Un-Structured OJT = Informal Learning

Back in the early 1980s I used the term Un-Structured OJT for T&D Instructional Content that “could be” – but that “wouldn’t be“ – because the Project Steering Teams on Curriculum Architecture Design (CAD) projects would have decide against any funding for building or buying THAT content.

They would make that decision in Phase 4 of a CAD effort.

The T&D Path – as I have always used it – includes both T&D that exists already and the gaps.

T&D that exists already is tagged for “Use As Is” or “Use After Modification.”

See the red dots and partial red dots on the T&D Path below.

All of the empty dots represent gaps in the current state curriculum – for prioritizing and funding to put performance-based T&D/Instructional Content in place.

The Content for Knowledge/Skills that are deemed needed but not worthy of funding to take it from an Informal state to a Formal state would be left untouched – as not every need warrants investment – in my view. Think of it as low hanging fruit.

I built that into my early versions of my PACT Processes as I had learned at Motorola (1981/1982) that some products or system might have potential Features – that were never developed – as the R for the I wasn’t adequate.

Just because you can doesn’t mean you should.

Lately it seems as if some are attempting to Formalize the Informal while still calling it Informal.

If I call Job Aids – a.k.a.: Performance Support or Workflow Learning – Informal Learning – I can sell it. So what is Informal Learning anymore?

We don’t do ourselves any favors when we cause confusion in the marketplace IMO.

# # #