Make work a better place for all: Interview with Author Julie Clow

For some reason, Julie Clow asserts, we associate work with suffering.

It sounds awful, doesn’t it?

But it’s true, at least to a large extent. Work is not supposed to be fun, so if you have a job where you enjoy what you do, somehow you feel like you’re cheating the system. But, as Julie argues in her brilliant new book, The Work Revolution, we don’t have to suffer anymore. In fact, by simply looking at our outdated work rules and updating them to guiding principles that suit our new working reality, we can, in fact, change the way that work is done and ditch the drudgery.

Who could argue with that?

Okay, so no one, really. At least, in theory. And, to be fair, Julie and I have long existed on the same wavelength. [Full disclosure: Julie was my manager for two years at Google, and I helped her with the book, serving as her “second brain” and “editor that looked for excessive use of quotation marks.”]

But this particular wavelength seems to really resonate with the GenY/Millennial folks in particular. As someone who is relatively new to the working world (about six years, to be exact), I wanted to get Julie’s take on how someone who isn’t an executive or even a manager can approach her concepts, and when it makes sense to quit your job and find something better.

I encourage you to check out this book and start thinking about what you can do to take responsibility for your work happiness! Stop suffering. Work doesn’t have to suck -- it can be fulfilling, exciting, and productive for all!

Cheers,
Sarah

More about Julie Clow:
All my life, I loved learning and school, so I followed an academic path and earned my Ph.D. in behavior analysis in 2000. I spent the first eight years of my career dutifully working in traditional corporate environments developing training programs and implementing organizational initiatives for various clients. Then, I joined Google in 2006 and everything changed. During my initial transition to Google, I felt the magic of freedom and autonomy at work, which inspired me to ask: if Google can create this environment, why can't everyone else? Thus, The Work Revolution was born.

I spent five years at Google focusing on team effectiveness, leadership, and organizational culture, primarily for engineers. I currently serve as the head of learning and development for an awesome, nontraditional mid-size investment management company in New York, NY, also chockful of software engineers and research scientists. You can frequently find me speaking at industry events and conferences. Connect with me on Twitter at @clowjul.

Instructional Design: Slow, painful death, or evolution? Part IV: Developing a consulting mindset.

(I guess it took speaking at ASTD to make me accountable to finish out this series. In case you’re new to my blog, check out parts I, II, and III first -- or you can just start here... For those of you craving my slides from my talk -- sorry, can’t share them -- I hit on many of the high points from the middle section, ID vs. OD in this post!)

If it’s true that no one wants to grow up and become an instructional designer or a facilitator, even grown-ups feel uneasy about becoming consultants. Consultants struck me as inauthentic program-pushers who responded with a canned line as soon as the last syllable left your lips. Imagine, then, my worry when I actually became one.

Once I overcame my gag reflex and accepted my new lot in life, I realized that, actually, consultants at Google were actually quite cool and I had, unfortunately, previously been exposed to scores of the bad kind.

Not you, of course. Other consultants.

Yet as I explored this ID vs. OD debate, it became clear that while there are many skills today’s ID must develop to stay relevant, there is one that is above all else. I believe in this particular skill so much that I volunteer my own time to teach it to our facilitators from the business and other Googlers in my broader group. But I value it more than that. I just launched a part-time apprenticeship program to develop this skill in eight of my peers. That’s right -- I’m building a bridge between my team’s work and the work of other folks in the learning function.

Yes, friends. I’m talking about developing a consulting mindset.

WHY, you ask, should I care about this skill? Not only will this a consulting mindset help you better serve your learners and bring a greater return to the business, it will make your work more exciting, engaging, and challenging and might open doors to many careers, both in this field and beyond.

It seems so simple, yet so few people focus on this. Seriously.

Why is this so difficult? It’s difficult because the skills that are required to be a good consultant fly in the face of many skills that are rewarded and upheld as the most important skills to have!

Let’s look at six ways that you can develop the consulting mindset:

Goal: Abandon the problem-solver mindset.
Solving problems is one of my favorite things to do. If I take any sort of strengths assessment, something around problem-solving (restorative on SF 2.0, for example) comes up. If I’m sitting across the table from someone who is experiencing a challenge on his team, my instinct is to start suggesting answers. I want to solve his problem for him!

This is incredibly unproductive. The next time this person has a problem, I won’t be there. And it’s the same for you. If a learner or a partner in the business has a challenge, you will not always be there to solve it. And -- trust me -- you probably don’t want to be there.

How do I do this?

When you realize that you are slipping into problem-solving mode, acknowledge it. “Wow, I’m going into problem solving mode. I need to focus on the question I’m asking instead of the answer.” Whether you do this out loud or in your head is up to you.

When I slip into this, I have to jolt myself out with something physical. Say I’m taking notes as someone is talking. I will actually write down “Stop solving problems, Sarah!” or “Listen and stop solving” over and over. Yes, I realize it might come across as a bit mental. But I have found that writing things down keeps it front-of-mind and doesn’t let me slip into my bad behaviors.

Still can’t crack it? If abandoning that problem-solving urge is still hard, reframe it so that the problem you need to solve is figuring out what the person across the table is thinking, feeling, or needing. Be curious and stay engaged with him or her. Challenge yourself to find the next answer or to go a level deeper.

Goal: Let your expertise go.
One of the shifts into a leadership role for some people is realizing that your expertise is not the only thing that matters anymore. Oh no Sarah, you might think. Our leaders MUST be experts! Maybe you’re right (and that’s a topic for a future post), but today’s leader must be more nuanced and walk a balance between two black and white options.
Not a CLO? No problem! You can practice by marshalling your expertise by deploying it in a more nuanced way -- only offer it when the situation or your learner would benefit from it!
How do I do that?

Recognize what other tools you have to use. Is it best to share a piece of knowledge right now or better to ask someone else what they think? It’s important to think of your goal for a particular meeting, course, etc. When in doubt, look to cultivate that knowledge in others first.

If you feel the need to share expertise, ask yourself, Why do I feel that I need to be an expert right now? What do I lose by sharing what I think? Get personal and reflect.

Change your language.
Language is a powerful ally as you shift to a consulting mindset. The same message delivered with different words might be received in very different ways.
How do I do that?
Ask better questions! Here are my favorites:

“Why?” If you ask nothing else, ask why. Ask it in a respectful way -- if you are at all flippant, they’ll know. Nothing beats genuine curiosity.

“Tell me more about x/I’m curious to hear more about...” Again, don’t use the word curious if you’re not actually curious.

“So I’m hearing you say... Reframing is a key piece of this mindset. This is something we’ve all learned at some point, but it amazes me how rarely people pause to make sure they’ve captured something properly. It is far more exciting to race ahead but we must be disciplined to make sure we hear what was shared and not what we wanted to hear.

“When you say Z, what do you mean?” Be precise with language. Do not assume that what you hear is what the person means. For example, if someone throws out a word like leadership or innovation, I want to dig in to see what that actually means instead of applying my own filter. It has amazed me how even within my own team definitions for these terms vary wildly. This alone can uncover why you might be facing challenges.

“That is really interesting/funny/odd. I’m really interested in focusing on Y.” The most challenging piece of listening is letting people say what they want while getting the information you need. Learn how to respectfully acknowledge something and then redirect the conversation. How do you lead a discussion without saying very much? More on this in a moment

“What’s your goal/ideal outcome?” In his book, Getting More, Stuart Diamond says it best -- in negotiation, you waste time by sharing what you think. You know what your goal is -- you need to learn what the goal or outcome is for the other person.

“What would that look like/How would you know you have achieved it?” Don’t assume you know what success looks like for someone else. Try not to apply your own biases and instead open yourself to someone else’s measurements, metrics, or signals of success.

Ask the right question at the right time.
It’s a conversation, people. It’s not an interview. I think I’m the only person I know who loves being interviewed as much as interviewing (side note: I love dissecting what people ask and then stealing great ideas!), so I have to remember to keep it casual and not become an interrogator! Focus on the right question for the right time and this will go swimmingly. Ask the wrong question? Watch out -- you’ll be in the weeds.
How do I do that?

Struggling to get someone to open up? Start with easy questions -- the “technical” domain is always a great place to start.

Avoid close-ended questions like the plague. We know this, but we still do it!

Avoid asking more than one question at a time. It’s paralyzing.

My shortcut formula for questions: They start with “how” or “why” and are eight words or less.

Observe, observe, observe.
This is nothing new -- so why aren’t you doing it? I’m so amazed when I watch people plow through a meeting agenda or a discussion and they don’t realize that people are uncomfortable! So many times what is unsaid is as or more important than what is said! Dual-processing (content + body language) is hard for some people -- so if it doesn’t come naturally to you, consider some short-cuts.
How do I do that?

Get to know the baseline. This is easy to do with people we work with every day, but much harder when you meet with a learner for 30 minutes. I can get a baseline in 2 minutes by doing my homework and learning a few simple things about someone. Think small talk is overrated? It’s where you get your baseline data.

Say what you (and everyone else) are thinking out loud. “I’m wondering if this is making you uncomfortable. Did I say something that didn’t resonate?” or “I feel like the energy has left the classroom. Is anyone else feeling this?”

Observe yourself. How do you react under stress? How do you react when you’re joyful? Experience those emotions and see how others react to you!

Reflect often.
I spend a fair amount of my time working with facilitators who have day-jobs (writing code, for example). What is the most important thing I can teach them? It’s reflection. I’m not always there with them -- how are they monitoring themselves? How do they know they’re out of their comfort zone? How would you know?
How do I do that?

Take 2 minutes to reflect after every conversation, course, interaction, etc.. I call it 2+2 -- two things that went well, two things for improvement. Then pick one to focus on next time. Yes, only one.

Ask for feedback from others. Reflect together. Make this a part of your meetings, your trainings, and any other aspect of your life.

Phew.
It sounds like a lot to develop, doesn’t it? But let me remind you -- moving towards this mindset is better for your learners and your business, not to mention YOU! Not only has switching to this mindset made me calmer and more focused on listening to my learners instead of proving myself, I have been amazed at how much more others are willing to share, to listen, and to open up to me -- and that’s pretty important in my role! It’s changed the way I approach conflict and has improved friendships and family relationships.
It’s not a silver bullet (don’t worry -- this series isn’t quite over!), but it is a critical skill. Developing this mindset forces you out of the black and white and teaches you how to think about and tackle the grey.
How have you developed a consulting mindset? What has worked for you? What do you think I’m missing here?

Cheers,
Sarah

Guest post: Scott Schaffter

I had the pleasure of meeting Scott at DevLearn 2011 in Las Vegas. It was clear from our very first conversation that he was creative and focused on finding innovative ways to serve learners. I’m thrilled to share my blog with him this week!

Learning How to Manage Knowledge

Many times I feel like our work becomes siloed around the area we are working in. It makes sense. As learning professionals we focus on learning, software developers focus on developing software, authors on writing books and so forth. But much of what we do is in reality interconnected and we can learn so much from others, despite their different focus. Learning is done through software and technology, authors learn as they write and so forth. There really is
no field that doesn’t overlap with another in some context.

Knowledge Management is one field that seems to have been siloed from learning but yet has much to offer. Knowledge Management (KM) means many things to many people. I see KM similarly to the British NHS who believe that “Knowledge Management is a process that emphasizes generating, capturing and sharing information know how and integrating these into business practices and decision making for greater organizational benefit”.

For our organization, KM was initially seen as an internal wiki and that was it. There were some problems faced with the software and as a result I was asked to help develop our “Knowledge Management strategy”. Initially it was seen as a project to improve the software tool. But I was able to get some space and got through reading several insightful books and talking to half a dozen people in the field. I began to realize KM was far more than a software tool and could offer insights that could fundamentally improve the way we approach both learning and knowledge management at our organization.

The concepts discussed in Knowledge Management brought to forefront the importance of connecting people with others and on how knowledge can be applied, shared and created. However, it seemed to discount the variety of ways that we can learn that knowledge and instead focused on how knowledge, once gleaned primarily from experience, could be shared.
Many of us as learning professionals however tend to come at it from the other side - we focus on teaching people the knowledge and building their capacity. But then we fall short in creating the meaningful networks, processes for applying that knowledge on the job, and identifying ways for individuals to share what they learn. This is the area that much of learning struggles to achieve: finding ways to take learning and integrate it seamlessly with day to day work. Creating that much sought after culture of learning and business impact – the elusive ROI.

Bringing the two fields together could help bring us closer to what I feel much of the learning profession is trying to achieve. Many of the concepts are not new and are in many ways simply common sense. Yet many organizations still seem to be struggling with this and so perhaps it is worth looking at it from a new perspective.

There are three ideas that emerged from some of the KM reading I thought I would highlight that might be helpful:

1. People, Process and then Technology

Highlighted in several places was the idea that three things are needed for effective knowledge management (and I would argue e-Learning). The most important of these being “People”. This refers to the organizational culture - ensuring people want to share and are supported to take part in creating, sharing and applying knowledge. Secondly processes, which considers what structures are in place that can either hinder or help knowledge sharing (ex: departments fighting for resources vs. focused on one common goal). And finally Technology, being the actual tools and systems that are used for knowledge sharing and cataloging. All three are vital, but without a culture and environment that enables sharing and learning none of the processes or technology would be fully adopted and have meaningful impact. Again – perhaps not new, but vital to keep in mind. Far too often we jump to the latest technology platform without looking at the underlying symptoms that need to be addressed.

2. The Stair and River Diagrams
From Chris Collinson and Geoff Parcell “Learning to Fly” and “No More Consultants”

This concept is a way of finding areas of possible knowledge exchange and creating networks and pairings of experts / learners from those gaps. It lets you figure out basically that “I don’t know how to bake a cake, but wow, check that out, Jane bakes TONS of cakes – I should talk to her”. The diagrams are simply tools that help visualize where there are areas of expertise in the organization and where there are gaps. It’s fairly hard to explain in a short amount of space, so if you want to find out more check out the books or there is a good explanation here. You can download a template of the tool here.

3. Finding Experts

One of the ideas that was highlighted from several books was the need to find key experts easily. Several organizations had used indexed data about where people were working, what their projects had been in the past, and various other key data to allow people to search for these key individuals. I thought this was a great idea and if you can go on step further and get automatically suggested experts to individuals based on their profile data and their interaction with the systems already in place it could be even more powerful (similar to what Google does with tailored search based on what they know about you). Nothing incredibly new, but if you take a course, add documents about say HIV and then others taking that course know to contact you as an expert or mentor, this could help provide informal peer learning and even regional learning as people in neighboring countries see who they can contact easily.

I hope this has been helpful and if nothing else re-awakened a desire to look up from our day-to-day learning jobs and learn from the millions of other fields that offer unique insights to spur us on. I am by no means an “expert” and still consider myself a student of these fields and so I would love to hear any of your comments and thoughts in developing these concepts further.
If you found this interesting I would recommend reading a few of these articles / books:
Articles (free):
“The ABC of KM” (Practical and useful – a simple and concise summary of many KM ideas)
“ODI KM Toolkit” (Some useful tools described that might be helpful)
Books:
“Learning to Fly” by Geoff Parcell and Chris Collinson (a great practical book that looks at how many KM practices were implemented at BP)
“The New Edge in Knowledge” by Carla O’Dell and Cindy Hubert (good book that has many case studies and more updated views on where KM is now, put together by the APQC which is the KM industry association)
“How” by Dov Siedman (somewhat unrelated, but an interesting look at the culture aspect of KM and the importance of focusing on values and building organizational culture)

Born in Thailand and now working as an e-Learning specialist at an international NGO, PSI.org, Scott is passionate about international development and education. His focus has been developing PSI's online learning systems which now enroll over 2,800 students across 55 countries. His current goal is to integrate PSI's internal social network, knowledge management tool and online university to create a more seamless and effective learning environment.

Sustainability…and not the Green kind.

I’m thrilled to welcome Adam Allred to my blog. A fellow innovator, Adam tackles the issue of sustainable learning below. So with no further ado...

One of the most common things I hear in my organization when we’re talking about training development is…

‘Whatever we do, we’ve got to make sure this is sustainable!’

Recycleable?

Biodegradable?

Low carbon emissions?
What exactly does it mean to make training sustainable?

Sustainability is one of the newest buzz words to take hold in training organizations in the last few years, and its meaning has big consequences to how we approach work as instructional designers. Like most trends that surface in organizations, sustainability too, has honest intentions. Most leaders within training organizations have become painfully aware of just how much work it takes to design or redesign training. Taking your content through ADDIE, running it by Bloom’s Taxonomy, and packaging it in PowerPoints and eLearnings could make you feel like retirement is closer than the project finish line. It’s this understanding that has driven organizations to dream of a training eutopia, one that both instructional designers and clients hope is waiting for them at the end of the project.

The banner hanging at the gates of training eutopia reads:

Welcome to Sustainabilityville! Don’t worry, you’ll never have to do that again!

The request of ‘can you make it sustainable?’ has come to mean ‘can you make it so we don’t ever have to touch it again?’ As a project goal, this is not only unrealistic, it’s also hindering our ability to adapt to the changing businesses we support.

Instead of spending our energy on figuring out ways to make content last, let’s start to acknowledge the reality that what we create will be outdated in a year, maybe sooner.

The pace of business has always felt fast, but with amazing leaps of technology forcing businesses to adapt their strategies, our need to adapt is increasing too. Moore’s Law says that the advancement of computing technology is occurring exponentially. Others have noticed that Moore’s Law could be driving aspects of social change at the same pace. This means if our businesses hope to keep up with the pace of technology and the ever-changing social climate, they must figure out how to move faster. If our businesses move faster, then we’re going to have to figure out how to create training faster. And not just a little faster, exponentially faster.

If you acknowledge the likelihood of your training content being irrelevant in a year, then sustainability stops being a word to describe our content, and becomes about our process for development. We must work in a way that allows us to sustain the exponential change of the businesses we support and the ever-increasing volume of requests.

Easier said than done, right?

I don’t believe that large, complex problems should be subjected to easy step-by-step solutions, but here are a few ideas for how we can move in the right direction.

First, let’s start by demystifying the art of instructional design for our clients. Let’s put together a few easy tools to help them understand when and why training might be the answer. For as much as we complain as instructional designers about how late our clients bring us in or how relevant their request is, we do surprisingly little to give them information about this process ahead of time. I’m not talking about pointing them to a website with ADDIE on it, but rather simplifying ADDIE or your chosen analysis and design model into an essential decision making tool. Then let’s advertise the hell out of it and provide it as a resource for any client thinking that training might be on the horizon. Let’s integrate this tool as an essential step of any project plan. If we can get them to make even marginally better training diagnosis without us trying to slow them down, then we can spend our short time on design and not back-tracking into analysis.

During design, we need to better focus on the essential skills and leave the just-in-time skills to Enterprise 2.0. I’ve seen many training courses bloated by providing comprehensive information of the job, but when I ask ‘when the learner returns to their desk, how will they use this info?’ I often hear, ‘once a year during X process’ or even worse ‘I’m not sure when it would apply, but they should definitely know it.’ This is information that is obviously not an essential skill. If they don’t use the knowledge frequently, eliminate it from the main training topics. This is information that can be better answered by Enterprise 2.0 tools. Defining essential skills and providing your client with the means to retreive the rest of those just-in-time answers will shorten your training. Some may call this 70/20/10 or even just good instructional design, but the ability to redefine essential skills and continuously put the bourden on your other communication tools will be essential in the coming years.

When it comes to delivering the final product, I myself am guilty of spending too much time on the packaging. I want to make sure that my course or eLearning looks as immaculate as possible whether it’s materials or presentations. However, reality is telling me that this is a lot of work for something that will be irrelevant soon. I think we worry about how others will perceive our instructional design skills if it doesn’t appear as though we’ve actually ‘designed’ something. Packaging also implies that there is a strictly linear approach to our learning. It always seems easier to make training linear, but if you’re now relying on a variety of other unstructured communication tools to help you, then you’ve lost control over the linear progression of your learner. This is a good thing. The package is now flexible and really only a package by name, not a set of agenda’s and objectives that must be addressed in page order. The training of essential skills is now your primary focus, not the package that the essential skills fit into.

There are a lot of little ways that you can speed up design and delivery and it’s my recommendation that we take as many of those steps as possible rather than investing more effort into making training last. The idea is that if we can design faster, not only can we meet our client’s needs but we’re also less attached to our content due to the decreased effort it takes to create it. To me, this is true sustainability; the ability to continue to add value to our clients in the face of exponential change. It’s my hope that those of us in learning and development are able to adapt so that when our leaders and clients ask ‘is this training sustainable?’ we can respond ‘no, it’s even better…It’s disposable.’

I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Adam Allred lives in Arizona where he works as an instructional designer and training consultant. Adam graduated from Arizona State University with Bachelors degree in Fine Art. Turns out, the fine art degree comes in handy when designing eLearnings. In his spare time he enjoys spending time with his family, painting, designing, playing music and reading.

Contact: info@adamallred.com

Instructional Design -- Slow, painful death, or evolution? Part III

I’ve struggled to perfectly encapsulate all of the skills I think today’s learning professional really needs to develop -- and maybe what I’ve learned is simply that it is very unlikely there exists one complete list (but that instead we need to adapt to the situation in front of us... more on that another day).
But that’s the easy way out, and I’ve never enjoyed that path. Instead, I’d rather be definitive and bold and say that the first skill I’d like to see learning professionals develop is that muscle we so rarely flex -- saying NO.
So rarely, I’d argue, they’ve atrophied.
Saying no is hard. Awkward. Potentially a fire-able (if that’s even a word) offense. Can you imagine it? “We need you to design a class on X,” your manager/director/client says. “No,” you reply. My sense is the satisfaction with those two letters only lasts until your manager/director/client responds, “Well, you’re fired!”
Okay -- that’s a bit dramatic. I’m not suggesting you simply tell someone in a position of authority to jump off of a bridge (metaphorically, of course) if she requests something unreasonable. But L&D professionals? We’re “Yes!” (wo)men in every sense of the word, and it’s not serving us well.
I should first explain that saying “no” has never been a strong point for me, a classic people-pleaser. I crave connection with others, a sense of team with my colleagues, and peace, harmony, and bunnies and flowers. I’m your classic NF, in MBTI-speak. This approach, however, is akin to professional suicide because, if my colleagues figure this out, I’ll be the person taking on all sorts of undesirable projects, and I would lose the nerve I have to grit my teeth and strongly advocate for my unpopular but brilliant ideas.
Coworkers, please erase that from your minds.
No, those two letters are not natural for me, but I started thinking about it as I was editing a book for my brilliant friend Julie (shameless plug: you should pre-order this book!). Without revealing too much (well, much of anything, really), we had a great conversation about this magical word and the power it brings to anyone who is willing to question the status quo and not just roll over and take it.
If I’m terrible at it, at least in the pure sense, why exactly does NO get me fired up? Because it’s critical for us to use our skills to influence the world around us instead of being organizational order-takers and simply serving up what we’re asked.
You shouldn’t be a short-order cook, frantically flipping burgers while the order slips pile up. You’re actually a culinary genius if you haven’t realized it yet (or if not, you could easily become one). Yes, we must stray a moment from the cookbook, bring out heads out of our cubicles, have a look around, and bring all of that learning to bear in our teams and our organizations.
Have you ever noticed how often people reach for training as the solution to a problem that they see? Sales people not making their numbers? Better organize product training. Manager survey results lower than expected? Teach them how to deliver better feedback. Lack of engagement on the job? Give them development opportunities -- how about a leadership course?
And is it always a learning problem? Heck. no.
What do our clients need to hear, from time to time? NO.
Maybe not in a blunt fashion -- actually, rarely (if ever) in such a blunt way. But they need to hear it because if you simply go along with what’s requested and it’s not meeting the needs of your learner, you are wasting your time, the learner’s time, and your company’s money.
Sure, I’m coming at this from a consulting point of view (hint: guess what’s coming next?), but I think it is critical that we more actively engage in discussion about what we are doing and why learning is the solution. Yes, it is so much easier to assume or to comply. But even if it is on a simple scale, it’s important. Get assigned something? Ask your manager for clarification -- what need does it meet? why this deliver method? Not safe enough? Chat with a peer over coffee. Take it as an opportunity to learn about the way someone else thinks. Still unsafe? Make it a self-reflection exercise. And start looking for a job where you can speak up.
There are many ways to finesse a response of no, but the best response depends on the organizational culture. When is it okay to say no? What projects are most valued and why? Does your company care most about cutting costs, reaching every employee, focusing all efforts on your clients? Is it more important to share data that supports your claim or tell a compelling story? Learning how the organization ticks will give you those clues.

The idealist and the practitioner in me can agree on one thing, at least -- those no muscles get stronger every time you flex them, whether it is for something very important or something insignificant. But, dear colleagues, to truly start to shift the role of L&D professionals in organizations, we need to start training ourselves to use that magical little word.

Cheers,
Sarah

Emerging Leaders in Learning

There are many things that get me fired up and passionate. Far, far too many to list anywhere. Though if I were to summarize many of them, or cull them into themes, a theme near the top of the list would be awareness and growth.

I love pushing myself to do things better, faster, quicker, and easier. I love finding something new and figuring out how it works. And I love looking at different sorts of situations and asking myself, “How can I grow here?”

I came out of Learning 2010 on fire. I was inspired. I was given amazing opportunities through the 30 Under 30 program, as well as the opportunity to encourage others to develop mobile learning through our Google Breadcrumb hackathon. “What’s next for you?” my then-manager asked. Ha! As if I hadn’t already mapped out the next three years.

I wanted to find a development program focused on learning and development professionals. There were many of these.... for CLOs, or for other senior staff. Yes, there were lots of general leadership programs, options within my own company, and the chance to get a coach. But I didn’t see any program for me. Naturally, I emailed Elliott Masie (and Nigel Paine) and said, “Hey, here’s what I’m looking for. I think it would be a nice complement to your programs and I like the passion you have for developing young learning leaders. What do you think?”

The answer from Elliott?

“Yes, sounds great. Why don’t you develop that with Nigel?”

I fell for my own trick! I do this all the time -- and, okay, it’s not a trick. In a learning culture that is community-based (and relies on community involvement), enthusiasm is a great signal that someone might put effort into something. Enthusiasm has helped me find facilitators, focus-group leaders, peer coaches, and content developers.

And I don’t lack enthusiasm.

Fast-forward to today, and Emerging Leaders in Learning has launched. Yes, I designed it in partnership with Nigel, and we’ll facilitate together. I wanted to find a final project for my M.Ed. that would have a positive impact on others, and I think I found it. I’m passionate about this project because I know it has great potential to impact others in the way I have in my engagement with the broader learning community.

It focuses on four major themes -- self-knowledge, leadership development, having an impact on your organization, and thinking beyond by engaging with the broader community. That’s the what -- the how includes virtual sessions, coaching, reflection, and interactions with the individual and his or her company.

The 11-week cohort will be, no doubt, intense. I find that often people try to undersell or under-estimate a time commitment. Not me. I like to be realistic. It’s a great opportunity for emerging learning professionals (people with less than eight years of experience in the learning and development field), but we’re looking for people who are motivated and committed to participate fully. As I’ve blogged about before, we’re the cobbler’s children and we so often forget ourselves.

I guess that makes me a maker of shoes.

I encourage you (or people you work with) to sign up. It’s a pilot run. It won’t be perfect. But it will be engaging. And, should you or your organization be interested, we’ll open-source the materials after the pilot. This way, you could run this in your own learning group.

Now that is something we can all get fired up about.

Cheers,
Sarah

Instructional design -- Slow, painful death or evolution? Part II

The comments and responses to my first post in this series are inspiring and challenging, and have helped me hone in on a few of the important pieces of this ID evolution that I’ve been thinking about.

But the comment that inspired me for this post came from my learning friend Dave Halvorson, and that’s the theme for this post -- Learning is not a transaction. It’s a relationship.

There has been a long-held model in Western education that there are experts and there are novices, and it is the job of the expert to cram as much information as possible into the head of the novice (in case you aren’t sick of hearing me stump for Rethinking Education in the Age of Technology by Collins and Halverson, I’m going to recommend it yet again).

And then came us.

Suddenly it was not enough to simply share knowledge from one head to another, so we decided to create a middleman of sorts, the instructional designer. Quite frankly, many of our experts were not so expert at engaging learners and as academic research piled up around teaching methodologies, etc., it made sense to bring in a new sort of expert to practice a very particular craft. In a sense, this was a way to improve efficiency of knowledge transfer, as well as the engagement of the learner.

And then came the interwebs.

But we didn’t change a bit.

Think of this in a transactional way for me one more time. The learners now have not only the experts in the immediate environment and social circles, but hundreds, thousands, millions! of experts from around the globe as well as the wisdom of the masses (Wikipedia, anyone?) available at your fingertips 24/7. There’s such a glut of information -- and, to Phil’s comment on my previous entry, not all of it is high quality. His analogy of network television and YouTube is spot on. Yes, we have a ton of video content uploaded every second, but you wouldn’t broadcast most (any?) of it on prime-time television because it’s not high-quality.

So now I, as a learner, have terabytes -- nay, exabytes! -- of information at my fingertips. And while a lot of it is junk, over time I learn to find what is relevant by sorting through what exists, taking cues from search engines, ratings, and links from other reputable sources. I have direct access to almost any piece of content I would need to learn.

And what are we doing? Where is the instructional designer in all of this?

Creating more content, of course. And not just any content, mind you. Better content than that crap out there in cyberspace. We’re using our experts, thankyouverymuch, and they’re much better than yours.

Our competitive edge that we so enjoyed before is slipping away. Yes, there are times when learners need a network-quality experience. But more often than not, YouTube will suffice. We need to learn something right now and then move on. At Learning 2011, some of the folks talked about this as “tissue learning,” which is cheaply produced. It’s not a handkerchief that you use, then wash and use again -- one use and BAM! -- gone forever.

Right or wrong, that’s what is happening. So it’s time to think more about what competitive advantage we bring beyond the transactional -- and that’s the transformative power of relationships.

As much as I’m intrigued by all of those “rise of the machines” theories, even in the technological age of today I’m convinced that human interaction is of critical importance. While information and content are available, there is an ever-increasing need for perspective, for curation, and for connection. The key distinction is that we must let go of the role of organizer of content or creator of content. It’s already there! But we know (hopefully) the bad from the good, the flashy from the effective, and the transactional from the transformative.

The future of learning is not in informational transactions, but instead of transformational relationships.

And now we have to explore how to make the leap.

Cheers,
Sarah

Instructional design -- Slow, painful death or evolution? Part I

I really hope instructional design doesn’t go the way of print journalism.

I have nothing against print journalism -- it was one of my undergraduate majors. I spent almost two years writing for small Seattle newspapers only to watch the industry slowly implode on itself -- one of the town’s big papers, the Seattle PI, has since gone out of print (they maintain an online version with content from the wire).

It’s an industry of people desperate to reinvent themselves, and sadly, their efforts might have come too late.

You can imagine, then, my fear when I look at one of the disciplines in my current field, instructional design, and feel my stomach knot and twist. Oh no -- is this the next victim of the digital age? My hope, though, is that as a field we can evolve -- and yesterday.

Just as the internet democratized the sharing of information, it has also changed the way in which people learn. While print journalists need to compete with blogs, instructional designers have to compete with user-created content in many forms, from blogs to Tweets, from YouTube videos to free elearning modules. There are so many types of software, some of them free, available to people to create their own learning. If one learner has information and another desires it, who is to say that an educational professional will be the broker anymore? Who says that they will consult with someone for the ideal design?

I say this not because it is an ideal, but because it is happening right now, and we are powerless to stop it.

While taught by one of the worst professors I encountered in my four years of undergraduate study, I was fascinated by my journalism ethics course. The big topic of debate during my session? How could journalists, a group of people bound by an ethical code, complete with bloggers, who could write whatever they wanted and claim it was fact? This was not to be tolerated! It boggled the mind!

Yet not only was it happening, but blog readership quickly passed traditional newspaper (online or not) readership.

I was fascinated as I observed the lunch discussion session about whether instructional design was dead at Learning 2011. Well-meaning folks all, but, in my eyes, so many of them are blind. “Of course we still need instructional designers,” one after another said. “Other people don’t understand the craft.” Or, “They don’t know how to design objectives.” And, my personal favorite, “They’re not aware of the best ways to engage learners.”

Right. Because every learning module I’ve been through has been extremely engaging.

In the great marketplace of information, credentials or training don’t necessarily matter -- and you don’t believe me, you need to acquaint yourself with Here Comes Everybody (2008) and Cognitive Surplus (2010). You don’t need to be a professional ID to engage people or help them learn. People are learning and (gasp!) designing learning for one another! While you might wrinkle your nose at the idea of design democratized for the masses, it’s here and I would wager that now (or sometime very soon) someone in your organization will create learning that better meets the learner’s needs or is more engaging than what is coming out of L&D.

The question is this -- do we roll with the changing tide, or cling to our design ethics and outdated assumptions?

I vote for evolution.

While design skills are useful in education and many other occupations, to define ourselves around one central skillset seems limiting, to say the least. I’ve heard many of my colleagues at various companies share that, as an ID, they aren’t invited to the table to discuss broader learning strategies. In many cases, they are expected to scope and deliver solutions to address narrowly-defined problems, sometimes without even the autonomy to choose a method of delivery. If others without design knowledge are making decisions about how to best engage learners, we’re often left with out-of-date compliance e-learning modules or unengaging sales training classes -- and we’re not really using the brilliant minds of our designers.

What if there were a way to pull the former instructional designer closer to both the learner and the stakeholder or organizational leader? What if there were a way to morph the role so that designers had the opportunity to develop and use broader skillsets within their companies? And what if there were a way to define ourselves more broadly, as professionals who engage learning through a variety of media by working directly with learners?

While what this might look like is not fully-formed in my mind, I certainly have some ideas. And what is critical to the success of the field we hold dear is to wake up and do something about it. Let’s talk about it.

Right. Now.

Cheers,
Sarah

The sad stereotypes that still exist -- at a learning conference!

One of the reasons that I really enjoy Elliott Masie’s Learning conferences is the variety of not only content but of perspectives that are shared both in the general sessions and in the scheduled sessions. But even more exciting, Elliott allows people with different sorts and tenures of experience to share and learn from one another -- take this year’s mentoring and reverse mentoring sessions.

But.

(You knew that was coming.)

You know, I’m getting a bit tired of hearing people criticize, stereotype, and, sometimes, bash the young folks in the workforce, whether it is young learning professionals or young learners.

Don’t stereotype me. Ask me. Learn my story.

Let me tie this to something that President Clinton shared in his keynote last night, because I was sitting in the front row saying out loud, “Oh, yes -- exactly!” He shared his experiences growing up poor in a time before television, so their primary form of entertainment was telling stories. You have to learn to listen to a story before you can tell one, he said. And he discovered that everyone has a story. Maybe they are not yet ready or able to tell it because of their life experiences. But they have a story. And this was one of the things that drove him to help and serve others, ultimately as the president.

This is similar to my philosophy around getting to know my learners, who are primarily software engineers, managers, or directors. And here is the thing -- I have very different hobbies, life views, and areas of expertise than these people. So I made it a goal to find something in common with every single learner that I encountered.

It’s not as hard as you think. I’m able to learn so much about each of them, to engage with them, and to empathize with them. And we connect, person to person, Googler to Googler.

So when I hear some of the common stereotypes about new grads or folks like me who are in our 20s (including but not limited to entitlement, very high expectations, don’t use traditional means of communication, have different life goals, lazy, dress improperly, etc.), my first reaction is to seethe.

But, as I realized last night, anyone who makes these assumptions isn’t interested in hearing someone’s story.

Don’t stereotype me. Ask me. Learn my story.

Something we often talk about at Google is this -- Assume the person you’re working with is smart and reasonable. So if you see or hear something that doesn’t make sense, ask. Most likely you lack context, experience, or perspective that would help.

What’s more, these stereotypes were (are) being spouted by learning professionals. These are the people who are supposed to adapt to learners in front of them, to engage them, and to help them reach their goals.

Are there individuals who are in my generation who lack listening skills? Certainly. Do I have peers who have horribly high expectations without the skills to back those up? Yes. Could some of us benefit from some coaching or mentoring to understand how to be sensitive of certain work practices? There is always room for improvement. Am I perfect? Heck no!

Yet as a smart, motivated, and metacognitive young professional, I take great offense that some people lump me in with a large generational group that they dismiss. I won’t sit down and give you all of the ways I meet or break any stereotypes because that’s not the point.

Anyone -- anyone -- who uses those sorts of stereotypes isn’t ready to hear someone’s stories or challenge their beliefs. I don’t care what your age is. I’ve watched peers stereotype those in other generations too -- and I always say -- “Why don’t you talk with Jane and learn about her perspective?” or “What else might explain John’s response?”

In a sound-bite, Tweet-deck, fast-moving culture, it’s so much easier to categorize -- and, quite honestly, our brains are working against us. We’re made to categorize, recognize patterns, and move on.

Think, though, of the impact that negative comments can have. Think of how discouragement and negative comments can kill enthusiasm and injure hope.

So, my dear Learning 2011 colleagues, I have just one request to all of you when it comes to dumping on us whipper-snapper young’ins -- or anyone, for that matter.

Stop it.

Don’t stereotype me. Ask me. Learn my story.

Cheers,
Sarah

Writing books -- the “new” blogging?

My favorite conference line at DevLearn? “I’m working on this book...”

Yeah, me too.

No, really. I am. Well, there’s my own book. I have a working title that I can only tell to a few people because it’s so brilliant that I’m afraid some leech will steal it and then I’ll be angrier than a charging bull.

That’s really as far as I’ve gotten, formally. I use this blog to test drive some components of the book, and anyone who reads it or hears me speak or knows me at all wouldn’t be surprised that it gets me excited.

No chapter titles, no excerpts, no book proposals. As much as my enthusiasm would carry me through it, let’s keep it real and focus on that degree. Oh, yes -- and an intense, rewarding career.

Instead, I’m living vicariously through my former manager by supporting her as she embarks on her own book-writing journey. I’m a sort-of editor, sort-of brainstorming buddy, sort-of critic who calls her on parts that don’t make sense. You know, break someone down, build them up. I try to make witty marginal remarks to help her laugh through the tears.

I really hope she doesn’t cry over my edits. Probably not. Most certainly.

But more than anything, I’m thrilled to watch someone with brilliant ideas pursue what she’s doing.

This summer, in case I wasn’t already overwhelmed with everything in life, I decided to help edit a book for my former manager.

Why in the world would anyone do this? Well, if your former manager is as awesome as mine was, you wouldn’t even blink. I doubt I’m the founding member of the Julie Clow Fan Club, but I should be an officer by now.

Unselfishly, I was fascinated by Julie’s proposal and concept --which I can only say is related to business and psychology, and that the book is, like everything Julie does, high-impact. In a world where books, movies, and anything else that is released is competing against 50 other products, it feels good to support someone who I believe has a unique perspective and who helped me think more critically and strategically.

And here’s the selfish part -- I want to learn how she does it.

It’s not the mechanics of the writing -- I received the top grade in my copyediting class in college. It’s not the devotion to writing, either. I wrote my first book when I was six and have written many since then. When I was a teenager (just to give you another window on my life), I checked out every “How to get published” or “How to write a book proposal” or “How to generate writing ideas” book from the Vancouver Public Library. And I wrote down all of the tips in several spiral notebooks. And created character family trees for my novels. And even used a John Grisham book as a physical model for a book jacket, which I still have.

It’s the business of it that bewilders me. Agents -- how do they work? Why in the world is Julie on the writing timeline that she’s on? How much do you talk about a book pre-release? How do you really decide on your audience for a business book? How much research do you use versus touting your own (perhaps unsupported) opinions and advice? Good questions all, and questions that I am slowly answering in this process.

Yes, I could self-publish. Am I hanging on to the childhood dream of chatting up a talk show host and sipping hot cocoa on a morning show? Oh, yes. Hey, I mentioned that I have a library in my house, right? Would it really be complete unless I get a copy to put on my shelf?

So yes. “I’m writing a book” is a great opening line at a conference. But it’s true. And if people keep reminding me, maybe I’ll get past the title.

Cheers,
Sarah