Deeper, Learning

Last year I attended the facilitation shindig run by Julie Drybrough. The shindig is designed to provide a space to explore different aspects of facilitation, for facilitators to practice their craft, to learn some new things, and go deeper in thinking about how they work with groups. It was a really good learning event.

Through his Emotion At Work podcast, Phil Willcox has been exploring lots of facets of emotions, emotional intelligence, and different ways we can understand the human condition. What I really appreciate about his podcast is how he allows the conversations to go really deep and for his guests to really explore what they want to talk about. His guests are either highly qualified, highly experienced, or their research is really interesting. It’s proper good quality content.

The world of L&D isn’t getting any easier. We are required as learning professionals to do more, at pace, across a range of needs, with multiple learning tools or techniques, and in some way hope and pray some of it makes a diffefence.

What Phil and Jools provide for, is that we don’t have to make learning happen in certain set ways. They provide alternative routes to helping people learn. Jools’ approach follows a traditional in-person mode. For the purpose of the content and the depth of content she invites people to explore, she doesn’t throw content at you, teach you models galore and force you into action planning. Hers is a more deliberate approach of design where you slow down, take your time and reflect deeply. It’s also not delivered in traditional 2-4 day slots. It’s done once every two months (ish).

Phil, with his podcast, invites guests to share what they are researching, the insights they’ve realised and what they’ve read, and allows for real deep exploration. It’s not micro-learning by any stretch – typical episodes are at least an hour long. It’s proper discussion and development of thought. The digital format means I listen on my commute when I can focus on the content and take my time with it.

These two approaches are different to how we ordinarily design and think about learning. They also go against the grain of fast paced, more now, micro everything, video everything, bitesize everything, social everything. They both demonstrate that for better learning to happen, better design and better execution matter too.


Modern Learning – it’s in the design

The below is essentially the outline of what I’m going to be talking about at Learning Technologies conference on Weds 31 Jan.

I’m one of a set of L&D bloggers who try to make sense of the L&D landscape as it shifts and evolves with insights and developments into learning itself, technology and L&D practice. The modern challenge of L&D is that there is a lot to consider in terms of resources, delivery mechanisms and content when crafting a solution. Also, it’s often the case these days that an insightful model or theory can only take you so far. Most L&D needs now require us to think far more in a multi-disciplinary approach than we’ve ever needed to before.

I’m also less and less interested in the ability, capability and knowledge that one person has or owns. In the modern world, that’s just not enough. It is unrealistic and unhelpful to think that one person can answer the many questions or provide a solution to every business need I have. The modern L&D vendor has to be able to demonstrate that they have an active network through which they are able to do what is required. Not just through an associate pool or network, but through the people they know, the thinking they do and the discussions they’re involved with.

And modern times demand that we pay attention to the awareness being raised about inequality, discrimination and attacks against women, people of colour, or other nationalities and the many different ways our privilege unduly influences our behaviour against other people. If we do not think that these societal impacts do not feed through to the way people think and behave at work, and what they bring with them when they are in workshops and courses, then we are being naive. At a fundamental level, we have to ensure that our learning solutions – however they may be designed and however they may be delivered – are providing safe spaces for people to invest their time, efforts and energies into their personal and professional development.

When we think about learning solutions, and learning design, and the many different ways that L&D bloggers and speakers evangelise about what should be done, we should be driving towards a set of solutions which provide people with the right set of resources and content to enable to them to perform better. Designing a modern learning solution is about being able to provide a learning experience which smartly makes use of:

  • technology
  • digital learning
  • social networks
  • dialogue
  • workshops
  • facilitation

When I put together the Modern Learning Leader programme, it was these fundamentals that I approached the learning design with.

I knew I wanted to bring people together and have them go through a learning experience the likes of which they’ve never done before. I wanted to do this to be able to demonstrate how it can be done, do a live experiment, and learn as I went along.

I’d also decided on the main topics I thought L&D Leaders would want to be able to explore. These were:

  • The Human Condition
  • User Experience
  • Adult Learning Theories
  • Instructional Design
  • Learning Technologies

I was also aware that these topics on their own could easily fill up a traditional course, and wanted to be more purposeful about how people were able to access that content, think about it usefully, and arrive at a workshop primed and ready to have full debate and reflection on their learning.

To that end, I decided that it would be useful to have these all delivered via webinars several weeks ahead of the workshop itself. I purposefully sought out speakers who could talk well about these topics. I was glad of the diversity of the group. Of the 5 speakers:

  • 4 were white people
  • 1 was a person of colour
  • 2 were women
  • There was a mix of ages
  • There were differing levels of education, experience and knowledge across all 5

I was also mindful that I didn’t want the webinars to be one directional. So I set up a Slack channel where people who had signed up to the programme could talk directly with the presenters. This allowed the presenters to ask questions about content that would be relevant to cover, provide links to resources and content ahead of their webinars, and in one case a full video used as a primer.

The use of Slack provided that initial experience of modern learning design because I had unpacked the mystery of the speakers and created an open forum. That doesn’t normally happen in learning solution design. Normally everything is funneled through a point person. I didn’t want to be the sole voice passing messages one way – and also highly aware that I would only colour things with my own bias if that were to happen.

The webinars themselves were no different to any other webinar you may have experienced. The main difference was that the presenters had already met their audience in the main because of the Slack channel. There was an established rapport, and the content had been developed directly for the group. I mean, short of a 1:1 approach, you really can’t get more targeted than that in your design.

In the lead up to the workshop itself, I used Slack to ask a different question each week which prompted practise around reflective thinking. The questions were never about actions or plans, instead asking questions focused more on insights, reflections and learnings. That allowed for some rich discussion to take place, for others to listen well and to build on thoughts and snippets.

The workshop itself, which lasted two days, was then an open session of exploration. By the time the group had arrived to this point, they had:

  • Explored 5 broad topics about learning
  • Discussed and asked questions
  • Reflected on their learning
  • Experienced content delivered through webinars exclusively
  • Engaged with each other and cultivated relationships due to Slack

That all happened before they arrived at the workshop. Just think about that for a moment. I had designed the programme in such a way that people were absolutely primed and ready for reflection and debate before they’d even arrived to an in-person session. We don’t tend to do that in L&D. We tend to focus our entire efforts on the design and delivery of the workshop with all those points I’ve just mentioned happening through the two days we were together. Imagine if you could do that ahead of time, what does that mean the two days can be then used for?

Which is where the two days came into their own. The group spent nearly 2 hours contracting with one another about their learning experience and learning journey they wanted to continue on. I didn’t direct it. I didn’t flipchart it. I didn’t capture individual expectations. There was already a level of trust with each other that they could just delve deep into their thinking without (much) reluctance.

One person reflected and said “I was able to reflect and commit mentally and emotionally to personal change in a face to face setting”. How often does that happen in an L&D workshop? What luxury of time can we afford to people in that setting where they can articulate their experience in such a way?

The two days was self-driven completely by the group. They decided where they needed to focus their efforts and discussions. I provided some guidance and a loose structure for how those thoughts and discussions could take place. The rest was up to each individual. We even had time to go for an hour’s walk in the surrounding area and pay attention to our experience of the physical environment.

The above, as I’ve described it, is not how we normally think about or design learning solutions to happen or to take place. What I wanted to demonstrate, and I think I have, is that you can upend typical structures we’re used to, and bring them into modern practice. I think the above demonstrates what that modern practice looks like, feels like, and how it happened.

In the above, I have taken inspiration from models and theories such as:

  • Minimum viable product
  • Time To Think
  • 70:20:10
  • User Experience
  • Design Thinking
  • Social learning theory
  • Facilitation shindiggery
  • Working out loud

This is just one possibility of how we can think about modern learning. There are many, many other ways it could happen. It most definitely matters about context. No one way of thinking can accommodate each and every need that arises. Through this approach for this programme I’ve been proud to be able to prove and demonstrate how we can provide high quality learning experiences by taking a multi-disciplinary approach to learning design and delivery.

Agency in L&D

Human Agency.

Our self‐understanding as human agents includes commitment to three crucial claims about human agency: That agents must be active, that actions are part of the natural order, and that intentional actions can be explained by the agent’s reasons for acting.*

I often wonder in L&D if people are attracted to the profession (in whatever form of the profession they enter) so that they can impart their wisdom, as opposed to believing that people have agency as described above. And I wonder if there are people who want to tell people what to think, that’s not L&D at all. It’s evangelism.

Part of the world that L&D inhabits is to impart knowledge. It’s the fundamental purpose of the function / profession. My question is less that we impart knowledge, and more about how it’s done.

I observe that there are trainers / facilitators / presenters who simply want to tell people what to think. And to tell them what they must be thinking. And to prove their cleverness by inferring on someone’s behalf. I see it often. And whenever I do, I become more alert. I become more alert to the person and their lack of belief in others and their agency.

A while back, I realised that I can only share things as I know them. That I know things in a certain way means it makes sense to me in a certain way. I learned that I could be challenged on my thinking and from that challenge I am forced to address my understanding. It also meant that I could only speak on behalf of me. I realised I could not, and should not, presume to talk for anyone else.

It has become my fundamental way of being. My belief in others that they have the freedom, permission and support to explore their thinking, to arrive at their own answers, and to decide a course of action as is best seen by them.

Which sometimes works against the loved frameworks of L&D we are comfortable with. In most courses and programmes and solutions we deliver, we explicitly take away a person’s agency. We essentially design learning solutions in such a way that says “you do not know, this is how you will know, you are now better for knowing”.

When I have the platform to speak with others, be that at a conference, in a workshop, on a panel, on a webinar, or any other platform, I am very aware that I cannot prescribe thought. I can share what I know, and invite people to explore that with me. If that takes them to a place of insight, that’s good. If it doesn’t, that’s also good because they have their agency.

I am concerned that there are people who do not realise agency is fundamental to human learning. That there are many out there who are willingly and confidently and enthusiastically misunderstanding how to support learning in others. That they believe they can hear the words a person is saying and then speak for them. That they can tell a group what they must be thinking because they are so insightful. That they can tell an individual what they need to do, because they’ve been there and done it.

And I’m aware in writing this, I am suggesting agency should be a fundamental design aspect of L&D. Maybe I’m right. Maybe I’m wrong. It’s up for debate.

*taken from the abstract for Understanding Human Agency, Erasmus Mayr

My #3GoodThings for this week

  1. I facilitated my first proper session with a management group in my new role. I’m really pleased to have got this under my belt. Being new in a company means some initial lag before you feel confident in understanding the context and delivering something of value. Positive feedback from key stakeholders strengthened my impression of how well the session went.
  2. Celebrating a birthday for Julie Drybrough. Mike Collins did a superb job of keeping it a surprise for me and others to be there. A really fun night and meal.
  3. Really pleased to have been on the GoodPractice podcast this week discussing all things self-care with Justin Andersen and Owen Ferguson. You can listen here

Have a good weekend, folks.

L&D are business leaders, too

I often hear how L&D need to be better aligned to the business. That when we design and deliver solutions of varying sorts, we have to ensure business leaders are bought in. That we’re not part of HR. That L&D are a cost to the business. How we need to market what we do better and create a learning culture. How we need to be better business partners and understand the leaders of the business.

And I hear less about how we are leaders of the business already. Because here are things normally under our control that we lead on for the business:

  • We normally have a budget we manage. Company money entrusted to us to deliver solutions for the business. That’s pretty significant.
  • In some cases we may be employing people to work with us and for us. We’re providing someone with gainful work.
  • We design solutions that help people perform better at work. It’s not always as clear cut as that, but it is what we do. That’s pretty important. 
  • We enable managers to be better. Managers/leaders are a core part of organisational effectiveness. If we are helping them to be more effective that’s pretty impressive.
  • We use data and insights into human behaviour to improve working environments and working relationships.

I stopped thinking of myself as not being a business leader some while ago when I realised I had all that in my purview. And sure people have different levels of comfort and acceptance that they are as such. And then I think, but you’re paid a fairly good wage to do these things. That, again, by virtue of itself gives you the remit and responsibility to lead the business. Imposter syndrome be damned.

Lastly, this. This isn’t about humility. L&D leaders have a unique business position where we are required to understand the business in a way many departments don’t need to or have the time for. That level if insight we can provide is unique. Additionally, when collaborative efforts are needed it’s often because there’s no-one to be that catalyst for change. Again, a unique position that L&D can provide leadership on.

Things will be ok

It’s tough at the moment. The constant threat of a world war looms with an unhinged President in Trump and equally unhinged leader in Kim-Jong Un. Brexit is only set up to be a disaster.

And if we look at human history, here’s some things that give me some confidence that things will be ok. Warning. This may be more optimistic than you may want.

Through nearly every significant moment of history, we have improved as a human race. Very rarely were in a position where we haven’t progressed since the Dark Ages.

We have enough checks and balances in place that public institutions, media and regulatory bodies will mostly mostly remain impartial and serve society as opposed to political leanings. Yes, there is a lot of worrying fascist and other rhetoric, but mostly the structures we have in society will protect us against any one person or persons leading us down dark paths as we’ve known them before.

We have the benefit of the present and of legislation to help us know what is morally and ethically defensible. We’ve never had that level of insight before. It means we can and do stand up for things in society in ways that we have never been able to before. Yes that means confronting some really dark social ills currently, and I have faith we’ll come out the right side of it all, because as people we’re good at doing that.

Regardless of your political leanings, over the last 20-30 years, each government has helped us do and be better as people. Yes there have been systemic choices which disadvantage some and advantage others, but we are still a better society than we were in the mid 1900’s.

Social media platforms will get better at what they do. If they don’t, people will just stop using them. Remember the old days of ICQ, Friends Reunited, Yahoo Messenger and those others? They were successful up to a point. Then they stopped. Twitter, Facebook and YouTube will get there. And if they don’t, other platforms will come along which offer something better. We never knew we needed those platforms until they existed. We won’t know we’ll need the next platform until it’s here too.

The rate at which technology is being developed and improving human living is astonishing. Just like ten years ago we never thought we’d need data scientists or social media directors or app designers we don’t know what jobs will be needed in the next ten years either. And at every step, the tech will help us be better. Because, again, humans are good at figuring out how to implement the right kind of tech for the right kinds of reasons.

So, yes, we can be sidetracked by the things that take our attention. And we can get riled up by them. And we can feel despondent and enraged. And we can and should take up political, societal and identity based stances. Our challenges of today are no different to the challenges of yesteryear – How do I live well? How do I make meaning in my life and for others? How do I help myself and others to grow? These are the questions we’ve always been searching answers for.

But things will be ok. It may take longer than we may want. In some cases like Trump and Brexit we don’t have a choice but to wait for a number of years. And once that time has passed, further decisions need to be made for things to progress and be corrected. But we’ll get there. Because as people, we’re pretty good at doing that.

The art of doing nothing

I remember listening to a talk, I think by Alan Wallace, where he was talking about the discomfort people have of doing nothing. He shared about how people are so uncomfortable in being with their own thoughts, they would rather play a pointless game such as Solitaire than be alone with their own thoughts.

Yesterday on the way home, I saw an elderly gent on the train occupy himself by playing a game for a full half hour. It was the game ‘coin drop’ which is essentially the app version of dropping two pence coins into the arcade machine and hoping to get a nice booty prize of some sort. Except it was an app. With no booty prize.

I hear people moan about how ineffective mindfulness is as a practice. That it can’t even be defined, so how do you know if you’re practicing it? That there’s no evidence base for it’s benefits, so why do it? There is an evidence base for practicing mindfulness, just not the kind these people are searching for.

I hear people who talk about how they struggle with ‘turning off’, that they need a ‘digital detox’, that they are ‘addicted’ to their smartphone.

There are people who professionally produce content and post on social media which fills our timelines with content we want to consume. (Not forgetting the bots that do a fair more than a chunk of social media positing). And by consuming the content, we are then almost driven to comment in some way – or at least offer a ‘Like’.

And as we read and see how everyone seems to be living their lives, we find ourselves in the quandary that I can’t have time to do nothing, because then I can’t live up to an unsaid expectation that I have to keep up with everyone else.

Which is quite exhausting.

And leaves no time for self-care.

Or allows us to justifiably do nothing.

Sometimes, we just need time for ourselves, and that’s ok.

Sometimes we need to sit with our thoughts, and then discern if we need to talk to someone about our thoughts or not.

Sometimes we need to do something on our own and experience things from our own point of view.

Sometimes we need to not be with others so that we can appreciate the time we do have with them that much more.

Such is the state of things today that people feel that being on their own isn’t a good thing to have available to ourselves.

And I’m not advocating for loneliness or solitude. Because we know that those things are social ills and cause much ill-health.

I am advocating that when there is nothing to do, perhaps we should just allow nothing to happen.