Social Tools: Organizational Learning's Uber

I had my first Uber service recently in Austin, TX.  It was nothing short of remarkable.  A few glitches (mostly self caused) but a far better experience than I have ever had in a cab. It was during this ride, and conversation with my driver William, that I made a few connections between business, learning and needs. It's got me to thinking that if content, context and connection is king, queen or some other type of royalty, then the Platform is God.

Uber, a platform, connects wants with resources. Nothing new.  But it is probably the most understandable idea of a platform for people who don't understand or think about platforms all that much. A service that connects a driver and their car with a passenger and a need. Simple.  The success of Uber (and other share platforms) is all predicated on the idea that 1. resources are plentiful (cars and drivers) 2. demand is greater than the current model of supply can support and 3. convenience and simplicity reigns supreme. It is also a great example of a modern paradigm shift for people who don't understand or think about paradigm shifts. For the better part of a century city dwellers couldn't see it any other way. This monopoly, like all monopolies, had some stress, like:

• If you needed a ride, you had to hail a cab
• hoping the driver speaks your language,
• hoping the vehicle doesn't stink 
• hoping you get to your destination safely,
• hoping you get to your destination quickly,
• hoping the cost was fair.

Sound familiar? Just swap out the word taxi for L&D or HR. 

These same criticisms have been levied against each for years but never so loudly as today. L&D and HR have long been the organizational learning taxi service, monopolizing organizational learning for far too long and supported by organizational leaders themselves like cities support taxi services; establishing a Learning Department has been default.  For the better part of a century employees couldn't see it any other way. This monopoly, like all monopolies, had some stress, like:

• If you needed to learn something, you had to hail L&D.
• hoping they speak your (business) language,
• hoping the (learning) vehicle doesn't stink, 
• hoping you get to your (learning) destination,
• hoping you get to your learning destination quickly,
• hoping the cost (your time and attention?) was fair.

But technology, and specifically the same technology concept (sharing) that launched Uber and others is changing this paradigm of the learning taxi service. People in organizations, through technology, are not waiting for the next course to be developed, instead they are using social platforms to building networks upon and connect with people and content regularly, and just-in-time as both are plentiful. Employees are not standing by waiting for the next resource to appear hoping it will meet their needs, they are actively seeking them out - rating them and their content as easily they do an Uber ride experience (for the benefit of others). The learning vehicles, like Uber's cars, vary in size and type. The drivers of the content, like Uber drivers, are not specialized but are knowledgeable and can offer quick value.

People are discovering the power of social tools to get just the information they need at the moment they need it. The power is in their hands to build strong networks and choose their own hassle free vehicle. In a recent Washington Post article about how Taxi services were uniting against Uber and other ride sharing services was this statement: "[Uber] threatens a taxi industry that critics say has been slow to modernize and keep up in a technology-driven era." 

Sounds familiar? So when people question the power of social technology to change the paradigm of learning, just ask them to look at Uber and the paradigm of transportation. 

Embraceable Me

Yesterday Tracy Parish challenged me to do a #Blimage. If you are unfamiliar, this is an interesting and fun approach to inspiring a blog post. It was introduced by Steve Wheeler and friends and the original post can be found here. Tracy wrote an excellent post based on an image of a cemetery titled Learning While Wandering. I enjoyed that she looked at learning very personally versus professionally and focused on the importance of reflection. Like all #Blimage challenges the object is to relate the image to learning and so she provided me this Star Wars snap from Flickr. 

First, let me begin by saying I am not a big Star Wars guy and fortunately I was able to immediately move past that part and look a bit deeper into the image (as if Star Wars Lego people can really be looked at deeply). Maybe the intent of the image is a Father-Son relationship or maybe it is to portray the comfort of hugging of a doll? For me, with the challenge of "learning" in mind, I see the "importance of the smaller self".

The world around us seems to be all about The Big. Big announcements (watch how products are rolled out), Big technology (The LMS and Enterprise Social Network platforms to name a few), and Big data (analytics, measurement). Yet at an individual level we long to get smaller. Our personal lives merge with our professional ones as humility and being real is how we make sincere connections. Social technology puts the the large planet in our pocket. We find personal satisfaction in tighter, more focused networks where the work gets done. And real power is in being a node in these networks not in being the know it all. 

This picture reminds me that our smaller, less imposing persona is what breaks down barriers between people and putting our smaller selves front and center is what matters most today.

Conversation Brings Change, Naturally

I've been thinking about Media Naturalness theory for some time. Well, more often it just pops up because it's not like I've invested all than much effort into it. In short, if you're not familiar, Media Naturalness Theory is the idea that human beings were built for face-to-face communication over thousands of years of evolution. Our gestures, voice inflection, eye movement, body language all contribute to giving and receiving information. Therefore anything that shifts away from this "medium" impacts our ability to effectively communicate. There was a lot of study around this with the introduction of email. To learn more I found this Wikipedia article a pretty good place to start.

Being more into the media rich New Social Learning (i.e. learning through social technology), I haven't put much stock into Media Naturalness theory but I had a bit of an epiphany at a recent meet-up here in Syracuse. I'm a member of a local Bloggers Facebook group. We comment and exchange posts as well as ask for advice, etc. I was wanting to meet some of these fine people in person and pick their brains about blogging and why they do it, how they do it, tools, approaches, etc. I think I'm somewhat of an outlier in this space as I don't blog for money, I do it for myself (although if the occasional speaking gig arises I usually don't say no), my topic is a bit fringe, and I'm a bit of a purist in that I focus exclusively on my writing/reflecting and do nothing in regard to researching tags, SEO and monetization.

Meeting virtual friends face to face is always pleasant and since we didn't engage much in long discussions in our Facebook group the opportunity was there to sit, have a beer and just hear each others voices if nothing else. Upon my arrival I moseyed up to a trio and introduced myself. After exchanging pleasantries I was asked by one, Joe I believe, "So what is it you write about exactly?" Without missing a beat I rattled off something like "I write about organizational social. How increasing transparency and openness can improve performance. You know, how social tools can be used inside an organization for sharing and collaboration."  As I sputtered out my final words I realized, but didn't feel compelled to add it in, that I said nothing about learning. I hadn't even whispered the term that has defined my career for over 20 years now. No ID. No elearning. No L&D. No training. Nothing.

Blogging has a unique pressure that really only strikes you when you hit "publish." Even as comments to your posts come in, you can pause almost indefinitely and ponder a reply. But in the heat of a face-to-face conversation, with real human eyes cast upon you and ears finely tuned, your response is unrehearsed, visceral and probably the most honest you can give. I write so much on my interest, beliefs, observations, efforts, etc that I really haven't even given conscious thought to the transformation I have been undertaking. In reflecting on this moment over the past week I started looking back at my conversations online, my blog posts over the past few months and years and the pattern was obvious; I have slowly shifted away from being L&D-centric and have been seeing the whole organization's role in impacting individual performance. Learning is a part of the work not apart from it. And thus learning is mostly indistinguishable from the other activities that make up the work we do, it is an unconscious underpinning. No longer does learning, in the formal sense, dominate my thinking and practice any more than communication, human interaction, culture, leadership, and trust.

Change happens one conversation at a time or in this case, change is made obvious through conversation. And why not - we've been learning about others and ourselves this way for thousands of years.

From The Business of Learning to The Learning Business

As you may have heard, about 3 weeks ago I joined the eLearning Guild and will be working closely with the learning community and onsite events. It's a small step in my employment journey but a large leap in my career. So, how's it going so far? Really good. I am getting immersed in the processes and people that make up this organization and contributing immediately where I can. I'm also being very patient with myself so I can better ensure that I have a good understanding of all the connected parts.

When I was first approached by the Guild I was of course intrigued and flattered. The eLearning Guild is a leader in this space, the "learning" space. I've been a member for years and spoken at several of their events. Of course when I speak, I speak about how I've used social technology in the organizations I've worked for. Therefore joining the Guild could be seen as a bit of a departure for me as it is the "eLearning" Guild after all. A colleague even remarked, "You're like the social guy, I wonder how this will be received?" But I and others saw it differently; not as a departure but more like a merger.

eLearning today does not mean what it once did and the Guild gets this. In the early 2000's the eLearning Guild answered a growing call for more information, ideas, technology and approaches in the then budding eLearning space. eLearning is continually transforming and today, driven by the interest and practices of the community, it can no longer be seen as just courses and classes delivered online. Due to expanding consumer technologies, mobile devices and the advent of Web2.0, elearning has become ubiquitous. The community conversations around eLearning have shifting rightfully to be more about Learning than just the vehicles that deliver or augment it. 

Web 2.0 in particular ushered in a populous movement across the Internet and has given rise to a New Social Learning. Growing learner autonomy and global interdependence has hastened the decline of a dependence on traditional learning approaches. The new Social Learning however will not be the nail in the coffin for traditional elearning or training, nor should it be, as formal learning is still very much needed. What the reinvigorated (or new) Social Learning has done is bring balance to the beliefs and practices around learning and put formal in its rightful, more limited place. Social learning is forcing a community conversation about how formal learning must improve its quality and impact to remain relevant.  

The Guild was designed as a platform to encourage this and other conversations where members can openly share their thoughts and ideas and then the Guild can communicate this back through research, resources, and events for the community. Community and conversation are at the core of the eLearning Guild and because of this they (ah hem...) we are positioned to help hasten the changes needed and help organizational learning to keep up with the speed of business.  

I'm excited to be more a part of this conversation and to be able to bring my own practices and beliefs about learning to the Guild. I look forward to taking part in the larger community, working with you all, and helping to better see and be the future of organizational learning.

Money Talks, Bullsh*t Walks

Ah the tentative marriage of Democracy and Capitalism. When times are financially good, incumbents win. When times are tough, the public moves to "throw the bums out!" In many organizations L&D is the long serving incumbent and as we know when organizational times get tough, L&D seems to be the first "bum" to get the boot. But what if the organization is profitable and division, departments and individuals can choose L&D services or not because they are a real cost (or investment)? 

In my organization we have charge codes for all activities. Simply put, if we don't charge our time on a customer project, we don't get paid (the org that is). To ensure that time and money is accurately recorded we have also had specific charge codes for non-project related activities, things like travel, training, and internal events. However this changed in 2015. Employees (about 80% of our workforce) are now required to charge any training event time directly to their project (vs. a single universal corporate code). 

Hold the phone! So any training taking 15 minutes or more outside of ones work will be charged against the profitability of the project? We may see managers and employees alike scrutinizing every offering and analyzing the impact of every attended event! Requests to L&D to build elearning, host a webinar, deliver a face-to-face event will plummet! Employees will now be cautious when selecting a training class over say a job aid or an informal coaching opportunity! Many employees will even forego an event altogether, instead promoting the idea to their peers that those in the know need to share openly and frequently!  

I couldn't be happier!

This can only make our organization stronger in my opinion. Better connected, thoughtful, continuously learning, and with everyone focused on the finances. Pragmatism can take it's rightful place on the learning throne! Unnecessary training and time away from doing the work will be on the decline. The question of "how can we get this information/skill without taking time out of work?" will be murmured throughout the organization. Now we may have a real opportunity to help people embrace workflow learning. More social approaches to knowledge sharing can thrive in these environments not because of some stale executive mandates to use an ESN, unconvincing presentations on loosely related industry comparable statistics re: social and informal learning, lukewarm peer encouragement efforts, or god forbid gamification tactics. No, now it's in using the model of business, it's economics, supply and demand, it's because people get hit in the wallet that behavior changes! 

At the end of the day, the bottom line is what matters and the fatter that bottom line is, the better.  Caveat Emptor! 

Social Inception

Have you seen the movie Inception? It's a fantastic sci-fi film where people infiltrate other people's subconscious while they sleep and remove information or, in the case of the title, plant an idea. When the person awakens, they think the idea is their own.

Now I do believe that the same idea can spring up independently from different people in different locations at the same time. Historically speaking, you can see that Pyramids of various sizes and constructs appeared all over the globe by different civilizations in or around the same time where the people had no contact with each other.  However time and space are no barriers anymore. As more and people find their voice online, begin sharing their stories, experiences, and ideas, an unintentional form of "Social Inception" can occur. When we engage in social networks we accumulate many ideas from many sources. Some can be fleeting, like those seen briefly in a Tweet. Others are deeper like those in articles, blog posts or videos and of course conversations. For me, I recently wrote about change happening one conversation at a time. The gist of my post was that we can just cut through all the fat about social media technology barriers, it's really as simple as helping people ask their internal questions out loud to those who are "connected" - Things like "where do you find the time?" "how did you start?" "How has it helped you?", etc. Good idea? Maybe. Was this my idea? I'm not so sure now. 

When I wrote it I was like, this is an interesting thought, I wonder what others would think? Flash forward to today. I'm scanning some favored Tweets looking for something in particular and I see:

It got me to thinking so I re-read the article. I was left with two thoughts. 1. This is brilliant and 2. Did I steal this concept?! 

Well, no, not consciously, not completely, and not with any intention to do so. I have always been very careful to sing the praises of the trailblazers (not sure that's a good term but I'm not a fan of the word Thought Leader). I vigorously read and promote the works of Jane Hart, Harold Jarche, Charles Jennings and many others in the learning/social learning space... including Euan Semple.  But here, over 115 days ago, he wrote an article of a very similar title to mine. Did I read this 115 days ago, process it internally, experience a triggering event and spew out my own interpretation as something really original? Did Euan plant more than a seed in my mind? Is this more common than I think?

Today information comes at us so fast, influencing our thoughts and practices in positive ways. We consume so quickly that even when we have trusted networks through which we have information curated the lines can blur between what is ours and what is others. Our thought, other's thoughts, our practices, experiences and reflections all blending together and in the end attribution is practically impossible as you walk away thinking... "This is an interesting thought, I wonder what others would think?"  

Well, then this is all I can offer - my mea culpa moment. For starters go read Euan's article here, as mine pales in comparison. If you can only read one, go to his.  Going forward, in addition to continuing to recognize the ideas of others in my posts and presentations, I'll revisit my Personal Knowledge Management (PKM) strategy and tools, and I'll continue to add to my blog roll as it serves as a great list of those who's work I find inspiring. These people continue to influence my thoughts and practices and I guess, as long as I keep them upfront and getting the attention they deserve, maybe my unintentional imitation is a sincere form of flattery. 

What ideas do you have to create a buffer against unintentional Social Inception?

L&Ds Business Is Not In Driving Social Business

I'm becoming more convinced that organizational efforts to help people build social networks and personal knowledge management skills should not involve L&D any more than the Accounting department. And it appears it not just me. Sam Burrough and Martin Couzins recently co-led a MOOC on Social Learning and asked the question in a final Tweetchat: "What role should L&D play in Social Learning?" which for me is a small one. Additionally, in a recent Tweet, JD Dillon made the point that in organizations, many are really doing similar things:

However, I think James Tyer put it best in his blog post titled "Who Owns Organizational Learning? You." and I encourage you to read it.

My take? As social tools become more commonplace many people today are already (unconsciously) building networks and have developed processes (undocumented) to manage fluid knowledge without much assistance. These people may not be as effective as they could be, or will be, but the way to learn this is not through training which arguably L&D still looks to as the first choice. What people need is to be more conscious of their behavior and then they need encouragement to make their tacit knowledge (processes) explicit for others. This should not really be exclusively L&Ds charge, which organizational leaders tend to default to because when the word "learning" is uttered all eyes tend to turn to L&D. 

Social learning is structureless, the opposite of formal learning. Social transcends the traditional organizational boundaries of departments and divisions. It knows no hierarchy or roles. To help social tools and behaviors to be more a part of worker's activity, it must simply become more a part of the worker's work. Learning the work is done by doing the work and this happens best within the work itself not outside of it where L&D typically sits. 

My thoughts on this were further cemented by Dion Hinchcliffe's recent article in ZD Net "The Growing Evidence for Social Business Maturity". This article highlighted the move of organizations from social adoption to adaptation (of open, collaborative work). It spoke of the importance of organizational culture, the significance of executive commitment, business partnerships with operations and IT, goals and KPIs as keys to progression. It was all about the business, the business leaders, the use cases, ambassadors, CoPs, and community management. There was no direct mention of L&D... but for an implied mention when speaking of training - but it was more specifically termed "viral training"; Helping people use the platform's features and functions peer-to-peer. This would be a significantly minor role for L&D, especially if the tools are intuitive as the should be and even then, motivated folks figure the complex out.

Today there is much focus on trying to convert learning professionals to new understandings and practices using social tools and encouraging social behaviors. This is a mistake in my opinion. Many learning professionals don't engage or understand the practices any more than any other organizational roles - why assume they will be best suited? Connecting, communicating, curating, etc are not exclusive to a single department. The learning of effective social practices and tools is best done socially; through observation, experimenting, feedback and conversation. This will take time and mistakes will be made of course but I think less control is the best path to longterm success. It's a higher up decision that patience and trust are to replace command and control. So render unto L&D that which is formal and render unto the entire organization the social efforts that truly surround business execution. 

Shortening the Social Tool Learning Curve with Open Office Hours

We strove from the onset to make the technical part of social networking as easy as possible and really modified our ESN platform to focus on the basic elements of social; community, collaboration and sharing. No frills, no unnecessary functionality. Our strategy has been "grease the wheel only when it squeaks," meaning that we will present functionality and features when the needs arise.  Even with a Simple is the New Black belief, an ESN is still foreign territory even for regular users of open tools and platforms. There is a learning curve for some especially when it comes to settings, notifications and the creating of streams to be more laser focused on the conversations they want to be a part of.  In addition to video demos and job aids being available in the platform itself, we would be naive to think people would naturally seek those out as their default learning action. We know people are much more apt to give it a try and then pop their heads in another's cubicle and ask for assistance. It's human nature to do first, ask questions later.

Early on we launched a series called Friday Features Feature and tagged it as #FFF in the platform. These 20-25min informal webinar events happened around lunch time where people could register in advance and set their calendars to attend. Very informal with a single objective highlighting the "how to" of a certain feature but with significant emphasis on the "why to." My Performance Specialist, Nona Gormley wondered aloud if we couldn't take this a step further, to make it even more convenient for our workforce as this has always been my battle cry: limited (learning) friction on the workflow. Her suggestion was to make it possible for anyone at anytime to reach out and have somebody walk through a feature or process. From this the idea of Open Office Hours was born.

Using a combination of Join.me and an internal conference line, I set up a 6 hour window where my screen was being shared (showing our ESN) and the conference line was open. No registration and 3 simple steps. Below is the invite.

From 9:00am to 3:00pm the lines were open.  We had 3 callers/observers attend in our first effort with specific questions about settings and other features. In some cases the questions were beyond my understanding of the tool's capabilities but it led us to explore together, in the open. Humbling to some extent but I think it was also quite humanizing to the attendee, as it makes things a bit less intimidating when someone like me who has success with social tools reveals that he doesn't know it all. This took me back to the point I was making in my post Learning Through Inexperts, that learning with and through even those muddling about can be beneficial to build community understanding.

By Snowded CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

To sum up, technology is logical, people are not. People are inconsistent and emotional. So in terms of Dave Snowden's Cynefin model, when environments are complex, such as organizational ones, sense making only happens in retrospect. So the efforts to enable and support people using social tools can't have a rigid strategy but require more of a flexible 'Probe-Sense-Respond' process.  For me this means to try something, see how it works and either expand it, or move on from it.

An Open Office Hours approach is just that, and although only 3 took advantage this time, it's far from a failure and more likely something we will tweak and try again soon.

Practice Makes Permanent

James Tyer and I co-authored this post to share that we are hosting a workshop in Orlando on March 24th at the eLearning Guild's Learning Solutions 2015 conference 'Kick-start Your Personal and Organizational Social Learning Journey'. We have created the agenda based on our experiences developing and supporting personal and organizational social learning practices. The workshop has a simple premise: 

If you don’t practice social, you can’t support it.

Why? Social learning is natural, but the addition of social technology adds a layer of complexity for many. Unfortunately, because of the technology used to extend and expand social interaction, the conversations frequently turn to be about the technology rather than learning. Personal social practice is challenging as it requires an openness that may feel uncomfortable. On top of this, if you haven't developed successful practices, you can’t support others to develop the same. 

How can you make sense of all the information from vendors and consultants? What really works, or doesn’t work? There is no one-size-fits-all answer and social learning is not, as many claim, the solution to all organizational performance problems.

Our workshop is meant to help you find your own answers. Split into two parts, the morning workshop is about your personal practices; in the afternoon it’s about extending these to your organization.

We will draw upon our own experiences to help: stories of success and failure (about 50-50 it always feels!). We invite you to take a look at our agenda and we’ll answer any questions you may have before you sign up.

Morning:

• An introduction to digital literacy and fluency and why our changing world requires a new mindset for all (including L&D/HR).

• Forging your career - finding your purpose, learner autonomy (we can’t depend on organizations to build our skills any more), and mastery

• The internal and external barriers to personal social practice

• Identifying the current state of your network(s)

• Participating in online social learning events

• Reflective practice: blogging and working out loud

• Building, growing, and sustaining your personal networks

Afternoon:

• Understanding the barriers to others developing a social practice

• How social practice fits into newer L&D models: 70:20:10, performance support

• Understanding your organization (business or purpose) and culture

• Communicating value to your peers and leadership

• Identifying and empowering your key organizational partners

• Some starting points: not just adding social to courses

• Nurturing your "trojan mice" and social coaching

• Organizational roadblocks

Post-Workshop:

A significant component of this workshop actually follows the workshop. We aim to continue our conversations afterward in a format decided by the participants, checking on each others’ progress, encouraging new social habits and sharing stories, resources and ideas. 

Let us know what questions you need answering or what you would change to make it more valuable to you!

Of Social Tools And Toys

"Twitter is for morons and b-level actors." 

I remember reading this in a Newsweek article in 2009. Funny thing is five years later I find many still believe this, and why not? Traditional media and late night talk show hosts do a wonderful job of highlighting only the harmful and the humorous. But what they don't know is how powerful this and other social tools are too many people for learning and growing through networks.

This got me wondering about who, how many and what in regard to social tool use.  Might there be a 90-9-1 use of social media?  If you don't recall, the 90-9-1 rule is where 90% of networks are made up of the equivalent of virtual voyeur, 9% contribute periodically, and the golden 1% create all the content that the lurkers and contributors consume or add to. 

I wondered then, when it comes to social tool use, do we have a comparable breakdown?

90% actors

9% marketers

1% makers

The 90%

No doubt social tools are a narcissists dream, where everyone can get their 15 minutes of fame. Traditional media does well to point out the sensationally bad behaviors of individuals and blames the medium as much, if not more than, as those making the blunder. These majority users aren't morons, as they still widely use social tools to connect and learn, yet much use is for telling their personal story with all it's comedy and tragedy displayed for the world to see. 

The 9%

Most businesses only toy with social technology. These "9%ers" build social brand promotion campaigns, sterilizing their customer "engagement" and then push so hard for ROI they excrete their humanity in the process. The hemorrhoids, of course, are too numerous to count. These companies rarely seem to get "it" right, but when they get it wrong, they get it really wrong; enduring black eyes for the silly games they play. Their half-baked approaches get chewed up and spit back in their faces like when they hijack a hashtag to sell a dress in the midst of a shooting or get into pissing matches with unhappy customers for the whole world to see. Who's the moron?

The 1%

The minority however are those getting the greatest value. They are using it in strategic ways that bypass old models, as one group's toy is another group's tool. All their activity is happening under the radar of the status quo; not much mainstream press for their success. Through networking, sharing and collaborating, they are silently growing skills and knowledge. They are finding unique ideas, challenging content, and brilliant minds through open sharing and humility. Each of their engagements is a stretch assignment, a mentor meeting or a chance for large group reflection. They are making progress through relationships. 

Of course we can't be pigeon held to one area. Just like 90-9-1 isn't a hard and fast rule where we are locked into one of three convenient lables of lurker, contributer, or creator. We are all simultaneously actors, weaving our tale. We are marketers, building our brand if we see it or not. And we are all makers, from time to time bringing value to others.  But I do think, through seeking and sincere interactions, the minority today don't just retain their humanity with these tools, they learn more about it and how powerful and rewarding it is to be real.

Learning in 2024: Same As It Ever Was

The eLearning Guild posed the question of: "What will learning look like in 2024?"  Of course I could be snarky and say well, learning is learning and that's an internal process that's been the same for thousands of years... but I know what they mean - How will the external influences on learning be different in 10 years.

On Friday they sponsored a Twitter chat (#LRN2024) which got me thinking of how difficult it is today to predict what will be in 10 years let alone in 3 months.  However, regardless of technology and methodology changes, I simply see learning going the way of work.

As the way we work changes, learning will follow suit or better -flow more within the work. Work will continue to change of course due in great part to technological advances and that technology will ultimately automate many tasks. The automation and outsourcing of work will continue and create increased productivity but also reduce the need for certain jobs.  The jobs that will be needed will require more emphasis on cognitive skills.  So rather than look ahead, let's do look back. And not just 10 years, humor me and think of where we have been as a species in say the last 10,000 years.

Thousands of years ago, during the Agricultural Revolution, I suspect the way most everyone learned was through Observation, Experience, Conversation and Reflection, what Charles Jennings has referred to as "Real Learning". This learning was individually and independently organized, and happened in the work. The tools for learning were the tools of work. Learning was informal and social, an outcome of the work itself. Later, in the Industrial Revolution, mass production was the work model. People were appendages of their machines and like mechanical parts bolted on, people were bolted to seats for uniform training - which was then mirrored in the academic settings. The products of industry were identical and so was the education. Organized learning shifted to formal and consistent because the work was consistent. The formula was still the same but the mixture was different - Experience, Practice, Conversation and Reflection was mostly managed by others. The time for each dictated and directed by instructors not the individuals.

So again, the work is changing. Rather than consistent and uniform, the real work of people will be inconsistent and growing more complex. Mass production remains but with fewer people and more machines. Machines will handle the simple rote work. The work that requires training, slightly more difficult, is increasingly being outsourced and likely too will be automated. The work then that will really propel organizations tomorrow is creative work, involving critical thinking and problem solving. Fast changes requires fast learning and that can't be supported by classrooms or elearning courses, it can't. The learning to support this will be highly independent and individualized. It will again heavily favor social and informal. At it's core learning will always remain with the same elements of experience, practice, conversation and reflection but like during the Agricultural Revolution, I see it more happening in our work and through and in the tools of our work. This will be critical, as the work of the future will be many people coming together for short periods and disbanding,  a swarming economy. The outputs or products and the collaborative knowledge will be equal in value as "learnings" will not reside in a summary document but in an ever evolving portfolio of various content types to be tapped into and continually added and edited.

Learning is still and will always be an internal process. What will change most will be where the dependency resides; no longer on the organization outside the work but once again upon the individual in their work.

The Space Between Us

In a recent webinar by Luis Suarez (@elsua) he asked the question of the attendees of what the biggest problem was in organizations today.  He stated that it was employee disengagement.  I do agree that it's a problem but I believe this disengagement is more a symptom of a greater problem. That problem being space; the space between us.

Space is created naturally or deliberately. It's also physical and psychological. We have space when organizations expand; space exists in time, geography, and culture. We have space when a workforce is geographically dispersed, no longer can we see the many we work and interact with. Space exists when hierarchy places people in rank and file as an artificial pecking order is created and this space between us defines who we are and how we interact.  Finally, our departmentalized functions create silos of work where space exists between them. And those functions of course are controlled by people who decide on how much space. 

When space exists we can choose to fill it constructively or like a vacuum, it just gets filled like silt settling after a heavy rain. Regardless, it never stays empty for long. Hierarchies fill the space with the written and unwritten. Policies serve to reinforce space between people by having somewhere to point to rather than someone to have conversation with. Unwritten protocol is that which maintains space by authority and creates a false respect based on fear. 

Disengagement then doesn't create space, space creates disengagement. 

What can be done? The opposite of disengage is to engage and to engage is an action of people and their work being drawn together. If we want to eliminate disengagement, we must first create the opportunities to engage, to fill the space.

Social media is that opportunity in organizations that bridges the geographic divides, opens up silos of work and can level hierarchy so meritocracy can flourish. There is no question it can do the job - but it can also be an empty vessel if not strengthened by the substance of meaningful conversation, dialog and debate. If social channels swell only with courtesies to avoid conflict, content that reinforces positions, or sharing to show off, then the space not only remains but becomes more permanent.

There are far more pressing questions to be answer in organizations than "how do we measure this?" Or "how do we get people to use this?" when considering social media in an organization.  We need to first be able to answer "Who are we?" And "who do we want to become?"

Openness: the agent of inclusivity

"How do we get people to ... ?"

I hear this all the time in my work on organizational learning initiatives and social tool use is definitely no exception. I've heard it so much that it's just became unquestioned white noise - until I heard it today, and something just felt wrong.

Worse than the directive of "get" is "we." The we here speaks of only those involved in the exclusive conversation and nobody else.

Us and them. Owner and worker. Manager and employee.... Have and have not.

If we start with a goal of changing people's behavior without those people in the conversation haven't we just set the stage for manipulation and disempowerment? Won't we just be playing the traditional role of power broker reinforcing all that is wrong with hierarchy?

Here's the thing. Don't we instinctively speak differently when we know everyone is listening? If everyone could at least hear the conversation, be in that space (if they choose to listen or join in is on them), I suspect the "how do we get people to..." questions wouldn't even be uttered or better yet, would be phrased in a very inclusive way. How could they not?

More community, less control.

...Of These, Isn't The Greatest Modeling?

I found myself inspired by the #wolweek (work out loud) movement that took place across the Web a few weeks ago. The concept is relatively simple; share what you're doing, make the tools of your work visible and open so others can see, comment, and contribute.  This means working in more public "spaces".  So if you followed #wolweek on Twitter, many people blogged about their work, successes, struggles, thoughts, questions, etc.  Still others really opened the gates and let people see materials and prototypes. 

I shared the concept internally in our ESN. I said: 

...Organizations have the same opportunity to do this and reap the potential rewards within their own walls.  In a small way we do this already without thinking. We ask questions of others in and outside of our ESN such as Who has a certain certification? Where can I find a form? What's the best way to...?  In each of these questions we really reveal a little about our efforts. Imagine then if the work that the answer to these questions fed was just as visible? Would we have to even ask as many questions anymore?

I didn't get much of a response to the idea.

So....it's been said that L&D is ideally positioned to lead organizations in Social Learning, Curation and Personal Knowledge Management (PKM); supporting people in learning how to learn independent of courses and classes.  Of course doing this means L&D must let go of formal approaches and instead serve as coaches, models and guides. Most important in my opinion is the modeling. It really is the least intrusive action where others can see, reflect on, and if done right, feel they can approach to have meaningful conversations. 

A little back story first.  L&D in my organization has been moving (slowly) on an initiative to help create a mentoring culture.  The idea is ultimately to 1st help new hires acclimate to life and work here by not only having material resources readily available but a real human resource to lean on.  We always knew this how how people really get up to speed in an organization and the idea of finding a "buddy" has always been haphazard... left to the individual to figure out.  What if this was just something we helped everyone with? What if each new person came aboard and in addition to their team and manager they had another they could just tap into. Having an expert available, get a question answered, and a few tips on "how it really works here" goes a long way.  Can't this model scale we thought? And so through research inside and out, we began the slow process of developing a multi phase program to not only to help new hires but also look to weave a program like this into the career path as well. Imagine someone desiring to be a manager and having to show that they can first successfully mentor another? Isn't that the main job of a manager, to develop his/her people? 

Behind the scenes, in our own silo, we talked, researched, developed, reviewed and shared all of this. And I thought it time we eat our own dog food (for lack of a better expression) regarding openness and transparency and WOL.  We needed to practice what we preach and take what has been a young internal L&D initiative and make it very public - wild hairs, half-baked prototypes and conversations included.  It was a perfect way to model open collaboration in the workplace and build proof of concept, help others see how it can scale, and ultimately open the door to conversations on how to get it going in their own areas. Our once hidden work and process is now available for all to see and comment on... and some have. In the end people outside our area can add much value by sharing their own experiences in mentoring with us, maybe post a few good documents and ideas we should consider in making this a reality.  Maybe they will do nothing at all but "lurk" but at least now they are in the know and invited to the conversation.

We're Going Social! (It's not what you think)

That title would imply adoption of a social technology but really that is only part of our strategy. We're "going social" as in placing people and connectedness at the heart of our performance ecosystem. It means we are focused on supporting and fostering relationships in a way that will better connect people for learning and working with and without the support of technology.  Simply put, our goal is: to create a connected and continuous learning organization. Here is where we are focusing today:

1. Mentoring

We are dubbing it "Sponsored Mentoring" because it is formally supported and designed as opposed to only encouraging it. The vision is ultimately to create a mentoring culture and if successful the formal scaffolding can be taken down.  Initially we are focusing on new hires in more of a buddy system. Eventually, as career pathing matures, mentoring will be a key activity in the journey. Along with this we hope to reinvent the IDP to have a more autonomous, transparent, and less pejorative leaning.  The 702010 forum has been invaluable in inspiring our approach. We have been careful to monitor current beliefs and approaches that exist in the organization. Melding these with our growing understanding should help the mentoring system gain a stronger foothold, or so we hope.

2. On Boarding

As noted above with Sponsored Mentoring, we are starting with new hires and working as closely as we can with current systems, approaches and understandings. Our managers tend to excel in project management but can struggle with people, motivation, and development. Time is not a luxury for them but we discovered in our research that managers and new hires were not on the same page in the first few weeks. Many discrepancies existed which contributed to inconsistent on boarding to systems, tools and team mates. Taking a page from The Checklist Manifesto, we crafted our own tool with great input from managers. Easy to use and respectful of unique department needs, it lays out a day-by-day, week- by-week schedule of suggested tasks and activities for managers to use in on boarding. The idea was to build consistency, reduce frustration, increase productivity, and welcome a new hire in a way that didn't create more work for the hiring manager. It's a simple device really and that is all we really wanted here. If following the sequence, the hiring manager is guaranteed to have more contact with their employee who can often be remote and that is a step in the right direction.

3. Resources
Resources over courses is the motto.  The majority of our workforce comes to us skilled up. And although its hard to break stakeholders of the "We Need Training" mindset, needs do arise. We are approaching it situationally through performance consulting with a training is the last option approach. Many of the processes and tools reside in the work and minds of our most senior people. Working with them as advisers, L&D guides them in the development of performance support tools to aid people in the work they do as opposed to taking them out of it.  Many of the resources come in the form of job aids, PowerPoint decks and other traditional tools. These "pull" user-generated resources form the backbone of the "University Library" but we are aware that most don't automatically turn to a library of resources for assistance, they turn to people first. Which leads me to number 4.

4. Sharing
Yes, our ESN plays a significant role but it is a solution among many that aligns to the vision of "Social at the Heart." Our workforce is geographically dispersed so the need is there to connect to the remote corners. We know the journey will be long to have the Network supplant other methods of communication such as email and conference calling. And in its infancy we see the network is highly cooperative but not very collaborative. The platform is robust but we were able to customize and remove features and functionality to focus on really one activity - sharing. We are modeling, guiding, reinforcing the act of sharing what one knows, what one needs, and what one is doing. Some groups have been using the tool for more project work and as they grow in expertise and see the value we continue to promote them.

I like to think we are making progress...

What's next?

• Curation
• Personal Knowledge Management

Helping our work force to develop into content curators and hone their broader but related personal knowledge management skill is key but will ultimately be the most challenging and longer-term. I think a more open and connected workforce at the organization, group and individual level will make some of this activity more apparent to each over time.

Mentoring, on boarding, resources and networking are the start. All serve to make the organization smaller. Our contention is that if we bring people closer in all ways then technology truly serves to support not lead people in their learning and work.