About Libraries of Generic Content.
I recall hearing back in 1981, when I was at Motorola, that perhaps Motorola should offer basket weaving courses to those that wanted to take them, as that would perhaps help people become more creative, and perhaps that would help them solve the big corporate-wide Critical Business Issues, as well as the local Nagging Minor Issues.
A whole lotta Perhaps in that thinking – has been my thinking. I’ve always had a strickly performance-orientation – and still do.
So I’ve never been a fan of Enterprise Libraries of Content – even before they were offered digitally. Because they are offering generic content, non-specific to an Enterprise’s Processes or Practices. And yes, they were offered pre-digitally, pre-Internet.
Now, I’ve appreciated that “Enterprise Libraries of Content” are a thing – a big thing – and have been for quite some time for many – and that Tide had washed up on our shores, arrived, a long time ago. And I couldn’t stop it.
But maybe I’ve been wrong about them, those Enterprise Libraries of Content.
Perhaps they have a role beyond preparing people for their job. Perhaps they have a role to play in Employee Satisfaction.
I just finished (today is 2021-11-02) a Learning Hack Podcast with Johnny Helmer (formerly of the Piranhas) interviewing Craig Weiss – here – and perhaps I’m changing my mind – or will change my mind.
After all – I’m supposedly “all about Performance” and retention and job satisfaction go hand in hand – or right after being Performance-Competence with the Job at Hand. According to one client at a big bank (Bank of America) back in the late 90s (at my prior consulting firm, CADDI, #2 of 3 consulting firms where I’ve had an equity stake) when I helped them merge 3 sets of curricula from their many mergers – and gave it a decidedly Performance Orientation.
Here is his LinkedIn Recommendation:
So it was their belief that “turnover” was addressed – and that was not the reason they employed me and my performance-based Curriculum Architecture Design methods – as it was their maintenance costs for 3 sets of curricula that were eating their lunch, so to speak.
So reflecting on The Learning Hack Podcast as it was playing out – I guess I’m guilty of parallel processing – I came up with this imagery in my head…
As Craig Weiss had been talking about LMSs (and perhaps LXPs) were guilty of offering Content that only related to the Job.
Well, that triggered me IMMEDIATELY. And that initial knee-jerk reaction led me to listen closely to what he had to say – so I could perhaps decide which side of the fence I might find myself afterward.
For Whatever Interests You
Here is where the full set of ELC – the Enterprise Libraries of Content – would/could sit.
Come and get … Whatever. Whenever.
For Your Current Job
This is where that ELC – the Enterprise Libraries of Content would sit, modified, enhanced, augmented, by bookends – which I’ve written about in the past – here – here – here – here – and here.
Bookending generic content makes it more authentic and relevant and will more likely Transfer and have Impacted real-world Business Results Metrics – and not just Learning Activity Metrics.
Bookending requires doing a good job at Analysis, Design, and Development (and then Pilot Testing) of Instruction/Learning Experiences – and then – an assessment/evaluation regarding Transfer and Impact.
But it would be worth it if that was done for High Stakes Performance only – as opposed to Anything & Everything.
For Potential Future Jobs
This would simply be a re-listing/offering of all of the “For Your Current Job” content. Organized by – you guessed it – all of the Jobs where the time and effort was put into Analysis, Design, and Development.
Plus this might also provide all of the Job Descriptions as part of the indexing – if they aren’t too lame and only created/used to justify/defend Compensation levels in a Court of Law – should that need arise.
Then lists of Content directly related and perhaps related could be provided. Perhaps job incumbents could create these lists as best guesses if the L&D function hadn’t done the Analysis, Design, and Development to ensure its Performance Orientation and Impact.
Why I’m Still On the Fence
Will the offering on all sorts of ELC – Enterprise Libraries of Content – lead to the Next Wave of Dissatisfaction?
Do employees want a promotion, to new and more challenging assignments – with a pay boost – and will they believe that taking advantage of Whatever Interests Them could/should/would lead to that?
Something to explore in my free time I guess.
What are your thoughts on this – and – do you have any data?
Pingback: Don’t Sap the VAP | Son of Pursuing Performance