Who Is at Fault – When L&D Falls Short?

IMX – most L&D falls short in its authenticity – its Performance Validity.

Its content might have Face Validity – it sounds good, but then it doesn’t address the specifics of the Target Audience’s Learner’s Performance Requirements.

So what needs to be addressed? Whose thinking needs to be altered?

If the client doesn’t ask for Analysis, or worse, insists that there be no Analysis – is it their fault?

Or is it the fault of L&D Leadership for not selling – and then insisting – that Analysis be a part of every front-end of every project? To have a prayer of impacting Performance?

I am channeling the late quality guru, W. Edwards Deming, when I suggest that it’s certainly not the L&D Practitioner’s fault.

It’s the fault of THE SYSTEM – which is in the control of meaders and managers – and not individual contributors.


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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.