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.
Security of Information – the impact of people
March 27, 2008
A recent study by PricewaterhouseCoopers has found that an increasing number of businesses are adopting security policies to protect the confidential information of their employees and clients. High profile Government cases such as the missing discs containing thousands of people’s personal information have contributed to putting this issue on the agenda for many organisations. (I recently wrote a security policy for my organisation - see my article on monitoring internet usage from February). However the research also highlighted that simply putting policies and systems in place is not good enough in the effort to protect information, and that changing employee behaviours is the key to success.
With changing ways of working, including the increase in home working and ‘virtual’ teams, information systems are becoming more complex and security provisions need to cover a range of networking challenges. Practices that increase autonomy and responsibility such as job redesign are leading to more trust being placed in employees, and so the information held by companies is now more than ever subject to the correct handling by their people.
Additionally, most companies now provide internet access for many if not all employees, which of course increases the security risks. The research showed that many employees were being targeted by ‘social engineering’ attacks, where outsiders tried to get information about the company through its employees using social networking sites like Facebook. Some confidential information had been found to have been posted by employees about their companies on these sorts of sites.
So a clear policy and system tools will not stop security risks on their own. Employees need to be aware of the risks of their actions on the internet whilst at work, or when talking about work on the internet. The communication and enforcement of the policy is just as important as the content. HR may play a big role in this as many of the internal communication mechanisms may be controlled by the function. Additionally, it may be that the team or person responsible for the writing of the policy (e.g. the IT Officer) may not have all the necessary skills and experience in the communication of policies and practices within the company. Additionally, HR should be able to add weight to the importance of security by applying the appropriate enforcement measures and advising on disciplinary action where required. The rules within any security policy will only be enforceable if breaches are effectively dealt with. However as well as HR, the senior management team will have an effect on whether security measures are taken seriously within the business, and need to display the required behaviours and attitudes, otherwise it is unlikely that employees will see the importance of the issue.
HR’s impact on customer satisfaction
March 26, 2008
I’ve just been reading an article in People Management about a Financial Services Authority (FSA) scheme called Treating Customers Fairly (TCF). The FSA is a company that has statutory authority over the financial services industry (e.g. mortgage and pensions providers, loan and insurance companies and banks), and part of its remit is to enforce certain conditions that financial services companies must meet to comply with their legal obligations and operate ethically.
The TCF scheme was introduced to ensure consumers buying services from companies regulated by the FSA are treated fairly in their purchases. The scheme has six required outcomes for consumers including confidence that the product they are buying is targeted to their needs, receiving clear and consistent information and advice at every stage, and being able to change providers and make a complaint without unreasonable barriers if required.
Firms in this scheme have until December to be able to show that they have the right internal structures in place to ensure customers are treated fairly and not mis-sold products or services. The FSA feels that implementing these structures and ensuring that the outcomes can be achieved will be heavily influenced by the human resources provision within companies. This is because the fair and appropriate treatment of customers is down to employees, and cannot be achieved with systems and processes alone. The TCF message needs to be embedded within the culture of the business and the attitudes of all employees, and HR can have a major impact on this. A consultant that was involved in the development of the scheme found that the most successful companies in carrying out the TCF objectives were those who involved HR from the start to embed the principles in the working of the organisation.
Whilst this is a scheme relating to the financial services sector, I think some of it could be really useful for a lot of companies, especially with such a large proportion now being part of the ‘services sector’. Companies that provide a service need to have customer interests as the central importance, and this needs to form part of all aspects of people management, from recruitment of the right people with the right attitudes to setting expectations and delivering on company values. Customer relations is something that is quite high on the agenda in my organisation at the moment and perhaps a scheme similar to the TCF one would be something to consider, and could also be useful in a lot of other organisations – the objectives would simply need to be adapted to suit the particular organisation and customer group. This could then be worked into people management practices such as handbooks, policies, recruitment, induction and development activities, performance management structures and communications practices, to ensure that all managers and employees buy into the same vision of how customers should be treated.
Definitely food for thought!
Maternity leave for men!
March 25, 2008
There’s often discussion about parental rights in terms of employment, and one area that’s not often out of the news is the rights to maternity and paternity pay. In the age of the ‘new man’, the question is should it only be the female that is entitled to extended leave (because she’s the one giving birth!) or should couples be able to share the available leave in the baby’s first year?
The Conservatives have recently taken this discussion to the next level; by unveiling plans to allow mothers and fathers to divide the maternity leave between them as they choose, as well as increasing the statutory paid leave period to 52 weeks (it’s currently 39 weeks). This system would be called ‘flexible parental leave’ and would give a lot more choice in how the leave is allocated, including the ability for both parents to take half of the year’s entitlement simultaneously and be paid double the rate of SMP. Alternatively the father could take the entire 52 weeks leave instead of the mother. I would assume that the compulsory leave for the mother would remain as the two weeks immediately after the birth as this is a health and safety provision.
These changes would be a really positive step towards giving both parents the chance to participate in the early weeks and months of their children’s lives, and for couples where the female is the higher earner it may be more beneficial financially as well. Mind you, I hope I’m not the higher earner in my relationship by the time we have kids – I think I’d be quite upset going off to work and leaving the new family at home, but I guess this is what guys do all the time at the moment.
I can’t imagine that many couples would be able to afford a drop in both incomes for a long period of time in order to take simultaneous leave, but the flexibility in these new proposals would definitely help a lot of couples. I think it might have quite a big effect on businesses though – especially in one like my organisation where around 80% of the employees are male and all within a similar age bracket – parental leave could suddenly become a big problem in a few years where everybody starts to reach the age of fatherhood together. It all comes back to that D word – diversity in workforces isn’t just for the sake of equal opportunities, a big bunch of people who are all the same will bring the same challenges and possibly all at the same time!
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.
Unemployment drops - but where are the figures shifting to?
March 19, 2008
Following on from yesterday’s article about people on incapacity benefit, news out today shows that unemployment is still falling as the number of people in work has reached a record high of almost 30 million (figures came from the Office for National Statistics). The number of people on jobseekers allowance fell by 2800 this month, which was the 17th consecutive monthly fall in the claimant count. Employment levels are now at the highest since the records began in 1971. This information highlights the need for the Government to concentrate on incapacity benefit claimants, as this number is still increasing as the number of people claiming jobseekers allowance drops. I saw a news programme a while back about this subject where a Conservative MP was critical of positive unemployment figures as he claimed many of the jobseekers had simply transferred to incapacity benefit and this had made the unemployment figures look better (well, he would say that wouldn’t he!). Sometimes you get the feeling that you’re never going to know exactly what’s going on as all the information available will have some sort of spin designed to mould your opinion one way or another.
Back to work schemes for incapacity benefit claimants
March 18, 2008
Getting people on incapacity benefits back to work is high on the agenda at the moment. Incapacity benefit is paid when someone has exceeded the maximum six months statutory sick pay and is still incapable of returning to work through ill health. Whilst the Government used to concentrate on those claiming jobseekers allowance, through employment schemes such as New Deal, in recent years there has been a shift in focus to reducing the number of people on incapacity benefit in the UK, which currently stands at 2.5 million.
Recently it was announced that as part of a ‘back to work drive’, all people claiming incapacity benefit will go through rigorous tests of their ability to work by 2013, and then will be provided with support to get back into work. But it’s not all about ability – many people will find it hard to find employment when they have been out of action for so long, as many employers will be dubious at taking on workers without recent work experience or if they may pose a risk of having a larger than usual amount of sick leave.
This is where Jobcentre Plus is having an impact, through the development of local employment partnerships (LEPs). These partnerships allow employers to tap into a wider labour pool whilst offering long term incapacity benefit claimants to gain essential training and participate in work. The employer offers a work trial (around a month) and the employee continues to claim benefits whilst on the trial, so there is no cost to the employer. If the employee does well they will be taken on permanently and taken off incapacity benefit. This set up has worked well at Nissan in the North East, where there is quite high unemployment but from my experience it can be very tricky to find enough suitable staff on a large scale recruitment drive. Nissan is currently recruiting 800 staff, and the Gateshead College Skills Academy for automotive, engineering, manufacturing and logistics courses is preparing people for Nissan through a training scheme called ‘Nissan Gateway’ as part of the LEP.
This is a fantastic opportunity for employers who are struggling to fill roles, particularly for large employers such as Nissan who are recruiting on a large scale, where an ongoing programme such as Nissan Gateway can be established. Employers will need to remember though that the new employees will need more flexibility and support in their first few months than ‘regular’ employees. A lot of people on long term benefits will have lost a lot of confidence in themselves and will perhaps not be used to the rigidity of working full time. Well designed and implemented induction programmes, which may simply build on the existing induction programme will help to integrate employees back into the world of work. Other schemes such as a buddy system will also provide employees with a source of support and guidance within the first few weeks and months back in work.
As well as reducing the number of people claiming benefits in the UK, schemes to enable people claiming incapacity benefit to return to work will open up a whole new section of the labour market for employers who are willing to take a few risks and put a bit of time and effort into their internal mechanisms for supporting such schemes. However it must be remembered that lots of people are on incapacity benefit because they are actually incapable of working at all, so hopefully the new Government tests will be realistic and won’t leave thousands of people trying to fulfill jobs they are not capable of doing – as this will cause more problems for the employers participating in the schemes, and something that has a lot of promise may ultimately fail.