A meeting last week with my boss yielded a surprising “all in favor” response to asking about doing research within our job family and using resources other than me to complete it. Not that there is anything in the research that warrants a ‘no’ but I was surprised by the enthusiasm and vision of what this could mean for our job family in terms of training. It also beget a conversation about the things that could be coming down the road for this group. We both left equally excited.

Still there are some other hurdles to overcome.

1. Permission from the regional leaderhsip of the geographic location I intended to use. I am using something outside the Northeast United States to eliminate bias and potential other hurdles related to vision and allowances
2. Letters drafted for each leader to showcase to the various committees and boards needed to earn an approved proposal
3. The finalized proposal and executive summary for the various committees and boards needed to earn an approved proposal
4. Finally, some project planning to implement this. I honestly think we can carry out the research in about 2 weeks of time.

I also have to finish updating my literature review and fortunately, an assignment in my current class hits right on the topic I need to research so bingo.

I must say that for the first time in months, I feel good about this. I wish I’d felt this long ago, I’d be done by now. I need to finish this Spring though. There is some celebrations and plans moving ahead for the Spring, Summer and Fall whether I am done or not.

Image Source: Kristina B

We’ve all been there. We’ve all argued in circles or been argued with in circles. Talking in circles refers to another logical fallacy known as the circular argument, circular reasoning, or begging the question. Essentially it is an argument that in some way is predicated on itself.

This is a fallacy that I’ve been catching more in my reading and listening. It happens at work, school, and all around me. For example, your function is moving out of the training department because it cannot be effective there; however you must still remain active in with department in many ways so you can be effective. This argument presupposes that effectiveness is not possible in the training department but that being heavily involved in the training department is required for effectiveness.

This is common enough argument that it is becoming almost humorous to find. One word of caution, people don’t like to be caught talking in circles. I tend to keep it to myself but use it to make determinations about whether or not that person has made careful or accurate decisions.

I think on of the reasons this and other fallacies happen is because we are moving so quickly that we can’t take time to think clearly before speaking. Ever notice how academics seem to move at a different pace? Slower maybe? Sure, is it because they don’t understand how it is in the real world? Perhaps, but more likely they are taking the time to be conscious and determined in both thought and response.

Businesses regularly report wanting more critical thinking people on the payroll. Critical thinking requires some prowess for logic and logical fallacies. Like all things, the more we practice the faster we will think critically. We need to be patient while the skills are built.

• What circular arguments to do you hear?
• What circular do you use?
• How can you stop using those logical errors and still get to the outcomes you desire?
• Does knowing more about circular reasoning help or hinder you?

In terms of study and research, being able to spot circular arguments is imperative to determining reliability and credibility in the work. I’ve read several articles that make this error and it is awfully easy to just ignore them to take what I need to make my own argument. Good researchers don’t do that though, they engage in reflective thinking and take care to use elements that make sense logically.

Still, I have more fun listening to people and finding the fallacy in the statements. This is particularly fun when you’ve already determined the argument is bunk. Be careful not to anger them though, people who think irrationally often act irrationally too.

Image source: Guille

Clark Quinn, writing for TogetherLearn, posted an interesting response to criticism about the informal learning. Quinn’s point was simply that training is changing and a true professional will include elements of informal learning into the spectrum of services provided for clients and organizations. I couldn’t agree more.

In my research people often think that I am advocating the overthrow of classroom learning. I am not. Like Quinn, and others, I don’t think classroom learning will go away but it does need to change both in purpose and in implementation. Quinn talks about the purpose of classroom learning under the guise of formal instruction (which is more comprehensive than simply classroom learning):

there [is] a role for formal instruction (when you’ve new folks, or are moving to a new suite of skills)

he continues…

Most classrooms (live or virtual) focus on knowledge dump, don’t present appropriate practice, don’t assess in meaningful ways, and aren’t leading to the necessary changes in behavior.  Classrooms persist more because they’re efficient, not because they’re effective!

What you should be paying attention to is that expertise is no guarantee of quality.  Learning designed by listening to SMEs often is fact-heavy, and irrelevant. Experts don’t even know how they do things, and rely on the knowledge they’ve learned.

I’ve lived this all my training life, knowledge dumps, and it only sets me to take the materials and learn it on my own using informal techniques. Personally, this suggests the the role of formal instruction is to convey knowledge. In fact, I tell people this all the time…training closes knowledge gaps not performance gaps. I get a chuckle out of people that feel training is the hammer to fix all problems. It is expensive, time consuming, and according to research not meeting expectations or objectives.

When you think about how and what you learn everyday (and I mean really reflect on it) it is done through other means than formal instruction. Today that looks like website, web communities, podcasts, blogs, talking to people, emailing people, IMing people. Oh yes, people still attend the occasional class but that is to learning something new.

Quinn sums up, in a way I feel is spot on:

Yes, formal is part of the full spectrum, the full ecosystem, the full learnscape of solutions.  But the ‘classroom’ shouldn’t be the standard bearer.  We aren’t calling for the death of formal instruction, we’re calling for a) acknowledging and incorporating informal learning, and b) death of the classroom as a ’showup and throwup’ or ’spray and pray’ proposition.

Being a full spectrum provider means that you have a multitude of tools available that match the situation and need (not necessarily want). Think about where you’d rather shop. Do you want to drive all over town to hit the specializations you need or look for the mall or location that has the most things to offer. As a learning professional, I want to be the provider of as many things as possible, not a generalist but  a specialist in many areas. I also want to know about many things and have the connections to bring them in when needed.

For my dissertation this means that I am providing some further evidence to support one area of informal learning and help organizations make a conscious choice about what to use, when, and how.

Image source: tanakawho

I’ve changed direction, again, on my dissertation. If you’ve been reading along you know that I dropped the blogs and wikis from my research fearing that the science would be messy. Not only that but the environment would also be messy and hard to isolate which factor would be superseding the others. The decision was not an easy one and it came with the cost of continuing to stew about the course change.

Admittedly, this has been a bit disabling. It is not easy to wonder if you made the right decision all the time and more difficult to separate the legitimate rationale for making another change from the invalid second guessing. I finally took some time away from my job to focus on myself and my work vs. them and their work (been feeling a little like they’re leeches lately). My reflections led me to recall an interview I gave recently about Web 2.0 and working environments. I don’t claim to be as much an expert as the few who are but I do consider myself a student of the phenomenon.

During the interview I remarked that blogs and podcasts are often seen together and rarely will you see a podcast without some sort of blogging component. I’ve never heard or used the phrase someone podcasted me back but have talked about people leaving comments or linkbacks to my posts. At the time I didn’t give it much thought but as the month wore on I really thought about that quip. Was there something to that? Could I combine the two and drop, what felt like a third wheel even at the beginning, wikis?

I inquired to my mentor. Our discussions led us to the conclusions that yes I could do anything I like and that the results will simply report what happens when you use blogs and podcasts together. I felt better about that. As such, I revisioned my dissertation to include blogs with podcasting. Now, I am writing up the thinking into a draft form so I can move forward.

The problem statement might need to change too. I am feeling that the problem might not be the ineffectiveness of classroom learning (although I feel that is a problem) but instead be the adoption of blogs and podcasts in corporate learning and no measurement on learning when using these technologies. I see a lot in terms of Kirkpatrick’s Level 1 and little in terms of measuring learning (Level 2), transfer (Level 3), or ROI (Level 4). All of this means, that I will be looking for some evidence to support what I feel is a problem (and of course, weighing the contrary evidence saying it is not a problem).

In working with my mentor there has been many discussions that are clarifying the process of completing the proposal. One of the discussions was around the testing instrument. I am choosing to do a pre and post test for my instrument founded in Kirkpatrick’s Level 2 evaluation of training programs. A related issue is the creation of the testing device.

The nature of the training intervention suggests that a custom test is deployed to target the instructed skills both in the test and control groups. Kirkpatrick, in a speech delivered to my local ASTD chapter, talked about designing such tests to be directly linked to the instructed concepts. In fact, he suggested that instructors use the test as the syllabus and give it out ahead of time to allow students to use it for the learning.

My concern would be the reliability and validity of a pretest and posttest designed by the researcher. Is there an issue with that? I suppose that as long as the test mapped to the learning objective and both groups used the same objectives and test it would be fine but I am still a little unsure.

Using an established instrument would alleviate the bias concerns. How would that established pretest posttest instrument be applicable to the training being delivered?

Lots of questions.

As I delve into the proposal writing, I am finding numerous situations that come down to the chicken and egg argument. To determine the ful study, I need to know this thing, to know that thing I need to know another but to know the last I need to know the first. Frustrating? Kind of frustrating, to be sure.

I feel like I want a template that steps through the process and links to assistance so effective decisions can be made. UPX provides a dissertation checklist but it does not have the you need to know this first, then this. Rather, it gives you what should be included in each chapter.

For now, I need to make some decisions about the statisitical analysis and experiment design. I have a conversation this week with a colleague offering some advice on the study process, experiment population, and working student dissertation issues. I am looking forward to it.

Image Source: woodleywonderworks

The March 2009 issue of Atlantic Monthly featured an article titled, “How the Crash will Reshape America” by Richard Florida, a professor at University of Toronto in Ontario, Canada. I caught the interview on NPR and the idea intrigued me to begin thinking about learning and creativity.

Florida’s primary tenet was that the economic reset the world is feeling know will result in a new economy driven by creativity and knowledge workers. As both a creative and knowledge worker, this was good news to me but caused some reflection about how learning can lead the economic reset and the next economic growth area — knowledge.

Tom Gram wrote about his reading of “The Elegant Solution: Toyota’s Formula for Mastering Innovation“, in a post named for one chapter, Let Learning Lead. Gram’s summary and captured points included how important learning was as the predeccessor for Toyota’s innovation, and in fact all innovation.

In it May argues that learning and innovation are intimately linked but that learning must come first–that it is a precondition for innovation. Through learning, ideas are converted into action.

A chief approach I use when leading training or learning interventions is that I want to create a thinking worker who can use learned knowledge, experience, and demonstrated skill to positively impact the organization. In other words, I don’t want robots, I want knowledge workers. Automatons just won’t do and if we heed Florida’s prophecy, automatons will not add value or grow the economy.

After reading Gram’s post, I headed off to Toastmasters, thinking about how learning was important to me. One of the speech’s delivered was titled, “Acres of Diamonds”. The speech, given by Jim Howe, was a throw back to Russell Conwell. Conwell was the founder of Temple University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. Jim’s speech summarized Conwell’s Acres of Diamonds speech which Conwell delivered over 6000 times to raise money to establish Temple University. Jim concluded with the primary point of the speech was that learning, knowledge, are the precursors to growth and riches.

Last night, I lay awake thinking about all these things and something Jim said in his speech. Jim said, “Mike knows”. Apart from the dramatic imagery of using knows in a speech about knowing, the point that I have my acres of diamonds, my precursor to growth, my precondition to innovation and sustainability, and the prerequisite skills for a new economy was particularly salient.

Leaders have long known that learning is a foundational skill to leadership itself. Learning is why my research is taking the profession to a new area so that we understand the impact of using technology in learning interventions. With this new (and old) importance shed on learning as the root of the future, I am re-doubling my efforts to complete my dissertation and get onto the next economy.

I begin DOC/733 today, it is the second course with my mentor and one that I’ve been looking forward to completing for some time now. I had to delay the start due to some unexpected circumstances and bills. The purpose of the class is to prepare the proposal or Chapters 1, 2, and 3. This is a monumental undertaking for me. As most of you know, I stepped back on my research to focus solely on podcasted training and the learning impact of using podcasts.

This narrowing of focus should help my research but it does require me to get going and flesh out the research. I also need to get my research methods in order and secure an study group. Apart from that, I need to find a committee in the next few weeks so that my proposal can be thoroughly guided and built. There is a lot to do. Perhaps it is a good thing that I am being certified in FranklinCovey’s Focus Time Management series. I can use all the help I can get.

It feels like I am beginning again. It has been some time since my last class and the bad habits have snuck back in on me. I am breaking them now and it hurts. I know the road ahead is going to be a rough one but no doctoral program would be complete without these rites of passage. There are times that I wish I could be in a physical community of doctoral learners to keep the momentum. I realize, though, that would breed unhealthy competition for favor and attention from faculty. I also know that would mean being apart from my work and family; two things I am not willing to part with right now.

As I look ahead to the next 8, and likely 16, weeks I see clarification beginning to happen and a new sharpness and professionalism coming to this research. I know a lot of people are interested in the outcomes, so am I.

Image Source: LiveALittle.org

Last week I was speaking to a few people about podcasting as a form of learning intervention. My research is narrowing to look at the podcasting technology solely and this gives me the impetus to reflect on the tool in terms of learning and other aspects. I began to think about podcasting in the ways the literature I am reading suggests, as a standardized communication of a message to a massive or varied audience. In my experience, though, podcasting serves largely as a 1-way method of communication. I have something to say, I record it, I podcast it, you receive it, done. Podcasting, again in my experience, has not been a 2-way collaborative modality. The quote I delivered twice last week was “no one ever podcasts back”.

This is not entirely accurate. Podcasts often beget other podcasts, some retort from another podcaster but rarely will people interact with a podcast by sending a recorded comment directly to the producer. Instead, podcasts often serve as the front of a large collaborative community filled with blogs, wikis, and other social media. Podcasts alone are like radio stations, you may react but I won’t hear you.

On the other hand, I sit in a lot of teleconferences where I can interact with the hosts. However, I sit in a lot of teleconferences originating from the same source but with different hosts. Along with that, a slightly different message. Sometimes this is valuable and sometimes it is not valuable. Regardless of value, it is interactive and people comment or collaborate back and forth.

Do I see podcasting as an inferior technology for collaborative learning? Not really. Of course, research will bear this out quantitatively. I am truly neutral on this matter; curious really.

I don’t theorize that podcasting needs to be 1-way or non-collaborative in nature. With the advent of microphones, low/no cost recording software, built-in cameras, and the like, anyone can create a recorded comment and podcast back as it were. Podcasts are hot items these days and I wonder about the impact on learning.

Image Source: mag3737

Many years ago I made a decision to go into training and development. I loved the idea of educating job performers at something and watching it come to fruition on the floor (so to speak). A nice side benefit is the feeling of glory and pride when people know you and come to you for advice, counsel, and knowledge. What I quickly realized was that training departments and trainers were just the quickest path to knowledge and not necessarily the keepers of knowledge. It is a lesson I was happy to learn.

Harold Jarche blogged about Close the Training Department. Harold talks about the use of social media, or as I often call it collaborative learning technology, as a tool that is poorly used inside the traditional training mindsets.

I think that social media can be powerful tools for collaboration, working and learning, but they are rather useless inside a training box.

It is a trend to take social media devices and drop them into a training portal as if it were some oracle for people looking for learning services. I just completed a survey that showed a majority of people felt blogs, wikis, collaborative discussion forums, and the like were undesireable in a training portal (SharePoint in this case). However, the same respondent group felt that something being pushed to them would be more helpful. This went to another point Harold made:

Talk to the people at the coal face and find out what they really need. Few will say training. The days of developing & delivering are almost over. Connecting & Communicating should be the focus of learning and performance professionals in a networked environment.

I did and training was part of what they wanted but they wanted it delivered to directly to floor of the operation and not to some classroom. This leads me to believe that training is not a real need but a perceived need. People are smart, they need to know how to find knowledge quickly so it can be used effectively. So Harold’s point is well taken: connect people to knowledge and communicate it effectively for that group of people.

My realization of training as the quickest path to knowledge early on in my career enabled me to hone in my performance and deliver services that are needed. It is a paradigm shift for many training departments but as social media captures the interest of many in the training world, real learning and performance professionals are taking the reigns. We are trying to figure out if the tools impact learning, how the tools are used best, and what is needed by the performers of the job. Most importantly the transition needs to continue so that training departments become performance boosters.

The research I am doing helps address some of the popularity of social media devices with quantitative understanding of impact on learning. This can be expanded by looking at the real impact of using the tools in various ways.

Image Source: fredcavazza

As I narrow the scope of my dissertation and think about my fun podcast idea, I learned that I need to know more about the mechanics and concepts around podcasting. I had the Doc Blog Podcast and it was okay. It lacked a certain flair and most likely disobeyed a lot of podcast suggestions and rules for good production. As you know, I discontinued the podcast until I could reinvent it in a way that was meaningful and fulfilling for me. I’ve not found that yet. I digress.

As such I went on an unannounced search for podcast training (even guides) and found some interesting tips and tricks. It would seem there is no consistent school of thought on this subject with ideas ranging from pirate radio to broadcast standards. Ugh! I thought podcasting was different. The search had been frustrating with trying to piece together ideas about what was needed, suggestions for use, etc. That was until Foley sent over a link that brought a lot of ideas together in one place.

Free Podcast Course is as the name implies a free resource. Yes, yes, you often times get what you pay for in this world but this resource is pretty comprehensive in terms of topic and content. It is text based, which is ironic for a podcast resource but still useful. I’ve not delved into every topic listed there and glanced over a few. It seems worth my while to read further. If you’ve been thinking about podcasting, I suggest taking a look there too.

If you have other resources, feel free to post a comment to this entry and let me know. Who knows, you might get cited in some research down the road.

Image Source: blogefl

I was having a conversation last weekened with my Dad, a consumate scientist, and we discussed the switch to Podcast-only for my dissertation again. During the course of the conversation I fell into the trap that often befalls people looking at science. I stated that using only one variable will help me determine if the podcast technology in corporate learning was better than not.

This is experimenter bias. Plainly explained to me, science merely determines if the variable makes a difference or not. Interpretation is not for the experimenter but the public. What difference will podcasting in corporate training make?

I am thinking though, that people are looking to see if it is better, worse, or the same. Perhaps there is a book in there somewhere.

On a tangent of this conversation, I am thinking of beginning a podcast unrelated to my dissertation and this blog. It would be something fun and superficial, I feel like I am neglecting that side of my life.

Image source: Balakov

My dissertation has taken a back seat to many more urgent matters in my life as of late but that does not mean that I have not been thinking about it. Truth be told, I’ve had a lot of time to think about what to do, how to do it, and why to do it over the course of the last few months. My intent was to study the impact of using blogs, wikis, and podcasting in corporate training on learning retention. The goal was to intervene in classroom or other training using these Web 2.o tools and study the response using a pre/post test Kirkpatrick model to study the learning retention.

Conversations that have taken place recently have given me a new direction. First is the nature of good science. Using 3 variables in the intervention only shows the imapct of using all 3 tools. This creates ‘noise’ in the stats and I would be unable to isolate which tool works best or at all. Second, that I do not need to change the world just move knowledge a little bit. Third, was the continuance of my work beyond the dissertation.

Last week I was privy to conversations about podcasting and the possibilities that exist of using audio and video podcasts in training or classroom settings. This got me thinking about limiting my dissertation to simply podcasts and leaving the others for future research.

This would shorten my timeline a bit and allow me to focus more scientifically on one variable introduced into the setting of training. What do you think? Is limiting my research to one thing, podcasting, a good idea?

Image Source: Strangeless

Instructional developers understand the notion of evaluation. Even the most basic ISD model, ADDIE, includes the evaluation phases needed in any deployment of training. As I look into the learning evaluation element of the literature review I am struck by how many people feel testing is the answer.

Student testing is a form of assessment, how much has that student learned, and to some degree can be used in determining the effectiveness of training materials. However, testing is only 1 form of student assessment and student assessment is only one aspect of evaluation.

To be effective training the training needs to meet or exceed the learning objectives developed at the beginning of the process. If you are designing behavioral or performance based objectives then looking at learner performance can help identify gaps in or highlight effectiveness in training. Still another tool to use is aligning training elements to the objectives.

• Does this training element support this learning or training objective?

Testing is such a hot item now that a lot of people want to implement it into the workplace training conducted within their organizations. Why? It is easier to develop tests and score them than actually observe performance. Even Kirkpatrick’s Level 2 – Learning stage focuses on pre and post testing.

Is testing evaluation? No. It is one element that can be used but it is not training evaluation. I will be looking deeper into this as I learn more about how to effectively evaluate training for learning.

Image source: Pragmagraphr

I got my newly revised problem statement, purpose statement, and research questions back from my mentor this weekend. I had also asked for some guidance on what elements to include in my new literature review.  Year 3 residency really set me back a bit with some small changes. Think of it like turning a ship only 1 degree from the course and figure out what that impact is 2,000 miles away; quite a different landing place.

I’ve selected some categories for the next evolution of my literature review:

• Constructivism
• Blended Learning
• Blogs, Wikis, and Podcasts
• Learning Evaluation

My mentor thought these areas will serve me well and likely aid in redrafting the problem statement, purpose statement, and research questions. What!?! Again!?! Yes, again. This process is iterative and continues to cycle back on the previous components at every turn. Frustrating to be sure but needed to validate and refine the project.

So the biggest piece of advice is keep reading. I will read. I need to read. First, I need to find some articles. So the remainder of the week is business travel and my regular class, so I will be in the academic frame of mind.

One nice about my research is that it fits my work well. If everything holds out, I will be able to use my work to do my research. That would be ideal.

Image Source: Swamibu

In revising my problem and purpose statement, along with fleshing out Chapter 1 of the dissertation, I got some sage words of wisdom from my mentor.

We want you to graduate

I liked the idea of measuring my dissertation to what Kirkpatrick would call the behavioral level or Level Three. However, as I know and my mentor pointed out to me again, this level of measurement is evasive and lengthy to determine. While I think understanding this is important, I also think graduation is important.

Even Kirkpatrick determined that Level Three is a difficult level to evaluate and can lead to false negatives. In the literature Kirkpatrick proffered that too many factors can mute a behavioral change and lead the researcher to issue a negative statement which might not be accurate. In fact, Kirkpatrick cautioned that influencers like a boss, workplace, personality, etc could give the impression that the training was ineffective when in fact learning took place, at Level Two.

So, I pulled back from work performance to get a faster and more accurate evaluation for the research. Is it cheating? Not at all. In fact, because the literature doesn’t have any determinations of effectiveness, this is a most appropriate level to evaluate. Future studies could include behavioral evaluation. In fact, that would make a nice second book for me…so don’t take my idea

I sent my revisions into my mentor and am looking forward to her feedback on the matter. This does add another component to my literature review but that isn’t going to be too bad. I jsut need to read more.

Mid way through day 2 we are complete with the first round of case study presentations and being asked to reflection our participation and expectations in the case study assignment.

What worked well for me in our assignment was the equal caliber of quality and excellence amongst the team members. This was exhibited in diligence and aptitude for compiling the overall assignment, creating and contributing individual work to the overall assignment, and high caliber presenting of a well thought through and conceived idea.

One area that requires some addressing is the preparation of my component. With limited time to prepare an in depth case study, I needed a little more time to prepare the presentation components I chose. I think working later on rehearsals and contingency planning, like in Toastmasters, would have helped. One team member said it right, if we knew the material cold and had more time we would have been stellar.

Moving into the next assignment we are regrouping into new teams. I do not like this activity and dread being grouped with one other student in the class that personally attacked me in a public setting, during the presentation. I find the idea of potentially being grouped with her distasteful and need to consider my options moving ahead.

For the next assignment, barring an unpleasant team assignment, I will work more completely to prepare for the academic presentation of case studies.

I’ve been following the organizational learning and performance industry for over 10 years now. I am always amazed when folks spin training into something that it is not (like the cure all for every problem we face in a company). In the 10+ years of being a practitioner and leader I have come to one indisputable truth, people know how to learn on their own.

Training, then becomes a convenient one-stop shop for the knowledge required to satisfy the need. In other words, someone has gathered the knowledge objects into one location and developed a delivery mechanism to provide to those in need. That is not how I learn. Sure, I take classes at University of Phoenix and some of the information I need is in the class but the bulk of it requires me to search, collect, label, store, and deliver the knowledge to myself. In Jay Cross terms, this would be the creation of a Personal Learning Environment or PLE (although he did not develop this concept on his own…it is where I read it first).

I don’t think I am special and see people seeking out information and knowledge as needed, when needed, and where needed. For the most part, people know when they need to know. Rory posted a few weeks ago about his own quest for knowledge and how that flies in the face of his job as an instructional designer. He writes,

When I need to learn something I pretty much create my own little PLE of resources and information, documents, bookmarks … you name it. My LMS-of-choice (if I can call it that) is Google.

Now, I’m fond of saying that training addresses knowledge gaps. For the most par this is true. Performance changes come from a different set of solutions, for the most part (no absolutes here). If training is an information delivery system and the need can be met differently (more effectively, cheaper, and faster) then people will go that route.

Harold Jarche talks about the changing role of training to enable the performance of the individual worker and be extension the organization. Harold writes,

I think that a better approach would be for the organisation to focus on measurable performance and give workers the time and support to direct their own learning. The T&D function then provides support, but not direction, and also provides a feedback loop to develop better performance support from the organisation.

I agree, I have agreed, and as recently as this morning I stated the same. As a learning and performance professional my job is to get folks to learn what is needed and enhance their individual performance. I just bid a job where I said the same and you would have thought the seas parted and light shone down on the meeting. The folks in the meeting responded like they thought this is what they had wanted for a long time but never had the words to describe it.

It shows you that the clients of training departments want more than a classroom class that takes workers out of production, costs money, and delivers training in a vaccuum that then slams shut. Instead, training groups need to find and support devices that continue the learning of the individual or group of individuals. If someone can develop a PLE, the training departments job is to be the source of information for that individual’s PLE. It is a transition from delivery of training to the delivery of information or more adptly learning and performance.

In terms of my research, this means that Web 2.0 tools like blogs, wikis, and podcasts can become elements of someone’s PLE. What impact does this have on their performance? A pretty interesting question. It moves beyond my research into the realm of educational psychology. Does the creation of PLE’s increase learning and performance? Maybe that is a question to be answered in my second book (post-dissertation).

Image Source: mushon

I am traveling this week for work and had a chance to have an exceedingly late dinner with a manager from the company last night. It was a nice time to get to know a new-to-me person. The discussion turned to what training is provided to for the job. The idea of training being an all-encompassing terms meaning anything related to associate communication about how to do the job.

This gave me an opportunity to isolate the term training and expand how we work with associates to help them perform. Many companies use the word training in a general and broad sense. This rolls over into training associates to address all sorts of gaps and usually getting a low success rate. which in turn is attributed to the failure of the associate, not the failure of management or the company to address the gaps with the proper solution.

Training, in the most accurate sense, is the transfer of knowledge related to the job. Think about this in terms of classrooms, eLearning sessions, etc. It is usually held that the knowledge is contained in one party and transfers to another (new employee orientation, product knowledge, process changes, new skills).

Typically, people know what is needed and require assistance implementing that knowledge. This is where a performance intervention is more handy. Performance interventions are a more inclusive service offered by professionals that involves a variety of solutions. Interventions I’ve worked on often involved some training, process improvement, coaching, mentoring, tool modification, or some other adjustment that impacts how someone does the job.

For example, a poor sales performance is a common enough problem to think about. When we know that the sales associate knows the product, services, etc.; we need to think about why the associate is not performing. Is the Client Relationship Tool adequate for the job (note, not the ability to use it but the tool itself)? Are the performance benchmarks accurately capturing the performance? Is the marketing/sales material appropriate for the marketplace? Is the associate in need of some coaching when in front of clients?

Sound different than sitting the person in a classroom and forcing them to comply to knowledge transfer? Sure. Sound more complex than simply putting on a class? You bet. Does it take courage to talk about changes in the system? Absolutely.

Too often we get stuck in a substandard performance loop because we obey the edict of “we work with what we got”. It what we got isn’t working, say something and be courageous enough to make the changes needed to retain good people and improve our company. Being adherent to a substandard policy, process, product, or service only sets the company up for failure. Our people are our asset, not the product or service.

How does this relate to my dissertation? I am looking at blogs, wikis, and podcasts as components of performance solutions and the ultimate impact on worker performance. So training is only a small part of a larger system.

Summing up. Training addresses knowledge gaps. Performance Consulting addresses performance gaps.

Image source: flyzipper

I’ve spent the Summer revising and revising my literature review in hopes of getting it to the point I feel it is worth my mentor’s time to review and comment. I understand the function of the mentor is to guide and offer coaching as needed. Perhaps I should have taken her up on this function. In fact, I know I should have.

Still, the revision process takes some time. I spend most of it writing something, then reading it to make sure it sounds accurate, understandable, and scholarly. This is no easy task.

What I have found in my reflection is an evolution of writing style from the Master’s level to this dissertation level. In my MAED program it was appropriate to conclude something based on cited evidence and support from a peer-reviewed author. In the beginning of the EdD program it was appropriate to cite evidence and conclusions that were cited elsewhere adding some transitional text that agreed with the preceding work. At the dissertation level, it is appropriate to academically report the findings and conclusions of others (at least for the lit. review).

My thesaurus and the online thesaurus tools are getting a work out. How many synonyms for report, conclude, said wrote, offer, etc. do you think there are?

Some good news on this front. I am learning to be a better critical thinker and writer. I am also learning more about journalism that I thought I should know. Journalism in the theoretical sense, not the practioner sense.

I am happy with the lit. review so far. The long process should conclude this month with another submission to my mentor and then onto planning the proposal (chapters 1, 2, & 3).

Side note: my APA PERRLA/StyleEase posts have gotten some notice from APA PERRLA. Here is hoping for a speedy release so I can return to my favorite APA tool.

Image source: quartermane

I’ve been laying low for a few days trying to break my Internet addiction and give my mind some rest from the last class (earned a B+, by the way). This morning I popped by the WordPress Stats page in my admin section and saw a spike in hits. What is this spike? It was a bunch of clicks from a recent Yahoo! Finance article by Anya Kamenetz titled Whose American Dream Is It, Anyway?

The article cites my Lit Review on the Millennial generation as substance for the following quote:

Money and security are important, but research says young people really want meaning in their jobs, too.

Anya was kind enough to read my research and use it for her work on Y! Finance. Doing my research Anya has quite a record of speaking and writing on the Millennials and I am impressed she felt my work worthy. Further validation that I am on the right track.

I would like to clarify and extend the quote by adding some important information about my feelings on meaning. Specifically by extracting that section of the lit. review section.

Meaning is an important element in Millennial work expectations (Allen, 2004; Martin, 2005); this generation expects the work being done to be social responsible (Martin) and important to the business (Eisner, 2005). Similarly, Millennials distaste being assigned work considered as chores or menial; preferring tasks important to the success of the organization (Eisner). The expectation of meaningful work relates to the Millennials’ lack of inherent loyalty to employers (Allen; Hulett, 2006). Rather this generation of employees aligns with organizations that best fit the need for balance and meaning (Allen; Hulett).

References can be sent or posted if you would like them, I just don’t want to clutter up the post.

What is seen here is that the Millennials really are looking for things to do that have value and meaning. This does not mean that they are looking for every task to be linked to a global steward level of importance. It means that this generation are looking for jobs, tasks, roles, and responsibilities that are important to the person, the organization (think strategic alignment), and community/marketplace/industry.

Anya, thanks for using my research for your resource.

Image Source: recurrence

It has been a while since my last episode. Here’s what is going on.

• Classwork
• Literature Review Update
• “Sharpening the Saw”

Jessica Hagy at Indexed had a brillant representation of the changing workplace and the impact that has on our economy.

The index card shows a graph with a direct relationship between boomers increasing in management positions and the X’ers starting up businesses. The message here is one of generation differences and the potential ripple effects in both businesses and the larger economy.

Each generation has a different style and the importance of them working together was highlighted in a post earlier on the Doc Blog; Millennials Are Not Alone. My mentor and I engaged in a discourse to study the impact of a new training intervention on the entire workforce population and not isolate the research to one subset or subgroup of the workforce, Millennials. Here is an excerpt of my Literature Review – 2nd Draft - that highlights the interrelationship of Millennials and other generations.

The current workplace is experiencing the presence of four generations that actively participate in organizational operations (Wagner, 2007). Each of these generations exhibit different working styles that result in conflict, change, and organizational growth (Wagner). Bridgers and Johnson (2006) describe the workforce makeup as 10% Traditionalist generation members, 44% Baby Boomers, 34% Generation X members, and 12% Millennials making for a workforce in flux from the employees beginning careers to those exiting into retirement.

What this shows is that a difference exists and the demographics of the varying populations. Hagy’s graph adds to the discourse by suggesting that potential conflict between 2 generations (boomers and X’ers in her case) can lead to an exodus from existing companies and the expansion of smaller startups (for good or bad).

How does this relate to my dissertation? If a solution is not found to satisfy the the bulk of the workforce, meet the expectations of senior generations, and bridge generational gaps through knowledge sharing there might be further exits of junior generations.

However, I would be curious about the X’ers exodus from Boomer managed companies and if these X’er startups appeal more to Millennials than the Boomer-run companies. Alas, this is a research topic for another time or someone else.

Someone asked me the other day when I thought the price of gas might impact the number of drivers on the road and thus the demand on petroleum. This question tells me that a lot of people are thinking about the same thing, the fuel budget.

Admittedly, I am thinking about it too. However, I am a telecommuter and my family has only one car that my wife and I share. We both need to leave the house for different things and rarely at the same time. Making the one-car family notion a reality in our home. But, this is not the case for most people. In fact, most people need to commute places for work and thus need more than one car and lots of fuel. Which explains the steady or increasing demand for fuel. Which takes us back to the question, when will gas prices adversely impact people’s driving habits?

The short answer is: when organizations, leaders, and managers are trusting, capable, and prepared enough to allow workers to telecommute (or at the very least consider a shorter work week and reduce the number of days needed in the office).

Telecommuting is a big scary word for employers because they feel that control over employee productivity will be lost or jeopardized if the employee is not in the office every minute of each working day. Certainly there is some legitimacy in this concern, but it is easily overcome with the use of technology, trust, and proper leadership.

A manager of an instructional design team once told me that the jobs he oversaw were not telecommuting positions because he felt the team needed to collaborate amongst themselves and other departments. This could be another reason, but the communication was phrased in such a way that it was easy to tell the big fear was that the team members would exhibit skills and autonomy that would render this manager irrelevant to the organization.

The reality is that telecommuters get as much or more work done in a week than people who work in an office. They do this in a shorter time frame because they are free of the politics, distractions, and sidelining present in every office.

It comes right down to the willingness and execution of employers to make telecommuting a reality for the workers. Once this happens people will not need to commute to work as often, reducing travel, and gas demand along with prices.

How does this relate to my dissertation? Simple, a collaborative training interventions have the possibility to link workers together remotely and in a robust environment of exchange and discourse. This, in turn, promotes performance and productivity. On the surface the research warrants some investigation into just how this could be accomplished. My research examines the link of these technologies through training to worker performance. Off shoots of my research could include the use of wikis, podcasting, and blogs to office communications, politics, and workplace dynamics. All of which might be part of the nudge needed to allow for telecommuting.

I telecommute and I am more productive, more focused, less stressed, happier, and a better employee because of it. Not to mention that I spend a total of $125 on gas each month now, can you say the same for you or your employees?

Image Source: veo_

My post yesterday, Am I Already There?, got me thinking and talking about my future and what is next. Lance Miller mentioned a council of elders in his weekend workshop on building a better club and I wonder if that concept could apply to my personal situation. It works for the dissertation, a committee of seasoned academics and leaders to aid in the development and launch of the massive document known as a dissertation, why not with someone’s career? I consulted some folks I consider guides in my life journey about their thoughts.

The response was overwhelmingly positive and even showed experience in doing such things. Now, I need to decide if this is something that I would benefit me and help to clear the fog so I can take the leap.

One suggestion was to have the group facilitated by a strong facilitator that can limit the dominant personalities that I have surrounded my life with and keep me moving forward. I agree with this and was already thinking it was needed, in fact I have someone who is close to me and knows me professionally in mind.

Somethings are certain about this next pursuit:

• I have 18-24 months to build a plan and execute it
• Where I am now, is not where I want to be
• I have the support in my life to do something of this magnitude

I was thinking of getting these people together over a meal and begin the work. Eating a meal together is the great equalizer of all people, so it is a powerful medium for conducting this type of initiative.

How would you do it?

Would you serve on a board like this for someone you know?

Time is of the essence and I need to make my decision quickly.

Image Source: kenseals