I saw Marc Rosenberg sharing this over on LinkedIn last weekend – and I thought to share it here.

# # #

Seriousness & Likelihood

A short while back I was Posting on “Asking So What 5 Times – before Asking Why 5 Times” – here and here – and at its root – that has to do with Prioritization of Effort.

And P of E plays out in Time Management and Problem Solving and Risk Assessment, and even in establishing estimates and actuals for ROI, RONA, etc. It applies in your job most likely.  It applies in lots of places, lots of Performance Contexts.

For it’s all about THE RESULTS.

Or should be.

And their Seriousness and Likelihood.

Or should be.

I learned about this Seriousness and Likelihood thing a long ago, from each of several Problem Solving (PS) training sessions that I attended back in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and from my learning from my role in many different training sessions where I did project planning, the analysis of the performance requirements and the enabling Knowledge/Skill Requirements, and then designing some learning intervention thing – typically using a Simulation – an Application Exercise approximating Real Work – if Real Work wasn’t available for the APPO.

The APPO often follows the DEMO which follows the INFO – in my Lesson Mapping tool/technique. But I digress.

What’s It All About?

Seriously? It’s about the Results.

And it’s about the Risk Assessment and/or Reward Assessment – for making any change to get those results or avoid those results – for determine the R in ROI if your targeted improvement opportunity competes for time, attention and money with other opportunities – requires looking at both the seriousness of the problem/opportunity, and then if worthy, looking at it’s likelihood.

If it’s not Serious, then why bother with likelihood?

Unless you need to exercise some of your extra your resources on something so they don’t get stale from non-use. Because you’ve got sooooooo many resources  You aren’t constrained. Maybe.

Sometimes – most of the time some would argue – while others would insist that it’s always – you have more to do than you can shake a stick at – as that saying goes.

You might be resource constrained in the face of more demand than you can shake a stick at. And so you need to prioritize.

Many jobs require an application of this S&L thing – in Problem Solving within their own jobs, such as your own job, and a generic approach to teaching  never gets authentic enough to actually have that prayer of transferring back to the job, for the attendees/ participants/ learners/ Performers. That authentic thing is big, right? Required , right?

And that that unless the generic approach just happens to fit the attendees’ real-world applications close enough you are wasting your time and everyone else’s time, and someones money. Some owner or shareholder.

And if your learning thing isn’t authentic enough – well, that means the level 4 evaluation will be negative – as for me, since 1979, the level 4 in evaluation  has always meant ROI and not just any Results – why bother with measuring for levels 1 and 2?

If you aren’t going to be authentic enough in the learning experiences, it’s isn’t going to transfer, that level 3 of the popular 4 or 5 Levels of something, evaluation for learning (and anything else related to change). Doing level 1 and 2 evaluations when you can predict that it won’t transfer is spending good money before bad, predictably.  You would be adding to the negative-ness of the ROI, the more you waste additional first costs and other opportunity costs.

An Adaptation of This For Learning/ Training & Development

Can you see this application?

Protect and Improve the Enterprise

In that order. First things first.

# # #

For when you have an hour or so to kill, er, invest in some Asynchronous Professional Development – if you are in the Enterprise Improvement biz…

Please go – here.

Joe Harless, Richard E. Clark, Bob Mager, Neil Rackham, Roger Chevalier round out the top 5.

Enjoy!

# # #

What every Improvement methodology has in common – Business Process Improvement, Quality Improvement, Performance Improvement, Human Performance Improvement, etc. – or should have in common – is a focus on Process Products (Ends) and then on the Process Performance (Means) that “set requirements” if you will, for their speciality in the Improvement biz. For their speciality to deliver. As in Measurable Results.

Otherwise one is just doing their thing, with no measurable thinking or goals to determine success, parity or failure.

That could include working under a banner, named along the lines of one, or more, of these:

• Business Process Engineering
• Business Process Management
• Employee Development
• Human Resources
• Human Resources Development
• Learning
• Organizational Development
• Quality
• Quality Improvement
• Talent Management
• TQM
• Training
• Etc.

Don’t It?

A comment about the Post’s title, later.

Forms Should Always Follow Function IMO. Except in Art.

When it doesn’t, form following function that is, I feel the dissonance. Do you?

I know that one shot, at the top of the e-page, is not a good sampling to get you to a place of being able to provide a well thought out, informed response.

But with your first blush, what’s your first impression, of the following 3 examples of what I’m talkin’ ’bout here…

What’s right/wrong – good/bad about this picture?

Inviting? Or not?

Or this one?

Any better?

Or how about this?

IMO only one of three are inviting when coming to them via a smartphone.

Two of these, IMO again, seemed not built and deployed with those users in mind.

Which is a shame, today. For I would think that a majority of their visitors would visit via that route, for content, professional development, in the moment of need or at their leisure.

But no. Two out of three times.

Of course I gamed the results in my selection. To make a point.

Back to the Post Title

With apologies to Rod Stewart and the Faces.

And to you, sorry about the commercial…

The lead song BTW is “the one” song I play repeatedly – once or twice each cycle, each drive in the Jeep from home to the airport and then back again in a very predictable pattern – a weekly round trip. With short weekends.

It, the song, of course reminds me of back in the day.

Which is a good thing.

For comparisons. To today.

For CI – Continuous Improvement. Or to right the course. As needed.

All the way to Discontinuous Improvement. As needed.

And in that vein, let me share with you an more recent version of that song than the 1971 version above, Every Picture Tells a Story…

Laugh it off.

Oh. Wait one.

Here is what another example.

To balance the Results out.

50/50

Beware of Sampling techniques.

So – what have these pictures told you?

# # #

This month we start the First Friday of May 2013 with another of my favorite gurus…

Carol Panza

Carol M. Panza is a management consultant specializing in performance effectiveness systems for clients in a broad range of industries and functions, via her firm, CMP Associates.

Carol holds a BS degree in Marketing and an MBA in Industrial Relations.

She was selected as an Examiner for the New Jersey Quality Achievement Award (NJQAA) in 1992 and continues to serve in that capacity. (The award is based on Malcolm Baldrige criteria.) She has served on the local level of the American Society of Training and Development (ASTD) as an officer and as an Executive Board member at the chapter-level of the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI).

She is also a member of the Human Resource Planning Group (HRPG), the American Society for Quality Control (ASQC) and the British Institute of Management (BIM).

Carol’s consulting company, CMP Associates belongs to the International Federation of Training Development Organizations.

CMP Associates is a management consulting firm specializing in the analysis and custom design of improvement strategies for business. The important word here is analysis. She does NOT OFFER an answer in search of a question or an off-the-shelf solution like a training session in interpersonal skills or communication. Before implementing any solution, you first need to ask yourself what changes or performance impact you will measure and how that relates back to the solution?

Prior to beginning her own firm, she was Senior Associate with the Rummler Group (TRG), a research and consulting organization. She managed a number of major projects for TRG over a six (6) year period.

I have know Carol professionally since we started working together in 1981 when I was at MTEC – Motorola Training & Education Center and she was working with Geary A. Rummler.

We did a lot of work together, months and months at a Motorola site near Plantation FL and in the Motorola corporate offices in Schaumburg IL,  and at Geary’s offices – in a house – in Union NJ.

After that I saw her continuously on an annual basis at NSPI – which later became ISPI – Conferences, where she and I were both very involved. We served together on the Board of ISPI for one year, in 2002-3, when Jim Hill was President and I was incoming President-Elect.

I am a big fan of Carol. I helped get her to my ISPI Charlotte Chapter to present at an evening session in early 2012, which was very well received.

Carol has been recognized and honored in her service to many like-minded professionals:

• ISPI Board of Directors 2001-2003
• ISPI Distinguished Service Award 2007
• ISPI Europe/EMEA Board of Directors 2006 – present
• IFTDO Board of Directors 2005 – present

One of the Many Things I Learned From Carol

Was how to look at an organization  from the top down, in a big picture view, using Organizational Mapping, which she did with Geary for years. She is a master at helping everyone get a big picture view of what’s really going on – so that upstream root causes for business issues can be more readily seen when starting with a symptom – which is a problem. Just not the cause. Addressing won’t solve much for long.

As her web site states:

Establish the CONTEXT.

Start with the macro/context and relationship view of an organization versus process specification.

What I Also Learned From Carol

Some Great Resources From Carol For You

Carol has a couple of books available via her web site:

Picture This . . . Your Function, Your Company . . . by Carol M. Panza ($13 – discounted price through her web site only) For more information on the book, click here.

The No-Nonsense Guide to Common Sense Management by Randolph I. James ($21.95) For more information on the book, click here. — To visit the James & Associates web site, click here.

Also connect with Carol at LinkedIn – here.

My Favorite Memories of Carol

Are the debriefings at the end of the day we shared with Geary, and often my boss Paul during that work with MTEC in 1981 and 1982.

I learned a lot from the insights she shared from her interviews and observations.

I was learning like a sponge.

And she freely shared, briefing me and debriefing me as I tagged along with her to see her approach. It was an invaluable experience.

Share Your Stories

If Carol has been a valuable influence and/or resource for you – please share your stories about that in the comments section below.

Or share a URL that is relevant.

And thank you for sharing!

My Favorite Guru Series

Next month – Allison Rossett.

The Series so far …

• Carol Panza – May 2013.
• Jane Bozarth – April 2013 – here.
• Judy Hale – March 2013 – here.
• Margo Murray- February 2013 – here.
• Neil Rackham – January 2013 – here.
• Robert (Bob) Mager – December 2012 – here.
• Joe H. Harless – November 2012 - here.
• Thomas F. Gilbert - October 2012 -here.
• Sivasailam Thiagarajan - September 2012 -here.
• Geary A. Rummler – August 2012 -here.
• Dale Brethower – July 2012 – here.

# # #

How are you embracing and following EBP – Evidence Based Practices in your Process Performance?

And have you proven your Process Practices?

Where have you made your strategic bets, and why?

How does that tie in to how score is kept and the requirements and desires of your stakeholders?

Lessons in Making Lemonade

Tips from Buzz and the Gang down at the Lemonade Stand, if they are not in a Classroom somewhere.

# # #

Learning Verbiage Versus Training Verbiage

Note this 2013 App has been updated to reflect Learning Verbiage Versus Training Verbiage, from the 2001 book: T&DSystems View, but IMO a rose is a rose is a rose.

Stop and really smell the roses.

This $20.00 iOS and Android App – will take your down a systemic and systematic path of first targeting, then assessing, and finally planning for improvements to your own L&D or T&D organization or Quality organization or any Improvement-oriented organization.

And please note:  The names of these functions, and collections of people, with budget allocations, and Results expectations, vary widely across the Enterprise landscape. Widely. But they all share something. They share their Processes, both Formally recognized and managed, but for the most part Informally at best, and at worst, not really recognized and managed at all. Doesn’t need to be.

The App facilitates a systematic and systemic process, so that you can target your priorities based on data and/or other insights, assess and compare assessment for prioritization at both the Sub-Systems and Macro Processes levels, and then at the Key Output level, in your current state. You can then plan improvements to those Output Processes for the Process itself, it’s Human Asset Management Systems, and/or Environmental Asset Management Systems, then you send yourself a Report to use as is, or edit further.

The 2001 Book and the 2011 Update

The 2001 version of the book is available as a $20 paperbound – and as a free PDF.

Please go here for more info.

The 2011 book The Curriculum Manager’s Handbook is available as a $20 Paperback and a $15 Kindle.

Please go here for more info.

Back to the App

It helps anyone in a Learning & Development-type functional organization, in a shop of 1 to 1000, to take a “systems view” approach to assessing it’s ideal state, current state and a plan for improvements. It applies to old school T&D – Training & Development organizations too. A rose is a rose….

You first target, zeroing in on a few priorities or many priorities of your own L&D or T&D systems and processes targets, leading to then a deeper assessment, prioritization

Go here – for the Android App at Google Play.

Go here – for the iOS App at the iTunes Store.

Deeper Dive Into the App

In the App Guide – from the Home Page – there are several one time administrative tasks to do, such as entering your name, enterprise and email for use later when You wish to forward the Report to yourself.

In the App Guide you will also find step by step App guidance and App navigation guidance.

These are the 4 major Steps in the L&D Assessment & Improvement Planning process of the App:

1. Targ (Target)
2. Asse (Assessment)
3. Plan (Planning)
4. Rept (Report)

1st you target your later assessment efforts using the 12 sub-systems framework of the clockface.

2nd you conduct an assessment by reviewing that sub-set of the total 47 Processes where your earlier Targeting steps focused you. And you further assess those in your prioritized Processes for that sub-set of the 71 Outputs.

3rd you estimate both the Investment Costs and the potential Return values and the cycle time for the start to finish of the improvement effort in 3 areas: 1: redesigning the Process itself, and/or 2: various Human Asset Improvement Initiatives, and 3: various Environmental Asset Improvement Initiatives

4th you send yourself your Report for further editing, or use as is. Just add page numbers.

Back to the Report

Once, or after each time you have played around with your targets, your priorities, your assessments, your improvement planning you can always email yourself a copy of the current report – for copying & pasting into whatever word processing/publication stuff you use.

Here is the Table of Contents of the Report that you would create:

1- Report Summary

2- The Tool and Methodology Overview

3- The L&D Sub-Systems Targeted

4- The L&D Macro Processes Assessments

5- The L&D Key Output Assessments

6- Prioritized & Sequenced Improvements

7- Next Steps

8- About the App: L&D Assessment & Improvement Planning

T&D Systems View Content

Training & Development Systems takes a process-centric view of the function known as Training & Development, Learning & Development, etc.

 T&D Systems View – ISPI – 2000 - 46 page PDF – from the 2000 ISPI Conference – covers the T&D Systems View from Guy’s eventual 2001 book of the same name.

TDSV - ISPI Fall Conference – 2004 - 84 page PDF – covers assessing the T&D System to identify targets with worthy ROI potential.

TDSV Assessment – 5 Day WS – 2007 - 372 page PDF – created for a 5 day workshop in Russia that never happened. Originally an agressive/fast-paced 3-day workshop – it was extended due to anticipated language/communications issues.

Back to the Book

Here are the marketing quotes I solicited in 2001 before I took this book to press…

What people say about “T&D Systems View”

George West, Director, Educational Services  Siemen’s Building Technologies:

If you are not actively controlling the critical components of your T&D efforts then they are by definition out of control.  T&D Systems View provides an extremely comprehensive overview of all of the processes that contribute to a successful T&D System.  Guy Wallace then takes the next step by showing you how to select those processes which are most critical to the success of your organization and how to get them under control before someone else does it for you.  This is a must read for anyone interested in more closely aligning the T&D function with the organization’s strategy.

John M. Swinney, Performance Consulting   Bandag, Incorporated:

At first glance, T&D Systems View paints a formidable picture of the ideal business-driven training and development organization.  Then it dawns on you that, intentionally or not, formally or informally, you’re already doing these things.  The question Guy Wallace raises is, “how well?”  If I were a CEO, this is how I would look at my training and development function.

Judith Hale, Hale Associates:

“T&D Systems View is an excellent resource for anyone with a management role in training.  The book has useful guidelines and models on how to structure and manage the T&D function.  The models should drive meaningful discussions that lead to better decisions about the roles, responsibilities, and relationships of the enterprise’s leadership, T&D as a function, and T&D’s internal customers.”

Miki Lane     MVM Communications:

Guy Wallace has done it again!  After demystifying the ISD process in his “lean-ISD” book he tackles the corporate training and development system and puts it in a business-focused perspective.  Whether you are in-house or serving as a external consultant you will find Guy’s model an invaluable tool for enterprise training and development.

This analytic and design process ensures that you dot all the i’s and cross all the t’s when moving your company or client to learning by design, not learning by chance.  The elegant clock-faced model helps you develop a clear picture of any organization and clearly helps you map out how best to effectively manage all the elements of the enterprise. Once the elements are mapped out, the model, through enclosed assessment and prioritizing tools helps determine where and when to put corporate assets to maximize corporate return on investment.  This is a must have book for any consultant or organization that is concerned about improving the performance of their organization through improving processes and competencies.

Dale Brethower, Professor, Western Michigan University: 

“(T&D) Systems View explains why the T&D function must be managed as a total system: to meet the challenges of a rapidly changing marketplace.  The book shows, in detail, what must be managed competently for a T&D manager to assure that learning happens by design rather than by chance.  The best T&D managers manage the system components described in the book though probably not as well as they will after studying and thinking through how to fill in the weak or missing components.”

Carol Nicks, Director, Workforce Development, Verizon:

T&D Systems View is a useful guide for any organization assessing current T&D processes or establishing new ones.  It’s emphasis on T&D delivering ROI and shareholder value is a timely message and one critical to any T&D organization’s viability today.

Charline A. Wells     Programs – Manager – Corporate Training   Sandia National Laboratories:

Whether you are new in the Training Business or an “old hand,” this book will provide you with as much guidance as you need to get the job done. Guy has provided material that leaves “no stone unturned” yet there is sufficient flexibility for application in all training organizations.  Well thought out.  Many fresh ideas along with solid reminders of things we knew we should do, but we have, somehow, let go by the wayside.

The App Landing Page

Is here.

This is where you can find all the info, instructions and examples of the process and Report that we have on this.

# # #

Dang Difficult

And we should be able to do better. Always.

But too often we don’t consciously assess and plan and implement. By understanding the constraints, the variables, the provisioning systems. The complexity.

Begin with the end in mind – the popular slogan goes, one that I am sure Deming would not have liked, liking no slogans.

But then what?

It’s Dang Difficult to Overcome Constraints

The following kinds of constraints in this graphic…

But What’s a Process All About?

It should be guided by goals and aspirations of the Enterprise.

It’s then it’s about Accomplishments not Behaviors, Results not Activity, Products from Efforts.

Yes.

And it’s about how you got there. The Process employed.

And the effectiveness and then the efficiency of how those Products came about, from their Processes.

There are many models to depict this. I have bunches.

Here is one of my favorite big pictures of the big picture…

What’s your own model? What can you add to yours, to mine?

Constraints are the variables one needs to management, and if there are problems/opportunities - one needs to first begin with the end in mind and understand the goals, the Products and then the Processes, and then the Enablers of Processes, and if any of those are discovered to be The Constraint, then one must look to the internal and external “provisioning systems – upstream – that are inadequate.

Understand those, at the right time.

Improve the Performance of those.

For downstream metrics improvement.

Begin With Both Ends in Mind.

Upstream and Downstream.

Yeah. That’s the ticket.

# # #

It’s the Ecology

This song says it all – IMO.

In a most pleasing way.

And this is from way back in the day – for me anyway.

1971.

Bringing back to my mind…this refrain…

Oh, when will we ever learn?

When will we, ever learn?

Happy Earth Day!

A day when Social Responsibility takes a Global Systems View – IMO.

# # #

13 Minute Video - May 2012

So What Can You Do About It?

That’s why I use the GROUP PROCESS – a facilitated Process.

I recently wrote about this in this post on…

All Together Now – The Group Processes in ISD and PI - here

The 2 articles I co-authored on this – in that older post above, were published in 1984 by Training Magazine and NSPI’s Performance & Instruction Journal (PIJ).

So I have lots of experience in this by now, for it is my default process for analysis, design and development – following those steps. I’ve used the Group Process – over 300 times, across my 75 CAD projects…

…and in my 50+ MCD/IAD efforts.

And I have used it in my dozen or so EPPI efforts…

It’s what I refer to as “lean-ISD” in my 1999 book of the same name. Facilitating the right people to make decisions – IN A PROVEN PROCESS – gets the job done, better and faster, and in the downstream reduction of REWORK it is ultimately a cheaper OVERALL Process.

That produces targeted Products.

Begin with the END IN MIND.

It’s the old Input and Output thing….

Know what the terminal objectives are, what the specific deliverables and schedules are, know what each of the stakeholder’s requirements AND their wants – for both the Process and the Product.

It’s that simple.

Once you know what the Stakeholder require and want, you can then better figure out those  those Enabler things…

And then you can check out your Enterprise’s Provisioning Systems – those that get the right stuff at the right time in the right quantities with the right quality to the right process – every day all day long, as that saying goes.

Or you fix what’s broken for ROI – and you do CI for ROI. Continuous Improvement for Return on Investment.

Or why bother?

BTW- That lean-ISD book is available as a free 410 page PDF and a $30 paperback book as well.

Check out the Resource Tab on this site for that and other free and for a fee resources in ISD and PI – Instructional Systems Design and Performance Improvement – the former being a sub-set of the latter.

# # #

Note: I am just as guilty as anyone else on this. Not having the answer to that question with me at all times.

But that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t ponder it publicly in a post.

And perhaps YOU will share the Evidence – with us all – one way or another.

But First, Let Me Digress 

As the 2013 ISPI Conference is coming up, BTW one of the three that I will have missed since 1980, I have been pre-reflecting on my missing my annual Booster Shots on EBP in PI.

a.k.a./ also known as: Evidence Based Practice in Performance Improvement.

Booster Shots, plural, as there were many in my mainstay for professional rejuvenation.

Often very much required after a full 12 months of tilting at windmills, professionally, without new blood, new thinking, rejuvination.

And THAT got me thinking… about…

Back in the day some one at NSPI/ISPI would stand to challenge the presenter – mid-sentence at times – with the simple request: “where’s your data?” – often rejoined with a challenge from the other side of the room with: “and data is plural.”

In other words, no “N’s of one” please.

And I imagine I always smiled, having just learned that what I had just heard from the stage was now suspect.

For those challengers knew their stuff, knew The Evidence, a.k.a.: The Research, inside and out.

And of course I would learn even more if and when the challenge and responses continued, a give and take in the kindest of lights, and something more brutal in another light. So this was discouraged by The Society. Too unpleasant from a Speaker’s perspective, for sure.

But for the audience, priceless.

The Very Leading Edge Is Often The Bleeding Edge

For a reason.

I’m thinking new fangled technology here. Stuff from say just the last 5 years.

Perhaps many of you are early adopters.  So you need to place yourselves back 5 years and then continue, and note, the whole world isn’t on that leading edge like you, so you are non-representative of all, except for of course, the early adopters.

So don’t “be over-generalizing by over-personalizing” your perspective - please. Because many struggle with new things and things new. They aren’t the early adopters willing to sustain a failure here and there. And sometimes that is quite wise on their part.

The Reason Those Exchanges Are Priceless

At least for me, they were priceless.

I often am able to quickly see applications for things that I learn.

And then I look for opportunities to make these new ideas practical, and if they cannot be, I bail right there.

So when I learn new things, albeit new to me, I believe I tend to immediately think through “the hows” – after this new idea/thing passed non-consciously through some “why – and – so what” filter of mine.

But my personal filters, my prior knowledge, often does not include The Research, The Evidence, and that quite frankly has always worried me. For I wished to be Research Based, and not some form of Voodoo Based, Foo Foo Based, “Hey, I’ve Got THIS Hammer, and it’s definitely, absolutely THE ONLY Hammer ANYONE Would EVER Need or want. And sometimes it is those people, with THEIR very nice Hammer, that present, and share, and sell….

But sometimes you need a saw.

I was and am a consultant (since 1982) and I was/am often in new Enterprise landscapes of “purpose, process, philosophy and practice” –  and I most always need to be able to generalize from some basis, something concrete, to get from the current state to a future state that made business sense, in terms of ROI of any “likely worst-case” and not the “most unlikely/Blue Moon worst case” imaginable.

And if you want your solution-set to actually work, and make improvements from the Baseline, you probably want to concern yourself with things that actually have worked, have been proven to work under and in known situational variables, such as a Process with certain, key, attributes, supported by both the various Human Capabilities and Capacities, and the various Environmental Support Capabilities and Capacities.

It’s that simple. :)

So – I should have an idea about what works and under what conditions.

For one size never fits all. Right?

I should hear challenges to new things (albeit new to me) and be able to sort the Wheat from the Chaff, the Fact from the Fiction,  the Valid from the Faddish, and the Valid Practices from the Foo Foo Practices.

And – to be able to Adapt whatever I cannot Adopt.

Because…

IMO – Most of the Time You Will Need To Adapt

Not because of the not invented here syndrome exactly, but partially.

Because if it wasn’t invented here, it wasn’t developed with our specific situational variables in mind, or found in the alpha, beta and Pilot-Test test criteria. How could it have?

And – so it isn’t going to quite fit, as in “if the shoe fits wear it” – will it?

Not unless this is your, and others, Lucky Day!

Not that that doesn’t occur from time to time, confusing us about our personal and/or group brilliance, and confusing us about what it takes to retrofit anything new into something established.

So hearing the points/counterpoints of a dialogue between the claimant and interrogator on anything new, or a new application of something old, is of great interest to me. A Learning Experience.

And BTW – I learn less from the old One Way Street methods, especially where I don’t get to drive along, I am forced to just park it.

That’s also why I prefer synchronous as my default (unless there are good reason for asynchronous – as there most often are)… and I prefer interactive (driving along) versus passive (parked)… and I am very content to lurk in the background and offer myself the opportunity to really listen and to process what I am hearing – versus having the added burden, leading to cognitive overload more quickly, if I have to also parallel process my witty questions or challenges or compliments, so that I seem behaviorally engaged; because cognitive engagement is harder to measure for the other parties, and they may need reinforcement from our outward behaviors as they can’t see the cognition.

So simply smile and nod your head. Especially when everyone else is doing so. For it’s all about them, the Presenter/ Speaker/ Facilitator – in many cases.

If it was all about you, me, the participants, then my lurking and learning, often a natural cognitive precedent to a more behavioral  active learning,  then no one should complain. For given the opportunity and enough time, I may just come along. I might stand up on the other side of the room, and voice my challenge, state my question, and/or make my compliment, actively.

What Do The Learning Curves Look Like?

Down at the bottom left to start – on this graphic…

And then, over time with appropriate attention, upward and rightward….

In the New and Future Media

How do we facilitate that, in the design of the tools and/or in the design of their applications?

The climbing of the Learning Curve?

And more quickly helping early adopters bringing others along? Those laggards!

Learning Laggards.

And how do we facilitate 2-Way and Many-Way conversations, of not just anybody with an opinion, and you know what that means, but with those who are experts who both Present/Share – and Question/Challenge/ Compliment?

I want to see that Crowd. I want to join and lurk & learn, and then more actively learn, from the right people and right resources.

For it’s just too easy to fall into the wrong Crowd IMO. And then spend more time at the bottom left of the Learning Curve – especially once it shifts to a Performance Curve.

To my many friends at ISPI – I will miss you GREATLY this year – in Reno.

For the North calls.

My project in Toronto.

# # #

Zoom In

And look at this photo, from my professional photos collection, of this greetings and signature from 1992…

Pretty cool, huh?

Why? Zoom Out

for the photo answer to why? …

So What?

This Post from the past explains it all.

###

This month we start the First Friday of April 2013 with another of my favorite gurus…

Jane Bozarth

Dr. Bozarth is a well know advocate of social media in training, inexpensive e-learning, training and development, reflective practice in T&D.

Her Blog is here – but this is the place to follow her – at The Twitter. I’ll let you search for her on Facebook, where she also hangs out.

She is a key player in Thursday’s Twitter #Learnchat with the her evil twin, Jane Hart.

Jane is a popular invited speaker. See her Blog for the past and future speaking gigs she is doing.

I have know Jane professionally – virtual – meeting her via Twitter – since back in 2007. I like her combination of Research-Based (Evidence-Based) and all-things Social Media wise for learning and performance support. When we started the ISPI Charlotte chapter we wanted to have her speak our first year, and she participated in a panel in December 2010 with three others. She was back again this past January.

She saw a Blog Post of mine and asked me if I’d write an article for elearn Magazine – here – about Learning Styles. Something she too often addresses, feeling as I do, that it is what I call Foo Foo.

One of the Many Things I Learned From Jane

Durham NC has a great music venue. That was also via The Twitter – as I had read on Twitter, from her, that The Steve Miller Band was going to play in Durham NC several years back. And so I got tickets, as it had been 40 years since I saw The SMB. Jane and I were on different floors, as I was on the balcony deliberately, not wanting to stand through the whole show, but we traded several texts. Ah, technology.

Although she sometimes claims to be the world’s oldest millennial, due to her being completely hip about current technology and social media in learning, she brings an evidence-based practice approach to it all which is all too often missing from those who are simply hip to the technology and not its application. She balances that with practical, proven approaches.

I like that.

In a recent book review she writes:

I was lucky enough to get my hands on an advance copy of Karl Kapp’s new book,“The Gamification of Learning and Instruction” (Pfeiffer) (also see the book’s Facebook Page) just in time for a long plane ride. What a delight! In an age when there’s so much confusion about this in the field, Kapp offers a timely, common-sense view of realities and possibilities.  Among my own frustrations are those in L&D (and, ahem, marketing) who are swept away on tides of badges and points without really understanding the instrinsic motivation and factors critical to successful, meaningful gamification.

 Yeah. Make it real.

And IMO she’s about terminal performance, and enabling that, using common sense use of common tools. And newfangled tools too. Use it all, if it makes sense. But don’t practice dis-proven methods.

I like that.

What I Also Learned From Jane

Some Other Great Resources From Jane For You

Jane has authored and co-authored many books – many of these are available via Amazon – see the list here.

Some of these books include:

• “Social Media for Trainers”
• “E-Learning Solutions on a Shoestring”
• “Better than Bullet Points: Creating Engaging E-Learning with PowerPoint”
• “From Analysis to Evaluation: Tools, Tips, and Techniques for Trainers”

Also, watch for her monthly “Nuts and Bolts” column in “Learning Solutions” magazine – here.

Also, check out Jane’s 2008 doctoral dissertation: The Usefulness of Wenger’s Framework in Understanding a Community of Practice.

In full disclosure  as I wrote above, I’ve published two articles while she was at the helm, editor-wise, of E-Learn Magazine – here.

Email Jane at: info@bozarthzone.com

My Favorite Memories of Jane

Share Your Stories

If Jane has been a valuable influence and/or resource for you – please share your stories about that in the comments section below.

Or share a URL that is relevant.

And, thank you for sharing!

My Favorite Guru Series

Next month – Carol Panza. Someone I got to work with in 1981-1982 when I was at MTEC – Motorola’s Training & Education Center.

The My Favorite Guru Series so far …

• Judy Hale – March 2013 – here.
• Margo Murray- February 2013 – here.
• Neil Rackham – January 2013 – here.
• Robert (Bob) Mager – December 2012 – here.
• Joe H. Harless – November 2012 - here.
• Thomas F. Gilbert - October 2012 -here.
• Sivasailam Thiagarajan - September 2012 -here.
• Geary A. Rummler – August 2012 -here.
• Dale Brethower – July 2012 – here.

# # #

I was at the Beach this past weekend. 6th Floor. On the Water. Drinking Coffee.

Persistent Practice

And I watched a family walking down the beach as many families do when at the beach. This family had three young boys, probably 6 to 10 in age range. And they were throwing each other a football, from oldest, or tallest, to next tallest, to the shortest, who then threw it to the older/taller kid.

I watched their routine for perhaps 15 cycles. And the two youngest/shortest of the three, never once caught the fall cleanly.  They fumbled it each time it was thrown to them.

Yet they persisted. They continued to attempt to catch it each time it was thrown to them. The ball being an American football, it bounced all over the beach. When they finally retrieved it, that crazy bouncing ball, they threw it. And eagerly waited for their next turn to catch the ball.

I thought about the practice each boy was getting.

Throwing. Catching, or attempting to catch, that oblong ball.

Each boy threw the ball fairly well, given their ages. But the two shortest/youngest never could catch the ball. At least during my short observation.

They had gotten down the beach quite a way and I could barely make them out, and I sat back with my morning coffee in hand, sitting on the balcony, and I imagined that at some point, on their journey down the beach or coming back up it, both of those short boys would be catching the ball, most of the time.

At some point, out of my clear view, I imagined that they would begin slowly, and catch it occasionally. And then they would catch it more often. And then almost all of the time. And then each and every time until they learned to throw it further, over each others’ heads, making the receiver run to catch it. Run further and further.

And then throwing on the run and catching on the run.

Expanding the skill set.

Of course it helped that they all wanted to learn this throwing and catching the ball. And they were willing to practice and fail. And fail. But continue to try despite all of the failures.

Maybe they didn’t feel that each dropped ball was a failure. The tallest of them didn’t seem to chastise them, the shorter ball droppers, or make fun of them as they played catch while running and skipping down the beach. He simply caught the ball and threw it, to the next tallest.

The feedback system in place silently told those two short boys that they were not catching the ball, that they were dropping it. They tried harder and harder to catch it. But they did not. Not in that round of 15 or so cycles.

But I bet they did.

I’d like to think that their diligence won out. That their persistence paid off.

That practice leads to perfection. Guided practice, yes. With appropriate feedback.

But maybe not each and every time. Perhaps that would take the fun out of it.

On break this past weekend.

# # #

What is your ReUse Strategy – as part of Lean Thinking about your Processes?

Across the entire Enterprise, how much ROI might there be to enable more appropriate ReUse for Information and Instruction to better enable the Performers in Process Performance?

Where have you made your strategic bets, and why?

How does that tie in to how score is kept and the requirements and desires of your stakeholders?

Lessons in Making Lemonade

Tips from Buzz and the Gang down at the Lemonade Stand, if they are not in a Classroom somewhere.

# # #

 April Fools!!!

It does not.

BEST PRACTICES/TIPS

Why Is the Research on Learning Styles Still Being Dismissed by Some Learning Leaders and Practitioners?

By Guy W. Wallace / November 22, 2011

A learning style is supposedly a mode of learning that is most effective for an individual. It supposedly helps to improve learning results. Why does this myth persist? Twenty-five years of research on this and related themes have not provided any form of conclusive evidence that matching the form of instruction to learning style improved learning or even attention. » [Full Article]

For an entire page of references on Foo Foo on Learning Styles, please go here.

 April Fools!!!

Designing Instruction for Learning Styles Preferences – has no validity.

Sorry.

# # #

If you stated your Problem adequately, and defined the Gap after defining the Future State and measuring the Baseline, you can define the potential R in ROI, answering SO WHAT? pretty well. And then finally one can estimate the Costs for closing the Gap to come up with the I in ROI, answering the WHY? and more SO WHAT?

And that ROI can be compared to all other “opportunities’ ROIs” to make a fix, add something new, avoid some Risk, etc. etc. to decide where to strategically place your bets.

I would look at the situation/workflow-process/ people/ person to look for their gaps in the following Asset dimensions…

But then what?

Well, first look at the organizational processes, the main process that deals with the flow, inputs, outputs, people, etc. – and then…

Swim Upstream

Swim upstream to the provisioning systems in or outside the

organization

Note: your Enterprise’s model/framework for these provisioning systems will most likely look different.

These systems/sets-of-processes provision the assets to the processes. Adequately or not.

Now, if only the business and marketing strategy and all other tactical plans were in alignment – and then adequately resourced…

# # #

Why So What Before Why?

The estimated ROI before “the fix” – and then the actual-to-plan ROI afterwards. For comparison purposes. Same as it ever was.

And note, I prefer life cycle views versus first views; as in first costs and life cycle costs.

Over some reasonable time horizon for potential comparisons for other opportunities for other investments for other returns.

Life cycle returns, like I said. And for comparisons-sake, like I said.

For which ROI, or ROE, which was created by DuPont – see the Wikipedia take on that real ROE metric – here.

ROI estimates before “doing something” can be compared to after the fact, actuals-to-plans data, but that assumes you can measure all of the variables affected by some change, some investment. And then understand what you got for your time and trouble, to make some investment, to address some problem.

Here next is the gang at Lessons in Making Lemonade play with So What After Why.

But Why? No. So What?

Back to Asking So What First, Why Second

OK, I am playing with this a bit. But seriously…

Why start your Problem Solving effort by asking Why? 5 times – which is an element of certain Problem Solving methodologies – of which there are more than can be counted IMO – I have more than one myself – instead of starting with another question?

The better question IMO is “so what?”

Because the real target for the first question in any PS effort – IMO – is to first determine whether or not you should really be investing your time, and others’ time, on some specific, or general, target.

Before you waste your time and potentially others addressing some low-payback, low hanging fruit, with little potential to return significant ROI or ROE, ask, So What?

Five times. Or more. Or less. Ask it often enough to hear the answers to so what, until you understand more about the R in ROI, or the R  in ROE. And not that ROE where it stands for Return on Expectations.

Kill 10 minutes on this opposing view on that newer, softer, can’t really be measured with any precision, after the fact let alone estimated on the front end, ROE Return on Expectations. Long live ROI. For comparisons for targeting, or not.

But I digress.

Back Again to Asking So What First, Why Second

Asking Why 5 times is part of some approaches to Problem Solving, which gets after a Root Cause, or more likely, Root Causes.

Then Interventions can attack the root causes, solve the problem, and everyone lives happily ever after. Until the next Problem appears. So as that’s going to be happening all of the time, one should be prepared to do this effectively and efficiently. Think about it. You yourself probably “pick your nose off the grindstone” of the last effort to problem solve, or do some routine task-set with it’s own set of problems every time you go to do it, and then another thing appears to need to be done, addressed. So you, me, everyone has problems to address, and when done, more problems to address. Or Opportunities, which in my view is on the flip side coin that reads: Problems.

But which ones, which Problems do you just live with? If you can’t address them all. And why?

No. So What?

Ah. Because Problem Solving efforts are Investments.

And someone should ask whether or not spending any time and any money on it, has enough of a payback to warrant that effort and those funds. Is there Return on the Investments that are not negative, that are positive?

OK. Well then, so far so good.

But Wait! Are There Bigger Returns Elsewhere? Bigger Fish to Fry?

More bang for the buck elsewhere?

Shouldn’t we be thinking about that too? Comparing Investment Opportunities - which as we stated earlier – has the flip side of Problem. They always go together, that couple, Problems and Opportunities.

But I digress.

It is important only if your resources are limited.

And whose aren’t?

So you should target for more bang for the buck.

Fry bigger fish.

So what and then why.

For the so what, it’s simply not good stewardship, and for the why, because people will probably be much more engaged, when working on something of significant ROI and/or ROE, rather than low hanging fruit.

So what?

It’s win-win.

Look for the R.

# # #

About the free book PDF – lean-ISD – here.

Why lean-ISD? Why PACT?

I wrote this book over a long period, 1983 until 1999, and I did it to explain how to achieve lean-ISD using what I started calling the PACT Processes for T&D in the late 1980s.

lean-ISD is a way to design and develop T&D, an approach with similarities to lean manufacturing. PACT is an acronym that stands for Performance-based, Accelerated, Customer-/Stakeholder-driven Training & Development.

The lean-ISD Concept

One way to re-engineer the ISD function is along the lines of lean-ISD. The concept of lean comes from the early 1990s MIT study of U.S. and Japanese automobile manufacturers. This study is documented in the book The Machine That Changed the World by James P. Womack, Daniel T. Jones, and Daniel Roos.

Lean production (a term coined by MIT research team member John Krafcik) describes an efficient approach that combines the best of both craft production and mass production. Lean production employs teams of multiskilled workers at all levels of the organization and uses highly flexible, increasingly automated tools to produce volumes of varied products. Lean production requires teamwork, structured yet flexible processes, communications, and continuous improvement.

The application of lean to the world of ISD can create a set of common, effective, and efficient processes. The processes span T&D project planning and management, analysis, design, development, pilot-test deployment, and evaluation. The PACT Processes for T&D share many of the characteristics of lean production, as you’ll see in this book.

These lean-ISD processes allow for

• Dividing ISD project efforts across multiple T&D organizations, locations, and personnel while ensuring that all of the T&D pieces fit together for a seamless learning experience
• Planning and managing predictable projects with predictable schedules and resource consumption (peoples’ time and out-of-pocket costs)
• Developing both shareable and unique T&D components
• Reusing (with little or no modification) many existing T&D products for various target audiences across the organization
• Involving upstream suppliers and downstream customers in a beneficial collaboration

The PACT Processes for T&D

The practice of lean-ISD is embodied in the PACT Processes for T&D. Furthermore, the overall PACT Process approach to ISD borrows concepts, precepts, tools, and techniques from the worlds of product management, financial management, and the quality and human performance technology movements.

The PACT Processes cover ISD end to end and are practical in nature, not theoretical. The processes use a highly structured, multiteam approach, and standard tools and templates. The approach reduces cycle time and enhances the quality and effectiveness of T&D.

A “pact” is also an agreement or a bargain. Implicit in the PACT Processes is an effective collaboration between ISD suppliers and ISD customers to ensure the instructional integrity of the T&D. Using PACT, suppliers and customers focus from the start on appropriate performance and content.

The pact between the ISD suppliers and ISD customers is embodied in a detailed Project Plan—the agreement—that the training suppliers create with their customers and stakeholders.

The PACT approach includes the following five key processes:

1.   PACT Analysis

2.   Curriculum Architecture Design (CAD)

3.   Modular Curriculum Development (MCD)

4.   Instructional Activity Development (IAD)

5.   Project Planning and Management

This figure shows the relationship among the processes.

All of the PACT Processes share the major characteristics from which the PACT name is derived:  performance-based, accelerated, and customer-/stakeholder-driven. All five components of the PACT Processes for T&D link together to create a very powerful, lean approach to ISD.

The three levels of PACT ISD—Curriculum Architecture Design, Modular Curriculum Development, and Instructional Activity Development—allow the T&D supplier to work with the T&D customer at a level appropriate to the needs and constraints of the customer. For example, Curriculum Architecture Design is the macrolevel process. It produces an analysis and design of an entire T&D product line, an entire curriculum.

The Modular Curriculum Development process works at the midlevel of ISD, concentrating on the analysis, design, and development of T&D Events, known more traditionally as training “courses.” T&D Events are composed of T&D Modules

Instructional Activity Development is the microlevel process. It’s an expedient process for the analysis, design, and development of instructional activities—performance tests, for example.

We have developed five PACT Processes that address core areas of ISD.

• Curriculum Architecture Design^SM (CAD) is a process for designing an overall architecture of performance-based T&D components to serve target audiences.
• Modular Curriculum Development^SM (MCD) is a process for building performance-based T&D Events (workshops, Web readings, CBT, etc.).
• Instructional Activity Development^SM (IAD) is a process for developing smaller pieces of T&D Events, pieces such as performance aids that do not really qualify as full T&D Events.
• PACT Analysis is a process for gathering the necessary information about the audience, performance, and work environment so that effective, performance-based T&D can be designed and developed.
• PACT Project Planning and Management is the process for planning, organizing, and controlling the other PACT Processes.

The Book – Cover Design – WasBy the Late Geary A. Rummler

Geary created this cover, back in 1999, not liking the one I had originally intended, that was in his review copy.

“If you want to ground your fantasy of a ‘corporate university’ with the reality of a sound ‘engineering’ approach to instructional systems that will provide results, you should learn about the PACT Processes.

If you are a leader of, or a serious participant in, the design and implementation of a large-scale corporate curriculum, then this book is for you. This system could be the difference between achieving bottom-line results with your training or being just another ‘little red school house.’”

Geary A. Rummler, Ph.D.     Performance Design Lab      1999

Is This Book For You?

This book is for those who know that T&D means training and development. It’s for those who know that ISD means either instructional systems development or instructional systems design. It’s for those who want to improve ISD processes to improve T&D products.

For readers who simply want an overview of lean-ISD and the PACT Processes, the first section of the book covers those topics at a general level. Readers looking for more information can proceed to subsequent sections, where each process is treated in much more detail.

In the book, I explain how the features embodied in the PACT acronym can provide tremendous benefits for the organization. There can be many payoffs for reading this book and implementing the PACT Processes. Some of the more significant payoffs include

• Better T&D that is more effective because it focuses on human performance requirements within business processes
• T&D designed and developed faster than with traditional ISD methods because of the structured PACT approach
• T&D that is cheaper to develop and maintain because it is designed and developed modularly

In addition, the PACT Processes focus on high-payoff T&D by using input from customers and priorities set by T&D stakeholders to make sure that only worthwhile T&D is designed and developed.

But Wait – There’s More

That book and a couple of others – were reconfigured into this 6 Pack on PACT and EPPI – in 2011.

Click on the graphic to link to more info.

The Free Book – 1999 Reviews

“This highly structured and detailed process for instructional design provides excellent guidelines for advanced students and practitioners. The focus is on improving training and development processes and products in business and industry.”

James D. Russell

Professor of Instructional Design, Purdue University

“Guy Wallace is giving away the magic. This book provides a model and methodology to help a training function link its long-term outputs to the business needs of the organization. The PACTProcesses help introduce the voice of the customer into any training organization whose mission is to improve performance.”

John M. Swinney

Manager of Curriculum Design and Development    Bandag, Inc.

“This book is not an easy read, it is something much better. It is a book written for people who share Guy Wallace’s passion for development training that adds value, for people who are so committed to competence for themselves and for the people they serve that they are willing to do what it takes to develop training that adds value. The best way to use the book is as a guide in doing projects . . . it describes the why and the what and offers many wise and useful suggestions about how.”

Dale M. Brethower, Ph.D.

Professor of Psychology, Western Michigan University

lean-ISD takes all of the theory, books, courses and psuedo job-aids that are currently on the market about Instructional Systems Design and blows them out of the water.

Previous “systems” approach books showed a lot of big boxes and diagrams which were to supposedly help the reader become proficient in the design process.  Here is a book that actually includes all of the information that fell through the cracks of other ISD training materials and shows you the way to actually get from one step to another.  Guy adds all of the caveats and tips he has learned in over twenty years of ISD practice and sprinkles them as job aids and stories throughout the book.

However, the most critical part of the book for me was that Guy included the project and people management elements of ISD in the book.  Too often ISD models and materials forget that we are working with real people in getting the work done.

This book helps explain and illustrate best practices in ensuring success in ISD projects.

Miki Lane

Senior Partner    MVM The Communications Group

“I’ve found lean-ISD to be a very useful reference tool and resource.  After having been involved with Guy Wallace on a large-scale application of the methodology at my last firm, I’ve taken on several recent projects in my new company using many of the methods, tools and templates of the PACT Processes for Training & Development.  The book is designed so that I was quickly able to access the information I needed to provide my clients practical, timely and quality approaches to tackling their business issues.

I highly recommend this book as a guide for business professionals challenged by either training and development, learning, knowledge management, or human competence development projects.”

Randy Kohout

Director, Knowledge Management     Fireman’s Fund

# # #