L&D's Biggest Failing - some further thoughts

L&D’s Biggest Failing – some further thoughts

Rachel Burnham writes:  Last week Sukhvinder Pabial wrote in his blog ‘L&D’s Biggest Failing’ about the lack of clear entry points into the L&D provision and absence of a career progression path beyond this.   I want to follow up on the points raised, some of which I agree with and some of which I don’t. If you haven’t yet read his blog you will find it useful to do so http://pabial.wordpress.com/2014/04/25/lds-biggest-failing/

Before I continue, I want to declare my interest as one of the focuses of my work is the development of L&D professionals.  I am a tutor for the Certificate in Learning & Development Practice for MOL and have been involved with this programme and its predecessor for about 14 years.  Each year I work with several groups of students who are participating in this blended learning programme.

From my contact with these L&D professionals I find that most people come into our profession through the route of becoming experienced in a particular role and then gradually getting involved in helping other people to develop the knowledge & skills required to be effective in that role, often through informal buddying and one to one instruction.   This links with the points made by Sukh about moving into L&D work because of a specialist skill or because you like & are good with people. 

Many organisations still see L&D as primarily about ‘delivery’, usually only ‘face to face’ and often very much about the imparting of knowledge in an ‘instructional style’ - that to me seems such a very long way from the much wider ‘performance consultancy role’ which is what L&D is now about, that there are days when I feel a sense of having one foot in one timeframe and one in another – as though I have stepped into the Tardis and popped out in completely another era.  And sometimes even on another planet!

In many organisations therefore to be an L&D professional requires knowledge of the role and organisation, with the skills and understanding of L&D very much relegated to a poor second.   And then those skills are often confused and limited to ‘presentation skills’ and ‘ability to use powerpoint’.  (Of course, this limited viewpoint sometimes continues into job design, with roles created that are all about delivery and with all other aspects of L&D squeezed into the time before the start or after the end of continuous workshops.)

Many L&D professionals work initially in either delivery of training or as administrators, often without any substantial development, which can stretch into years.  This means that their organisations miss out on the benefits of a more impactful L&D during this time.

Where I disagree substantially with Sukh Pabial’s article, is about the absence of any vocational qualification for L&D.  There is and it is the CIPD’s Certificate in L&D Practice.  Done well, this provides an excellent foundation in modern L&D practice, which looks at alignment to business needs, provides an introduction to the application of relevant learning theories, introduces a wide range of learning methods (from work-based learning through uses of social media to more traditional approaches such as coaching and face to face workshops) and covers the basics of LNA, evaluation and delivery.  It has a practical skills based approach and unlike its predecessor, CTP, it is possible to devise assessments which more closely replicate the sort of tasks that L&D professionals are required to perform in the workplace, rather than academic style reports.

Is it a perfect qualification? No – of course there is room for improvement.  For example, it is hard in such a fast moving field such as ours, for the underlying curriculum to stay completely up-to-date and that is certainly a criticism that could be levelled at CLDP.   Does it give the right balance between all the various topics that could be included in a foundation qualification and in particular between academic rigour and practical skills development?   That could generate another whole debate in its own right.   

A wider issue is that of locating L&D as an integral part of HR, which is the basis of all the CIPD based qualifications.  I personally find it useful to be aware of the wider role of HR, but many in L&D find that this assumption of being a part of HR, just does not fit with their reality.  Whether this is because their role as an L&D specialist or trainer is operationally quite separate within their organisation from HR and never the twain shall meet. Or even because their L&D/training role is part of a  external training or education provision or is part of a customer-facing offering providing training to support the products/services offered by the organisation.  It would be helpful if the qualifications offered recognised this range within our professional field.

When it comes to progression within the L&D field, I think the next steps beyond a foundation qualification are muddled.   The CIPD professional path brings you much more into a management role, whereas many in L&D want to develop their expertise as practitioners.  And there is such a lot of scope within L&D for expert practitioners.  This needs much greater emphasis on the development of skills and application of current thinking on learning and how to impact performance, than is currently acknowledged with the CIPD qualifications framework.  Whilst other qualifications are available, it is crazy-paving at best.

We need a better approach.  L&D needs a better approach.

I offer these thoughts as a further contribution to the debate and look forward to hearing your ideas in relation to them.

Rachel Burnham

27 April 2014

Burnham L & D Consultancy specialises in the development of L&D professionals, blended learning and evaluation

Follow me on Twitter @BurnhamLandD

Skills for the Future: Securing the UK's long term competitiveness

Skills for the Future: Securing the UK’s long term competitiveness

Rachel Burnham of Burnham L&D Consultancy writes: This excellent conference took place last week in London and was jointly organised by the Work Foundation and the UK Commission for Employment and Skills (UKCES).   Matthew Hancock, the Minister of State for Skills & Enterprise and Liam Byrne, the Shadow Minister for Universities, Science and Skills and a whole host of speakers from the OECD, UKCES, businesses and organisations from throughout the skills field shared their ideas on this important topic.  Here are the key themes that I picked out from this event:

1.    Skills development is really, really important for the future of the UK.  The types and level of skills available amongst people have a huge impact on the effectiveness & success of individual organisations, the wider UK economy and on individual’s life chances – not just access to work & income, but also health.  The conference was also the occasion of the launch of a new report ‘The Future of Work: Jobs & Skills in 2030’ by UKCES  which examines four possible scenarios for the UK economy and the kinds of work that will be available in the future.  This report brings out the key point that developing the skills needed will influence the way organisations and the economy are able to adapt to meet and respond to the changes we face. To find out more about this report go to http://www.ukces.org.uk/ourwork/future-of-work

I recommend that you do take a look at this and think about the impact of these possible scenarios on your own organisation.

2.    Matthew Hancock spoke of the need for employer ‘ownership’ of the skills agenda – other speakers immediately questioned whether as an employer they would want ownership of this field, but would rather have ‘influence’.  Whether the move is towards employer ownership or influence, certainly the consensus from the conference was of a need for much greater involvement of employers large and small in the whole area of skills development.

3.    Another area of consensus was the need for partnership working, bringing together employers, training providers, government & public bodies, unions and of course individual learners.

4.    One of the great pleas echoed by most of the employers who spoke is the need for a stable system that is allowed to develop and improve, rather than being changed constantly and particularly whenever there is a change of government.  One speaker contrasted the 30 major changes in to the vocational education system in the UK in the time that Germany has had 3 major changes.

5.    One of the changes welcomed by many was a move to greater regionalisation or even localisation of decision-making on skills and the possibilities that this gives for locally relevant partnership working.  It was also suggested that possibly this could lead to greater stability, as localisation may make it harder for rapid changes of policies and initiatives.

6.    A continuing challenge is how to involve businesses in skills development and particularly smaller businesses.   With all businesses, the attitudes of senior managers to investment in training and skills are key, but it can be particularly difficult for SME’s to engage in this complex and ever-changing field.   Intermediary organisations can play a key role in helping SME’s to navigate this and to work together to articulate their real skills needs.  We heard of some great examples of how this is being done including from Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce, but it is difficult to see how this can work without assistance for some form of intermediary body.

7.    One of the most interesting aspects of the event (to me) was the short presentation from Francesca Froy, from OECD, who shared research on the impact of the demand from businesses for skills as well as the effect of the supply of skills.  The demand for skills from a business is hugely dependent upon the business strategy chosen and whether the business choses to compete on the basis of high skills or competes on the basis of low cost.  She identified that looking at both issues allows for consideration not only of the familiar issue of skills gaps, but also the often un-noticed issue of low skill supply and low demand for skills in local economies.   One of the examples, she shared is of the contrast within Manchester – with South Manchester having a ‘high skill demand: high skill supply’ economy and North Manchester having a ‘low skill demand: low skill supply’ economy.  For Francesca Froy’s full presentation go to

http://www.theworkfoundation.com/Assets/Docs/Events/Skills-conference/Francesca%20Froy%203rdMarch.pdf

Rachel Burnham

10/3/14

Burnham L & D Consultancy specialises in the development of L&D professionals, blended learning and evaluation

Follow me on Twitter @BurnhamLandD

Four Thoughts for 2014

Four Thoughts For 2014

Rachel Burnham writes: Here are some thoughts on the current direction of L&D for 2014.  They are very much first thoughts and it would be good to hear your response to them.

1.  Critical Thinking

Isn’t it great at last to see that more critical views of some long-standing and very popular models of learning are getting an airing?   Ever since Professor Frank Coffield and colleagues produced their report back in 2005/6 into learning style theories, it has been known that many of the most popular and best known models of learning styles had been found to have questionable validity.   I am picking up a lot more links to Coffield’s research in recent months and the suggestion of a more sceptical and questioning approach to various models of learning styles.  If you haven’t yet read this report, do read it for yourself.

http://sxills.nl/lerenlerennu/bronnen/Learning%20styles%20by%20Coffield%20e.a..pdf

Wouldn’t it be great to see some other theories that are regularly referred to (and misused) such as Mehrabian’s work on communication get a more accurate and rigorous treatment within the L&D field?

2.  Choose the Right Spoon for the Right Dish – or A Spoon for Every Occasion

In a similar vein, I am noticing that within L&D we do seem to becoming a little more sophisticated in relation to choosing when and where to use different learning methods.   Within L&D, we have been rather prone to fads and fancies leading us to attempt to use the latest in learning methods for all sorts of situations, whether they were quite suited or not.  Think about e-learning, coaching and now, perhaps social learning.   In each case, these have been trumpeted as great innovations, with lots of promise and have been rather over-sold.   And in many cases, we in L&D have uncritically attempted to adopt these methodologies wholesale. 

My mother – in- law has a great love of cutlery and over the course of her life has gathered a huge collection.  Under her tutelage I have discovered that there are far more types of cutlery than I ever realised.  For example, in relation to spoons, I knew of course of ‘desert spoons’, ‘soup spoons’, ‘table spoons’ and ‘serving spoons’ but I was less clear on the distinction between ‘tea’ and ‘coffee spoons’, nor was I aware of the full array of egg, grapefruit, ice cream, cake, oyster and other specialist spoons that are available (though I may be confusing oyster spoons, with oyster forks – my memory is a little fuzzy on the details!).  My mother-in-law is emphatic about the need to use the right cutlery for the right dish.

Perhaps like this cutlery enthusiast, we need to be better at picking the right learning method for the right situation, rather than expecting to use the same tool for every occasion.

3.  More useful, but less dutiful evaluation

More effective evaluation of L&D is a subject close to my heart.  We all know that we need to get better at evaluating L&D.  Last year I did a small piece of research into practice in evaluation and one of the issues that came out of this, was about the mindset that we bring to evaluation.   I think that we often see evaluation as a duty and feel rather guilty and possibly a little embarrassed at how little or how badly we do this. 

I think we need to change our mindset in relation to evaluation and focus on evaluation as something that is useful.  

We know that it can be hard to find the time or resources to put into evaluation.  If we focus on evaluation that is useful, we may find it easier to do this.

Evaluation can be a practical tool to encourage learners to learn more effectively eg by encouraging reflection and application.  It can provide us both with ideas to improve programmes, but also develop our insight into what works for L&D in our particular organisation.  So, the evaluation process can add real value to L&D.  So, let’s keep evaluation simple, practical and make full use of it!

4.  Peformance, performance, performance

In 2014, I think we in L&D need to focus less on learning and much more on performance in the workplace.  In some ways this sounds a little crazy and counter-intuitive – after all we are all about learning in L&D.   But sometimes we focus on learning and in our commitment to applying the latest thinking about how people learn and our enthusiasm for the latest learning methods, and all our other concerns, we forget that we are not in the business of education for its own sake but in order to improve performance by individuals, teams and organisations. 

So, let’s make it a priority to start with performance in mind, and build this in all that we do.

Rachel Burnham

20 February 2014

Burnham L & D Consultancy specialises in the development of L&D professionals, blended learning and evaluation

Follow me on Twitter @BurnhamLandD

Acknowledgements

I would like to particularly thank my friend, John Morris, for the encouragement to get writing again.

Awards and Unsung Heroes

Awards and Unsung Heroes

Rachel Burnham writes: All the publicity and discussion around the People Management Award Ceremony last week, has had me pondering who my L&D role models have been over my career.  My list of unsung heroes is quite a mix: an L&D consultant, two particular colleagues, the MD for a consultancy I used to be an associate with, a learner who always asked the most difficult questions and my Dad, who is a retired Church minister. 

Let me share with you some of the things I have learnt from them.

I began to do some training quite early on in my career when I worked for a small housing charity.   The first training session I delivered with my colleague was particularly challenging and I wouldn’t say it was a great success – but what turned it from a near-disaster into a very important part of my development was that we worked with an external consultant to review what  had happened and how we could learn from it – and that was so powerful!  I still draw upon the learning from that review day: working with a co-trainer; managing your energy levels when delivering; to more particular challenges such as how to work with line managers when training their team.  So, my first unsung hero is nominated for her facilitation skills – particularly careful listening and questioning skills to help us to learn from this real experience.

Other key people in my development have been colleagues.  From one I learnt how to become more relaxed in my delivery style and to balance my desire for structure with a more fun approach.   From another colleague, who is always trying out new IT possibilities, I am continually challenged to move out of the familiar and have a go.  From her I have learnt that I don’t have to be an IT whizz to make use of new technology to enable and enhance learning.

Over the years, I have worked as an associate L&D consultant with various organisations and consultancies.   The MD of one of these organisations, was the most polite person I have ever met to everyone he met.   In contrast I realised that I could seem quite rude and abrupt with people I met casually and I have set out to adopt more of his approach – though I am not sure that I will ever quite achieve his level of consistent & genuine charm!  

My next nomination for unsung hero in L&D, was someone who had a bit of a reputation for being a ‘difficult delegate’ in one of the organisations I worked in.   He often came up with really challenging questions in sessions and sometimes trainers felt quite put on the spot by him.   However, I had one of those ‘light bulb’ moments that we all look forward to and realised that he had absolutely no intent to be ‘difficult’, he genuinely wanted to know and had a particularly enquiring mind.  Once I realised that, I changed my approach to difficult questions from all learners, not just him.   I realised that he and other learners putting posers could actually help me to deliver a session that was much more lively and relevant to that particular group of learners.   Questions can often helping you to tailor the session.

My final nomination in this blog, is my father, who is a church minister, now retired.  In the course of my childhood, he was probably the person who I heard most often speak in public, when he delivered the weekly sermon from the pulpit of our church.   (By the way, if he ever mentioned one of us children in these talks, he was required to pay us at, I think, 50 pence a mention – we were tough negotiators!  Of course, this now means that that I owe him for this blog and with the rate of inflation as it is, this amount should be considerably increased!)  My father is a brilliant preacher, because he speaks with passion – not the fire and brimstone kind, but with conviction.   And that is what I aim to bring to any delivery that I do too.  Sometimes, L&D professionals (and ministers) present with so little heart in it, with so little sense of their own belief in what they are delivering that the impact of their material is undermined.  So, I have learnt to let my passions and enthusiasms shine through when delivering.  

So, those are some of my key role models in becoming the L&D professional that I am.    If you would like to share your inspirations and role models, please do add these to the comments section for this blog.   I look forward to hearing from you.

Rachel Burnham

25 September 2013

Burnham L & D Consultancy specialises in the development of L&D professionals, blended learning and evaluation

Follow me on Twitter @BurnhamLandD