I’ve Been Doing L&D Paths Since the Early 1980s
Of course they were called Training Paths – and many other labels – back in the day. Whatever the client preferred. Paths. Maps. Roadmaps. Guides.
We were replacing reliance on the Course Catalogs of old.
Most of the Paths I’ve done were not lock-step – although a few have been. I’ve done 75 projects as an external consultant since 1982 – and have produced multiple Paths in maybe a quarter of those projects.
Those Paths that were not lock-step were Personalized in the downselect from the Path and the re-sequencing (if needed) and scheduling.
Downselect? Think: Cherry Picking.
The downselect accounted for the job assignments – as jobs with the same Job Title were rarely responsible for the same Outputs & Tasks. And the downselect also accounted for the incoming K/S of the Performer in creating their Learning Plan.
The Path would also provide for Spaced Reinforcements – if the Job itself wasn’t going to reinforce key Task performance all by itself. When you had to do Cold Storage Training – just in case it might be needed – and when Learning in the Workflow was problematic. Otherwise our Design Rule was to avoid Cold Storage Training – which was subject to much Forgetting.
The Master Performers who sat on both the Analysis Team and then the Design Team made all of those determinations, as well as the suggested sequence of Events and their “Titles” – that they approved. Truth in Titling is an important concept IMO.
Which is the best approach IMO. Authenticity was always at the forefront – and Mickey Mouse Content was never included – and was therefore left to Un-Structured OJT.
# # #