Learning in theory or in practice?
May 1, 2008
I’m coming to the end of a gruelling HR qualification, summoning what little motivation I have left to finish the last few sections of the final, enormous assignment. When I first started the qualification, I loved it and thought that it was really useful to my job; I tried to put every bit of learning into practice in my work. This last year has been a nightmare though, I think there’s only so far you can go before the experience counts for a lot more than the academic learning, and this has become apparent even more with this assignment that I’m doing. The problem is that everything academic is based in theory, and it’s sometimes hard to relate that to practice when you have to actually carry out the things you’ve been learning about. Another key issue is that some of the tutors have been lecturers for decades, so the last experience of business they had doesn’t relate that well to today’s working environment – in some cases it was before I was even born! I think the best teachers are those who have recently worked in a similar environment – but how can that work in practice? You’d have to keep kicking out the old to bring in the new and that’s hardly feasible!
In many areas of HR, there is a need to carry out formal training to understand the requirements and the theory behind HR practices; such as employment law, the recruitment and selection process, learning and development options, and how to develop a HR strategy from the business strategy. But the responsibility for making this happen in real life is placed on the individual, and you only get good at this through practice and a commitment to trying things out.
So I’m not really sure what I’m saying here. I have definitely benefitted from carrying out a HR related qualification, but a lot of it has been down to me drawing on the information and using it effectively, which is how it should be I suppose. I think now I’m just at the point where having to research theories of practitioners from 1975 and then somehow put that into an action plan for my organisation is making me think ‘what on earth am I doing?’
Staff motivation
April 25, 2008
According to a new survey carried out by YouGov on behalf of Investors in People UK, 30% of workers are de-motivated in their current role, and the main reasons for this are lack of development and career progression opportunities. The research found that people who had been in their role for one to two years are most likely to want to leave. This is because their employer focussed all of their efforts on the induction period, where a lot of development and progression took place, but once the employee was settled in the role the focus on development tailed off. I was speaking to a colleague of mine the other day and he said that personal development had always been more important to him than his salary prospects, and I suspect that for a lot of other people this is also the case.
The research also highlighted the important link in making this happen – line managers. 28% of survey respondents to the survey who had a line manager felt unsupported by them. I can’t express enough the impact of the line manager’s actions and management style on the morale, motivation and job satisfaction of employees. No matter what great policies and procedures are in place, an employee will still be de-motivated if they do not feel that their manager takes an interest in their work and their future career path. Staff who do not feel this connection with their manager will be those who lose track of their goals, lack commitment through low motivation and will probably eventually leave after one or two years.
The UK supposedly has one of the lowest productivity rates in the world, even though we work longer hours than most other countries, so there has to be something in staff motivation levels. From the findings of this research, it looks like many companies have a lot more to do in terms of staff development and career planning; something that’s probably quite obvious if you think about it.
Why e-learning doesn’t always work
April 9, 2008
Yesterday I wrote about the benefits an e-learning programme can bring to a business. Today I’ve been thinking about the problems that can limit the positive effects of the learning method:
- The pressures of time on employees has a negative effect on e-learning as it relies on people making the time themselves to participate in learning. Obviously in light of a set of work-related priorities the first thing to be dropped will be the e-learning course an employee is due to complete. The only area this may not be applicable is where e-learning forms part of a compliance-related training course, for example on-line driving awareness courses. Somebody I know used to work for a company where going out to a site visit was not permissible without first completing a set of on-line learning tasks to make them aware of the risks.
- Whilst many e-learning opportunities do allow for interaction with other people, those that don’t can lack the support and discussion required for effective learning to take place. E-learning can be a lonely activity and self-motivation can be affected.
- Access to e-learning opportunities may be limited, especially in companies where not everybody has PC access (e.g. in manufacturing)
- Whilst ongoing e-learning activities are inexpensive, the set up of a programme can be very costly – if you get it wrong first time there may be a loss of faith in the potential benefits.
- E-learning is not an appropriate method of learning for skill development, as the learner is too distanced from the situation the skill will be needed for, and there is no practical element to the method. This is why e-learning will never take over as the main learning method used by organisations, although it could be really useful when used in combination with other methods (referred to a ‘blended learning’) as a feedback and communication tool following more practical activities.
- As we all know, technology isn’t always as reliable as we’d like, and frustrations with system failures can lead learners to lose interest in the method, especially if it is not linked to other learning activities that can help maintain the momentum.
So overall it looks like there’s more cons than pros for e-learning. The picture isn’t as bleak as it looks though, it is simply important to recognise these pitfalls when embarking on an e-learning programme to help it become as successful as possible. The main thing to ensure, I believe, is that the e-learning courses are integrated with other activities and learning methods rather than as a stand alone project. Also, it is important to recognise that e-learning will not be appropriate for all learning needs, and HR/L&D professionals should not attempt to implement it because it is the latest fashionable idea or that they’ve heard it works well at another organisation. Learning activities need to be tailored to the needs of any particular organisation, and e-learning is just another option in the learning and development mix that can be utilised to meet these needs.
E-learning – what’s so good about it?
April 8, 2008
According to a new survey by the CIPD, almost a third of learning and development professionals think that in a few years time between 25-50% of training will be carried out by e-learning, although few of those surveyed thought it was an effective learning method. The survey found that whilst e-learning was becoming increasingly available to staff in many organisations, the number of employees actually using it or completing courses was still quite low. E-learning can be described as any type of learning that is delivered through electronic communication methods (e.g. through the internet) or electronically based technology (e.g. on a CD-ROM). E-learning can be a really useful addition to an organisation’s learning and development programme, but there are important pros and cons to using the method that need to be considered to enable the right choices to be made about using it. The rest of this article will look at how e-learning can benefit employees and organisations.
Benefits of e-learning
- The learner can access the course at any time and in any location. This is obviously beneficial now due to the increased occurrence of home working and ‘virtual’ teams, as well as pressures on workers’ times meaning that training courses do not always fall at convenient times. You can do e-learning in your pyjamas if you want to!
- E-learning doesn’t always just involve a person carrying out a course on their own: other e-structures include virtual classrooms and online discussion threads with other people who are learning about the same subject. This can lead to the development of networks of professionals that can provide a continual support and learning environment.
- E-learning can be a fairly inexpensive way of delivering a message to a large number of people, quickly (providing they carry out the course!). Many national multi-site and international companies now use e-learning as a key part of their learning strategies.
- E-learning works well for knowledge-based learning, for example it might be useful to deliver employment law developments to line managers.
- E-learning can be used in some organisations as a way of providing risk based initial training without the risks, through the simulation of a situation to test the reaction of the learner. This is similar to the driving theory test that is now in place for learner drivers.
- It is easy to track and log learning activities for an individual with e-learning. It is also possible for the learner to carry out part of the course and then come back to it at a more convenient time at the same point. This can also help in relation to motivation – sometimes you just can’t be bothered finishing something off and arguably you’d be better coming back to it when you’re in a better frame of mind.
So e-learning can be a fantastic way of enabling employees to get the development opportunities they need in their busy working lives. It’s certainly something I could see being beneficial in my organisation. However, of course, it is necessary to think about the pitfalls and how to overcome them before diving headlong into an e-learning programme that might never achieve its full potential due to poor planning and implementation. The next article will look at the issues that companies can face.
Action learning 3: what are the drawbacks?
March 31, 2008
So I’ve been through what action learning is and how it can be beneficial to companies and employees, but as with most things where there’s pleasure, there has to be some pain! Here are the reasons why action learning can fail and how to avoid this:
The process of action learning really needs a lot of commitment and sponsorship within the company and in particular from the action learning set. The process will only succeed if all members commit to seeing it through, and have support from management in doing so. Action learning can have a high drop out rate or sporadic attendance as other company priorities will take precedence, especially in times of high pressure or time shortages. This is the same problem with many forms of learning, but here the problem is greater as the responsibility for making meetings and action plans happen is with the participants. It is really easy to see how action learning activities would be the first thing to be dropped in my organisation under pressure from management when times were busy – for example at the end of a month when targets needed to be hit! It is therefore vitally important that management understand the long term gains of action learning so that the activities are not pushed to one side. If this commitment is not going to happen, there’s not a lot of point wasting time and resources on implementing action learning.
The problem with getting management on side can be that there are no ‘quick wins’ – normally change, improvement and learning takes place over a long period and it can be difficult to sustain the motivation and enthusiasm levels required. This means that there is a need for strong facilitation – somebody who will champion the process, chair meetings, chase action points and ensure every step of the process takes place. The facilitator needs to encourage reflection within the group and challenge actions so as to create a better learning environment. Often, organisations use an external facilitator who has been briefed on the organisational culture, but is distanced from the issues being tackled. Other organisations will train up a facilitator or facilitators from within the organisation. Either way, this requires an up front investment, and this can lead to another problem.
As with many forms of learning, particularly those that are not traditional training sessions, it can be hard for learning and development professionals to gain investment without the possibility of being able to show a return on investment to the sponsor of the project. Whilst studies into action learning have found there was demonstrable benefit in using the method, it is, as with most learning and development initiatives, difficult to evaluate as the benefits are often intangible. Most studies into the evaluation of action learning have focussed on the perceived benefits to participants rather than bottom line output. It may be easier to measure this with some employees than others, e.g. those with targets such as sales people, however there is always the issue that it is very difficult to isolate the effect of the learning intervention from other factors that would also affect performance. However if the organisation has an effective performance management system then some of the improvements gained through action learning should be evident in the performance information and feedback generated through this system.
Action learning can be a very useful learning method for individuals and organisations, however, the need for strong facilitation, commitment, up front investment and a way of evaluating the impact are key factors in ensuring its success. Without these things, action learning is likely to become another failed ‘fad’ after a too short trial period.
Action learning 2: what are the benefits?
March 29, 2008
I wrote an article yesterday about what action learning is and how it can be used by organisations. There are many benefits to using action learning, some of which are as follows:
The ‘experiential learning cycle’ (Kolb) is a theory of learning that is used commonly by learning and development professionals and training or management consultants. The work of Kolb is considered to be extremely important in the understanding of human behaviour in relation to learning, and the learning cycle describes the process by which we learn something through four phases – conceptualisation, experimentation, active experience and reflection. It is felt that the more stages in the cycle the learning method covers, the more effective it is as a method.
Action learning takes the learner through all the stages of the cycle as it involves the consideration of a problem, action being taken and reflection afterwards, so it can really help the learner to take on board the new ideas or ways of working that come out of the process. Also, research has found that skills are best learned by active methods (i.e. that involve doing something as with action learning) rather than passive (for example sitting in a lecture). Whilst active methods can be more time consuming, they are promoted by learning and development experts for the acquisition of skills.
Another good point about action learning is that there are no ‘transfer of learning’ issues. In a lecture, for example, the learner is told something and then has to try to adapt this information to be able to apply it to real situations when back at work, which can be quite difficult as theory and practice are not the same. Action learning works on actual work issues, so the learning occurs from carrying out an action rather than being told how to.
Action learning can be a key contributor to the company becoming a ‘learning organisation’ – which is a popular buzz phrase at the moment. The learning organisation is one that can adapt to constantly changing business environments by reflecting on its practice and constantly striving to improve. Action learning can obviously help with this as its purpose is to use organisational problems in the learning process – in this way issues that are unique to the organisation can be resolved for the benefit of both the company and its staff. Additionally, the opportunity to work towards resolving issues in a team environment can be a great motivator for those involved.
So, action learning can be a very effective and powerful learning tool, both for individuals and the organisation. I can definitely see where it could benefit my organisation. However there are definitely drawbacks and limitations to the method that would need to be addressed for it to be successfully implemented. The next article will look in more detail at these issues.
Action Learning 1: What is action learning?
March 28, 2008
I recently wrote an article about coaching, which is a growing method of employee development in many organisations. A less well known and utilised method is action learning, but it can also be a very useful mechanism for the development of the organisation. The CIPD describes action learning as “an approach to learning that is based on individuals working on real problems that are capable of having action taken on them”, and Pedler, a key theorist in this area sums the concept up quite well: “there is no learning without action and no sober and deliberate action without learning”.
So how does it work? The process is as follows: an individual identifies a real problem and takes steps to resolve it. This is done with a group or ‘set’ of colleagues, normally of between 4 and 8 participants. You will often hear the term ‘action learning sets’ within this area. The set may share the problem with the individual or they may have a different set of problems. The set could be a group of colleagues from the same organisation, or could be from different companies; the concept will work with a variety of groups. In the set, which will meet on a periodic basis, the problem is identified and an action plan, with timescales, is developed. Everybody involved must have a clear idea of their role in making the action plan happen. At the next meeting the group will report back on progress, and reflect on what has happened and the findings that were discovered as a result of the action that was taken. The set would normally have a facilitator to ensure all the stages of the process are carried out and to chair meetings of the set. The types of problems that would be appropriate for action learning will be those that are complex and messy, will probably have no right or wrong answer and could be open to opinions and ideas from different people. Problems that are easily solved with one simple action, or for example a system update, will not be appropriate for action learning as they are more likely to be solved quickly by an expert in that area, and will not benefit action learning participants through exploration of and reflection on the issue.
This process seems very simple, and when I first learned about action learning I thought it just sounded like what happens at meetings within companies all the time! The difference however is the reflection that takes place – by doing this the individuals learn through real insights into work based situations and from how other people handle them. Of course, this is just one approach to learning out of many, and as with all forms of learning it has its benefits and limitations that must be considered by organisations that are thinking of introducing action learning as a learning method. I’ll be looking at these benefits and limitations in my next couple of articles.
The Virgin Vision
March 21, 2008
Virgin trains has launched a training academy in Crewe, to serve as the learning and development centre for the company. A 23 strong ‘talent team’ will be based at the academy, tasked with looking after recruitment, training and career development for the company. Facilities at the centre will include training for new starters, new managers, and delivering emergency response training to enable staff to deal with major incidents. One of the main purposes of the academy will be to deliver a cultural change programme through ‘vision workshops’ – designed to change employee attitudes and behaviours to encourage them to realise their potential. These will be led by a team of industrial psychologists.
Having company ‘vision’ and ‘values’ can be really important in establishing a shared identity and culture within the organisation, and research has found that companies with shared values tend to perform better as a business. The company vision can be translated into loads of HR practices such as performance management – as the value words can be developed as competencies, and also for training purposes; like what’s being done at Virgin. I’m quite a believer in this sort of thing and in the future I’d probably like to do some work on it where I work. However it’s not just about having a vision and developing values – it’s no good having words if they’re not embedded in the behaviour of all employees, and this is something that has to start at the top. So, as Virgin has done, a company needs to make a commitment to driving forward the vision through the way people are managed and the way managers behave, which can come through effective recruitment, performance management and development opportunities.
Coaching in organisations
March 20, 2008
Coaching is becoming an ever popular method of learning and development in organisations, with 71% of respondents to the 2008 CIPD Learning and Development survey claiming to use coaching of some sort in their organisations.
Coaching is a goal focussed method of helping an individual improve specified aspects of their work performance. It differs from mentoring as it concentrates on one aspect or area of a person’s job at a time, and normally for a set length of time, whereas mentoring is a long term ongoing development method that focuses on all aspects of the person’s work or personal life to enable development to take place. Coaching is an alternative to traditional training methods as it is very individual and tailored, plus the style is non-directive; the coach’s role is to enable the individual to develop within a framework of support rather than ‘teaching’ them skills or imparting information. The individual is given time to practice and experiment with new ways of working and behaving rather than being given a ‘one best way’ approach.
One of the biggest questions when considering developing some form of coaching within an organisation is how exactly you want it to work and be implemented. The method can be used on a small scale with individual managers and employees, or the organisation can choose to develop what’s commonly referred to as a ‘coaching culture’, where the method is so embedded within the practices of the company it is almost a style of management. I think that in many organisations the first option, i.e. managers using coaching as a development tool in their departments, is done on an informal level automatically – it is where I work. On the other hand, embedding coaching as a culture takes a lot more commitment, resources and time. However this investment can pay dividends: whilst small scale ‘operational’ coaching can be very useful as a performance management and improvement tool, consistent ‘transformational ‘ coaching can provide a new way of managing the company that can help to drive important changes in an ever more competitive business environment.
Finding the right approach to the implementation of coaching will depend on the current culture and attitudes within the organisation, not least at the top. I recently read about some CIPD research (member only resource) into this subject which has found two main approaches to implementation. The first approach, “centralised and structured”, is planned and controlled, integrating coaching activities with policies and procedures as part of a learning strategy. The focus links more to business improvement than to individual growth and development. The second approach; “organic and emergent”, sees coaching as a personal and individual activity, focussing on the need for guidance, support and supervision, but not for a strict policy or framework. A number of factors will affect the choice of approach: including the purpose of introducing coaching, the size of organisation, resources available and the way learning and development is viewed within the organisation. In organisations where L&D does not have a high importance, it is hardly going to be appropriate to suggest implementing a large and costly programme; in this case the organic and emergent approach will be more successful as the practice can gradually develop, building on ‘small wins’ by adding more participants once the news of its effectiveness begins to spread. In organisations where a large scale change is required then the centralised and structured approach will be required; this worked well for Vodafone in the late 1990s and early 2000s when new business models were required to allow the company to stay competitive with all the new networks that suddenly appeared. The large integrated coaching programme helped to change attitudes and management style to help accommodate the business changes.
Developing coaching in an organisation is probably not something that can be done without advice and assistance from an external expert. A consultant will be able to ascertain what is required by assessing the needs of the organisation and judging the current climate for learning and development practices. However to get this kind of help there would have to be an up front investment, which is where the opportunity might fail to even get off the ground!
For more information on coaching click here.
The benefits of work experience programmes
February 21, 2008
Everybody remembers going on their work experience placement when they were in school. Many people take work experience in their further and higher education as well, including summer internships, gap year placements and workplace based projects. There are obvious benefits to the individual such as developing their work related skills, increasing their marketability and the opportunity to find out what it is they want to do as a career.
There are also benefits to be gained for an employer in taking on students for various work experience opportunities, including quite simply the ability to get additional labour into the business for a low cost. Developing relationships with academic institutions can also help to reduce recruitment costs in the future by targeting recruitment campaigns there or keeping interns on for full time positions after the end of their education.
Students can also bring the most up to date academic thinking into the workplace, and can provide a fresh pair of eyes to help solve problems. Introducing a programme can provide opportunities for more inexperienced staff who are seeking progression to learn and practice management skills on work experience placements.
Work experience programmes can assist with employer brand development and marketing, as well as raising the profile of the company within the local community. From an ethical and corporate social responsibility (CSR) point of view, offering work experience gives employers the chance to influence the skill set of the future labour force.