Being Customer/ Stakeholder Driven Versus Just Collaborative

They Can Be In a Blend Or Mutually Exclusive

I approach this as more of the former in the decision taking – Stakeholder-Driven that is –  and more of the latter when processing the decision making – more Collaborative.

This is when we are in a GRM – Gate Review Meeting – see the next graphic’s Go Lights – upside-down Stop Lights…


That’s where the GRMs are typically in my approach to ADDIE (my MCD/IAD) that is often (for me) preceded by a CAD effort – to produce Learning Paths – which I prefer to call Performance Competence Development Paths – which is WAY DIFFERENT from Competency Development Paths.



CADs produce Performance Competence Development Paths – and MCD/IAD builds out the gaps from that ideal product line.

What Happens In a Gate Review Meeting – GRM?

The project is again overviewed – quickly. The WHAT – WHY and HOW.

The Meeting objectives – unique to the Phase – and the agenda is reviewed.

The Phase review is quick, the who and the where and when.

Then the results produced in that Phase are reviewed – with a mind toward the use in the next Phase or two or three.

Then the decisions are “processed” and decisions made (or taken).

Then the next Phase is previewed, the who and where and when.

Then the what – the outputs – for that next Phase are overviewed along with the GRM’s decisions – so as to manage everyone’s expectations.

I close out EVERY GRM with this slide – just as I had warned the Project Steering Team at the beginning of the GRM … see the 2nd bullet …


I believe in Command & Control – of the enterprise leaders in an ISD effort – and I believe in Collaboration with the Master Performers (you might call them SMEs or Exemplars) to focus on the Performance Requirements – and Enable Them.

In PACT I could have made the C mean Collaborative.

I did not.

LinkedIn PACT Logo  (1)

I wanted my Project Steering Team to own the project – and I simply wanted to be their hired gun – and I need to insure that they took ownership – otherwise my fixed fee price would be underwater if I allowed the effort to drift.

Focus on the Performance.

Enable the Awareness – Knowledge – Skill REQUIREMENTS – and call out the other barriers causing any Gaps uncovered in the Analysis Phase. Working with a Project Steering Team – PST – that is charged with improving the Performance of some target audience – or audiences.


Moving from Informal Learning – when that isn’t cutting it – or is just too RISKY – toward more Formal Instruction/Learning/Training/ Performance Support.

Or even a redesigned process upfront – BEFORE Instruction is built/bought.

Empowered Collaboration In Between All GRMs

I ask for Master Performers – other SMEs – sometimes Novice Performers – and sometimes supervisors/ managers.

I own the process – they own the content – for the Analysis and Design and sometimes the Development efforts. I can make it efficient – they can make it effective.

That’s worthy collaboration. Under control.

PACT Via a Group Process for CAD Analysis and Design

To conduct Analysis – Design and Development activities – all focused on the Performance Requirements – authentic Performance Requirements – and not some generic set of enabling Competencies.

A focus on Performance Competence. Driven by the business/leaders. To do their bidding.

Which is sometimes more about Communications – creating Awareness.

Or about Education – creating Knowledge.

And sometimes the real need is to create Training – to create Skills.

Performance Competence requires Awareness, Knowledge and Skills – with a focus on enabling Tasks to create Outputs that meet the balance of Stakeholder’s Requirements.


Being a good steward in the L&D function means investing in your own processes, people and practices for continuous improvement for ROI.

Do your ISD processes focus enough on authentic performance?

If not – IMO – you really need to get them there! You really do.

Let a GRM with your PST help you get aligned to the needs of the business.

GRMs are covered in many of my books on ISD – Lean ISD (1999) is the original.


And their place in a Governance-Advisory structure is covered in my T&D Systems View book (2001) – see 12 O’Clock in the clockface graphic below the next.

L and D - Formal Goverance and Advisory Structure Example

The PST is “as needed” and is dis-banded after their assignment. The rest of the structure is permanent – changed as needed – with rotating people filling out each level – in the example above.

There are of course many ways to structure these systems – Command & Control & Collaborative systems and processes and tasks – to insure communications – and to insure that decisions are turned into appropriate actions – for Measured Results.

T&D Systems View


The placement on the clockface was deliberate.

12 O’Clock high.

On top.

Additional Resources

Thes 6 books are a 2011 update to lean-ISD and T&D Systems View – plus two other books – are are available as both paperbacks and Kindles.


# # #

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.