My analysis model for looking at any organizational entity – has 14 sets-of-processes – which I call Areas of Performance – AoPs – that I start with. How is this accomplished in the Enterprise, I ask directly or snoop around indirectly.
My goal is to convert my mental model, made tangible, with other Analysts-in-Training – and perhaps Certification. So I committed it to paper – back in the day – and wrote about it, presented on it, and trained others to use this as their starter – for either analysis or design – of organizations and jobs and multi-job/cross-function process performance. The toughest (worst) case is a complicated organization with many routine and non-routine process-sets – and the easiest is a straight-forward simple set of routine processes. Your analysis framework needs to be robust to both uses.
In the Learning & Development realm – as with any other function – I’d start with the Core Processes and Products – the reason for being – those outward facing Processes that serve external Customers with Products. Our outputs are their inputs. I start my analysis there in the Core of the model.
Then after that – it depends.
It depends on what I have learned/uncovered in the Core areas.
I’d start with those three – in the Core – even though “bucketing” them into three might be initially deceiving – for you’ll see that there is a great deal of complexity in these three. As there are in the other buckets as well.
There are 14 Buckets in my mental model/framework for analyzing an organization – here it is applied to an L&D operation – for the range of: the lone person, the team, a department, a function, or a vast empire.
The complexity of your empire can be captured – as well as the simplicity of your Texas Ranger’s approach to getting the job done (one riot, one ranger).
But start with the Core AoPs – the reason for being – for your Learning & Development organization. Start with those Product producing Processes.
Yours – may already be broken.
CORE – Curriculum Architecture Design
Your L&D Product and Service Line Program Management Processes may be broken if:
- Projects undertaken by the L&D system are not the most critical to the Enterprise.
- Return on investment and economic value add forecasts do not exist, or suggest a low-payback for the efforts.
- You’ve spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to develop/acquire generic content, e.g., time management and communications skills, when strategic and/or critical Enterprise initiatives have been under-resourced in the past.
- No project management portfolio exists for the critical Target Audiences.
- The Portfolios are not aligned with the business’ or the L&D organization’s strategies.
- The Portfolio is not logical, and it doesn’t align with functions and/or management’s model of business; it’s not an engineered architecture – it’s a list of courses.
Your Service Line Design Processes may be broken if:
- Portions of the Enterprise are complaining of a lack of needed services from L&D or are recommending/demanding them.
- L&D service efforts are “one-offs” and not part of a comprehensive effort to understand the total, critical needs of targeted audiences, and then address and meet those high-payback needs with services on a priority basis. Perhaps you could offer coaching – but cannot afford to do that too!
- L&D services don’t directly target high pay-back performance improvements.
- Service offerings don’t align with critical, high-payback business/ L&D strategies and needs.
CORE – Modular Curriculum Development
Your Product and Service Line Development and Acquisition Program Management Processes may be broken if:
- You can’t measure positive return on investment and economic value add actuals against plans for products/services.
- Product and service development is being done because someone internal to the L&D system thinks it’s a good idea—the portfolio is not being managed.
- Products and services developed aren’t maintained due to resource constraints.
- Resources are not reallocated as needed based on changes in business direction.
- You don’t know what to work on next if a project is completed early.
- Projects are not sequenced to take appropriate advantage of synergies (e.g., similar content/subject matter experts between projects).
Your Modular Curriculum Development Processes could be broken if:
- Your content does not meet the established objectives for transferring awareness, knowledge, or skills to the Target Audiences’ jobs.
- Your content development efforts are somewhat ad hoc, not in control, and not predictable in terms of their eventual costs or cycle times.
- Your content development does not design and build appropriately reusable “chunks” of content for sharing with other Target Audiences.
Your Purchased Product Acquisition Processes may be broken if:
- L&D bought often doesn’t make the grade in terms of creating the awareness, knowledge, and skills as measured in the Target Audiences during/after the L&D deployment.
- It takes too long to evaluate and decide on which L&D you should purchase.
Your Purchased Product Modification Processes may be broken if:
- You have/have had any legal issues (lawsuits, complaints, or future risks) resulting from making modifications to copyrighted materials.
- The cycle times and costs for making modifications are not reliably predictable.
- Content bought and modified often doesn’t make the grade in terms of creating the awareness, knowledge, and skills as measured in their Target Audiences during/after the deployment.
Your Existing Content Maintenance Processes may be broken if:
- Products are still being deployed or accessed that are in need of updating.
- Updating cycle times and costs cannot be reasonably predicted.
- You never stop updating.
- Maintenance is not a planned, resourced or prioritized project effort.
CORE – Curriculum Deployment
Your Master Materials Storage and Retrieval Processes may be broken if:
- It is too difficult to retrieve material masters for updating or deployment purposes.
- It is too difficult to access current content to attempt reuse.
- Materials are used in deployment when the intent should have been to make them unavailable during updates.
- There is no version control of material masters that ensures all materials are up to date.
Your Master Materials Change Management Processes may be broken if:
- Outdated materials are still being used in deployment after updating.
Your Scheduling Processes may be broken if:
- There are complaints from the Target Audience about availability of your offerings.
- Seats (or site spaces) go underused or seats/spaces are backlogged.
- Materials are overstocked or under-stocked (unavailable) when requested.
Your L&D Facilitator and Coach Development and Certification Processes may be broken if:
- There is an insufficient number of staff to deploy L&D per the demand.
- Evaluation feedback identifies any problems with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes/demeanor of the facilitators, coaches, or other support staff.
Your Facilitator-led Deployment Processes may be broken if:
- Feedback from delivery evaluations (learners, instructors, administrative, etc.) suggests problems from their perspectives, with things other than facilitator credibility or content accuracy, completeness, and appropriateness, but including non-content items such as the room, facility, and equipment issues.
Your Self-paced Deployment Processes may be broken if:
- Feedback from evaluations suggests problems from the learners’ perspective for things other than content accuracy, completeness, and appropriateness, including items such as availability, timeliness of receipt, or accessibility.
Your Coached/Mentored Deployment Processes may be broken if:
- Feedback from delivery evaluations (learners, instructors, administrative, etc.) suggests problems from the learners’ perspective with things other than coach/mentor credibility or content accuracy, completeness, and appropriateness, including non-content items such as room, facility, and equipment issues.
Your Individual Development Planning Processes may be broken if:
- There are no individual-to-group-to-Enterprise roll-ups of the participation plans. They are all discrete and not linked.
- Individual plans are not used and/or no common format exists.
- No one has a realistic clue of the future demand for development products and services.
- Seats and sites are under-filled or sites are underutilized for many deployments.
- Seats and sites demand outstrips availability.
Your Ordering and Registration Processes may be broken if:
- Customers complain that their “orders” are not being filled in a timely manner or are being filled incorrectly.
- Expediting orders is usually necessary and taking a lot of people’s time and attention.
The School of PACT
My new – 2011 – book covers all of this and more – on all 14 Systems/AoPs…
Now available as both paperbacks and Kindles – here – along with 5 other books in the “From Training to Performance-based Training to Performance Improvement Consulting” book 6-Pack…
# # #
You must be logged in to post a comment.