PIAF - I need you

All this week, I have been discussing a simple four-phase model for the design of workplace learning interventions:

• Preparation: Helping the learner to prepare for a productive learning experience.
• Input: Providing the formal element which hopefully will inspire the learner and act as a catalyst for changes in behaviour and on-going skills development.
• Application: Providing opportunities for the learner to test out new ideas and skills in the work environment.
• Follow-up: Helping the learner to continue their learning journey using on-demand content, coaching and support from peers.

I end this series of posts with a call to action.

Next year (probably nearer the end than the start) Onlignment will be publishing More than blended learning, my attempt to build on what I started eight years ago with The Blended Learning Cookbook, based on countless encounters since with workplace learning professionals from around the world. In this book I would like to include something like 6-10 case studies of great blended solutions, particularly those that include all the four phases described above. By 'great' I mean that they met their performance objectives without wasting organisational resources, while at the same time taking account of the hopes and fears of the target population.

If you agree to participate (and your employer/client is happy to make the case study public), I will arrange an initial discussion, to talk through the case. Where practical I would like to take this further and conduct interviews on video.

Please contact me using the contact form at http://onlignment.com/contact/ if you would like to help.

PIAF - the ideas adventure

From Monday of this week, I have been sharing with you a simple four-phase model for the design of workplace learning interventions:

• Preparation: Helping the learner to prepare for a productive learning experience.
• Input: Providing the formal element which hopefully will inspire the learner and act as a catalyst for changes in behaviour and on-going skills development.
• Application: Providing opportunities for the learner to test out new ideas and skills in the work environment.
• Follow-up: Helping the learner to continue their learning journey using on-demand content, coaching and support from peers.

Yesterday I demonstrated how the four phases could be applied to a typical skills development intervention. Today, I will attempt to do the same for an intervention that explores ideas.

First of all, what do I mean by exploring ideas? Well, I mean more than the teaching of the knowledge (facts, concepts, rules, etc.) which underpin work performance. Knowledge may be a pre-requisite to the exploration of ideas, but it won't take you all the way there. Ideas are key principles which underpin your decision making. It is not enough to know about ideas; before you can put them into practice you have to believe them too. Here are some examples of subjects which are fundamentally driven by ideas:

• Leadership
• Equality and inclusion
• Project management
• Art and design
• Marketing
• Strategic management

These topics will often form the basis for academic programmes, but the four phases of PIAF imply a focus not on learning for its own sake (or to obtain a qualification) but on learning as a basis for changing work behaviour. Here's how an adventure in ideas might look:

Again I have attempted to show how, as the intervention progresses, we see the shift from push to pull, from courses to resources.

Tomorrow, in the final post, I ask you to help me by sharing your own case studies for blended solutions which utilise all these phases.

Next: I need you

PIAF - the skills journey

On Monday and Tuesday of this week, I shared with you a simple four-phase model for the design of workplace learning interventions:

• Preparation: Helping the learner to prepare for a productive learning experience.
• Input: Providing the formal element which hopefully will inspire the learner and act as a catalyst for changes in behaviour and on-going skills development.
• Application: Providing opportunities for the learner to test out new ideas and skills in the work environment.
• Follow-up: Helping the learner to continue their learning journey using on-demand content, coaching and support from peers.

In this post, I intend to demonstrate how the four phases could be applied to the development of skills, whether motor (driving a car, lifting a heavy object, using a mouse), interpersonal (dealing with customer complaints, providing feedback, negotiating) or cognitive (troubleshooting a computer fault, solving an equation, developing a strategic plan). All skills have one important thing in common, which is that they will not develop without lots of practice, ideally with helpful feedback.

You will see an outline for the skills journey below, mapped to the four phases and also to that old favourite - the model which sees the learner move from unconscious incompetence to unconscious competence:

• Unconscious incompetence: Ignorance is bliss. Skilled performance looks so easy when applied effortlessly by experts - surely it can't be that hard.
• Conscious incompetence: So then you have a go. 'Oh dear, this is much harder than I thought. There's so much to think about at the same time - I don't know whether I'll be able to manage this.' Unfortunately, that is the stage at which many learning interventions finish - the learner is in a worse emotional state than when they started. Ideally the Input phase would not leave the learner in such an uncomfortable position; they should be along the way to �
• Conscious competence: You continue to practise, with lots of constructive feedback. In time you will begin to believe you can really do this, even if it takes a lot of conscious effort.
• Unconscious competence: In time and with enough practice a skill will become unconscious - you will be able to perform it without effort. Eventually you will wonder what the fuss was all about - this is so easy it almost seems intuitive.

I must admit I've been wary of this four-step approach - the play on words seems too good to be true. However, it does conform quite well to the realities of skills development, so I'm happy to use it here.

You will see from this table that I have also mapped the shift from courses to resources, although in reality the distinction will be much less clear-cut.

Tomorrow I'll demonstrate how PIAF might apply when the aim is to explore ideas rather than develop skills.

Next: The ideas adventure

PIAF - blending in

Yesterday I outlined a simple series of four phases through which a workplace learning intervention should progress:

• Preparation: Helping the learner to prepare for a productive learning experience.
• Input: Providing the formal element which hopefully will inspire the learner and act as a catalyst for changes in behaviour and on-going skills development.
• Application: Providing opportunities for the learner to test out new ideas and skills in the work environment.
• Follow-up: Helping the learner to continue their learning journey using on-demand content, coaching and support from peers.

In practice, many interventions consist solely of the Input phase. While formal inputs may be stimulating at the time, they are all too often isolated events that are not fully exploited. While some learners, particularly those who are well supported by their line mangers, will be able to organise their own equivalents of Application and Follow-up, all too often all you are left with are regrets.

PIAF is helpful because it does not unduly focus on the Input phase; it blends this in to a process that starts and ends in the real-work environment. So why is 'blending in' so important?

Preparation: Any sort of formal input - from a series of virtual classroom sessions, to an online simulation, to the meeting of an action learning set - needs a clear purpose. In the Preparation phase, the learner, ideally in partnership with their manager, can reflect on their needs and establish goals. If there is any misalignment between the upcoming Input and the learner's starting point then this can be addressed here: the Input can be adapted to better meet the learner's need; and the learner can undertake some preliminary study to make sure they are fully prepared to take advantage of the Input. Either way, the Input phase will blend in more effectively - it will not be isolated or mis-aligned.

Preparation has another important role which is to start to address the learner's hopes and fears - their emotional response to the intervention. As Nick Shackleton-Jones has pointed out, while a focus on performance is important, it is not sufficient. The Preparation phase can be used to build relationships between peers, to establish ground rules, to address fears and align the intervention with the learner's personal aspirations.

Application: Without Application, all we are left with is good intentions - skills remain rudimentary and ideas untested. Application is when you should start to get a return on the investment that has been made in Input; 'should' because sometimes the skills you have started to develop and the ideas you have provisionally taken on board will not deliver on the promise and will fail to improve performance; but without Application you will never know.

Follow-up: An intervention is just that; it is an interlude on the journey not the journey itself. The Follow-up phase embeds the learning into the everyday job environment, helping the learner to refine their skills and ideas and to keep up-to-date with the continually changing demands of the job. This phase sees a shift from push to pull, and from courses to resources. As their confidence increases, the employee will start to become an actor in supporting others, a teacher as well as a learner.

In the next two posts, I will demonstrate how PIAF can be applied to the development of skills and to the exploration of ideas.

Next: The skills journey

PIAF - no regrets

I don't often have cause to write about French singers on this blog. It is true that, at the time of writing, I am on my way to Lyon to run a workshop on blended learning, but otherwise the connection is tenuous to say the least, as you will see.

I have been refining my method for the design of blended solutions for close to ten years now, testing it against hundreds of different real-world problems. I feel comfortable with the processes I have settled on for gathering data about the requirements of a particular situation, and for the way in which decisions are made about methods and media.

But until recently I did not believe it was possible to follow a standard sequence within blended solutions, a series of phases that could be applied effectively in a wide variety of situations. However, what I found when I looked back over many different designs was that successful solutions seemed to follow a certain pattern of four phases. I struggled to find names for these phases that would apply to both formal and non-formal interventions using a wide range of different strategies, but I'm happy with what I've settled on. You can imagine I was amused when it also spelled out a name, PIAF.

Preparation: In this phase your aim is to prepare the learner for a productive learning experience. You may include measures to pinpoint areas of need, establish goals, address any shortcomings in prep-requisite knowledge, introduce learners to each other and provide an overview of what is to follow.

Input: This phase represents the primary formal element of your programme. This is when you do things like run workshops, provide on-job instruction, make available core learning material, and so on.

Application: In this phase, learners put what they have learned into action, whether directly on the job or through individual and group assignments. With larger programmes, Input and Application are likely to cycle as the learner progresses through a number of modules.

Follow-up: It is very unlikely that you will have achieved your objectives fully at the end of the Application phase. The follow-up phase allows your solution to become an on-going process rather than a one-off event. You will look to provide facilities such as coaching and materials that the learner can access on demand. As the balance shifts from �courses� to �resources�, the follow-up phase will become increasingly dominant. 

PIAF is not rocket science - I'm sure that, given the chance, you'd have come up with something similar - but that does not mean it is common sense. Most workplace learning interventions have just one phase - Input - typically a classroom course or a piece of e-learning. They are disconnected from the real world in which the employee operates. They struggle to make an impact, even when - at the time - they are engaging and enjoyable. What PIAF does is to put formal Input in its place - just one step in an on-going learner journey that will most likely also include non-formal, on-demand and experiential elements.

In subsequent posts this week I will explain more about PIAF and how it might be applied to different types of (mostly top-down) workplace learning interventions. I'm sceptical if it has application in any sort of educational setting but I'll let you be the judge of that. What I'm hoping is that, when it is applied rigorously, you will have less regrets about interventions that start promisingly then fizzle out. Like Edith Piaf, you'll be able to say 'Non, je ne regret rien'.

Next: Blending in

Designs on Learning: An interview with Lisa Minogue-White

This video is the third in a series of interviews that I am conducting with leading e-learning designers in the UK, in conjunction with e.learning age magazine. This one appeared in the September issue.

See previous interviews with Mark Bennett and Stephanie Dedhar.

The Really Useful eLearning Instruction Manual is here and it is really useful

Along with my co-contributors, I�m delighted to be able to let you know about this new publication, edited by my good friend Rob Hubbard, which celebrates 25 years of the eLearning Network.

This is what the publishers have to say about the book:

�Technology has revolutionised every aspect of our lives and how we learn is no exception. The trouble is, the range of elearning technologies and the options available can seem bewildering. Even those who are highly experienced in one aspect of elearning will lack knowledge in some other areas. Wouldn�t it be great if you could access the hard-won knowledge, practical guidance and helpful tips of world-leading experts in these fields? Edited by Rob Hubbard and featuring chapters written by global elearning experts: Clive Shepherd, Laura Overton, Jane Bozarth, Lars Hyland, Rob Hubbard, Julie Wedgwood, Jane Hart, Colin Steed, Clark Quinn, Ben Betts and Charles Jennings � this book is a practical guide to all the key topics in elearning, including: getting the business on board, building it yourself, learning management, blended, social, informal, mobile and game-based learning, facilitating online learning, making the most of memory and more.�

Table of contents

1. So What is eLearning? Clive Shepherd
2. Getting the Business on Board Laura Overton
3. Build In-House, Buy Off -the-Shelf or Outsource? Jane Bozarth
4. Production Processes � Making it Happen! Lars Hyland
5. Making the Most of Memory Rob Hubbard
6. Blended Learning Julie Wedgwood
7. Informal and Social Learning Jane Hart
8. Facilitating Live Online Learning Colin Steed
9. Mobile Learning Clark Quinn
10. Game-Based Learning Ben Betts
11. Learning Management Charles Jennings

If you�d like to purchase the book directly from www.wiley.com, then you'll get a 15% discount using the code VBF11. Alternatively, you'll find it at Amazon and all the usual places, including on Kindle.

Designs on Learning: An interview with Stephanie Dedhar

This video is the second of a series of interviews that I am conducting with leading e-learning designers in the UK, in conjunction with e.learning age magazine. This one appeared in the July/August issue.

See the first interview with Mark Bennett.

Video for learning: part 1 of my interview with Nice Media

Designs on Learning: An interview with Mark Bennett

This video is the first of a series of interviews that I am conducting with leading e-learning designers in the UK, in conjunction with e.learning age magazine. This one appeared in the June issue.

I have deliberately chosen to interview the new breed of successful young designers, rather than the old hands, to hear what fresh perspectives they may have on design and to give them a chance to show their work. I hope you find them enjoyable.

I'll try and post one up every 2-4 weeks, although if you want to see the very latest videos, you'll need to go to the magazine.

Tips for blends 10: Extend the blend along the whole learning journey

For far too long we have deluded ourselves into thinking that we can achieve meaningful learning through a single live event or using a single resource, however brilliantly these are facilitated or designed. Learning is a process, a journey, which requires takes time and a wide range of initiatives, some by teachers, trainers and coaches, but many by learners themselves.

One of the primary arguments for blending is that it allows us to dispense with the idea of learning as an event and look to provide just the right support to the learner at every step they take from ignorance to mastery. This starts by helping them prepare for the journey they will be taking, providing formal learning activities and resources, encouraging application to the real work situation, and then following-up as long as with needed with additional input and guidance. That�s further than most learning departments currently go, but anything less is a job half done, at best.

And that's all folks!

Tips for blends 9: Recognise that face-to-face learning still has an important part to play

However fast your bandwidth and however high-resolution your webcam, you cannot fully replicate a multi-sensory, face-to-face experience online � at least not for now. There are occasions when learners really do need to get hands-on with tools and equipment (perhaps even with each other), explore a real physical space, be aware of the body language of others in the room or just experience the magic of the occasion.

Most learning does not require you to be face-to-face with others � just like you happily listen to music on your iPod, watch sport on TV or films at the cinema � but some does. While face-to-face learning will increasingly become the special case rather than the default, it will still have a valuable role to play. Imagine if you never, ever got to go to a theatre, watch a live band or join the crowd at a football stadium.

Next: Extend the blend along the whole learning journey

Tips for blends 8: Keep all ideas about technology out of your mind until you�ve fixed on a suitable method

Technology will rarely make much of an impact on the effectiveness of your solution. Yes it could make it faster, cheaper, more flexible and more scalable, but it won�t guarantee that you achieve your goals. The first priority in any learning design � once you have a clear understanding of the requirement � is to establish the strategies that will best facilitate the required learning for your particular population.

Once you have a strategy that you believe in, don�t compromise. There is absolutely no point in going for a highly efficient solution that doesn�t work. So, take each element in your strategy and ask yourself how you can deliver this efficiently and flexibly, without compromising on the intended outcomes. Technology is a tool, not a goal in itself.

Next: Recognise that face-to-face learning still has an important part to play

Tips for blends 7: Keep a balance between the synchronous and asynchronous

Asynchronous media work at your pace � there is no requirement for you to be �in synch� with anyone else. You can consume the contents of books, DVDs and iPods � or their online equivalents � whenever you want; you have similar flexibility when you communicate using email, forums, SMS and social networks.

But there�s something special about participating in a live event in the company of your peers. It focuses your energies and helps to ensure you keep up-to-date with your self-paced learning activities. Synchronous experiences, whether face-to-face, online or on the telephone, enrich a blend and provide it with momentum. Sometimes a blend can be too flexible � it makes it too easy to put off those essential learning tasks until another day.

Next: Keep all ideas about technology out of your mind until you�ve fixed on a suitable method

Tips for blends 6: Use guided discovery to get across the big ideas

Some tasks are rule-based � they are carried out in accordance with clearly laid-down policies and procedures. But nearly all jobs also require the incumbent to make judgements in highly variable situations. These tasks are principle-based; they rely on the employee�s ability to make sense of the myriad of cause and effect relationships that impact on them in their work.

It is rarely effective to convey principles through exposition or instruction. You will not be nicer to customers, stop eating chocolate or finish your meetings on time just because someone else tells you these things are important. You need to discover the big ideas for yourself, either through hard experience or through a learning activity that has been designed specially to encourage those �aha� moments.

Next: Keep a balance between the synchronous and asynchronous

Tips for blends 5: Build in lots of opportunities to practise new skills

We have already discussed how easy it is to overload learners with information, particularly abstract theory, facts and procedures. Another side effect of our focus on knowledge is that we allow far too little time for learners to practise new skills. Imagine if you went to a tennis lesson and spent the whole time watching videos and discussing tactics: how frustrating this would be?

Generally speaking it�s best to provide the learner with the absolute minimum amount of information they need before they can start practising. You can top up on the theory later, as they encounter difficulties and are striving to get better. That�s why coaching can play a valuable role in so many blends.

Next: Use guided discovery to get across the big ideas

Tips for blends 4: Don�t overdo the self-study

Self-study provides attractive benefits to learners, particularly in the control that it allows them over what they learn, when, where and at what pace. It also puts a smile on the face of the finance director, because it�s so cheap, at least when there are lots of people who require training. But blends have to be effective as well as cheap and flexible. As we�ve seen, they must deliver in terms of performance.

Self-study works well in small doses, but we are social animals and we need to externalise our learning, to reassure ourselves of our progress, and to compare our thoughts with others. Not only that; after prolonged periods of self-study we are going to be bursting with questions and comments that can only be adequately resolved by contact with coaches and experts.

Next: Build in lots of opportunities to practise new skills

Tips for blends 3: Focus on performance, not knowledge

Schools and colleges exist primarily to foster learning. Employers are only interested in learning to the extent that it influences performance.  Employers invest in learning interventions because they believe these will positively impact on their key performance indicators, but they have lots of other ways to spend their money and need reassurance that they are getting a good return.

So, focus in on business needs and what employees need to be doing differently or better if these needs are to be met. Then ask yourself what employees absolutely must know if they are to do the things that the business needs. This focus will ensure you don�t overload employees with information they don�t need and that, instead, you provide lots of opportunities for them to practise and build confidence.

Next: Don�t overdo the self-study

Tips for blends 2: Try to stop the subject expert and the client dictating the solution

A subject-matter expert should be your friend and partner, but he or she should not be your master. Their role is to ensure the quality of the technical content; yours is to ensure that the learning objectives are achieved. Of course the SME may be able to provide you with valuable insights into the best ways to communicate their expertise, but they are not ideally placed to offer this advice. Why? Because subject experts suffer from �the curse of knowledge� � they believe that every aspect of their subject is not only of vital importance but intrinsically interesting to just about anyone. They are wrong.

The situation is similar with clients and other forms of project sponsor. Try not to let them dictate to you how their needs should be met. Your relationship should be one of professional adviser, not order taker. The client�s responsibility is to articulate their needs. Yours is to help them to meet these needs effectively and efficiently.

Next: Focus on performance, not knowledge

Tips for blends 1: Don�t jump to solutions � start with a sound analysis

This one�s a bit obvious, but it needs saying. It�s oh so tempting when confronted with a new project to jump straight into the creative process of selecting the ingredients for your blend without a clear understanding of what it is that you�re required to achieve. There will be plenty of room for creativity later on in the design process, although you may find that the �how� becomes all too obvious once you have answered the questions �what�, �why�, �who for�, �by when� and �for how much�.

To conduct a thorough analysis you need to be systematic and persistent; systematic to make sure you fully explore all aspects of the learning, the learners and the logistics, and persistent, because project sponsors may be reluctant to answer so many questions. A good test is how clearly you feel you could articulate the requirement to a third party; if you cannot explain it properly, then you don�t understand it well enough.

Next: Try to stop the subject expert and the client dictating the solution

My tips for better blends

This is my self-proclaimed year of the blend and I'm releasing a new book on blended learning in the new year, so it's time to collect my thoughts.

There is nothing inherently wonderful about a blended solution. Making the decision to design an intervention in a blended format is only your first step � the quality of your end result depends on what you include in the blend and when, and how well these decisions reflect the learning requirement, the characteristics of your target population and the particular resource constraints within which you are being asked to operate.

Every day for the next week or so I will be sharing some of my tips for better blends. None of these will guarantee that you will make great design decisions but they may just point you in the right direction.

Here's what's coming:

1: Don�t jump to solutions � start with a sound analysis
2: Try to stop the subject expert and the client dictating the solution
3: Focus on performance, not knowledge
4: Don�t overdo the self-study
5: Build in lots of opportunities to practise new skills
6: Use guided discovery to get across the big ideas
7: Keep a balance between the synchronous and asynchronous
8: Keep all ideas about technology out of your mind until you�ve fixed on a suitable method
9: Recognise that face-to-face learning still has an important part to play
10: Extend the blend along the whole learning journey

The new self-directed learning toolkit

For practically thirty years now, the default corporate solution for any sort of formal, self-directed learning intervention has been self-study e-learning, specifically some form of interactive tutorial. While this format certainly can deliver the goods, and provides  a simple, trackable means to monitor compliance, it frequently falls down on many fronts:

• Interactive tutorials are time-consuming, expensive and complex to put together.
• It takes a great deal of expertise to do a really good job of designing an engaging solution, and this is in short supply.
• The format has hardly advanced since the 1980s, except perhaps in superficial graphical terms, and there appears to be little interest among producers for fully exploiting the potential for intelligent, adaptive tutorials.
• The learner is isolated from peers, experts and others who can assist their learning.
• Assessment is often superficial and knowledge-based.
• It can be tricky to deploy these tutorials on mobile devices.
• It is hard for the learner to re-visit any of the elements of the tutorial for reference, without getting caught up in the sequential, page-driven navigational system.

This would be a depressing state of events, if there weren't simpler, cheaper and better alternatives available, with lower barriers to entry. These days I hardly ever suggest an interactive tutorial as a solution for a client, unless I know it can be produced to a very high standard. So what do I believe are the essential components of my everyday online learning toolkit?

• Videos can be easily delivered to any device and can be highly-engaging as long as they are kept short and sweet. Even when professionally produced, they cost little and can be ready in as little as a few hours. Whether you need interviews, demos, how-to's or animated explanations of difficult concepts - video works perfectly. 
• Web articles and PDFs are not a glamorous or high-tech solution, but they are the resources we normally turn to for a more in-depth examination of an issue. Web articles are the more flexible of the two options, but PDFs are better when you know the document is going to get printed.
• Scenarios are the one ingredient of contemporary e-learning which I would keep in my everyday toolkit. They do not have to be technically difficult to develop (they can be as simple as a piece of text followed by a multiple choice question) but they do have to be challenging, authentic and relevant to the learner's real-world problems. Scenarios are a form of guided discovery; they encourage insights; they help to get across the big ideas.
• A forum is another simple, inexpensive tool which sits nicely alongside the packaged self-directed materials. Forums allow for Q&A, for debate and for the externalisation of learning. Obviously there are other ways to achieve the same result, not least a face-to-face discussion, but the forum does the job.
• Links might seem too trivial to be considered a self-directed core learning tool, but they act as a gateway to all sorts of other resources beyond the packaged materials that you have put together. You can act as a content curator and suggest links, but then so, of course, can learners. Come to think of it, they can come up with some pretty good videos and web articles too.

These are the staples for a predominantly self-directed solution. There will be other tools that need to be brought into action for the special cases:

• Learning journals (blogs) provide a way for a learner to record and share their reflections over a longer course of study.
• Wikis provide a way for groups of learners to work together in building a knowledge resource. Not strictly speaking a self-directed element but who wants to be self-directed all the time?
• Sims and games provide highly-authentic opportunities for skills practice and discovery learning.
• Quizzes provide an indication of what the learner knows. They also provide a means for rehearsal of facts, concepts, rules, principles, etc.
• Narrated slide shows are probably second best to videos but if your starting point is a slide show then this is probably the way to go. And you can always turn it into a video!
• Practical assignments are going to help learners put ideas into practice, individually or in groups. They also provide a means for assessing competence. Ideally a facilitator will be on hand to provide feedback. If not, you could ask the learner's manager to step in or provide some means for peer assessment.

Nothing I have suggested here needs to be complex or expensive, although all have to be skilfully blended into a solution, often in combination with live events, whether one-to-one or in groups, face-to-face or online. There's nothing here to frighten an experienced learning professional with only average computer literacy, because the emphasis is on learning and teaching, not technology. What's stopping you?

Blended learning report shows where work needs to be done

It's not often that anyone researches blended learning. After all, blending is not remotely sexy, even though it now seems to be the strategy of choice for most employers around the world. Well, a month or two ago, e-learning developer Kineo and global training providers The Oxford Group helped us all out by gathering information to show how blended learning is being used, what benefits are being obtained and what problems are being experienced.

Blended Learning: Current Use, Challenges and Best Practices summarises the responses from more than a hundred different organisations. The bottom line appears to be that 'blended learning is well-established but not necessarily well blended�.

How well established? Well, 86% of respondents were blending frequently or sometimes, with an average of 4.8 different ingredients per blend. Of these, 54% are reporting improvements in business performance and 38% believe that blending leads to more effective learning than simply using a single ingredient. Not dazzling benefits, but encouraging, considering blends are still quite primitive.

Respondents highlighted the danger of having a team of designers working in their silos on each different learning element. One imagines that the most likely manifestation of this problem is face-to-face people in one corner and e-learning in the other. There is no way that we will achieve better designs for learning until the responsibility is integrated under a single designer who understands not just face-to-face learning or e-learning but the whole range of possibilities, including all other forms of collaborative activities and learning content. Go to the face-to-face and e-learning silos and you will get - surprise, surprise - unimaginative blends of face-to-face and e-learning. This will achieve some efficiencies, but completely underplays the potential of blended learning to cross over from the formal, to all types of social and experiential learning.

To be fair, the respondents to the survey have picked up on the problem, recognising that you 'can't assume that good face-to-face trainers or e-learning designers will have the skills to design and map a truly blended solution'. Some 57% admitted that 'they have no or only few people in the organisation with the appropriate skills.' As someone who spends much of their time trying to fill this gap, I am encouraged to see that this need is at long last being recognised.

The report also reports on the winners and losers in terms of blended learning ingredients. Some 25% are reducing the face-to-face element, whether classroom or one-to-one coaching. This is an understandable efficiency saving, although care needs to be taken not to deny a face-to-face experience on those occasions in which it really delivers results.

We will see more emphasis placed on learning resources (44%), webinars (38%) and self-paced e-learning (36%), all of which should yield benefits in terms of efficiencies, as long as they are implemented with skill and care. I personally would like to see a greater emphasis on collaborative online learning using simply tools such as forums, wikis and blogs. For longer programmes, this can supply the glue which holds the programme together.

So, thanks to Kineo and the Oxford Group for shedding some light on what is happening out there. Blended learning is now practically ubiquitous; now we need to see L&D departments organised to reflect this fact, and capability building programmes to ensure that all participants get the big picture.

Classrooms are not the problem but they are also not the solution

In July, the Learning and Performance Institute published an initial report summarising the results of some 983 self-assessments carried out in the previous six months against their Capability Map.

To quote from the Executive Summary:

'Two things stand out from the data collected over the first six months of use of the LPI Capability Map  First, the Learning and Development profession has broad and deep roots in the traditional training model - in particular, in the creation of training materials for delivery in a face-to-face environment.

This should not come as a surprise. Until recently this was the entirety of L&D, and in many organisations classroom training is still the primary medium for improving employee skills and knowledge. While the classroom has its place, L&D's model has to change to deal with the 21st Century's fast pace of change.

The second - and concerning - thing to stand out from these data is that the L&D profession does not appear to be expanding its skills base to do this.'

As the writer says, this should not come as any surprise. It should also not be that surprising if they find very similar results in another two or three years. I have long resigned myself to the fact that L&D is one of the most conservative professions going and is finding it very hard to believe that its role as provider of classroom courses is becoming less and less relevant.

However, I sort of understand why. In the hands of a good facilitator, the classroom can be a very productive place of learning, at least in small doses. L&D knows how to deliver classroom experiences that are well received by learners, even if they do not make much of an impact back on the job. Both the emergence of new and powerful learning technologies and the increased recognition of the importance of on-demand, informal and experiential learning, are unsettling in the extreme to a profession that likes to act as an agent of change but doesn't like doing the changing.

At their best, classrooms provide an opportunity for extended periods of practical experimentation, discussion, reflection and knowledge sharing, away from the demands of the day-to-day job. But, as everyone knows by now, they are also relatively expensive, inflexible, unscalable, not to mention ineffective (at least when used in isolation).

There's no doubt that L&D is shifting, in some cases because new L&D managers have got the message and are making change happen, and in other cases because of pressure from the business. But this process is being held back by a widespread deficiency of skills and confidence among the profession as a whole. It doesn't help that much of the training that is available for trainers only reinforces the old model and slows up change. Yet without a radical re-skilling, it will become harder and harder for L&D to maintain its credibility.

How I would approach creating compliance e-learning

Last week I reported on Towards Maturity's latest study, Reinvigorating Compliance Training. The study showed clearly what a hole we have got ourselves into with e-learning compliance training. More often than not management is coming to us with a requirement for a simple tell-and-test programme that does little more than tick boxes, and it seems that we are only too keen to oblige. In the process we risk irreparable damage to our status as professional designers and perpetuate management's perception that we are mere order takers.

It's easy to criticise, much harder to put forward a solution. However, I like a challenge, so, it falls to me to put my reputation on the line by suggesting how I would approach a request for compliance e-learning. I'm going to assume that I've already explored the alternatives and that e-learning stands a reasonable chance of influencing the outcome. So what would I do?

Analysing the requirement

FIrst of all, I need answers to some important questions:

• What do we want employees to do that they may not be doing now, if the organisation is to achieve its goals for compliance?
• What must (note the emphasis) employees know if they are to do these things?
• What big ideas/principles do they need to understand and buy into in order to do these things?
• What skills, if any, do they need to acquire and/or put into practice in order to do these things?
• Over and above knowledge and skills, what else needs to be in place in the work environment if performance is going to change?

A typical solution

The answers to the questions above will obviously determine the shape of the solution. However, more often than not I would expect to see many of the following elements in the solution:

• A resource, probably a video, which ramps up the level of emotional engagement. Using a documentary approach, I would interview real people who have been in real situations of risk related to the area of compliance. Statistics are not enough - we are much more likely to engage with the stories of real people. The important principle to get across here is that non-compliance really matters - it could threaten your employer's future and your own.
• A diagnostic assessment which determines how much of the programme you need to take - none, some or all. This assessment would comprise of a series of mini-scenarios (the portrayal of a situation, followed by one or more 'what would you do?' questions) rather than a knowledge test.
• For novices, a clear and concise exposition of the absolute essentials of the policy, backed up with examples and rationales. Probably best if this is easily accessible and printable, so not a piece of e-learning.
• A series of more in-depth scenarios tackling ever more challenging but realistic situations, ideally directly relevant to your particular job role. An element of gamification here might add something.
• Resources which support the scenarios with in-depth explanations. These can take the form of web articles, videos, PDFs or whatever is necessary. The idea is that you will go to these to fill any gaps in your knowledge brought out by the scenarios.
• A final assessment, again based on mini-scenarios, and ideally drawn from a large pool to reduce the risk of cheating. To avoid users guessing, I'd include the option 'I don't know' in every question. This would score zero points, whereas wrong answers would score minus points, making a guess a risky response.
• To follow-up, I'd provide a forum where you could ask experts for answers to really tricky questions not covered in the programme.
• I'd also keep up a steady flow of new stories and reminders by email, on the intranet or any social platform.
• And I'd try and make sure that compliance was not only modelled by managers but backed up by the performance management system.

So, what would you do?

Compliance - e-learning's greatest friend and worst enemy

Towards Maturity has just published a study called Reinvigorating Compliance Training. Bringing it back from the dead might be more apt.

Here are some of the findings, based on responses from 136 organisations representing 2.3m employees across 17 countries:

• 98% of organisations want technology-enabled compliance training to help manage risk more successfully.
• 12% of organisations say compliance training is helping achieve their business goal of changing working culture.
• 23% of businesses are raising awareness and understanding of complex regulations with compliance training.
• 67% of organisations say user engagement is the top barrier to adopting technology enabled compliance training.
• 20% of organisations include opportunities for staff to practice.
• 20% of organisations provide managers with resources and job aids to encourage application back in the workplace.

It looks to me like a whole load of organisations are experiencing a very poor return on their expectations.

In the Foreword to the report, Iain McLeod of SAI Global Compliance, which sponsored the study, had this to say:

Universally, lack of employee engagement emerged as the biggest barrier to effectiveness � and is linked strongly to the poor reputation of compliance e-learning. Ask yourself what efforts you are currently making to really engage your audience and make it relevant to them. If you are subjecting your employees to �death by PowerPoint�, rolling out the same content year after year to everyone regardless of their job role or risk profile, blinding the learner with irrelevant detail about what the law says rather than what it means to them or failing to engage your line managers in the process, then the chances are you are potentially turning off the very people whose buy-in you need to effectively mitigate your compliance risks.

I have had the misfortune to experience some dreadful compliance e-learning, constituting the worst form of 'tell and test'. I have also seen some wonderful efforts. It is possible to do this job properly, to satisfy the needs of regulators while also providing a stimulating and thought-provoking experience that has a good chance of changing behaviour. But clearly we are not doing this often enough.

E-learning producers are in a difficult position, because a great deal of their work comes in the form of compliance training (according to Charles Jennings, 80% of all e-learning produced in Australia is to meet compliance needs). But in the long run they must surely feel the effects of a poor user experience:

1. Employees hate doing compliance training
2. As a result, trainers hate training it
3. The answer, then, is to use e-learning instead
4. With the result that now learners hate e-learning

Sorting out this problem may, in the end, determine whether formal, self-study e-learning continues to exist. In the next week I'll present my vision of what a compliance course could look like.

Should webinars be recorded?

In their book Wired for Speech, Clifford Nass and Scott Brave make an interesting point:

'Recording can have an enormous psychological impact on people. When people have a sense of being recorded, they are likely to say different things and process what is said differently than when they believe they are not being recorded. The lack of a record allows people to speak with a sense of informality and plausible deniability. Conversely, consider how much more careful, self-conscious and guarded people are when speaking "on the record" as opposed to "off the record".'

While the purpose of Nass and Brave's book was to describe their research on voice interfaces for electronic devices such as satellite navigation systems, there are implications in the context of learning technologies. The first and most obvious is whether we should be recording webinars. By doing so, are we unnecessarily impeding the natural flow of conversation? Do participants become inhibited by the fact that some unknown others might listen in to the recording some time in the future? Quite possibly.

This presents us with a difficulty because the ability to make recordings for the benefit of those unable to be present at the time represents a real advantage for webinars over the physical classroom. If we want the same easy flow of communication that can be obtained face-to-face when we're online, then we have to consider not pressing the record button. We have to rule out recording surreptitiously because this would be unethical and possibly illegal, but we may be able to achieve a happy compromise by limiting access to the recording to fellow students.

There is another implication of this reluctance to be recorded which might explain why it can be so difficult to get employees to contribute to forums and other types of social media in the workplace. Contributing a post, even just a comment, is like being recorded. Your words are captured digitally and stored for years to come for all sorts of third parties - real and imagined - to retrieve, read and interpret, favourably or otherwise. Many employees will ask whether this is worth the risk? Those of us who have poured out our souls to social media over many years with little in the way of negative consequences will believe they are over-estimating the danger, but we're not them, are we?

Why statistics are not enough

It would be easy if all you had to do to teach an important general principle was to describe it. You know:

• An organisation with a rich diversity of employees will be more effective in addressing the diverse needs of its customers.
• Young drivers are more at risk of being involved in a major automobile accident.
• E-learning is twice as quick as the equivalent classroom training.

Presenting people with statistical information and descriptions of scientific studies will only get you so far. Your students may be able to recite a statistic in an exam and even regurgitate the 'official interpretation', but that doesn't mean they really believe it, not deep down, at least as far as it applies to them.

Psychologists Richard Nisbett and Eugene Borgia conducted a number of studies with their students at the University of Michigan back in 1975 which led them to the conclusion that psychology was very hard, if not possible to teach. Although their students became more knowledgeable about the genetal principles of psychology, they showed little evidence of application of these principles to particular cases. However, when confronted with real, human examples of surprising behaviour (especially their own), they were quick to generalise these to the population at large. Their conclusion:

'Subjects unwillingness to deduce the particular from the general was matched only by their willingness to infer the general from the particular.'

This statement, quoted in Daniel Kahneman's excellent Thinking Fast and Slow (Penguin, 2011), struck me like a bullet. Of course, this is why guided discovery works so well when the objective is to improve problem-solving and decision-making skills, and why the exposition of theory is so frustratingly ineffective.

If you really need to 'sell' an idea, go for case studies, scenarios, simulations, practical assignments, backed up by coaching and facilitated discussion. Forget the slides full of theory and the tests that these have been remembered - or at least hold them back until the insight has been obtained through personal experience.

As Kahneman explains:

'You are more likely to learn something by finding surprises in your own behaviour than by hearing surprising facts about people in general.'

Which means, of course, that this post will be of little more than passing relevance unless or until you can relate this to your own experience. But I couldn't resist trying one more time.

Strategies for transformation 6: from face-to-face to online

In the next six posts, I explore six ways in which learning professionals can realise a transformation in the way that learning and development occurs in their organisations. It builds on my previous six posts in which I set out the six major elements in a vision for change, i.e. learning that is aligned, economical, scalable flexible engaging and powerful.

The sixth and last step on the route to transformation is a shift from delivering learning face-to-face to delivery online. There are obvious benefits from learning online in terms of flexibility, as well as savings in terms of time, budget and emissions, but old habits die hard and many learning professionals are finding it hard to make the change.

Of course, not all learning can be brought online while maintaining quality, for example:

• Some interpersonal skills courses require tutors and/or participants to be able to accurately monitor the body language of others.
• Some practical courses require students to interact with equipment in ways that cannot feasibly be simulated online.
• Some courses benefit from the opportunities provided for networking socially.
• Some skills are more authentically practised in the real job environment.

But, as a whole, we tend to exaggerate the extent to which our face-to-face events really need to remain that way. It is worth reflecting on how we consume media in our personal lives. Of the music we listen to, only a small proportion is in a club or concert hall. Of the drama we consume, most is on the TV or in the cinema, not the theatre. Of the sport we watch, the overwhelming majority is on TV. When we do go to a theatre, concert hall or sports stadium, it is a very special event, often one we will remember for a very long time. But for most of us, this is not normal practice.

The benefits

So what effect does pushing the slider from face-to-face to online have on the six elements of our transformation vision?

Aligned: No real impact here.

Economical: There are obvious benefits here, as time and money is saved by removing the need for travel. Learning time also tends to reduce, because there is less of a temptation for course designers to fill a whole day or week with training when the time is not strictly needed.

Scalable: Face-to-face events are constrained in terms of scalability because of the practical limitation of space. Eighty thousand people may have been able to watch the 100m final at the Olympics in London, but hundreds of millions could watch remotely, not only on TV but online. As the providers of massively open online courses have discovered, while a lecture room might be packed to capacity with 100 students, a thousand times more could take part in an online lecture.

Flexible: Online learning is, above all, more flexible because it frees the learner from the constraints of geography. An online learner can access what learning they want, wherever they want, without the time, financial and environmental costs of travel.

Engaging: There is no reason why an online experience should necessarily be less engaging than one which is face-to-face, assuming it is relevant and well-designed, but there is still a certain magic about 'being there,' particularly when the opportunities are scarce, e.g. the big game, the farewell tour, the invited audience. You will never quite be able to match this experience in a live online event, but whether this really matters in a learning and development context is debatable.

Powerful: No reason why there should be an impact here.

In summary

If you push the faders on all six strategies, you can maximise every element of your vision, as you can see from the 'mixer' below. While some of the strategies have positive and negative consequences, when used in combination the pluses greatly outweigh the minuses and allow you to achieve all your goals.

Strategies for transformation 5: from courses to resources

In the next six posts, I explore six ways in which learning professionals can realise a transformation in the way that learning and development occurs in their organisations. It builds on my previous six posts in which I set out the six major elements in a vision for change, i.e. learning that is aligned, economical, scalable, flexible, engaging and powerful.

The fifth step on the route to transformation is a shift from courses to resources. I�ve borrowed this terminology from Nick Shackleton-Jones. Nick distinguishes between the formal nature of courses, where the focus, he believes, should be on engaging the learner emotionally with the topic and building their confidence to continue to learn independently, and the on-going provision of resources, both human and in the form of content, to support the learner as they continue to learn and apply their new skills.

Why courses are not enough

Courses have, historically, been what l&d does, perhaps even its raison d'�tre. And they will continue to play an important role, particularly with novices who 'don't know what they don't know' and when formal confirmation is required that particular learning objectives have been achieved. Courses may take place in a classroom, online, on-job or by some blend of these, but they all typically have objectives, entry criteria, a curriculum, formal content, tuition and assessment. More often than not they also take place at a predetermined time and are 'pushed' at a particular population. All of this structure helps an organisation to make sure that certain key interventions do take place in the intended fashion, but does not guarantee success. All too often, courses fail to fulfil their aims:

• They are frequently forced on those who don't need them.
• Timing is rarely ideal - often they are too early or too late.
• They are often knowledge-focused and, as a result, serve only to overwhelm the learner with new information, without placing this in context.
• They typically provide nowhere near enough opportunities for practice and feedback.
• They make little provision for follow-up once the course has been completed.

The case for resources

There�s nothing wrong with courses as such, it�s just that we place too much attention on them and not enough on what happens afterwards. By and large, we would do well to teach much less and provide much more in the way of support. Courses are for stories, scenarios, simulations and discussions; resources are where you go to find the information you need to follow up on your interest. These resources can take many forms:

• Experts that we can call upon for information.
• Coaches who can help us to analyse our successes and failures and establish our goals.
• Packaged content that can provide us with information and help in diagnosing problems and making decisions.
• Forums and other collaborative tools that allow us to share expertise and solve problems.

The argument for shifting the emphasis from teaching everything formally up-front to teaching the essentials and then providing other information on-demand has strengthened over the past few years:

• We now have a much better understanding of how easy it is to overwhelm novices with information and how little of this information is retained.
• The easy availability of information through search engines and on mobile devices makes it much more practical to provide resources as and when needed.
• Expectations have changed. Employees no longer expect to have to learn large quantities of information up-front, when it can so easily be made available on-demand.

The benefits

So what effect does pushing the slider from courses to resources have on the six elements of our transformation vision?

Aligned: There is nothing about the move from courses to resources that will make an impact here.

Economical: In this respect you should see an improvement, because resources are much more economical to provide than courses.

Scalable: Courses take a lot of time and effort to manage. Resources can be made available to large audiences with little difficulty.

Flexible: Because resources are available on demand, the learner is in complete control over what they access and when.

Engaging: Slimmed-down courses that focus on must-know information and key skills, and which provide plenty of opportunities for practice will be much more engaging. With resources, engagement is not the issue - you only call upon the resource when you need it.

Powerful: Most importantly, the courses and resources combination gets the job done in terms of improved competency on-the-job.

Coming next: Strategies for transformation 6: from face-to-face to online

Strategies for transformation 4: from top-down to bottom-up

In the next six posts, I explore six ways in which learning professionals can realise a transformation in the way that learning and development occurs in their organisations. It builds on my previous six posts in which I set out the six major elements in a vision for change, i.e. learning that is aligned, economical, scalable, flexible, engaging and powerful.

The fourth step on the route to transformation is a shift from learning and development activities that are directed from the top-down to those that originate from the bottom-up.

Top-down learning

Top-down learning occurs because organisations want their employees to perform effectively and efficiently and they appreciate that this depends, at least in part, on them possessing the appropriate knowledge and skills. Top-down learning is designed to fulfil the employer�s objectives, not the employees�.

Whatever the attractions of a more bottom-up approach (as we shall see), some learning cannot be left to chance. Why? Because employees need basic competencies and they don�t always know what they don�t know, where to look for answers or who to turn to; because requirements change (new policies, products, plans), and because employees must be developed to fill future gaps.

However, it is unrealistic for all learning to be managed on a top-down basis, particularly in those organisations where change is constant and knowledge requirements hard to predict. As most top-down learning requires the direct intervention of subject experts and l&d professionals, resources are clearly going to be limited, so priorities have to be made. Top-down learning is likely to be most valuable for the 20% of knowledge that is needed 80% of the time, and for learning that is most critical in terms of risk to safety, budget or reputation.

Bottom-up learning

Bottom-up learning occurs because employees also want to perform. The exact motivation may vary, from achieving job security to earning more money, gaining recognition or obtaining personal fulfilment, but the route to all these is performing well on the job, and employees know as well as their employers that this depends � again, at least in part � on them acquiring the appropriate knowledge and skills.

Bottom-up learning is managed by employees themselves. It addresses the 80% of knowledge that is needed 20% of the time and is particularly important in those organisations in which there is constant change and fluidity in tasks and goals.

Bottom-up learning is cheaper, more responsive, less controlling, less patronising and altogether more in tune with the times. But it is also less certain, less measurable and less suited to dependent learners who don�t know what they don�t know.

For bottom-up learning to thrive, employees need the motive, the means and the opportunity (just like the perps in the crime novels). They will only have the motive if they are rewarded for effective performance. They will only have the means if employers help them to develop the skills they need to learn independently and provide, where appropriate, the right collaborative software tools (a rich and searchable intranet, forums, wikis, blogs, communities of practice, etc.). They will only have the opportunity if employers are able to foster a culture which encourages self-initiative and does not penalise mistakes.

L&d professionals could do worse in future than to regard bottom-up learning as the default solution, the one on which they rely except when it is obviously unsuitable. For too long, employees have been spoon-fed their education and their training, and have failed to develop as independent learners to the extent that perhaps they should have done. Those now entering the workforce have, in many cases, overcome these barriers and have higher expectations. Provide them with the motive, the means and the opportunities and their capabilities are likely to astound you.

The benefits

So what effect does pushing the slider from top-down to bottom-up have on the six elements of our transformation vision?

Aligned: This particular change should not have a major impact on alignment.

Economical: Some investment might need t0 be made in collaborative tools, but otherwise bottom-up learning requires little or no additional expense.

Scalable: Bottom-up learning is highly scalable because it draws upon the expertise of every employee. In a bottom-up learning culture, everyone is a teacher and everyone a learner; no-one knows everything and everyone knows something.

Flexible: Here is the greatest advantage. Bottom-up learning occurs as and when it is needed; it responds organically to changes in requirements.

Engaging: There's not likely to be much impact here, except perhaps to the extent that bottom-up learning is likely to be more relevant to current needs.

Powerful: It could be argued that bottom-up learning will be less powerful because it is not so professionally conceived and delivered, but this factor could easily be over-weighed by greater relevance and increased responsiveness.

Coming next: Strategies for transformation 5: from courses to resources

Strategies for transformation 3: from compliance to competence

In the next six posts, I explore six ways in which learning professionals can realise a transformation in the way that learning and development occurs in their organisations. It builds on my previous six posts in which I set out the six major elements in a vision for change, i.e. learning that is aligned, economical, scalable, flexible, engaging and powerful.

The third step on the route to transformation is a shift from interventions aimed primarily at ensuring compliance to those that aim to achieve competency. Now every organisation does, to some extent, have to comply with regulations of one sort or another, whether that relates to employment policies, health and safety, the prevention of money laundering, the marketing of pharmaceutical products, and so on. The implications of breaking these regulations - and being found out - can be devastating for an organisation, not only financially, but in terms of public reputation. In extreme cases, executives and others lower down in an organisation could face criminal charges. Not surprising, then, that organisations - sometimes on the insistence of their insurers - take great pains to ensure that infringements are kept to a minimum. An obvious step in achieving this is to ensure everyone involved obtains adequate training.

There are two ways of looking at this sort of training: (1) you can regard it as a simple box-ticking exercise in which employers and employees go through the motions of delivering and receiving training, in order to satisfy regulators and insurers that the job is being done; or (2), you aim to bring about a shift in behaviour such that infringements are very unlikely to occur, because employees believe in the policy and have the necessary knowledge and skill to put it into practice. Option (1) is based on the assumptions that infringements are unlikely, the regulations are a nuisance and that compliance is a necessary evil. Option (2) is founded on the principles that infringements can and do happen, that the regulations are rightly in place to prevent harm to third parties, and that policies are not enough - delivering on these policies requires competence. Quite a difference.

The implications of an approach based on compliance

So what are the dangers of basing your approach to training on simple compliance?

• Executives and learning professionals regard the whole exercise as a box-ticking exercise.
• The training is designed to deliver as much dry and abstract information as possible in the minimum time. Subject-matter experts rather than learning professionals drive the design.
• Knowledge is typically assessed immediately after delivery of the information, invalidating the results. No effort is made to assess whether this information can be applied effectively in context, in other words competence.
• Employees will do the minimum possible to complete the training, focusing all their attention on passing the assessment rather than on gaining useful information that is important for their job.
• On the basis that people resist 'being changed', it is possible that the whole process makes them less likely to comply rather than more so.
• E-learning is often used as the means of delivery to minimise costs and take the pressure off trainers who understandably don't want to deliver training that nobody wants to do. As a result, e-learning becomes synonymous with compliance and bad training generally.

Shifting the emphasis to competence

How would the picture change if a genuine attempt was made to ensure competence?

• Executives and learning professionals would themselves be committed to change and would model the desired behaviour consistently.
• The training would focus on encouraging positive attitudes to the necessary change, providing critically-important information (the rest can be accessed as reference resources), putting principles into context with examples and case studies and, most importantly, providing plenty of opportunities for practice (with supportive feedback).
• Employees are assessed on the basis of their ability to apply what they have learned in context rather than their ability to retain information.
• Management reinforce the desired behaviour when it is put into practice.
• E-learning is used when it is an appropriate medium for delivering elements of what is likely to be a blended solution.

The benefits

So what effect does pushing the slider from compliance to competence have on the six elements of our transformation vision?

Aligned: Courses oriented to building competence can be directly aligned to business needs. This means genuinely complying with the requirements of regulators, not just going through the motions of delivering compliance training.

Economical: Sorry, but competence-based training will cost more to deliver. On the other hand have you factored in the real risk of a billion dollar lawsuit?

Scalable: Again, quality comes at a cost. Simple self-study courses may be  cheaper, but are they really achieving a positive return?

Flexible: To be honest there's not going to be a lot of change here. If anything, more elaborate blends are going to be less easy to complete than those that concentrate on ticking the boxes. So, no more asking your assistant to click through the screens on your behalf.

Engaging: Relevance drives out resistance. Who's going to be engaged by a box-ticking exercise?

Powerful: And here's the bottom line. Competency-based training really will protect you from risk and surely that's the whole point.

Coming next: Strategies for transformation 4: from top-down to bottom-up

Strategies for transformation 2: from synchronous to asynchronous

In the next six posts, I explore six ways in which learning professionals can realise a transformation in the way that learning and development occurs in their organisations. It builds on my previous six posts in which I set out the six major elements in a vision for change, i.e. learning that is aligned, economical, scalable, flexible, engaging and powerful.

The second step on the route to transformation is a shift from interventions that are synchronous to those that are asynchronous. In case you're not familiar with the jargon, 'synchronous' learning activities happen in real-time - they are 'live'. The most obvious examples are classroom courses and on-the-job training sessions, but also in this category we must place the use of the telephone and live online tools, such as instant messaging, Skype and virtual classrooms. The defining characteristic of a synchronous activity is that all the participants have to be available at the same time.

Asynchronous activities, on the other hand, are self-paced; they allow the learner to determine when and for how long they undertake self-study activities or communicate with fellow learners or trainers. Reading a book, watching a video, listening to a podcast, surfing the web or interacting with an e-learning programme are all asynchronous; so is communicating by post, by text messages, by email or through forums, blogs, wikis and social networks.

Like each of the recommendations in this series, the change from synchronous to asynchronous represents a movement of a slider, not a switch on or off. Every organisation is different and needs to find its own balance.

The argument for being synchronous

There is nothing inherently wrong with synchronous communication. It gets things done quickly. It allows a learner to get speedy answers to questions and to obtain quick feedback on their performance. It makes it possible for learners to work together on practical activities such as role-plays. It allows for free-flowing discussions and is altogether more relaxed and sociable.

Synchronous events also act as milestones in a blended solution. Because they are scheduled to happen at a particular date and time, they get blocked out in the diary and are less likely to be put off to another day. They also act as a convenient deadline for activities which are self-paced.

All in all then, it's good for a proportion of any programme of learning to be synchronous.

So, if it ain't broke, why try and fix it?

Although synchronous learning events, such as classroom courses, have their benefits, they also have some snags:

• Having to organise dates and times which suit everyone is tiresome and time-consuming. In some situations, in which learners are based in different time zones or have all sorts of existing commitments, it can sometimes prove impossible.
• Waiting for a date and time can hold you up from learning that you want to do right now.
• Synchronous events can be more stressful, because you will often be put under pressure to make quick responses to questions and discussion topics. You also have no control over the pace at which you learn, which is a particular problem if you start with less prior knowledge than your colleagues.
• An important element of learning is reflection and that's not easy to accomplish when you're under time pressure.
• Every learner is different in terms of their needs, prior knowledge and preferences. Live events are simply not flexible enough to cope with all these differences.

The benefits

So what effect does pushing the slider from synchronous to asynchronous have on the six elements of our transformation vision?

Aligned: There's no real change here, because synchronous and asynchronous activities can be equally well-aligned.

Economical: There could be some benefits here, particularly in terms of the amount of time consumed by the learning activity. Generally self-paced learning is quicker, as much as anything because learners can access the material they want and ignore what is less relevant. There's also the possibility that learners can get faster to competence, because they are not having to wait about before receiving the training they need.

Scalable: Here's a real plus, because many more people can be learning at the same time.

Flexible: This is an obvious one. The main purpose of increasing the asynchronous component is to improve flexibility.

Engaging: You might lose something here, because live events will, for most people, be more urgent and engaging.

Powerful: Asynchronous events are not inherently more powerful, but having a better balance between synchronous and asynchronous elements is likely to show performance benefits, if for no other reason than learners have more time to reflect.

Coming next: Strategies for transformation 3: from compliance to competence