites the magazine and article that the "rhetorical question" appears in as "research has shown that only 10% of training transfer to the job." Not too long after that books and speakers are citing the peer-reviewed article (and each other) as proof that training does not work. Learning professionals applause and are awed by this amazing piece of "research."

Yea. Right. If I knew that only 10% of my efforts paid off I would follow Beck's advice, call myself a looser, and go shoot myself.

Two researchers show that Kirkpatrick's Four-Levels of Evaluation is not effective for evaluating "training." However, rather than actually examining "training" programs, they exam such "learning" programs as spirit-building, inculcation of company history or philosophy, and individual growth. And of course the Four-Levels prove ineffective in evaluating these "training" programs. The learning community is happy — the research has not only shown that "training" does not transfer, but also that our methods for evaluating it are ineffective.

Yea. Right. Kirkpatrick never said that his method was valid for evaluating all learning programs, but rather training programs.

The world is becoming so complex that training is no longer a useful concept, besides past "research" has shown that it is pretty much ineffective. It only works with dogs.

Yea. Right. The aerospace industry is perhaps one of the most complex industries around, yet they are able to survive in this complexity through set processes, which of course must be trained.

Great work learning community! We can now forget about "training" and simply do pure "learning" programs. To show that we are still advancing our profession, what word are we going after this decade?

Leading Through a Rear-View Mirror

Shortly after posting Metalearning and Learning Styles I glanced through the latest edition of Chief Learning Officer and came to an interesting quote, "Many CLOs believe podcasting is oversold because few people are auditory learners and its no different than cassettes or CDs from the past 15 years." You can read the article at, A Look at the Industry in 2010 (the quote is on the last page, top paragraph).

I find this quite interesting as CLOs should be the thought-leaders in our profession and yet they are following Marshall McLuhan's quote spot on:

The past went that-a-way. When faced with a totally new situation, we tend always to to attach ourselves to the objects, to the flavor of the recent past. We look at the present through a rear-view mirror. We march backwards into the future. - The Medium is the Massage.

Rather than looking backwards through a rear-view mirror, they should be looking at McLuhan's tetrad: four laws for looking at our culture and framed as questions:

• Enhancement or extend: what improved performance does it provide over the old
• Obsolescence: what does it make passe
• Retrieval: what new media is pulled from our cultural inventory
• Reversal: we tend to over-do the new until we run out of benefits and into detriments

Thus, the four questions that should be asked about podcasting are:

What does the technology extend or enhance?

It extends the benefits of dL (distance Learning) by providing the best medium for delivering lectures. See The effectiveness of m-learning in the form of podcast revision lectures in higher education and Turn on your iPod and learn. Note that lectures are an effective means for departing subject matter knowledge and is just as effective as discussions (Dunkin & Barnes, 1985; Kulik & Kulik, 1979; McKeachie, 1962; Ryan, 1969). In addition, the CLOs in the survey are guilty of placing too much stock in learning styles. The question is not "what media should we use for a learning style," but "what method of learning is best for the knowledge or skill that must be acquired.

Podcasts also enhances the device itself in that it is digital and a more versatile package than cassette or CD players.

What does it make obsolete?

Time spent in the classroom can now be spent on interactions and activities rather than listening.

Podcasting, part of the audio digital file family, is already eliminating the need to keep track of extra media, such as cassettes and CDs.

What is retrieved?

Subject matter knowledge.

What does the technology reverse into if it is over-extended?

It reverts into classroom training that is composed of nothing more than lectures. Thus while podcasts may be used strictly on their own in a few select instances, they should normally be used to train the subject knowledge required for a task, in addition to being used with classroom or elearning activities that will actually give the learners the skills to use the knowledge gained with the podcasts.