From An Exchange on LinkedIn
I started in the field in 1979 – so I have an old school view. In the 1990s Senge’s 5th Discipline caused many T&D organizations to change their names to L&D – in an attempt to be/become more learner-centric (versus Performance -centric) and to ride that wave with their executives who wanted to become A Learning Organization – so T&D adopted that language. And the result became the means – linguistically.
And yes – I separate training and education … and communications (that are for creating skills, knowledge and communications). I have many posts on my Blog about these distinctions. But the popularity of L&D vs T&D has continued – and the language confusion – which some are beginning to experience and talk/write about.
Training is but one set of means to the ends of Learning. The T&D department is there to support all of the managers who are responsible for the means of Learning via any source (formal to informal) and everything else in the performance context required for the performance of their processes and results.
Training Leading to Learning Is Critical But Not Sufficient to Performance or Performance Improvement
Performance Is Much More Complex Than Learning Via Training, Education and Communications … and Serendipity.
Training/Learning professionals who want to be Performance Improvement Consultants have so much to learn in order to have impact.
They can a best – IMO – be team players – in Enterprise efforts at true Performance Improvement.
There is a lot to learn and master.
T&D/L&D folks can be team players – and if skilled at Project Planning & Management – lead the effort.
But they’re going to need a bigger boat – so to speak.
# # #