Learnlets

Secondary

Clark Quinn’s Learnings about Learning

Organizational Learning Engineering

28 June 2016 by Clark 8 Comments

Organizational learning processes – across L&D, Executive Development, Leadership Development, and more of the roles in HR and talent management – are largely still rooted in both industrial era models and myths. We see practices that don’t make sense, and we’re not aligned with what we now know about how we think, work, and learn. And this is a problem for organizational success. So what are some of the old practices compared with what we now know?  No surprise, I created a diagram (a table in this case) representing just some of the tensions:

OldNew2

I won’t elaborate on all of these, but I want to make two points.  The first is that I could’ve gone on; both in breadth and depth.  That is, each of these unpacks with many implications, and there are more ways organizations are not aligned with what’s know about how people work.  The second point is that there are known ways to address these problems.  Systemic ways to get the combined benefits of more effective output  and more engaged people. Not surprisingly, treating people in ways that reflect their inner nature is more rewarding for them as well as more successful for the organization.

I’ve argued in the past that we should treat learning design seriously, with the depth of rocket science applied as a learning engineering. Similarly, we should be basing our organizational learning designs – our strategies, processes, and policies – on what’s known about people. That’s not being seen often enough.  It’s time for organizational learning to move into the information age, and start performing like professionals.  The action is at the coal face, not in the comfort zone. There’s good work to be done, and it’s time to do it.  Let’s go!

 

Comments

  1. Neil Von Heupt says

    28 June 2016 at 5:43 PM

    Hi Clark,
    I’ll be honest. I’m finding the proliferation of old vs new models/diagrams/diatribes unhelpful. Sure, there are elements in any L&D endeavour that can be improved but this positioning of people and/or businesses who haven’t embraced “modern workplace learning” as “old” works against “what’s known about about how people work” as well. They’re not going to embrace the new because they’ve been told that they’re old. They’ll embrace it when they see (or are shown) the value of the new, when those who’ve found it share their knowledge in ways that bring others forward rather than relegate them to anachronism.
    I’ve seen organisational learning constantly moving forward my whole career. I think that’s because it’s part of the DNA of L&D people to keep learning and questioning the status quo and bringing everyone else along with them (some more willingly than others). I’d like to see us thinking through how we can bring everyone along (relinquo nemo post) rather than just pointing out that they’re getting left behind.
    Neil

  2. Clark says

    29 June 2016 at 11:09 AM

    Neil, thanks for the feedback. I use other methods too: in my talks I talk about what’s now known, and the potential opportunity for L&D; in my book I not only call out the problems but cite examples and provide frameworks to move forward. Some of my posts provide guidance, and I also occasionally write posts like these, looking to be inciteful! It’s not mere chiding, however; I do think that folks need to see the delta behind much of what is currently in play and what’s now known. Still, we’ve been railing about these things for years now (look back to Rosenberg’s Beyond eLearning and Cross’s Informal Learning, for example), and the evidence is that change is happening much too slowly. Similarly the evidence from the ASTD (now ATD) data that I cite in the Revolution book, and the ongoing data from Towards Maturity, both point to a continuing gap. It pains me to see these missed opportunities (and, frankly, waste of org money), so I occasionally get frustrated. And I too see orgs moving forward, but I see others in, essentially, denial (ambiguity denial syndrome as I cheekily described it in my previous post :). I welcome thoughts on bringing everyone along, but I figure we should try all the levers, as there are a lot of forces opposed to improvement as well (c.f. vested interests). I get that change is hard, so I’m trying to use both carrots and sticks in provoking change. Heck, I’m available for those folks who want assistance, but to really change, first you have to admit you have a problem, and I’m not convinced all see that. Thanks again for being willing to call me out, and I welcome your suggestions of ways to bring all people along.

  3. Chris Riesbeck says

    29 June 2016 at 11:59 AM

    Seems like a fine table. I think proponents of the Old would consider a few rows mere “straw man” attacks (“learning is recitation” “we can get people to perform flawlessly”), but “inciteful” works for me.

    But let me argue that one New item really belongs in the Old column: “learning is doing.” Roger Schank has been saying lately “learning is conversation.” That makes more sense to me. Doing is critical, but limited unless embedded within conversation about, during and after the doing.

  4. Clark says

    29 June 2016 at 3:34 PM

    Good point, Chris. I would actually say learning is ‘action and reflection’ (I don’t believe conversation without action will yield learning either), and will need to update accordingly. And they would be straw men if I didn’t still see actions that reflect all of these! Thanks as always for the feedback.

  5. Neil Von Heupt says

    4 July 2016 at 8:01 PM

    Thanks for your response Clark, both in this post and the one that follows. There wasn’t any question for me about your positive contribution to the L&D dialogue, in one sense I wouldn’t have felt free to make my comment were it not for the broader context you create. It’s the proliferation of that polarisation that I’ve noticed over the last 12ish months that I guess I’m trying to address (here as well: https://divergentlearning.wordpress.com/2015/12/09/polarisers-fundamentalism-and-bathwater/). Whilst your voice on the issue is moderated by your other contributions, it seems to me that there are many who will take a poke at the laggers, an action I find curious given what we know about how people are motivated to change (and common sense even).
    In terms of how do we move people along that’s an interesting and big question! Perhaps one that’s suited to a few twitter chats, with the big players buying in so that the dialogue is broad. It’s easy to identify the problem, much more challenging to create a solution!
    I appreciated your willingness to consider my feedback/ideas, the mark of both a good L&D person, and according to Aristotle an intelligent one “It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” Neil

Trackbacks

  1. tensions of modern learning – Internet Time Alliance says:
    30 June 2016 at 12:04 AM

    […] Clark Quinn, my Internet Time Alliance colleague, has presented a quick view of old and new ways to address organizational learning engineering. Clark created a table “representing just some of the tensions” between what we still do and what we now know about learning. I have appended these new practices with examples and elaborations of what Clark has presented. […]

  2. My pick of the best posts of June 2016 | Jane Hart's Blog says:
    1 July 2016 at 2:19 AM

    […] & 9 – In Organizational Learning Engineering, Clark Quinn produced a table representing just some of the tensions between what L&D (Old) […]

  3. Anders Pink | How A Distributed Team Can Share Knowledge And Stay Smart says:
    5 July 2016 at 2:36 AM

    […] intelligence. Smart teams are efficient are seeking, sensing and sharing new information. As Clark Quinn puts it, “the room is smarter than the smartest person in the room.” That’s true […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Clark Quinn

The Company

Search

Feedblitz (email) signup

Never miss a post
Your email address:*
Please wait...
Please enter all required fields Click to hide
Correct invalid entries Click to hide

Pages

  • About Learnlets and Quinnovation

The Serious eLearning Manifesto

Manifesto badge

Categories

  • design
  • games
  • meta-learning
  • mindmap
  • mobile
  • social
  • strategy
  • technology
  • Uncategorized
  • virtual worlds

Blogroll

  • Charles Jennings
  • Christy Tucker
  • Connie Malamed
  • Dave's Whiteboard
  • Donald Clark's Plan B
  • Donald Taylor
  • Harold Jarche
  • Julie Dirksen
  • Kevin Thorn
  • Mark Britz
  • Mirjam Neelen & Paul Kirschner
  • Stephen Downes' Half an Hour

License

Previous Posts

  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006

Amazon Affiliate

Required to announce that, as an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Mostly book links. Full disclosure.