Last week I had the pleasure of trying out a new workshop for the ASTD Hawkeye Chapter in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. In fact, the workshop was requested and designed by their VP of Programs, Marcie Van Note. Thank you, Marcie! Based on the level of activity the group kept all day, this one is going into our regular offerings. Marcie wanted a program on e-learning that could make new designers and developers more successful. We settled on the title: E-learning Starts with Instructional Design. I wanted her ASTD members to understand the links from task analysis to performance objectives to measurement and instructional strategies. We spent the morning doing real task analyses with five different groups. By mid-afternoon, we had written performance objectives, which we used to create measurement and instructional strategies. We kept a focus on e-learning, although at least one group could see that e-learning alone would not do everything they needed for their particular learning solution around sales training. Around 3:30, Chris Adams and Beth Hughes from our staff took over via a live webinar to show examples of some e-learning strategies we have used, along with discussions on tools and other tips. When I asked people to be honest and tell me if they could really see themselves using these instructional design techniques in their work, they expressed concerns about having enough time to complete the tasks and if management would support the new practices.  My best advice to them was to simply try some of what they learned; see if it works and is well received. The best way to prove a point is by good example. I have to compliment all 25 participants for being engaged and very dedicated through the day. I really enjoyed your enthusiasm and willingness to try new things. I enjoyed being with you all and welcome the opportunity to come back to Cedar Rapids in the future. Here are a couple of pictures of the group hard at work.  

On the sliding scale of too much versus not enough content, many training developers and subject matter experts err on the side of too much.  Chris Adams, Handshaw’s Learning Technology Consultant, often says, "Our clients think the hardest part of developing training is deciding what to include; instructional designers know that the hardest part is deciding what to leave out."  Omitting unnecessary training objectives benefits our clients and their learners: our clients do not have to pay for extraneous training to be developed and save lost productivity costs for the extra time their employees spend in training.  Their learners also reduce time spent in training, and with more relevant content, motivation is higher because the content is applicable, and retention are increased because cognitive load is more effectively managed. So, how do we decide what to leave out?  This is what we seek to answer during our task analysis work, and two factors in particular that help us make this determination:  1.       Performance need - Must the learner complete this task to meet the identified accomplishment? 2.       Learner deficiency - Does the learner not know how to do it? The key to figuring out whether to include the task in training is to realize it’s not whether either factor is true, it’s whether both are true that makes the determination. For example, let’s say we are conducting a task analysis for a course on making coffee and a task of selecting the right filter size for the coffee machine.  During our analysis, we may discover that the correct size filters are delivered with the rest of the office supplies, so this isn’t actually a selection that learners need to make.  If we use either factor to determine whether this task should be included, we could say, "It’s true that learners don’t know how to select the right size filters, so we’ll include it in the course."  However, if we insist that both factors must be true in order to include the task, we could say, "Well, it’s true that learners don’t know how to select the right size filters, but they don’t actually need to do so in order to make coffee, so let’s leave it out." If you require that both questions be true about a task in order for it to make the cut into your course content, instead of including it if either question is true, the content of your course will more accurately and more efficiently help your learners accomplish their performance goal. Beth Hughes, Senior Instructional Designer, Handshaw, Inc.

Ever notice that when you tell someone you’re an instructional designer, they have a hard time trying to figure out what you do? Try telling people you’re a performance consultant. It’s even worse. This got me to thinking about the differences between the two disciplines and how to draw a line between them? I often tell people, "instructional design is doing things right and performance improvement is doing the right things." But is it right to separate the two in actual practice? I think practicing instructional design without performance improvement does your client a disservice and can potentially waste a lot of time and money. Even if a designer does a great job of designing instruction that enables performers to achieve an instructional goal, if that instructional goal isn’t linked to a business goal, your client may not achieve the business goal. When I bring this concept up to a room full of instructional designers—which I have - I get a lot of push back  People tell me it’s not their job to suggest other solutions to a problem if they do not involve learning. Some tell me it’s not even their place to talk to the "true client" when they are given their direction from a training manager. And even when they do get to talk to the actual owner of the line of business they have a difficult time asking for the desired business goal. I want to know what you think. Do you distinguish between instructional design and performance improvement or do you think they should be practiced together?

In our industry, a lot of time is spent talking about performance goals and accomplishments. They are the driving force in the design process that will ensure training is focused on the right tasks. But what drives the performance goals? What "thing" is management so concerned about that employee accomplishments need to be addressed? Whether or not your stakeholders explicitly say so, there is a business goal at risk. Or, as Dick would say, "the thing that keeps managers awake at night." When we know the business goal we can use it to direct the design and assessment strategies. Time and resources will be saved when all of the effort has been focused on addressing the issue at the root of the problem. The project stakeholders will appreciate receiving an effective solution the first time and will start to see you as a trusted consultant with a valuable opinion. So how do you recognize the business goal when speaking with stakeholders? Jim and Dana Robinson identify two types of business goals: Business Problems - a gap impacting the business that needs to be fixed Business Opportunities - a process that is working fine now, but could be optimized to work better Use this formula to identify the elements of a business goal during your conversations: What needs to change + By what amount (from X to Y) + In what time frame + To what effect Let’s look at an example: "Reduce production costs due to error from $3,000 per 100 units to $1,000 per 100 units in the next three months to meet Q2 financial goals." You can clearly see what is keeping management up at night: they are worried about profits and have discovered that there are costly errors during the production process. You now have a concrete accomplishment for learners (reduce production errors), the time frame you have to improve it (three months), a metric for assessment (cost of errors per unit), and the impact your training will have on the business (improving the bottom line). Remember, it could take several conversations to reach this point. You may not always be able to get a business goal, and that’s okay. Bringing up the topic can be enough to get everyone thinking about the right solution. When you take the time to build stakeholders’ trust in you and can talk about the business needs alongside training needs, you can be sure your work is effective and valuable. Peter Engels, Instructional Designer/Developer, Handshaw, Inc.

…or for a few days at least. In December, I’ll be visiting two of my favorite southern cities: Birmingham, AL and Memphis, TN. Two things they both have in common are great hospitality and great barbecue, but that’s not really why I’m going. On December 3rd, I’ll be visiting the Greater Birmingham Chapter of ASTD - AL to deliver one of my most requested presentations, "Instructional Design: Demonstrating Value through Results". The industry and many of our clients have seen a resurgence of interest in instructional design in the last five years or so. This program will focus on three low cost, high value components of instructional design that I don’t see in use that often. The primary focus of the presentation is increasing the best practices of instructional design and getting positive results. On December 7th, I’ll be attending and speaking at the annual Employee Learning Week Event sponsored by the ASTD Memphis, TN chapter. This year the focus is on performance improvement with a one and a half hour session called, "Performance Partnering - Proactive and Reactive Performance Consulting". This session is based on the work of Jim and Dana Robinson. We all know we would like to have earlier input with our clients and we would like to be valued more as consultants and business partners. This session uses video and live role plays to help you master the skills of proactive and reactive performance consulting. If you live near Birmingham or Memphis, please take the opportunity to attend.

"Instructional Design: Demonstrating Value through Results"

Annual Employee Learning Week Event "Performance Partnering - Proactive and Reactive Performance Consulting"

"Leading the Learning Organization"  Join us at 1:00 PM EST…

"Performance Partnering - Proactive and Reactive Performance Consulting" - 3-hour Clinic

This has been a challenging year for internal training departments. Our company has seen many organizations go through major re-organizations in 2012. And with every re-organization we are familiar with, we have seen layoffs of trainers and instructional designers. Where is the role of performance consulting in these organizations? In many cases, it has been difficult to find evidence of a performance improvement effort. It’s clear that many organizations are trying to cut costs by moving people around and reducing headcount. This is neither a new nor innovative strategy. A better idea might be to reduce the number of "Band-Aid" type training programs that are developed and only develop training for training goals that can be linked to business goals. This is the role of performance improvement, to link training goals to strategic business goals. This would dramatically reduce the amount of time productive employees spend away from work attending training classes or sitting through e-learning programs and increase the quality of training programs that contribute directly to the achievement of strategic business goals. Perhaps the answer to why this isn’t happening is because there is some personal risk involved on the part of those who choose to practice performance improvement instead of being an "order-taker" for any training request that comes their way. We are definitely sticking our necks out when we offer to be responsible for affecting outcomes rather than completing activities. This might also have something to do with the fact that many organizations rarely follow up training initiatives with any kind of data gathering to see if any of the desired results were achieved. Measurement and evaluation go hand in hand with performance improvement. It seems to me that our resources would be better spent to find out why certain business results are not achieved, identify all the causes for the shortfall—not just those related to performance—and implement a variety of solutions designed to mitigate the causes of failure. Launching a successful performance improvement initiative in your organization will take time, but it is not difficult. There are risks, as I mentioned, but the rewards will outweigh the risks. One of the most important factors in creating a successful performance improvement initiative in your organization is to find or cultivate leadership with a vision. Having committed leadership is the only way these initiatives can achieve sustained results. Next, you must build internal skills in a consistent manner. Attending training and reading books is not enough to build skills as a performance consultant. You need to practice your skills with a colleague who can coach you and give you feedback on your performance. You need to seek champions in your organization and make them successful. Once you can accomplish a successful solution or two, you only need to leverage your results to keep a sustained effort. Become a true Performance Partner to your organization… Next week’s blog will provide more thoughts on creating a performance improvement organization. Part one of three