What do you believe is absolutely true about how people learn? The answer to this question is an example of a learning principle. Some people believe everyone learns differently. Others believe we learn by doing. Still, others believe we only learn when we are ready to learn.
There are literally hundreds of learning principles and theories. What’s critical is that what we believe drives how we design, deliver, and implement training. For example, if you believe everyone learns differently, training becomes very individualized and self-paced. Different forms of media are matched to suit different learning styles. If you believe we learn by doing, training will have a great deal of practice, simulations, and on-the-job coaching.
In any case, selecting a set of learning principles shapes how companies and organizations train their workforce and develop their leaders. Making the best choices about learning principles will have a direct impact on the effectiveness and cost of their training. It also will have an impact on how fast employees learn.
I’ve found significant value in having a small number of learning principles that are clear, powerful, and universally accepted. With that said, this is the starting point of the discussion about Learning Paths.
The concept of Learning Paths is rooted in three basic learning principles. Most people find these principles very intuitive and in line with their own experience. However, they are not always reflected in how people train others. Let’s take a look at these three principles in more detail.
Learning Is a Process Not an Event
Is it possible to learn how to sell in a three-day workshop? Can you learn to play tennis in one lesson? Can you learn how to operate machinery safely after five hours of safety training? You could learn some of the basics or have a general understanding of what to do. However, you’re a long way away from getting good at any of these tasks.
What’s missing? It might be the hours and hours of practice. It could be coaching from an expert, or it just might mean days of real-life experience. In a sales workshop, you might do a half dozen role-plays. This doesn’t replace the 50 to 100 calls with real customers that it’s going to take to ingrain those skills and concepts. One lesson can’t substitute for the thousands and thousands of tennis balls required to get good at tennis. Lectures, classes, e-learning courses, and more all have their place, but they are only a part of the story.
A learning process is the sequence of all types of learning activities that lead to the desired level of performance. The learning process is a sequence of formal, informal, experiential, and social learning activities from start to finish.
When you start to think of learning as a process, new opportunities open up. You can begin to treat it like any other process and apply what’s known about process improvement. These techniques specifically focus on driving out time, waste, and variability. These are not concepts traditionally associated with training, but they are very powerful and relate directly to the cost and effectiveness of training.
Knowing and Doing Are Not the Same
There is an old saying that “knowledge is power.” In reality, being able to use that knowledge is the real power. Knowing and doing are not only not the same, but they are miles apart. Knowing how to sell and actually making sales is very different. Knowing the answer to questions about a product is one thing, being able to answer those questions for a customer in a positive and timely manner is completely different. Knowing the trends in the marketplaces is vastly different from building and implementing a plan to take advantage of them.
All too often, training and education have been focused on knowledge acquisition. It’s easy to teach, and it’s easy to test. Lectures, classroom, Webinars, and e-learning are simple ways to impart knowledge. However, it doesn’t mean any of the training will transfer to the job. The real challenge of training is to make that leap out of everyone’s head and into action.
When you adopt the principle of “knowing is not doing,” it changes how you design, deliver, and implement training. First, the training objectives read more like performance statements with actual numbers and measures. Instead of using words such as know, understand, comprehend, and aware, you see words such as operate, sell, produce, plan, and lead. Knowledge objectives can be met in an e-learning course, but performance-based objectives are met through a long process that includes extensive practice, experience, and feedback.
With the Learning Paths Methodology, instead of learning objectives, we use a proficiency definition that describes the required level of performance in terms of how good, how much, how fast, and how safe. In other words, quality, output, speed, and safety.
This principle dramatically changes how learners and training are evaluated. Instead of multiple-choice knowledge tests, evaluation is done in two ways. First, performance on the job can be directly observed by an expert. “Experts know it when they see it.” Think about evaluating agents in a call center. You can observe and hear how they interact with customers and how they handle tough questions. You see how they navigate from screen to screen and how quickly they find answers.
Training Should Be by Design and Not by Accident
Most learning happens on the job and informally after the formal training ends. Almost every study I’ve ever seen says that informal learning is between 70 and 90 percent of all learning. Unfortunately, most of this learning is haphazard, highly unstructured, and filled with trial and error. It’s different for everyone, so it creates a high degree of variability. As a result, some learners will take a long time to become proficient, and some will never get there.
Most informal training leaves the realm of the Training department and happens outside of their reach or control. It’s managers and supervisors who need to do this training and see that it gets done. However, managers often say they don’t have time to coach their people. They also aren’t prepared to do it even if they do have the time. As a result, this informal training or coaching is done by another employee who is even less prepared.
When training happens by design rather than by accident, there is a structure and process to makes sure learning is complete, effective, and timely. For example, companies frequently use joint calls or ride-alongs to train salespeople. New salespeople are simply sent out with a more experienced salesperson or sales manager. However, there is usually no process or structure to these joint calls, so it’s uncertain what will happen. As a result, they often fall into the category of waste.
Excerpt from Chapter 3 of “Learning Paths: How to Increase Profits by Reducing the Time It Takes to Get Employees Up-to-Speed” by Steven C. Rosenbaum. For more information, visit:
http://www.learningpathsinternational.com/lpbook.html.
Steve Rosenbaum is founder and CEO of Learning Paths International. He has more than 20 years experience leading successful Learning Paths initiatives for major corporations in manufacturing, sales, health care, finance, and leadership.
