Learning Styles

For several years learning professionals were writing and reading about different learning styles. The talk was about how different people learn more effectively from different styles of content presentation. In more recent years some educators are saying that learning styles are not a factor. They are saying that all learners can learn from good presentations regardless of the modality.

In a January 9, 2019 Inside Higher Ed article Greg Toppo, a senior editor at Inside Higher Ed., discusses the topic of learning styles.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/01/09/learning-styles-debate-its-instructors-vs-psychologists

“But Daniel Willingham, a cognitive psychologist and professor at the University of Virginia, said the categories themselves ‘haven’t been shown to mean anything.’ Nonetheless, recent surveys have found that about 90 percent of Virginia students believe in them.”

In this article Toppo also says there are learning professionals who very much support the concept of different learning styles.

“Richard Felder, a professor emeritus of chemical engineering at North Carolina State University who has written in support of learning styles, said psychologists have spent decades working to debunk the theory. ‘On the other side are literally millions of people who have used learning styles to design instruction’ and to help students become better learners, he said.”

A quick search of scholarly articles about learning styles produces a host of articles. In recent years there have been many learning professionals who have written to deride the concept of learning styles. At the same time there are many others who have written scholarly articles based on the theory that different people learn differently.

A good number of learning professionals continue to develop and deliver learning products designed to deliver instruction geared to different learning styles. I am not sure there is any harm in doing so, even if it is true that the learning styles theory is invalid. I also believe that the learning style theory is a comfortable concept. We believe we understand what needs to go into content for each type of learner. We can include graphics and pictures and so forth for the visual learner, audio for the auditory learner, and materials that can be handled for the kinesthetic learner.

However, I believe that a good learning professional, using whatever methodology works for them, will provide what is needed for learning to occur. It is the design of the learning product as well as the instructor’s delivery of the content that will provide the learner with what they need to grasp the content not the learner’s perceived learning modality.

I am perplexed at how much time and effort is being put into arguments for and against the concept of learning styles. I understand that the research that has been reported is that learning styles do not have merit. I think it is time for researchers to design some new studies. Learning events that make use of different modalities to deliver the same instruction should be developed. In addition instruction covering the same content using various modalities should also use different instructors’ preferred delivery styles.

Each of these instructional units should administer the same evaluation instruments to each group of learners. Comparisons of the outcomes should be informative and might help us to understand if there are indeed differences, or if all well designed and well delivered modalities lead to effective learning outcomes.

Different Methods for Different Learners

People are different; at every age they have different responsibilities, goals, knowledge and skills, financial resources, and families. And that is to say nothing of all the other aspects of the human race that are different. I believe we are definitely heading in the right direction as we customize learning opportunities for the populations we serve. However, in some cases we are hampering learning. Some organizations want people to learn on their own time at home. Homes and home responsibilities are not the same and handicap some learners.

Public Schools in Massachusetts, where I live, are following the “common core” concept.

http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/

“The Common Core is a set of high-quality academic standards in mathematics and English language arts/literacy (ELA). These learning goals outline what a student should know and be able to do at the end of each grade.”

This makes me worry. While there are good aspects to this practice there are likely as many bad results that will impact students both now, while they are in school and later, as they enter a world that doesn’t have a common training algorithm. I also know of many smart students who are getting bored and tuning out.

However, I’m hopeful that people who do the planning for students will recognize that different people learn differently. For example this Forbes post talks to the importance of focusing on the individual rather than the one-size concept.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeshumanresourcescouncil/2018/09/24/seven-learning-and-development-trends-to-adopt-in-2019/#547d336e104b

“Training in the past that focused solely on content was “one size fits all,” which made it difficult to engage with the learner. Today, we must zero in on the learner, including his or her experience, work environment, performance and technological fluency, to create a training program. Any effective training program is one developed for the individual and offers social activities to share their experiences.”

I think the key concept that will bring new and interesting results is the importance of meeting the needs of each individual. However, we need to be careful in how we implement our programs. If we aren’t careful, we could find that although we are getting good results, the financial impact could derail the good work.

Like with any other learning event, it is important to begin by identifying all the end results. End results are all of the things that any individual will need to be able to do on the job related to the training needed. Once you have listed all of the activities needed then, as with any other learning event, identify all the things they will need to know. It is very important to identify what they will need to do before you identify what they will need to know. The “doing” informs the knowing.

When customizing training for specific individuals, I recommend that you develop all the instruction in mini modules. All of the good practices that you have used to develop learning events apply here. The only difference is that you will be developing multiple mini (and perhaps micro) modules that are complete onto themselves so that they can be pulled together in a learning event customized for an individual.

Everything that has worked in full learning events applies here. Use whatever methodology you believe will be appropriate to deliver the learning experience to the individual. It may be that you want to use Gamification for some lessons and some learners. You may find that other techniques will work for other learners. The important concept is that one size does not fit all and you must customize to meet each learners needs. But, stay focused on the end results needed and what needs to be known to achieve those end results.

So yes, different people learn differently and if we want everyone to get as much out of our events as possible, we owe it to them to customize our output. While it can be challenging to constantly adapt and change a learning event to meet individual needs, I believe the resulting learning is well worth it.

Another Way

I have found that when technical professionals are tasked with developing instruction, the hardest thing for them to do is learn how to write learning objectives. In this post I suggest a method for communicating what the learner will be able to do without writing those dreaded objectives. Even better, using this method will allow you to translate the end result of this exercise into objectives that are painless to develop.

Rather than beginning with writing statements of objectives, begin by writing questions that you want a person who took your training module to be able to answer. These questions should ask something about every area that you plan to cover in the module. Keep in mind as you do this, that we are now talking about covering small, discrete units of training in an instructional product.

 

https://www.shiftelearning.com/blog/numbers-dont-lie-why-bite-sized-learning-is-better-for-your-learners-and-you-too

 

“According to the Journal of Applied Psychology, learning in bite-sized pieces makes the transfer of learning from the classroom to the desk 17% more efficient. Here’s why microlearning is more efficient than traditional longer-duration courses:

When bite-sized learning content is easily and readily accessible, learners can take it at their own pace, wherever they are, and most importantly, when they are “ready.”

Because bite-sized courses are more focused, learners don’t have to clutter their memories with irrelevant information. This makes retention easier.

Learners have to digest only small chunks of information. This makes comprehension easier without spending too much effort.

Because microlearning content addresses only 1-2 learning objectives, courses, on an average, yield 4-5 learned takeaways.”
…….

“Cut to the chase. Do away with the history, the background information, and the theories. Deliver the “how-to” right away. Remember, your learners are looking for just-in-time solutions.”

 

If however, you are not developing a small unit then I suggest you partition out each area that you will be covering and develop questions for each of them. You may want to develop questions for just the first section and proceed as I recommend below before moving to the next segment of your learning product.

Develop a list of all the questions that you want somebody to be able to answer when they complete the training. In some cases your training might require a demonstration rather than an answer. For example if you are training someone in how to drive a car there are many questions that you will want to ask them to answer but you will also want them to demonstrate their ability to drive the car. In this case questions can be developed that say something like show what you will do when you get into the car, show what you will do when you want to turn left, show what you will do if someone darts out into traffic unexpectedly, etc.

The end result of developing these questions will provide you with an outline of what you should include in the learning materials.

You may find as you develop the learning materials that you think of additional questions. That is OK; add them to your list. Keep at this until you believe you have listed all the questions that someone will need to be able to answer and you are ready to begin to develop the instruction. It is at this point that you can stop and translate the questions into objective statements.

Examples:

• Describe how to develop learning objectives from a set of questions designed to cover the content of a learning module
• Explain what needs to be done to make a legal left turn

Hopefully this technique for developing objectives will help both you and your learners.

Welcome 2019!

In the last several years there have been many new discoveries in the field of learning as well as some old ones rediscovered. As I continue to say, this is a very exciting time to be a learning professional.

Below I present some quotes from two posts. However, I would also like to recommend that you read the full text of Josh Bersin’s article below. I often quote his publications, but in this case there is so much in this post that I want to share that I’m suggesting that it be read in full. I believe it would be worth your time to do so.

https://joshbersin.com/2018/06/a-new-paradigm-for-corporate-training-learning-in-the-flow-of-work/

In addition to what Josh Bersin’s article covers; the post below talks to research findings which show that better retention continues to be attributed to learning in small segments. Hopefully during 2019 practice will align to what the research has been telling us for a long time. It is time to move learning out of the classroom. It is time to move learning events from passive to active participation. Let’s forgo asking learners to sit in a classroom, or remotely at their computers, listening to a lecture augmented by multiple slides. We now know that passive participation leads to poor retention.

As learning professionals, it isn’t enough to develop and deliver training events. In my opinion, we must also keep up on the research and then apply what has been validated by research findings. In many cases this involves working with management to make them aware of the latest research and how it can be applied within your organization.

https://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/15-surprising-discoveries-about-learning/

“A learning technique that maximises the brain’s ability to make and store memories may help future students, say UC Irvine neurobiologists.

Christine Gall, Gary Lynch, and colleagues found that mice trained in three short, repetitious episodes spaced one hour apart performed best on memory tests. The mice performed poorly on memory tests when trained in a single, prolonged session–which is a standard K-12 educational practice in the U.S.

It’s been known since classic 19th century educational psychology studies that people learn better when using multiple, short training episodes rather than one extended session. Two years ago, the Lynch and Gall labs found out why. They discovered a biological mechanism that contributes to the enhancing effect of spaced training: brain synapses encode memories in the hippocampus much better when activated briefly at one-hour intervals.”

https://www.edgepointlearning.com/blog/future-of-corporate-training-2019/

In this blog, the author Corey Bleich, presents 10 emerging trends that he sees for the coming year and beyond. Here are two that are in line with what I have seen in other professional publications.

“Adaptive content delivery

Artificially intelligent content delivery that adapts to your employees’ corporate training needs is also emerging as a way to personalize and individualize training.

This type of training (gamification being a good example of adaptive content delivery) predicts learner behavior to keep training relevant, interesting, and fresh.

……

“Microlearning

Microlearning continues to play a huge part in the future of corporate training, providing employees with easily-digested bites of information or instruction that can be immediately applied to a task or project.

This trend doesn’t seem to be slowing down or going anywhere any time soon.”

I look forward to seeing how these trends play out in the coming year and what other new trends will help us all to learn and grow.

Developing Certification Exams

There are many factors to consider when implementing a certification exam program. The benefits of a well-developed and implemented program are many, ranging from well-prepared employees to increased profits due to a knowledgeable team. The tests themselves are most often a revenue generating process as many different populations can seek to be certified. But getting there requires multiple steps to ensure a quality exam.

It is critical to ensure that each step in the development process is well planned and executed. Below is an overview of steps that need to be taken to ensure a quality outcome. There are other steps that are followed by different development programs. However these are the major steps and processes.

• Begin by identifying the end results needed. What do the people who receive the certification need to be able to do.
• Once the end results have been identified, the steps needed to produce the end results have to be documented. For example, if the test covers driving different types of vehicles (perhaps cars, trucks, motorcycles, golf carts or others) include all the steps needed to drive each type of vehicle. This is known as a task analysis.
• Next a blueprint is developed. A team of experts most often develops the blueprint. The experts who develop the blueprint generally include practitioners and others who have expertise in the area. The blueprint describes each component of the task analysis. The blueprint identifies each area that will be tested by the exam. Most blueprints include the number of items for each objective that will be included on an exam. They also usually assign a weight to each topic area. Multiple examples of templates are available on line. Here is just one example.

https://www.nursingworld.org/~4acd24/globalassets/certification/certification-specialty-pages/resources/test-content-outlines/familynp-tco.pdf

• Once the blueprint is developed it needs to be validated by other subject matter experts (SMEs). Note that it is not expected that one person will have expertise in all areas covered by a full exam.
• At this point the item writing process begins. The very first step is to agree on the blueprint. Most often there are changes. Additions and some deletions can also happen, as topics may not be appropriate for the specific exam, may be covered on another exam, or might make the exam too long. Also there may be changes to the percentages and other edits before the team agrees on who will develop which items and the number of items each person will write.
• Handouts for the types of items to be included on the exam (for example multiple-choice, matching), how to write items, and what should and should not be included in an item are generally passed out and reviewed before participants begin writing the items. There are often handouts to explain how to input questions into the item development program used for item input.
• Here is an excellent set of guidelines for exam writing

http://www.cedma.org/blog/certification-exam-item-writing-best-practices

• It is important to let item writers develop just a few items (about three) and stop so that their items can be reviewed for feedback. Generally letting them write for no more than 30 minutes works well. It is also a good idea to review with the full team so that everyone hears the feedback. For a large group, the exam facilitator may want to just review one item written by each developer. Have them post their items in a way that allows for only the facilitator to see them. The exam facilitator should choose items to review so that different areas that need attention can be discussed.
• Once the first review is completed it is time to let the writers write more items. The exam facilitator needs to continue to review the developers’ items so that if they are making errors the facilitator can let them know what needs to be fixed. Usually a recommended rewrite helps. If the facilitator doesn’t know the subject area, they can use a gibberish word that will allow for the needed concept to be explained.
• After a period of time (usually two hours works) take a break and then begin to review the items. The facilitator can provide feedback on test development techniques and the developers need to provide feedback on the content of the questions. If there is agreement that the question is good, then it can be approved. If there isn’t agreement, the team can try to repair it. But in some cases it is better to delete the question, as time is often a factor in getting the number of questions that are needed and approved completed in the allotted timeframe.

Once the development workshop is completed the questions are sent out for review. Each question needs to be reviewed by multiple reviewers. Also each reviewer should only review a limited number of items to ensure the confidentiality of the exam.

That’s all for now. A future blog will cover additional information about certification exam development. Please let me know if you have comments or questions.

Confessions of a New Yorker 4

4th in what now is a not-so-Occasional Series

So a funny thing happened this past month. After returning from a wonderful 3^rd trip to NYC I was invited to go one more time. Relatives now living in other places were coming home for a visit. Lucky, lucky me; I gladly accepted the chance to see relatives and to once again be a tourist in my “home town.” This trip allowed me to visit some new places as well as old favorites. But I am only going to talk about places I haven’t talked out in previous blogs.

Highlights of this trip included:

We went everywhere by subway. We also did quite a bit of walking, usually several miles a day. As we walked we often stopped for food. We felt invited in to various establishments by wonderful aromas or by seeing people walking out eating something we instantly needed to eat.

We visited the Delancey Street Tenement Museum. We watched a movie about people arriving in NYC looking for work and a place to live. We also participated in a tour, discussion, and a visit with a historical interpreter who portrayed a young girl from a large family that all lived in three small rooms. She told us how much she missed the home she and her family left, how all 10 of them lived and slept in the small apartment. The actor portrayed a young woman who actually lived in that apartment with her family. Her parents slept in a small bed; she slept on a rug and her brothers slept on the chairs, couch and the floors.

One morning we walked through Prospect Park in Brooklyn. It was Labor Day weekend and many, many people were taking advantage of one of the last week-ends before fall sets in. The weather was a bit warm but no one, including us, seemed to mind. There were several types of kid’s ball games, there were people setting up grills and others were playing frisbee. The most interesting site to me was a food fair. Many, many different international foods were for sale. But, no where was there a vendor selling hot dogs or hamburgers. All the food looked very fresh and delicious. We really enjoyed our walk.

We went to the Brooklyn Aquarium that was jammed packed with people. Lots of big tanks with lots of different fish and excellent signage explaining what we were seeing and which species were in danger of extinction. One exhibit had tanks on each side of the hall as well as a tank above the walkway that connected the tanks on each side. We saw fish swimming across from the different tanks. It was an interesting exhibit. 

I loved getting deli on the Lower East Side. I had a bialy, which is a crusty roll with a soft center filled with toasted onion. I have lived in lots of places across the country but have yet to find New York style bialys anywhere else.

When I lived in New York City they charged for traveling the Staten Island Ferry between Manhattan and Staten Island. Today it is free and many people were on the ferry with us when we crossed from Manhattan to Staten Island and back again. It was getting a bit dark when were travelled on the ferry but I sort of got a picture of the Statue of Liberty. As Lady Liberty came into view the rails filled with people, many of them speaking languages other than English. I very much enjoyed this experience. 

It is very true that NYC never sleeps. One long day after sight-seeing we had snacked all day and weren’t ready to eat again until after 9:00 PM. We walked down a street and had our pick of several different eateries. We choose a Vietnamese eatery where several people were eating both indoors and outdoors. As we were eating our excellent meals other people came in to either eat there or pick up take out.

All in all, as usual I had a wonderful time. However, as much as I love New York City I also love where I now live and very much looked forward to coming home.

How We Learn: Applying Methods for Learning Complex Games to Other Learning

Throughout our lives we learn many different things in many different ways. We may learn to choose a pair of shoes because they fit without hurting, or we may chose a pair based on how they look or based on where we will wear them. Most people won’t wear tennis shoes to a wedding and won’t wear dress shoes to a tennis court. People learn which foods they like through trial and error, or perhaps they try it based on a recommendation from a friend, or because it is being promoted as a new taste treat, or as something that is not only healthy but also tastes good.

All these learnings are usually much easier for us then learning an academic topic or a work related activity. We have looked for, and continue to look for, new and better ways of imparting knowledge and skills to learners. I wonder what the difference is in how we learn work or academic topics versus topics related to our avocations.

Over the years I have observed many different people learn how to play complicated board games. These games have many strategies and rules that need to be learned in order to play effectively. In thinking about how some successful gamers learn new games, I began to wonder if the methods they use might not be similar to effective learning strategies. In particular, they use iterative processes while learning and playing that also work in learning technical topics. I wonder why the game learning is usually successful but we are still looking for better ways to impart better learning outcomes in other learning environments. What am I missing?

Gamers read, listen to, or watch a presentation of a chunk of the rules. They then begin to play the game according to a portion of the rules they have just studied. They discuss what they have learned and how they applied their learning. They work to play the game as effectively as possible. They discuss all the nuances of the game, all of the complex rules, and all of the gotchas.

Looking at complex games, there are many options for how a player can interact with the situation and with other players. The game usually includes multiple rules, different outcomes; different paths to the end of the game, and of course multiple problems that can be encountered. It is very much like learning how to perform a new process or other aspect of a job role.

Most often new game learners will rely on the multi-chapter, multi-page, or audio or video guide or rulebook that comes with most of the more complicated board games. In other cases a well-versed player will teach the rules to inexperienced participants. Players often spend several hours-long sessions studying the game rules and testing parts of the game. They begin to play while often consulting the rules or notes they have taken while learning the directions. There is usually a great deal of discussion as they work their way through the game.

Even when one or more players have previously played the game, there are questions and discussions and reference to the game rules. Because this type of game is complicated, consulting the rules often results in all the players gaining more understanding and being better able to effectively play the game – even those who have previously played the game.

The game master or game instructions present the opening situation. Players are given the information about the game objectives and any other information needed to begin playing. As they begin to play, the players identify points of confusion and questions they have about the game rules and they frequently reference the rules. They continue this process until the game is completed. They then review all steps and assess changes needed for next game play session. They modify play as needed to better meet the rules. In some cases they modify the rules to meet the groups preference. They know there are no game police but rather rules that can be modified to meet their preferences.

Comparing this process to learning situations, I believe one key difference is that they use a process similar to formative evaluation of instruction to ensure the game materials meet their needs. Yes, their needs are fun where the needs of learners in business environments are to be better able to perform their job roles. I think we might try to use this game learning process in our evaluation of learning materials.

Formative evaluation techniques are rarely used in business environments for many valid reasons. The foremost is that learning products change frequently. Because the products and services being offered change constantly the training needs to also change at the same time.

I propose that if a modified formative evaluation process was used when the training is piloted, that we could produce better instructional materials. I suggest that, just like sitting down to learn a game, a team of evaluators should sit down with the training materials and follow the steps that gamers use. These techniques might produce better training events right out of the gate. I think it would mean adding a day or two to the pilot but in doing so we could end up with much better products. Let me know what you think.

There is always a but…

As we move into 2018 it is good to think about the progress we have made in the last few years with regard to how we develop and deliver learning products. For example, I believe the process of chunking learning is now being widely used. And I believe we have truly made some very good progress. But, there is always a but… we still need to learn about the application of our learnings to different instructional situations.

One of the best instructional situations I have ever experienced was when I learned some intermediate skiing techniques. This was before I knew about chunking and I didn’t realize just how effective it would prove to be.

http://theelearningcoach.com/elearning_design/chunking-information/

“Chunking refers to the strategy of breaking down information into bite-sized pieces so the brain can more easily digest new information. The reason the brain needs this assistance is because working memory, which is where we manipulate information, holds a limited amount of information at one time.”

The ski instructor told our class of 6 people that he was going to teach us 3 techniques and only 3 techniques but that at the end of the session we would be able to execute them on any terrain. As the session began I thought something to the effect of, I paid for a full lesson and I was going to come away knowing only 3 new techniques. After all, in every other ski lesson I had taken the instructor had covered much more than just 3 techniques. But, I was there on the mountain and was not about to leave.

The instructor explained each technique to us. He also demonstrated each technique. Then one by one he had us do the first technique. He watched us and gave us feedback. We all of course heard and learned everything he said to the other people. When we each showed proficiency he moved to the next technique. He then had us practice the three techniques together.

I was so wrong about that lesson. It was the best lesson I have ever had on any topic. I was able to perform each maneuver on every terrain I tried to do it on. But, here I go with a “but” again. What if I was a more proficient skier and was trying to learn something a bit more advanced. Would just 3 steps be acceptable?

What if I was an experienced programmer and wanted to learn a new language? Where should my instruction begin? How many steps should be covered in each lesson? Should the mini lessons I take cover the same number of concepts as I move into more advanced topics?

Does the age of the learner make a difference? We know younger learners often learn more quickly than older learners. But, should the lessons for younger people contain more material or should the amount of content be dictated by other factors?

Should the type of learning factor into our decisions? Various psychologists have defined and named different types of learning. Should the type of learning factor into how we design our learning events?

Do our learnings for one field apply to another field? Do our learnings map to all populations? Do recent college grads learn at the same rate and same proficiency   level as experienced professionals?

I don’t know the answers to these questions. But, I hope that as some us begin to apply our new findings, we will begin to find answers. When we learn more about how people learn in different situations at different levels we can add to what we know. And hopefully, those of us developing new learning materials can use these findings to develop new (and improved!) learning products.

Social Learning: Is it new or has it been around all along?

Creators of learning products have, for the most part, successfully transitioned from almost exclusively delivering learning through classroom events to multiple methods of delivering instruction. I am pleased to see that people are now investigating better ways to deliver the good aspects of classroom learning through other methods. Yes, we have heard the complaints about the classroom-less methods that we are currently using to deliver training. Today most learning professionals agree that learners learn most effectively when they actively participate and receive feedback. Newer learning products don’t always do this well. But integrating social learning into learning products is being recognized as a way to offer some of what is missing from some of today’s training offerings.

 

Altman, Ian. DEC 5, 2017. The Top 10 Business Trends That Will Drive Success In 2018. Retrieved from https://www.inc.com/ian-altman/the-top-5-business-trends-to-watch-in-2018.html

 

“Social learning is the process of learning through peer social interaction. The most common example of traditional social learning is the chance encounter at the workplace water cooler. Two or more people run into each other, share ideas, and walk away knowing a little more in the process; this is social learning.”

…

“The most successful online learning programs include a digital community where participants can share their experience, ask questions of each other, and engage in social learning that goes beyond the course curriculum.

 

As companies adopt more social learning, so too will they adopt tools that support mentoring and coaching that leverages the internal expertise organically.”

While I am very much a proponent of social learning, I need to add a word of caution. We need to find ways to validate what we learn from social learning. I believe we need to develop methods for testing what we have learned so that we can add this knowledge to what we can reliably use.

There are still many things that need to be explored and tested, as we move forward in developing better learning products. I believe social learning is a move in the right direction. However, we have always had social learning. What we perhaps now need to do is to find ways to ensure the information imparted is correct and up-to-date. We also need to be able to measure the effectiveness of what people learn through social learning methods.

Years ago, many companies would bring new hires into the company and put them through weeks-long extensive training programs so that they could learn about the product and services they were hired to support. As part of my role as a consultant I would speak to learners who had graduated from these programs to see how they were integrating into the organization. What I often heard was that it wasn’t until they were actually in a role that they understood how to apply what they had learned. This is an area where we likely need to improve how we measure the effectiveness of both our training events and also the effects of social learning. Perhaps we can encourage learners to develop questions that will help them integrate what is covered in the learning events. Once they have answers to the questions, the questions and validated responses can be added to existing FAQs or new FAQs can be developed to support these learning events.

Social learning is helping to bridge formal learning and peer-to-peer learning, which I believe will lead to better learning and better performance.

 

All Together Now

As learning professionals, it is important to constantly monitor what your organization is doing and what type of learning events they will need to be successful. While you may not consider yourself to be in a sales role, you still need to be tuned into what your business organizations are doing and what they are planning to do. It is important for you and your colleagues to figure out the type of learning events the organization will need to be successful. If you only function as an order taker and wait for your client organizations to tell you what they need, it is likely that you will not be giving them what they actually need.

You need to be plugged into each organization that you serve. You need to get copies of their plans, marketing materials and hiring needs, as well as anything else that will inform you of where the organizations will be going.

In years past, once the business directions were identified, the training team could work with key individuals to develop training and development products that met the organizational needs. Today things are different. Instructor-led training events with learners all in the same place is rarely an option. Learners are frequently scattered all over the world. In addition, each learner is likely to need to develop a different set of competencies, knowledge and skills. Learners will also likely want or need to consume their learning at different times and in different ways.

While training events need to meet individual employee’s learning needs, events also need to ensure that the employees learn how to apply learnings as a team. Very often, a product or service offering requires the involvement of different corporate organizations. Sales needs to sell the product; support needs to service the product; marketing needs to make customers aware of new offerings and how they will meet their needs. Most successful organizations have representatives from all these internal organizations working together to meet customer needs and business objectives.

I recommend that as you move forward into 2018, your training organizations develop connections to members from each business function to develop mini-modules that together meet customer wants and needs for your product and service offerings. I believe it would be a good idea to have a training team with members from all organizations – for example, sales, services, marketing, finance and so on – that meets regularly, just like product and service teams. This training team should discuss the learning needs both for internal folks and customers regarding new and existing product and service offerings. This will allow for the development of mini-modules of training. These modules should include information from all organizations whose work relates to the product. It should also include service offerings that the organization wants customers to be informed of, and of course to purchase them as well.

While corporations that develop and sell services and products may have different internal groups working on their offerings, the customer likely has multiple organizations using the vendor’s offerings in different ways in different places. Developing mini-modules of instruction that can be consumed by different people and in different ways for different purposes will go a long way towards helping us improve the effectiveness of our learning offerings.