About GOOG-411 - Free 411 Service

About GOOG-411

Google's new 411 service is free, fast and easy to use. Give it a try now and see how simple it is to find and connect with local businesses for free. Go to:

http://www.google.com/goog411/ 

# # #

Can You Be Process-Centric in a Functional Organization? Yes!

I never fought with my Clients to get them to reorganize into a Process-orientation from their Functional-orientation. I think too many of my peers did.

They forget that that would lead to a Process silo-ing - different from a Functional silo perspective/operation, but just as bad.

So how can one be both functionally-organized and process-oriented? And by "process" I mean "workflow."

One needs to think of process and processes as "outputs as inputs" from upstream being processed to create "outputs as inputs" going downstream.

Processes/Workflows are sometimes quite complex - some are routine and others on demand. Some are well documented - others not so much. Some are critical, others are not.

A functional look at the Enterprise, or the Business Units, or the Functions, or the Departments, or the Teams - can take a process-perspective. These entities "own" processes and "support" processes owned by others. Not always, but often.

My L-C-S model for Managerial Performance (Areas of Performance) looks at managerial Leadership performance, Core performance and Support performance - as shareable across the Enterprise - in addition to the unique processes owned/supported that make each entity unique. Training does training, sales does sales, payroll does payroll....

 

Once the configuration of Performance (via my AoP construct) is done, all of the enablers to support/enable that process - or the roll up of many processes - can be systematically derived.

And then the enablers and their enabling provisioning system can be assessed for their adequacy - the need for "leaning" and six sigma-like efforts to bring the process into "enough" control. 

In the Big Picture of EPPI - Enterprise Process Performance Improvement (the parent methodology to my ISD methods of the PACT Processes) - all of the processes should be assessed as to whether they are meeting Stakeholder Requirements - or not.

The "example" Stakeholder Requirements "hierarchy" might need adjustment for your context - one size does not fit all.

The the process can then be designed if non-existent - or leaned, and/or brought under "enough"control - to meet those requirements if it already exists - and then the enablers that make or break a "paper process design" when brought to life can be specified and/or assessed for their adequacy.

Then the enablers that are found lacking can be addressed by whatever provisioning systems exist within the Enterprise. 

Above, the Environmental Assets' provisioning systems.

Above, the Human Asset provisioning systems.

You might find this free book PDF -Management Areas of Performance - of help in figuring out your specific context's process needs, the enablers, and plan for the development of Managerial Performance Competence. For yourself and/or for others.

For managers - make or break the processes of the Enterprise.

# # #

Social Media and YOUR Learning Context - or Contexts

Here is a first for me - reuse of Content - in my Blog Postings, not just a slide or two, but all.

Hmmm? Cheating? The more I read about Twitter and Facebook as Learning Tools (versus Performance Tools) the more I am unconvinced of their utility in that domain - Context depending...of course!

Check this out from Guy (no relation, just kidding) Kawasaki: Twitter as a tool—specifically as a marketing tool—for my website Alltopand my book, Reality Check. If the concept of using Twitter in a commercial manner interests you, keep reading. If it doesn't, then you can continue to send and receive tweets about how cats are rolling over and the line at Starbucks.

http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2008/12/how-to-use-twit.html

Well, that's the Marketing "utility" - but what about for Learning?

This post suggests an answer - but doesn't provide one. For me it's still a stretch to label this as a Learning Tool:

http://blog.litmos.com/2009/01/how-can-twitter-be-used-as-learning.html

Quote from the Post above: "Twitter has a lot of learning tool potential. It can be used by trainers to keep students informed about coursework, reading materials, and provide a place for discussion. I don't think you can create groups though, which would mean forums and Facebook still trump Twitter for that purpose."

I don't buy those first two sentences. 140 characters limit - means: it is not a place for "discussion."

And, of course, it depends on your definition of learning. 

Most of these overly broad definitions of learning suggests that the Dewey-decimal-systems' card files at every public library when I was a kid in the 1950s was a "Learning Tool" - good for searches that lead to learning. My Schwinn bicycle then was a learning app on top of that Library system learning platform.  The baseball card in the spokes? An app for an app.

Here from Wikipedia, definitions of Social Media...

Again from Wikipedia, the distinction of Industrial (Mass) Media...

 

As one who has spent his adult career in Enterprise Learning,with a fair amount of experience in Educational Learning and Personal Learning - I think it helpful if other writers would refer to what kind of Learning Context one is speaking about before they over generalize and muddy/mash it all together.

At least IMHO.

And as I am on this kick to label things as Performance Tools versus Learning Tools - when that is what they really are - let me define the three contexts I see for both Performance and Learning...in this next graphic...

So how do Social Media - and specifically Twitter and Facebook - both of which I have about 60-90 days worth of Performance/Learning experiences - fit with those 3 Learning Contexts?

See the next graphic...

 

Twitter...

1- As Personal Learning can be almost anything, using Social Media as "one tool" can be helpful. 

2- As a Educational Learning tool Twitter might help one conduct brief 2-way communications, but is so limited to that 140 characters that it might lead the recipients somewhere else - but then email could have done that just as well - at less than or more than those 140 characters. So- maybe.  

3- Ditto to #2, but in the Enterprise Learning domain. So- maybe.

Facebook...

4- Again, as Personal Learning can be almost anything, using this Social Media app as "one tool of many" can be helpful. But again, it is limited.

5- As an Educational Learning tool, Facebook can help one create a network to be connected to. But other Social Media may be a better fit. So- maybe.

6- See #2 above, and again, in the Enterprise Learning domain. So- maybe.

Other Social Media...

7- Given all of the "other Social Media" of Web 2.0 - there are many Personal Learning applications - such as learning how to Twitter, how to make digital movies, edit them, and post them. Or learn how to bake a cake. Or raise cats. Can you learn to ride a bike? Or to water ski or to snowboard? Not really. But you can make a start.

8- In the Educational Learning context, many Social Media allow you to form a group and share with others. 

9- See #8 above. 

Here is an important distinction - at least for me/I/i - if one can forget (and not remember) the content, procedures, etc., from the search results - of any media/mechanism - then all that one is LEARNING is how to search, how to get answers to questions.

Is that Learning? Or is that Learning how to search and find?

Or to "follow" someone else's posts? How does that compare to many different folks involved with the "Miracle on the Hudson" two weeks ago when on TV everyone saw real LEARNING kick-in by trained emergency response folks - police, firemen, harbor patrol, and even Ferry Boat Operators (my favorite heroes of that day) who stopped what they were doing/supposed to be doing and went and did something else. 

Darn few checked their online learning tools to see "what to do now!!!" 

For they couldn't be allowed to forget the specifics and allowed to look it up when needed.

It is not that learning how to search Enterprise procedures/polices isn't Learning. It is. It's Learning how to find answers to questions. That enabling "how to" - not the terminal "how to."

Which is really the important thing - sometimes.

One personal example: I have used the paper phone book to find someone/something. I have used the Internet - 1.0 and 2.0 and Social Media such as Facebook to find someone/something. 

But then I bookmark my source - and then I forgetaboutit.

Was that Learning? And then...Learning "what" exactly? An enabler to Performance? Or the terminal Performance?

Let's not oversell the Learning Aspects of Performance tools as Learning tools.

Guy Kawasaki's post suggests to me that Twitter is a Marketing Performance tool - and less-so a Learning Tool.

Otherwise - Texting on your mobile phone is just as valuable a tool for Learning as Twitter and Facebook.

At least IMHO.

# # #

Twitter, Facebook, and Other Social Media and the 3 Learning Contexts

According to this post by Don Clark at Big Dog, Little Dog on Social Media: 10 Ways Social Media will Change in 2009 - "Social media is morphing into a holistic experience that speaks to people's social needs in new ways."

And depending on your idefinitions of INFORMAL LEARNING and SOCIAL LEARNING, Social Media as an enabling technology may play a large part, a small part, or a non-existent role/part in YOUR Learning Context. Or Contexts.

Because of course, you may be involved in 2 or all 3 Learning Contexts in any one time-span. Maybe not at the moment.

I did not grow up texting, haven't really done a lot of texting since it has been available on my mobile phones over the past decade plus. I've been an adult since all that came about/became available, so I just made the phone call. And left a message if needed. 

No need to hide or be quiet. If I needed privacy - I went into my office or a conference room. 

Ever since I was a teenager - and ordered my own phone and phone line from Ma Bell in 1969 at my parents' house - the voice-phone call, not the text message - was my Social Media/device. And the parents' or my own car - with a tank of gas.

I haven't been texting with my social group or groups for most of my life. But many other have! I do my recent texting via Twitter and Facebook - experiments of mine to see what's up. 

So Twitter didn't automatically slide right into place in my top tools in terms of usage/time/mileage - and it did not replace something else. It layered on top. It augments.

I am not driven to daily or hourly or moment-to-moment usage by my social needs to connect, to stay connected, to reconnect, and once disconnected to connect immediately with someone else - ASAP!

But many are. 

Is it the ability to self-generate content that is the appeal? 

Is it narcissism?

Everybody wants to know what I am doing - and I may want to know what they are doing/ thinking/ planning.

So these are cool tools from the worlds of IT and miniaturization of electronics (thank you NASA!) - but in what way, what manner are these Learning Tools? Besides being social tools - I see these more as Performance Tools than as Learning Tools.

Performance Tools enable me to perform better- faster- cheaper! And I will learn from each use, just as I would have from the use of a wood router or a chain saw.

But in what Learning Context might these tools have utility - and not just loads of applications that feed "the fine art of wastin' time."

I see 3 Learning Contexts:

They are:

• Personal Learning - Learning for personal interest - not to earn a living or to perform for someone else.
• Educational Learning - learning to earn and/or learning to expand the body of knowledge.
• Enterprise Learning - to perform in some defined or un-defined (or ill-defined) process or workflow.

Which of these do Social Media and specifically Twitter and Facebook enable?

Here is my chart:

That's the chart for Learning.

In Personal learning I can use them all. 

In Educational Learning I might be able to use various Social Media such as Blogs, Wikis, etc. But the utility of Twitter and Facebook is limited. I can use them to text/connect/communicate with teams, classmates, etc. Or to find people who know stuff. Or think they do.

In Enterprise Learning as with Educational - the limits are the same for Twitter and Facebook, and the potentiality of other SM exists. 

I think the utility and limitations are basically the same for both Learning and Performance Support.

Here is the chart for Performance:

I'm having difficulty labeling tools as learning when they are used as reference tools - after which using to get some task done -

- I might not need to have remembered anything/ learned anything - other than how to source the answers to my questions.

I think our profession's labeling of almost all things Web 2.0 as "learning tools" versus as "performance supporttools" too often turns off the Enterprise leaders who need to "buy in" to the investments it takes in technology and tools.

Just my thinking.

# # #

 

Training Should Be the Last Resort in the Performance Improvement Solution-Set

Sometimes the Learning Content used in the Workflow - is committed to memory - but "only as needed" for most learners/Performers. Sometimes not.

Sometimes I can completely forget the content - the Information and/or Instruction - and simply "source it again" the next time I need it.

So - if that is the case - what Learning is really happening? 

Is it Learning How To?

Yes - it is - but is it - how to do the performance - or - how to resource the answers to your questions?

Learning sometimes isn't needed/desired/enough. 

Training should be a last resort. Training for recall - for critical performance to manage risk and reward. When you needs skills "well honed" or "like second nature."  

Performance Support is often the better choice. To train on if needed. Or to use "in the workflow" - the process performance.

 

Some training is good. Much is bad. Bad gets all the press.

And sometimes real Learning occurs from training/ learning - real long term Learning/Performance Capability occurs/develops. 

Learning as evidenced now by Performance Competence at some thing - without the Performance Support. Recall is used instead.

As the situation demands of it - typically - complex performance isn't committed to memory unless its situational context is likely to leave time for sourcing the right content in the workflow.

 Not always. 

And sometimes people learn things so well despite the lack of real need for it - when compared to "all that could be learned" on the road to mastery. 

As always, it depends.

It's people. It's hard to predict. It's better to prepare.

Think about all of the air flight crews up at any one moment. Prepared. Trained. Trained often in the use of Performance Support Systems and Tools. Prepared.

Prepared to a "T" !!!

# # #

New to Instructional Design/ Learning & Development? Learn Enough About ISD in 3 Hours from 3 Videos to Get Started in the Right Direction!

These are just my suggested start to those new to the biz of Learning - in an Enterprise Context.

Invest 3 Hours to Develop Yourself in the world of Learning to Improve Performance for ROI.

There is also much more to learn about the specifics of your Enterprise - it's critical processes, business challenges, culture and the technologies you can have for planning, analysis, design, development, deployment/access, tracking and reporting - but this is how to get a fairly quick orientation to the best approaches/thinking about human performance and the desired/required results of training/ learning and/or knowledge management content.

Regardless of any current technology/gadgets to deploy/access content with. Timeless in that regard.

3 Hours via 3 Videos:

Geary Rummler - Performance-Based Training - web link - from 1981. 46 minutes. From a series of development sessions at MTEC conducted in 1981.

Neil Rackham - Instructional Design Criteria - web link - from 1981. 57 minutes. From a series of development sessions at MTEC conducted in 1981.

Ruth Clark - Leveraging the Virtual Classroom for Effective Learning - web link - 68 minutes from Dr. Clark - part of the University of Maryland Baltimore Campus (UMBC) series of ISD- November 2008.

Just a suggested start. My suggested start.

A quick start...to a longer learning curve.

But there are many paths one might take to really "get into it."

The route you take could be filled with fads and frills...or it could start with a focus on: results: human performance competence and what the research tells us about fact and fiction in the Learning space that one can use to achieve results that positively impact the individual, the process, the organization and the whole of society on our planet.

Performance-based approaches are GREEN - they waste not, want not inappropriately of shareholder equity!

Any other ideas/ contributions/ suggestions?

# # #

How Would Your Rapid Methods Handle This Scope of Work?

There were 3500 in the target audience - across 7 regions - and one region with 2-ways of doing things -each a little different - due to state regulatory differences and product/service bundles/mixes - and 8 sets of management who "did their own thing" mostly. They each use to be different companies. So it wasn't deliberate malfeasance. Driving up their total costs that is.

I and my partners/consulting and production staff at CADDI Inc. applied a combination of the CAD - Curriculum Architecture Design methodology/phases - along with the MCD - Modular Curriculum Development/Acquisition methodology/phases - because the customer was sure on day 1 that they were going to build out 100% of the CAD - so we planned an accelerated effort - simply adapting our standard/common ISD methods - the PACT Processes for T&D/ Learning/ Knowledge Management.

The goal was reduced costs and improved performance post-training.
















We increased sharing of content at our object level: the Instructional Activity level - as well as at the Lesson and Event levels - across 8 T&D Paths.

















Every project has its unique situational-differentiators - and in this project it was management's desire/need to take folks out of training once in a while - not predictably - and have them help out on the production floor - for a variety of non-controllable causes. So we did via the design, by design you might say...















Each of the 8 paths produced was based on an "architecture" - from top to bottom.

A CURRICULUM ARCHITECTURE is simply a way to view content (your products) at various/defined levels: Total Enterprise Curriculum, Paths, Events, Modules/Lessons, Instructional Activities, elements/components of image and text.

It's an organizing scheme for complex situations.

It is overkill in the extreme if applied to simple situations/settings.


What's your situation/need?

# # #

Who Survives/Thrives in Tough Economies? How About Some Data?

I am sure it is happening in your circles/communities too.

One of my Professional Circles/Communities has been discussing how the world "we" live in - is marketing EVERYTHING they got - in terms of:

How To Survive Tough Economic Times.





I liked the following and asked permission to repeat it here...

Don Tosti's contribution to the blend/mix of ideas...




How about some data?

Our analysis of companies that made significant gains in hard times indicated that they generally followed the axiom: adapt or die.

They were innovative, coming up with new ways to provide customer value. Internal tinkering focusing on cost, incremental process improvement, and individual performance did not seem to be part of their solution. In fact their driving focus was almost completely external.

"Back to basics" may be a dangerous admonition, since it is most often interpreted as doing things that worked in previous good times and may be non adaptive in the present.

The most important performance factor was the existing or newly created "spirit of flexibility and agility," in other words their behavior counted more than their technology.

The "winners" demonstrated the following practices far more often than those that failed to "win."

THE TOP TEN DIFFERENTIATORS

1. People see their job more in terms of the value they create than the task they perform.

2. Our people show a sense of personal urgency and energy about achieving results.

3. We are willing to make significant change in the way we do things now to better provide value to the customer and to the company.

4. We are more concerned with about doing what's right for the customer and organization then we are doing only what the boss wants.

5. People in the organization have a clear understanding of how their efforts impact the satisfaction and retention of our customers.

6. Meeting the needs of the business and customer is seen as far more important as conforming to bureaucratic/administrative requirements.

7. We see ourselves as able to influence events, not as victims of circumstances.

8. People feel encouraged to make on-the-spot decisions when necessary, without waiting for full approval from higher management.

9. At the conclusion of a project, we regularly look for “lessons learned.”

10. Once we have made a commitment to change, we have a sense of urgency and a high level of resolve to follow through.

Our subsequent interventions for those who do not have such cultures is to first measure the extent to which such practices are demonstrated and encouraged and then to provide appropriate feedback and leadership to increase their likelihood.

- Don Tosti (1/23/09)

Don may be reached via email at: dont888@aol.com

I've known of Don since 1980 when I attended my first NSPI (now ISPI) conference. We were on the same ISPI Board years later during my year as President in 2004 when he was the President-Elect.

Very smart guy! Very! And I see that he is on the program again at this years upcoming ISPI Conference in Orlando.

Here is a link to a video at Google Video - HPT Practitioners Podcast Series 2008 - that Don and I did at the last conference - part of a series I was promoting last year:

Don Tosti - HPT Practitioner.

# # #

What's In Your Mobile Phone?

The new President did get to keep his BlackBerry - and I guess he'll still get this new Spy-Proof phone that Karl Kapp recently posted about...or is it really just spy-resistant?


















Back in the day - when I and spies were coming of age - it wasn't the phone - it was the briefcase. At least in 1966 it was the James Bond briefcase. And the Bond cars....



The briefcase of then - doesn't contain the following items any longer - as they are now "in" the phone...

• Calendar


• Phone Number Listings


• To Do List


• Notes


• Pictures of the kids


• Maps


• Business/Personal papers to read/scan


• Articles/books to read/scan


• Still Camera


• Movie Camera


• Voice Recorder

There are many things that the mobile phone will never replace/displace - that you/I will still need to carry around. Like my wife's lipstick when we are out on the town. Or refills for my writing pen.

But thanks for the ever-evolving and shrinking size/weight of personal performance technology!

Thank you NASA!

I wonder what the "Q" of personal communications/performance devices is up to - or was up to - that we may see soon.

Hmmm.

And will they be labeled as personal learning tools - or personal performance tools?

Hmmm.

# # #

ADDIE - The New Product Development "Process" for the World of Instruction/Information to Better Enable the Workflow/Processes

ADDIE is simply the NPD - New Product Development process - of the Instructional Design/ Instructional Systems Design world.

# # #

Walter A. Shewhart - In the Beginning of the Quality Movement - the 1920s

Strategic Planning for the Learning & Development Organization Requires More Than 1 Tool or Technique

I was reading about OODA at the CLO site - and had to comment.

OODA looks an awful lot like Shewhart's Cycle - often wrongly attributed to his most famous mentee...W. Edwards Deming. That's Walter A. Shewhart.

Tools are tools. How they are used within a overall process is probably more important than any one tool. Say for example in conducting Strategic Planning for your Learning & Development function/organization/team.

















What are your Strategic DRIVERS?

They are the strategic plans of your customers. They drive your plan.

I see 4 basic steps...
















#1- Review THEIR plans. And discuss those plans to understand the "whys" behind all components.















#2- Think about and then discuss to confirm/change any Strategic Vulnerabilities regarding the human component/element in the plan.

Any new/different knowledge/skills - attitudes - going to be required?
















#3- Then perhaps use OODA to think through he implications to you from the implications of the changes required going forward.















#4- Then develop your Strategic Plan - following the format/style of your largest and/or most Strategic Client.
















How you go about your Improvements/Changes will vary by how your Enterprise goes about that sort of business. You should understand how/where your "workstreams" will fit in.
















It is not about Learning.

It is about Performance Competence.

In any "Economic" season.

Pretend it is YOUR money - always.

# # #

What to Do Instructionally When It's High Risk and Reward and Not Intuitive? Train! And Train! And Train Some More!

I started driving when I was 8 years old. My divorced parents both believed strongly in continued practice even though there were diminishing returns from that expenditure of effort. There wasn't much they agreed on. And they didn't as much agree on this as act the same.

I am inspired to think about practice by the Richard Clark video. And something Ruth Clark mentioned in her video.

I didn't "get it" - the do the diminishing returns practice-after-practice (with plenty of feedback) until I started paying increased insurance premiums for a teenager, years later. Duh!

Oh, but of course! Practice!

From the age of 8 on I drove from my grandparents' mailbox to their farm house. Each and every time we visited - at least monthly. Until I had to start sharing drive-time with my younger brother. On the way home when older I got to drive the old country roads until we got closer to real traffic. We lived about 20 miles away.















It was perhaps 1/2 mile drive from mailbox to farm house - but as an 8 year old it might have been the Daytona 500! The car was a Mercury Comet (1960-1961), sky blue, with a three-speed on-the-column and a clutch. A clutch!

I loved going out to the farm and visiting with grandma and grandpa - I visited for a week twice during each summer school break - and driving in for each arrival and out for each departure - and that was just icing on the cake. That continued until I was 16+.

I hurked and jerked down that country farm driveway, learning the peculiarities of a manual transmission - which I think all should learn/master - for a couple of years before I could just start, go, shift, and not hurk and jerk. So I was now 10-11. And I could start and shift smoothly. Years to go until I got that DL. Still time for practice with those diminishing returns.

Those were outings with Mom. Her parents. Her childhood home. The farm.

With Dad it wasn't much different. He had me drive everywhere his business took him on weekends once we were out of the really busy traffic.

But when I turned 15 and got that Permit I drove everywhere - if I was in the car. With Mom or Dad. Maximum practice and plenty of feedback! SLOW-DOWN!!!!

After turning 16 and getting that DL- the Drivers License - I moved to live with my father and stepmother and siblings- from the suburbs of Chicago to the suburbs of Kansas City - so now I was driving in Missouri and Kansas. I drove everywhere again. I moved in March. The weather in KC varies tremendously in the winters. Having driven in the icy, snowy winters of Chicago's far southern suburbs/farmland - I thought I'd had enough practice driving in those conditions.

My father thought different. So the first time it sleeted and then snowed he ordered me out of the comfort zone that I a 16 year old teenager had found - and into the car and down the street and to the local Big Box Retailer's parking lot - empty - Kansas Blue Laws circa. 1968 - empty but not yet plowed.

I was about to be taught skidding.

Or - more appropriately - the anti-intuitive action of turning into the skid.

Wow!

It was perhaps 3 to 4 acres of open asphalt. 8 to 10 inches of snow on top of ice. Here is how it looks on Google Maps 40 years later...from above...


















We were parked at 12:15 above - when Dad commanded "get the car going 25-30 miles an hour and then slam on the brakes."

I "gently-punched it" and started skidding a bit - and then gained control - and at the half-point he commanded "turn around and go back." So I did. Slowly. It was slick.

On my next attempt - when I got it up to 25-30 - he reached his left foot across the transmission hump and crushing my right foot he knocked my foot off the gas as he slammed on the brake and put us into a skid.

"Do that," he said after we came to a stop.

So he took me from turning away from the skid to turning into the skid. It was hours and hours. I complained several times - adding to the practices I would then have to do to be done.

Why? Was the old man crazy?

No. He knew something I did not. And he was going to train it into me. And - it was his car! His deductible!

Why so much attention - to learning to turn into the skid?


Because it ain't intuitive.

















Or - isn't intuitive.

Either. That's when you really needs lots of practice.

Timing is everything.

So 2-3 weeks later I am driving his car on a Friday night date - driving the Impala - and after the HS basketball game that I and my date attended - we come outside and the car and streets are covered by a sheet of ice and 8-10 inches of snow.

Were there any warnings from the TV or radio weather-people prior?

Probably. I wasn't listening to them - to that. I was listening to FM radio. The beginnings of that anyway.

So I drive VERY CAREFULLY - as trained - for miles and miles from that HS to the girlfriend's house. I don't recall if a pizza joint was involved in between. Anything is possible. There were several in between point A and point B.

It was probably a 15-20 mile drive from point-to-point. A to B. It was a slow go. She lived on a lake and the Kansas suburbs of KC are quite hilly. The area surrounding the lake was hilly too. Especially my favorite route around the lake.
















And within 2 miles from the girlfriend's house - YOU KNOW THE STATS - I'm going up a steep drive just off of hole #4's green - I believe - never played the course you know - and the wheels start spinning halfway up the hill - and then I start to slide.

Not into the hill on my right - but into the abyss on my left. The cliff-side.

Yikes.

It doesn't look too bad from on high...
















Nor from this angle...


















But this view is different...

















Halfway up the hill I start sliding to the left side backwards! This was not part of Dad's training, not part of Dad's test!!!

Sliding backwards, downhill to the left - to the hill-down-to-the golf-course.

So my prior training kicked in. Think! You are going backwards!

I turned around in my seat and turned into that backwards skid with my brakes pumping - not to mention my heart and adrenaline. I turned into the skid and got the wheels all straight enough so that I could try to turn them slightly - and get us back into the middle of the icy road. Going backwards downhill on snow and ice in the dark.

I slowly backed down that hill and the curve after gaining control, turned around with a 3-point-turn-around at the bottom - next to the green and the next tee box - and we went around the lake - the long way. The flat way. To beat her curfew time by a minute or two.

This is the view from where we were headed...up the hill...
















Thanks Dad!

Practice makes perfect. Or much better. And saved some major damage and repairs to your car. But then, you knew that. You knew that day would come. As certain as the sun would come up.

The second learning that day - and that came to me much later. Years later. Practice the non-intuitive. Practice that a lot. Make it second nature. Automatic.

Sometimes valuable learning isn't appreciated until it is really put to the test.

And that was the third Learning - following the first and second Learning. Again, learned much later. After reflection. After the usage.

All from one Lesson from Dad, who passed away in 1991.

And the beat goes on....

# # #

Video - Learning Research at the Center for Cognitive Technology at USC

So after watching the video from Clive - I came across this video Brown Bag session at USC - University of Southern California - part of the Rossier School of Education Brown Bag Series, Richard E. Clark and Allen Munro discuss topics such as: cognitive load theory, instructional design, direct instruction, cognitive task analysis, creative technology, see one, do one, teach one, mental simulation, tactical planning/ instructional/ assessment tools.

I've known Dick Clark for about 10 years - I've been learning from him at ISPI for that long - and was hoping to see him at the upcoming ISPI conference in April - and now I can learn from him off the web - and you can too! I hope to see more of these. This video is excellent!

Here is the YouTube link to: Learning Research at the Center for Cognitive Technology. It is 1 hour and 2 minutes in length.

# # #

Video on YouTube - Welcome to the Virtual Classroom.

After watching the Dr. Ruth Clark video (excellent!!! -except for low audio near the end) I happened to have fat fingered the ol' keyboard and up came a Video from Clive Shepherd (see my BlogRoll for a link to his Blog: Clive on Learning) on Welcome to the Virtual Classroom. It was posted in November 2007.

It too - 9+ minutes- is excellent! It is a very quick introduction to Virtual Classrooms - and covers typical features/functionality - it might even be an appropriate introduction to VC for your Clients - or staff new to synchronous and asynchronous distance learning.

# # #

HPT/HPI and ISD and OD and Six Sigma and Lean Efforts in Tough Economic Times

The key thing is to be working on efforts where there is significant R for the I. Not the low hanging fruit.

Otherwise – why bother?

That requires determining the probable I before you start. That also requires determining the probable R before you start. Both. Unless you are flush with cash and need to spend it rather than return it to the owners in dividends, etc. Not likely.










Determining the Probable I
Determining the probable Invest Costs should include everything compared to doing nothing at all.

Determining the Probable R
Determining the probable Returns Values should include everything compared to the results from doing nothing at all.


Another Approach
Determine the R before the I, and then immediately skip Rs where the R-bang isn’t going to be BIG ENOUGH regardless of the size of the I. Small I mean. Small Is have nothing to do with the decision - unless you are down to your last I capability.















Determine the CoNC first - and then the CoC. Show the CoNC first - and then the CoC. It scares people less that way - the investment costs required that is.

Here is a prior Blog Post on that:

Who is the Decider?
The Customers/Clients and Other Key Stakeholders! Are you aligned to them - in sync?

Here is a prior Blog Posting about that.


HPT and/or HPI?
Oh- and I think there is a wide difference between HPT and HPI. Human Performance Technology and Human Performance Improvement.

HPI – the “brand name for "it" of ASTD” is really all about the people’s knowledge and skills – whether put in place by selection, development, etc. But its focus is on people enabling.

HPT – the “brand name for "it" of ISPI” is really about everything that impacts human performance – regardless if that human performance is “performance” represented at the level of Society/Humanity, the Enterprise/Organization, the Process/Workflow, and the Learners/Performers.

HPT includes Lean and Six Sigma approaches/methods because they work at the Process/Workflow level of human performance. Human Performance in an HPT is all encompassing – because humans direct and control (or don’t) all of the activity that rolls up to the P/W, E/O, and S/H levels. Getting that aligned is what ISPI’ers talk about, argue about, debate about (more civilized than just arguing).

And as Don Tosti remarked - all business processes and systems are human performance systems.

We aren't at the point where it is systems/processes/machines created by systems/processes/machines - they were created by humans to perform in place of or to better enable humans.

ISPI
I don’t mean to pigeonhole anyone in what follows…

ISPI’ers like Roger Kaufman and Mariano Bernardez and Dale Brethower advocate for a look at Mega first – get aligned to what the Society/The World level needs as a whole. Then develop your Enterprise/Organizational charters, missions, visions, values, yada, yada, yada.

ISPI’ers like Don Tosti and Bill Daniels and Jim Hill advocate for improved competence of the Enterprise/Organization level.

ISPI’ers like the late Geary Rummler and Alan Ramias and Ray Svenson advocated for improved competence of the Process/Workflow level – aligned appropriately to the needs at the higher levels.

ISPI’ers like Ruth Clark and Judy Hale and Harold Stolovitch advocate for improved competence of the Learner/Performer/Individuals and Team levels.

It’s all good. All points of view are valid. Not everyone is “in charge” – some are in the trenches. Their needs are different. We work interconnected with people who work at various levels of Performance Improvement.

The 2009 ISPI Spring Conference in Orlando – April 19-22.

Click here for details.

Come to learn from some serious folks – who don’t always take themselves so seriously. Well, most of the time anyway.

And again, I don’t mean to suggest that anyone named above focuses only on one level. No way Ray!

# # #

Sometimes It's the Message, Sometimes the Messaging, Sometimes the Messenger, and Yes, Sometimes the Messaged

Some folks I know have been having a hard time getting a loose confederation of people to hear them. They lament the fact constantly. They have been working at this and lamenting their lack of traction with any sizable group within the larger community for years. They wish the larger group to focus on one dimension of a complex-methodology-set.

Getting caught up in it recently - I've been pondering their plight. And its causes.

I see the cause of their plight coming from one of, or a combination of, the following 4 factors at play...

1- The Message
2- The Messaging
3- The Messenger
4- The Messaged

1- Is it the Message?
I think their message is OK. I mean - I don't think it is that. The core message is correct. I buy it/ believe it.

2- Is it the Messaging?
Personally I think that perhaps the problem is in the delivery. At least the current messaging. It is harsh, and bruising, if one questions it, or responds neutrally, or if anyone challenges it. It's obvious, to me anyway, that there is a lot of frustration at their lack of "connections" or "sales" of their message that has been building for years.

It is not open. It is closed. Very closed. It is not collaborative. Even if they weren't willing to change one iota, word/phrase/picture they should pretend to be willing to.

They should pretend to be interested in people's clarifying questions - and not react to each as if it were a "public in-your-face challenge" necessitating a ratcheted upwards heated response.

They should pretend to listen to people, employ Socratic Active-Listening skills. They should pretend because that's the only way they'll ever figure out how to correct their messaging. If they accidentally listen to what they get back.

3- Is it the Messenger?
I think that that is becoming a problem. Due to my answers/my view to the second question. And their growing impatience at the dumbness of all of the rest of us. I don't know when this started. But there is a growing resentment of the messengers - as expressed privately and not publicly. They don't know when to give it a rest. Or when to change their tactics - their messaging.

4- Is it the Messaged?
The audience? I think that the message receivers are smart enough to make their own informed decision. They are not too stupid to see the brilliance.

But they are definitely "not buying it" - the message/ messaging/ messengers.

Ahhhh. What to do?
What to do? Sideline sit? Or Scrimmage? What's the return on that investment, for me, my group, our methods, or society at large? Hmmm.

Anyway - that's what's going on in one of my professional circles.

How's it going in yours?

# # #

The Limited Applications of Informal Learning in the Workflow

By now you've seen the TV coverage and some still photos of the US Air jet laying peacefully in the relatively calm, but cold, waters of the Hudson River yesterday. As the rescuers approached their target I'll bet none were checking their BlackBerry or iPhone to get help on what to do now.

And those on their 2-way radios weren't referring to them as Learning Devices either. They are Performance Tools not Learning Tools - not that the rescuers would reference them as that either - more like "get on the damn radio and...."















The papers and TV news are full of the word "training" and "their training just kicked in" and some references to "there is a procedure for water landings" - so I hope I don't hear any more of this nonsense that "we train dogs, not people."

Bull-oney.

Formal Training or Informal Learning? If you got to pick from those options as to how your crew was "developed" before you board your next plane, train, bus, or water ferry - which would you choose? It's kinda risky - is it not?

Formal "Information-Demonstration-Application" prior to the need - or exchanging chats and tweets and text messages in the workflow? Or getting instructions in some KM system or from your Social Network? Too late.




















The plane's skipper, Chelsey "Sully" Sullenberger - like other pilots "train 3 days a year in simulators and classrooms in Charlotte or Phoenix...as part of their training they review procedures." (from the Charlotte Observer 1/16/09).

And after you are out of the water...

You are counting on a host of people who you hope are Performance Competent - for as a Survivor - your experience isn't probably over yet...it's only just begun...













Even outside of a predictable disaster that one could prepare for - are many opportunities to be Performance Competent during the more mundane parts of a day...















Yes - learning in the workflow - is sometimes the best approach. When there is time to refer to them. And when the risks and rewards are low.

But in these tough economic times - who is working on that? - and who does that play well to? When dollars and yen and marks are tight - and there is a need to focus on significant R for the I?

My suggestion: Change your focus and language from Informal Learning to Formal Learning - and from Learning Tools to Performance Tools. And focus on high RISK and high REWARD situations. And work with your Clients to better understand the Rs as well as the Is.

I bet that resonates with your stakeholders better.

First two photos from...

http://www.abcnews.go.com/US/popup?id=6657456&contentIndex=1&page=14&start=false


# # #

Dr. Ruth Clark Video on - Leveraging the Virtual Classroom for Effective Learning

Click here for a Dr. Ruth Clark Video on Leveraging the Virtual Classroom for Effective Learning - from UMBC from November 2008. 1:18(hour: minutes).

# # #

HPT Practitioner Video Podcasts - 2009

Another change of years - another season of getting ready for the next ISPI Conference - this year in Orlando. I've got one general session and I'll be doing a table at the Bagel Barrel. More on those in some later Post.

Today it's about the next years series of HPT Practitioner Video Podcasts - 2009 - this year the theme/subject is your HPT Elevator Speech.

How do your explain HPT?

HPT - Human Performance Technology
















If you've known me for a while through NSPI/ ISPI - then if you see me coming your way at this next conference with my tripod-mounted-camera - you should be prepared to respond to/answer the 5 point script:

1. State your name
2. Tell us about your first exposure to HPT
3. Who have been your biggest HPT Influences?
4. Give us your 30 Seconds HPT Elevator Speech
5. Where you are focused on expanding your knowledge/skill in HPT and its applications?

And if you don't know me - approach me and I'll video you!

And don't take much longer than 30 seconds!

I actually hope to see several of us out there "tripod-mounted-cameras" in hand - capturing real people inside the diverse world of HPT - Human Performance Technology.

And details about the "HPT Practitioner Video Podcast Series" - will be coming soon. But anyone who gets ahead of me, just use the following in quotes when posting a Video wherever in cyberspace you choose - have it your way - just make it easy for me/anyone to find it:

"HPT Practitioner Video Podcast Series"

For more about the ISPI 2009 Conference go to http://www.ispi.org/

# # #

Formal or Informal Alignment to the Voice of Your Customer? Which Is Right for Your Context?

The slides in this post are from an "Encore" presentation I did for the second time in 2003 at the ISPI Conference in Boston.
















If your situation/context isn't COMPLEX - then you need less formality. If your situation is COMPLEX - I think you'll need more formality. As always, it depends!
















Session objectives...















Session Agenda...


















About me...


















3 levels to the model...















A visual model of "one possibility" for a structure - as there are many approaches...















Level 1...















How to align formally or informally...
















The part of the "one potential" structure...
















So what? Why care? What to look for...
















Assessment...
















Level 2...


















How to align formally or informally...

















The part of the "one potential" structure...


















So what? Why care? What to look for...
















Assessment...





















Level 3...


















How to align formally or informally...


















The part of the "one potential" structure...

So what? Why care? What to look for...

Assessment...

Final assessment...

# # #

Shrinking the Footprint and the Weight of My Performance Tools with Technology Advances

I bought this at the same time Ray Svenson, my new employer bought his. I forget who had the idea. It was the very first portable computer. At least a consumer version. The thing was heavy. But I did drag it back and forth between home and the office - for a short while. Then I parked it home for good. I never learned the operating system well enough to really use it. And it was heavy.

I drafted my early drafts of what became lean-ISD - back then titled: The Curriculum Manager's Handbook - about the very early CAD methods and my adapted ADDIE methods.

Nowadays - I travel with a small laptop. It works even when the person in front of me backs their seat almost into my face. That - is the acid test. And being lightweight.















And at the "home office" I have another Sony VAIO - which has served me well.
















When I upgrade my mobile phone in 10 days I would like it to replace all of those other performance tools - covered in this earlier Blog Posting - even though I am sure that I'll LEARN something using them.
















My very small Briefcase - I downsized that to force me to not drag around too much - also includes some other very important performance tools, including Kleenex, Lip Balm, a Bandaid, Aspirin and Day Quill. And a very small and lightweight Umbrella. They are there - and all lightweight - because of my prior learnings:

Learnings from when they weren't there when I needed one or another.

Be prepared. Learn from your experiences. And get small.

# # #

Kaoru Ishikawa and the Ishikawa Diagram

Back in 1981 when I first saw this and was learning about quality, Quality and TQM - Total Quality Management - I mentally combined this with Gilbert's 6 Boxes.

Processes were not seen - to my knowledge - within the type of "context" that Geary Rummler brought to that party - the quality movement before Dr. Rummler did so at Motorola.

I see Bloggers referring to HPT within a fairly tight ISD/ID frame. HPT is much more than ISD/ID. In fact ISD and ID are SUBSETS of HPT. Not the other way around.

Focusing on improving - leaning and getting closer to Six Sigma are another 2 subsets of HPT. So are improved selection, retention and compensation efforts. Plus capital improvements and collaboration between supplier and customer.

Kaoru Ishikawa made a tremendous contribution - and his tool - and sometimes his name lives on. When properly referred to.

You can call it a fish bone diagram, or a cause and effect diagram. I need to refer to it as the Ishikawa Diagram. Out of respect for that contribution.

# # #

Any recommendations - about which phone - iPhone or Storm - that I should consider?

Whenever I've heard someone complain about the wasted federal dollars in the USA's space agency: NASA - I think: thank the heavens for NASA - and JFK.

OK: get this school-room sized computer on board a space ship - and reduce its size, weight and heat generation. OK?
















Or take something the size of a refrigerator - and make it the size of a pack of cards. Or a pack of gum. OK?


Man on the moon - in, oh, 10 years. OK?

Anyway I'm in the market for my next mobile phone upgrade. In 2 weeks. I'm not on my own schedule in this. I can check in with my "provider" to see "when I am eligible." I did.
















If I stay with the same carrier - it's the Storm.

If I am willing to change - it's the iPhone.

Considering where I was 10 years ago - it's cool! Very cool!

But 30 years ago? Talk about rocketing!

Well, then it was the little red/black address book - and then the Rolodex. James Bond had the former - and his assistant had the latter. "Q" had what we have today - or will, in the next cycle or two.
















Then, still cutting down trees (a renewable resource mind you!), there were the paper planners. I used Day Timers for years. And then there was the folio with cards on the left of the paper pad. Cards that you would make notes on and arrange "however you wanted it."

Let's not get too excited about this "i" and "my" craze. When I was in grade school Burger King taunted McDonald's about how "I could have it my way" - way back then (mid-1960s). And "Rebel Without a Cause" was almost an old flick by then for me (1955). "I" and "my" is rejection of "the crowd" - but then - go figure.

We are all standing on shoulders. Think about "Barack."
















My first PDA...
















It was with me everywhere - well - you know.

I left one on a plane and bought new the next day and re-entered everything - only to have UA return the old one (had been stuck in my seat - on a very long flight) a few days later. Those friendly skies!

One of the few lost items in the seating area ever recovered - by me. Only had my luggage lost twice - in 30 years!
















It was during the first gulf war that I bought the Apple Newton.

Total waste. For my interests.

Everything I wrote out was recognized as/came out as "Iraq" or "Iran" - and I was uncomfortable carrying my luggage and my double-wide flip chart easel in a case - and that "bazooka-looking-thing" that was the flip chart paper in a case - into O'Hare airport and then carry an electronic device that spelled out those!

Never had to mess with a Chicago cop - security at O'Hare back then. Knew better than to get close to that. And to "just drop to the ground" if it occurred.

Now I have nothing against the people of Iraq or Iran. I love them too. But terrorists, Iraqi, Iranian, Irish or otherwise - that is different. Every societal group has these far-wingers - left and right. We have our own. Cast the stone upward. It's the Irish in me.

3 years - 1972 to 1975 -in the USN taught me - be smart - every day every moment. Ever vigilant. And other things not to be mentioned.


So I chucked the Newton. And was very disappointed in the people who had given me the Mac II. Which was so totally cool back then in 1983/1984.

The Palm Pilot was all the rage during my Zuarus days. But I liked it better. But the Zuarus didn't interface with Outlook - or not to the extent that I wanted - it's hard to recall now. I think I could download a files of contacts - but not sync to the computer. That was yet to come.
















This Palm Pilot and the ever shrinking cell phone - or "mobile" phone - as cell sites might be temporary - remember "car phones" that then got portable? No? Doomed to repeat the sin of "too-high-are-your-expectations" that we older folks have seen repeated endlessly - the same as John Prine sang: "all the news just repeats itself" in "Hello in There."


Or Boston Chicken not anticipating their expansion beyond chicken!



Then - I had no choice. If I wanted email on-the-road (OTR) - it was the BlackBerry - for my situation. I liked the Palm format/interface better - and never really liked this BlackBerry model. I was happy when its turn came to go.
















When my 2 year term was up - I switched to a Palm Treo.

I loved that phone. A bit heavy. But "getting there!"

It did more than phone and all PDA functions. It was a Internet browser and email "live" without the daily $9.95 charges at the hotel for accessing email while OTR. I spent a lot of time OTR. It had voice recording - which wasn't smooth - but it had it. It had a camera for stills and video clips. It could store and play music.

















Then I joined my current employer and they use the BlackBerry. So to be connected - I went back. And now to make a call I've got to enter a complex "password." PITA.















But now policies are changing and I may get off their network to get back on to my personal network.

So now I have choices. I have my "specs" - my buying criteria...

And even now the president-elect of the USA says he will make them "pry it from his - hands "- and I get his sentiment. Being connected and able to connect - is important when you spend a lot of time OTR. Away from those who are important to you - for you to connect with daily.

















So I've completely fallen into the continuous upgrade trap - which is made much worse because of all of the peripherals...
















Any recommendations - about which phone - or even other phones I should consider?

And yes: I know that I can give my old phone to a "battered women's shelter" and to "dispose of my batteries properly."

Been there. Done that lots. When I wasn't OTR.

# # #

Culture = Consequences

Balance the Consequences - Rewards and Punishments.


If your consequences are out of whack - don't expect the required performance.


And the requirements are established by the Stakeholders...













































The Culture creates and maintains the Consequence System.


# # #

4 Levels of Incompetence and Competence

Why does someone at the level of competence of a "Tiger Woods" need a coach?

Because after a while, some, not many, rise to a level of Unconscious Competence.

You know -when you pull into your own driveway and you are amazed - as the vehicle driver - that you are "home" - and you don't recall the drive.

You knew you were on "auto-pilot" and it was scary.

But then you went inside and forgot about it!

This is why it is wise to seek feedback.

# # #

Web 2.0 - This Time For Sure? Someone Wake Up Thomas Edison!

Web 2.0 - Social Media - Media in General - This time for sure?















When I hear the Clarion Call for Web 2.0 and Social Media for Social Learning - it's deja vu all over again. I was graduated from college with a degree in Radio-TV-Film and wanted to be into Educational TV - but you know - I took the first job offered - with my current employer of my part-time college job - at Wickes Lumber. Into the Training Services department - part of HR. Moved from Lawrence KS - to Saginaw MI - in July of 1979.

They - Wickes - were migrating from the old educational technology of Slide-Strips with Audio -- to -- to the latest educational technology of Video (VHS - Beta had recently lost/or it was obvious to most - it was the 2-hour length to capture a full movie - versus Beta with its superior quality). And I was a newly minted graduate with that degree. So they asked me to be a Training Developer in the Development organization versus the Video department. Go figure.

I'd been in the U.S. Navy for 3 years by then - so I rolled with that punch. And now - look at my landing - or continuous roll....

But/so - I am wary. That wasn't the only cycle of "The Technology Will Save Us!"

And I lived near enough to Missouri for 10 years to demand: Show Me!

Why?

Something I remember from back then in the late 1970s and early 1980s from - Thomas Edison. A pretty smart guy.

That's Tom and George Eastman (think: Eastman-Kodak)...below in the photo...






















From http://www.cambridge.com/

What’s wrong with technology-centered approaches? A review of educational technologies of the twentieth century shows that the technology-centered approach generally fails to lead to lasting improvements in education (Cuban, 1986). For example, when the motion picture was invented in the early 20th century hopes were high that this visual technology would improve education. In 1922, the famous inventor Thomas Edison predicted that “the motion picture is destined to revolutionize our educational system and that in a few years it will supplant largely, if not entirely, the use of textbooks” (cited in Cuban, 1986, p. 9). Like current claims for the power of visual media, Edison proclaimed that “it is possible to teach every branch of human knowledge with the motion picture” (cited in Cuban, 1986, p. 11). In spite of the grand predictions, a review of educational technology reveals that “most teachers used films infrequently in their classrooms” (Cuban, 1986, p. 17). From our vantage point beyond the close the 20th century it is clear that the predicted educational revolution in which movies would replace books has failed to materialize.


Consider another disappointing example that may remind you of current claims for the educational potential of the World Wide Web. In 1932, Benjamin Darrow, founder of the Ohio School of the Air, proclaimed that radio could “bring the world to the classroom, to make universally available the services of the finest teachers, the inspiration of the greatest leaders...” (cited in Cuban, 1986, p. 19). His colleague, William Levenson, the director of the Ohio School of the Air predicted in 1945 that a “radio receiver will be as common in the classroom as the blackboard” and “radio instruction will be integrated into school life” (cited in Cuban, 1986, p. 19). As we rush to wire our schools and homes for access to the educational content of the Internet, it is humbling to recognize what happened to a similarly motivated movement for radio: “Radio has not been accepted as a full-fledged member of the educational community” (Cuban, 1986, p. 24).


...consider the sad history of educational television – a technology that combined the visual power of the motion picture with the worldwide coverage of radio. By the 1950s, educational television was touted as a way to create a “continental classroom” that would provide access to “richer education at less cost” (Cuban, 1986, p. 33). Yet, a review shows that teachers used television infrequently, if at all (Cuban, 1986).


...consider the most widely acclaimed technological accomplishment of the 20th century – computers. The technology that supports computers is different from film, radio, and television, but the grand promises to revolutionize education are the same. Like current claims for the mind-enhancing power of computer technology, during the 1960s computer tutoring machines were predicted to eventually replace teachers. The first large-scale implementation occurred under the banner of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) in which computers presented short frames, solicited a response from the learner, and provided feedback to the learner. In spite of a large financial investment to support CAI, sound evaluations showed that the two largest computer-based systems in the 1970s – PLATO and TICCIT – failed to produce better learning than traditional teacher-lead instruction (Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt, 1996).


What can we learn from the humbling history of the 20th century’s great educational technologies?


For more see:

http://www.cambridge.org/us/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521838733&ss=exc



My thought: "Healthy skepticism. It's healthy!" Show Me - Show me the Data!

And as the late Claude Lineberry commented: Data is plural.

# # #

A Motivated 6 Year-Old Learner and Social Learning

Boy Misses Bus, Takes Family Car
The Associated Press
Posted: Tuesday, Jan. 06, 2009


WICOMICO CHURCH, Va. A 6-year-old Virginia boy who missed his bus tried to drive to school in his family's sedan - and crashed. His parents were charged with child endangerment. State police said the boy suffered only minor injuries and authorities drove him to school after he was evaluated at a local hospital for a bump on his head. He arrived shortly after lunch, Sgt. Tom Cunningham said.


It happened around 7:40 a.m. Monday on Route 360, about 61 miles east of Richmond.
The boy, whose name wasn't released, missed the bus, took the keys to his family's 2005 Ford Taurus and drove nearly six miles toward school while his mother was asleep, police said.
He made at least two 90-degree turns, passed several cars and ran off the rural two-lane road several times before hitting an embankment and utility pole about a mile and a half from school.
The boy told police he learned to drive playing Grand Theft Auto and Monster Truck Jam video games.


"He was very intent on getting to school," said Northumberland County Sheriff Chuck Wilkins. "When he got out of the car, he started walking to school. He did not want to miss breakfast and PE."


**** **** **** ****

Motivation - and Informal Learning - can lead to Performance - but not necessarily high performance.


When it comes time to really learn how to drive - will this 6 year-old need to unlearn things learned "Informally" via Social learning via Grand Theft Auto and Monster Truck Jam? That the vehicle doesn't just pop back onto the road after your crash - and you just go on minus a few points? Will his personal Informal Learning "lesson" be able to "hold sway" for the next decade or so?

Let's hope so.

But what about all of those other Informal/ Social Learners/ Gamers approaching the "golden age" in their area for getting a Driver's License? Will the current Drivers Education programs in place be up to THAT task? Of helping the Learner unLearn the incorrect lessons learned earlier, less formally, or very informally?

Let's hope so.

Are the horror films of post-crashes enough to sway teenagers from dangerous driving? Unless it is very different from the late 1960s when I and my friends were getting our licenses - because back in that day it wasn't.

# # #

Designing for the ISD Life Cycle

Another model. Another professional presentation.

Another start of a Blog Series. Click on the following graphics to enlarge/ copy.

















The agenda...

















And of course, why bother?
















You "bother" because of the ROI, or ROA, or RONA, EVA, etc.















You need to understand the Cost of Conformance - and - the Costs of Non-Conformance.















And as they say, "do the math" - to whatever level of detail that the Risks and/or Rewards dictate.
















There are but "two major levers" - Top Line Revenues and Mid-Lines Costs. Or try both.
















Here is the 7 Value Variables Model that we'll cover in the following 7 or 8 posts.















When you design and then develop/deploy something/anything - there are a myriad of systems/ processes/ outputs & tasks.

Perhaps their total costs are insignificant to the Top Line Revenues and no one cares. Perhaps not.

# # #

If You Build It - Will They Come? - And Will YOU Update It As Needed?

What are the Risks and Rewards of Learning "Content Creation" - and not keeping whatever you create/ deploy/ make accessible UP-TO-DATE?












It is situational.

# # #

In the Charlotte Observer - January 6, 2009

The Big-to-Little Picture of EPPI

The graphic was intended to allow a discussion/ presentation on:

1- Process Requirements from Stakeholders - product and/or process REQUIREMENTS/ desires - and the Process Designers' needs to balance those requirements (tradeoffs!!!)

2- Process-derived Human Assets Requirements to HR-type groups - who with immediate/ local management acquire-develop-assess-reward/ develop-assess-reward/ etc.

3- Environmental Assets Required - the "everything else." What do the humans need to "do the process/ workflow/ task performance" and do "any handoffs?"

If this was a math problem - I'd say do the math.

But process performance problems/ opportunities are not simple math problems.

So, do the diagnosis! Before doing the math of the value of the cost of the issue - and the value/cost of resolving it - then do the math about all the alternative prescriptions. The ROIs for various scenarios.

For the sake of the shareholders/owners - and all other stakeholders.

And if you really need to do the math - I believe that Deming said that 80% of all problems were in the direct control of management. Not the workers. Remember the Red Bead Experiment?

So calculate the Cost-of-Non-Conformance and attribute 80% of that "value" to management discretion. And then - Praise and Blame accordingly.

# # #

Workflow = Process - and Improvement - via the Enabler Systems

My Approach to Performance Improvement
First focus on performance and then enable that. By that I mean look first to your process or processes. Then secondly and thirdly look at the two sets of enablers and the enterprise systems that provision those enablers.

My model is another three legged stool: Process-Human Assets-Environmental Assets. And while some have suggested that it is simply a revamp of Gilbert’s six boxes circa 1970s – it is not. It is a revamp of the Ishikawa Diagram circa 1950s.

The diagram above is an example of the “non-politically correct” fishbone/cause-and-effect versions of the Ishikawa Diagram from the early 1980s when I first learned about it while working at Motorola.

My first exposure to "process" was ala Geary Rummler in 1979 - so a couple of years later when I was at Motorola I got exposed to all sorts of quality tools and concept - one of which was the Ishikawa Diagram (from Professor Ishikawa in Japan in the 1950's).

The graphic above is certainly not "politically correct" then or now. But is was what it was. It is also known in its variations as the Fishbone Diagram - and the Cause & Effect Diagram.

A rose is a rose is a rosa.

While at Motorola I got to work with Geary on quite a few projects - for my internal Motorola Clients - and for my organization MTEC - Motorola Training & Education Center (run by Bill Wiggenhorn).

I left MTEC after 18 months to join a small consulting firm - and while Geary continued within Motorola and introduced his version of Process - and walla - out came Six Sigma - and I took what I had learned from Geary first-hand and others second-hand (Deming, Juran, Crosby) and evolved my own ISD methodology with the intent that it would expand/be scalable to go beyond Knowledge/Skill enablers - and cover all of the ENABLERS of Process.

My EPPI - Enterprise Process Performance Improvement methods are intended to look at any Enterprise, it's units, functions, departments and teams with a process-centricity - while allowing my clients to remain functional. Functional but with a process centric view of themselves. Up and Down any Enterprise - or targeted.

















And Process centric folks have got to be in tune with/ aligned with their STAKEHOLDERS to be successful. For the Stakeholders spell out the requirements - whether you picked up on them or not. Whether you saw any shifts or not. As they say: Shifts Happen.

For those who may not yet realize it Geary Rummler (not Rummler-Brache) invented the Swimlane Process Map. I always liked it - but liked the Performance Model (also from Rummer-Gilbert - but I used something that must have been a second generation derivative) . I always have thought I captured richer data with the Performance Model - which I organized by AoPs - Areas of Performance. I had seen too many process maps that just went on and on - without any visual break points.

















I use the Performance Model to systematically derive the enabling K/Ss when my project was focused on T&D/ Learning/ Knowledge Management.
















I use two sets/categories of ENABLERS- Human Assets and Environment Assets - whereas the Ishikawa Diagram had 4.















My view (or is that iView?): Processes are messy. Many are routine but plenty more are on-demand. Some are straight-line but many more are branched, intertwined, convoluted and hard to tease out diagrammatically. Process need to be looked at in chunks. Mostly at where a significant operation ends and there is a segue to one or many downstream destinations.

But what if you had a good/ well design Process - but it wasn't performing up to speed?

Sometimes the problem/opportunities are with the Process itself. Sometimes not.

Sometimes it is the enablers that are the weak links.
















And the "systems" that provision the enablers or do the enabler acquisition/ development/ enhancement so that they are available in the EPPI models are shown in the next two graphics. First - the Human Assets Management Systems - HAMS:














Secondly - the Environmental Assets Management Systems - EAMS:
















The Human Assets required to bring the process to life are found in the graphic above. The enterprise systems that provision and/or enhance those assets, albeit known most likely by other names, are depicted in the graphic below. Again, adapt as necessary.
















The Environmental Assets required to bring the process to life are found in the next graphic. These are what the human factor uses to bring that well designed paper process to life. The enterprise systems that provision and/or enhance those assets, again known by other names, are depicted in the graphic below. Again, adapt as necessary.

















I am doing a quarterly column with PROVEN Publications that covers all of this. For more information about PROVEN - go here.
















# # #

Interesting Post from Stephen Downes

Go here to read it!

# # #

1989 Video Clip References to Online Modules for AT&T Network Systems Product Managers

20 years ago - and earlier - I designed "Online Learning modules" into a Formal Learning Curriculum Architecture Design.

I've been writing/posting lately about my experiences with the AT&T Network Systems (the old Western Electric, the NS, then Lucent, and now Lucent-Alcatel) Product Management Curriculum. Here are 2 of the earlier posts: 1 - 2.

Here below is a 22:58 video clip of me in Atlanta delivering the 1st Lesson of the 6th session (including the Pilot Test session in October 1987). At least those are my claims in the video of the session's kick-off. My Client had asked me to overview the entire Curriculum with the session participants before launching into the session. So I did. We - my team at SWI and my Client Gerry Kaufhold and his assistant Maddy Van Hertbruggen - had just done a lot of work producing the Curriculum Video and the Training Planning Guide/ Supervisor's Course Catalogue. And they wanted all of this introduced at this session's opening in early 1989.



Boy this is from the old days - overhead projector, transparencies being shuffled through, double-wide flip chart easels on the walls - and me walkin' and talkin' at the front of the room.

What was of particular interest to me after watching this - and I had never watched this tape after it was made - were the references to the many "modules" of the curriculum that were available/ accessible "online" - in this case the page-turners (according to me on the video) were from the IDS "tool" that was operated by the DDO - Document Development Organization. The "online modules" covered the various organizational entities within AT&T that had a potential role to play in any Product Manager's Product Plan implementation.

Those page-turner modules were both "pre-requisites" to the 8-day session I am kicking off here - and they were also "references" for use post-class on-the-job.

After my organization (SWI) developed the first batch of modules - my Client found a closer resource to maintain all of that very volatile content - and it was scheduled to be done 3 times a year - and you'll hear my several references to the organizational changes that Network Systems (and all of AT&T) were going through at that time. This is about 5 years post-divestiture - when the Justice Department broke up the monopoly that we all knew back then as Ma Bell.

Today all of this would be on a wiki perhaps, and updated by designated folks, not the crowd and their varied wisdom and opinions, because too much of this business is highly regulated. And there was too much risk in having content that was not compliant/ aligned with requirements or otherwise could be used in court against yourself. Too risky.

So the wiki would have a broad audience - but few authors. Perhaps designated folks from the organizations themselves would update the data using templates and guidance. Or appointed authors might poll contacts in each organization and be responsible for making the updates happen.

A SN might be used to enhance communications - as the Product managers today might not all work in the same building as their peers - and communications and seeking help is harder when everyone is geographically dispersed. Managers or top performers might use Blogs within the wikis to communicate with their people and/or teams.

Back in the day - when someone received a paper letter from their team leader about the project status and plans going forward - was that LEARNING? Or is it just Learning today because it might use Web 2.0 and a Blog Posting? Because back in the day early EPSS (Electronic Performance Support Systems) were thought of and labeled as Performance versus Learning tools.

Learning is only one of many means to Performance Competence. Selection is another. And having an Enabling Environment (information, tools, materials, facilities, financial resources, and the consequences of the culture - the Cultural Context of the larger Performance Context) is also key. As Geary Rummler often said: Put a good performer in a bad system - and the system will win every time.

The video of me 20 years ago is of particular interest to me - to reflect on the changes in me - in this traditional season for personal reflection.

I'm older, grayer, and heavier than I was - that has changed. But enabling Performance using the current technology for deployment/ access has not changed. And my thoughts on how to best guide the development of that content - architecting that content - have also not changed. Not when the rewards and risks are high - especially not then.

# # #

Upskilling for ROI $ - In Tough Economic Times Focus on Performance

Times are tough - and bound to get tougher. If not, we just got lucky.

And you may be familiar with the old line:

Would you rather be lucky than good?

That phrase is usually spoken just after a "feat of luck has let someone slip by unscathed" - and it was duly noted!

As you sell your Learning Solutions internally or externally - are you focused on terminal performance objectives, terminal learning objectives or the whiz-bang rapid development tools or really cool Web 2.0 deployment/access tools?

Which sells? I think it is/will be terminal performance objectives - aka (also known as): Performance metrics, Process metrics, or Workflow metrics.
















Geary A. Rummler had a bigger influence on me than Thomas F. Gilbert - but both had them.

One big take-away for me from Gilbert from back then (I started reading this in 1979 - I even have a "proof-readers copy" of some of its chapters somewhere in the paper files downstairs - another story for some other day) was his PIP framework.

But first, his concepts about performance improvement...in the quote in the next graphic...
















I meshed/mashed up that with my (then new) understanding of ROI...which has been Kirkpatrick's 4th level since 1979 for me!!! How else would one discuss Results - other than in business terms such as ROI or RONA, EVA, etc.
















Here is Gilbert's PIP...
















Another of my favorite models for this was the Quality concept of the CoC and the CoNC - as in "if you think the Cost of Conformance (the solution) is big - just wait until you compare that to the Costs of Non-Conformance (being off target)."

If you've got a $10M problem/opportunity and the costs for addressing that are $250,000 - well then the way to present that is not to present the cost of the solution first (unless it's part of your stage show somehow); talk about the value/worth/costs of the problem/opportunity first! And then the costs of the solution!
















In one project in the late 1980s/early 1990s I used the salary dollars of the Target Audience to help justify the solution (a Curriculum Architecture Design and development effort for CATIA operators - the operators of a CAD-CAM system).

I had an article published on this - "Costing out a Training Project" - ASTD's Technical & Skills Training (May/June 1991). The title was a bit of a misnomer. I hate when editors do that! Change the title so then it is stupid! It was titled "The Costs of Non-Conformance" when submitted. OK, so that's not so "enticing either" - but it was correct. The article did not help one cost out a training project. It determined the R, the PIP, the CoNC - but not the Investment costs, the CoC costs. Which is what the new title suggested back in 1991.

But I digress.
















The above is a simple version - see this prior Blog Posting for a more complete look at dealing with a more complex Performance Context. But the simple version works well, just using salary dollars (yen, etc.).

Of course there are many other costs to consider - if they don't muddy up the picture too much -or your audience needs/loves that additional detail. But if not - don't create a more confusing picture than necessary.

Here we use a percent of Performance Competence - comparing actual/current to potential (if not 100% then what %?). And we use salary dollars - average or fully loaded or not. Whatever. Whatever that is - in terms of what is really important to your Client/Customer and the other key Stakeholders. That whatever.

Performance Competence requires more than just the K/S competence component - much more.

And - I have two free books that might help address the enabling K/S component of Process Performance...
















Each book plus others is available as a free PDF at http://www.eppic.biz/ - plus there are many other resources there and at my Social Network for PACT Practitioners (free membership/sign-up required) and at the PACT Wiki.















Focus your efforts in 2009 on Performance Competence development - or simply redouble your efforts to do so!

# # #

Intellectual Property Ownership of PACT and EPPI

When I/we dissolved CADDI in the fall of 2002 - I was the majority owner - I gave my fellow partners and key employees the rights to use my PACT and EPPI methods - as long as they maintained my copyright markings.

It was my intellectual property that started CADDI - and it was mine to take post-CADDI. I brought them in from where they were developed - at SWI - Svenson & Wallace Inc. - and that was after reaching a legal agreement with my two partners at SWI.



































It is not something that you can just claim is your own proprietary processes, or that you can change x% and then claim it as yours. Or credit them to others. "Really, Deming?"

No, not really.

There is a long history with plenty of paper trails about the origins of these methods. CAD efforts and Performance Models and K/S Matrices and Event and Module Specs and Module Blueprints later becoming T&D Paths. Qualification/Certification Systems and Performance Tests. Lesson Maps and Instructional Activity Specs.

It is very disheartening to see it being treated as otherwise.

It is disturbing ethically.

And the whole world is watching.

# # #

Free Book PDF Download Totals Through 2008

The sum totals for my free book PDF downloads is in - as of 12/31/2008!

# # #

Thank You Don Clark - aka: Big Dog!

I've been following the online work of Donald Clark since the late 1990s - originally his "Big Dog's ISD Page" - and now he has several repositories of great ISD and HPT content on the web.

Here is his site on Performance, Learning, Leadership and Knowledge.

Here is his site on Big Dog, Little Dog - a news blog.

And here is his Knowledge Jump - Knowledge Jump is an extension of Big Dog & Little Dog, which is a quality provider of knowledge, leadership, learning, and instructional design content. Due to the large amount of content on Big Dog & Little Dog, it became necessary to "grow" another site. Big Dog & Little Dog will still be around for a long time to come, in addition to being updated on a regular basis; while Knowledge Jump will become the repository for most of the new material.

Thank you Don Clark for sharing quality content on the web for over a decade!

# # #

Enabling the Workflow - the Process - via Performance-based Learning

It's a great idea - enabling the workflow with learning. It's a better idea to enable the workflow with both learning and Web 2.0 Performance Tools.

To do that you've eventually go to know/ understand/ be-able-to-paint-a-picture-of-the-Performance.

















Have you "done it to yourself" yet - or are you the all-too-typical cobbler's children without any shoes?

I offer my T&D Systems View book and PowerPointShow...
















Whether you have them as formal process or not - you've got all 47 of these processes operating.

Are they all that you need them to be?
















The Clock-face framework/model is useful to show relationships between processes/ families of processes...
















The L-C-S model is key in supporting a functional organizational structure with a process-centric view of itself.
















The L-C-S for a Training & Development/ Learning/ Knowledge Management organization....
















The model can be applied to any function/ department...
















The T&D Systems View book for managers of those functions...
















The Management Areas of Performance book provides a process and tools for defining your own...

















# # #

Is 2009 the Time to Refocus on Performance Competence?

Serious Learning Needs in the Enterprise Learning Context Will Not Be Met By Informal Learning

I've been Posting recently on "3 Learning Contexts" and Informal Learning and Formal Learning - to help put a "Situational Context" into the discussion of Web 2.0 and Learning and Performance.




















I have been having a very difficult time imagining any Enterprise Context or even any Educational Contexts where a pure Informal Learning Strategy would be a wise investment. Where one would want to invest time and money to "make that happen."

None.

If it wasn't worthy of Investment compared to the Costs of Non-Conformance in the first place - then why would executives invest in something for that "low-hanging-at-best-fruit" later?

Most Learners/PERFORMERS (85%) need both "guidance" and "in-context Learning" for it to be effective. Only the 15% at the top of their game are great candidates for an Informal Learning approach to meet their needs. Others will struggle.

Of course - an extremely motivated Learner trumps all of that! And that pretty much defines folks at the top of their game.




















I've also been Blogging about the need to talk Performance versus talk Learning.

And to relabel all of those Learning Tools as Performance Tools! What will 'sell" now in an economic crisis? Is none of it worthy of attention/investment?




















The focus always should have been PERFORMANCE.

REFOCUS as necessary!





















Interlopers/enablers such as "Learning" are not the focus - not the measure. Not the goal.

In 2009 focus on the larger picture of workflow/process performance - and get "the Learning" to effectively enable that! During the workflow - and/or before the workflow.

And then do great Learning!

Focused on Performance Competence.

# # #

Being Clear in Tough Economic Times About What Is Important - Learning or Performance?

I believe that IF we look at Learning within its Context - then we will match means with ends better.

We will see where Informal Learning fits in. And we will see where Formal Learning fits in.

And we can better judge how all of the Web 2.0 "capabilities/applications" might serve our needs. Our needs, again, fit into my iDefinition of Learning Contexts, as in the 3 referenced here and here prior:

1- Personal Learning
2- Educational Learning
3- Enterprise Learning

Just to be clear - I am coming at this from a #3 perspective - Enterprise Learning.

So, where do various Web 2.0 functionalities/ capabilities/ applications fit into my iLearning for Performance Paradigm?

And where does something such as Social Learning fall?


















The Wikipedia definition of Social Learning:
Social learning theory is the theory that people learn new behavior through over reinforcement or punishment or via observational learning. People learn through observing others' behavior. If people observe positive, desired outcomes in the observed behavior, they are more likely to model, imitate, and adopt the behavior themselves. It also suggests that the environment can have an effect on the way people behave.


My iDefinition of Social Learning:
It's all about the Consequences of the larger Social System - we learn what is reinforced. Unless we are rebels. Thus the French Underground and the Nazi sympathizers.

Let's not use Web 2.0 applications for Social Learning - but let us focus on Enabling Performance.
















I've been here before myself. Years ago. Faced with the decisions.

Spend money on Learning - or elsewhere. Or pocket as profit.

You may not be an owner or even a shareholder where you perform for earnings.

But you can pretend if you need to:

It's all your money. It's profit in your pocket - if you don't spend/invest it. For greater returns.
On Web 2.0 Learning Tools. Or on Web 2.0 Performance Tools.

It's a strategic bet. Make it.

















I think it is time that we turn the tide of the talk from "Learning" to "Enabling Performance"-if we are to survive the tough economic times ahead.














Think of the investments required for implementing a Web 2.0 strategy to enable performance - with learning as a necessary component - but not the whole show. How would you "sell those investments?"

What is important - behind EVERY Learning Investment - in an Enterprise Learning Context - is the clarity regarding Stakeholder Requirements. Those are where the R's come from in ROI. Return on Investment.

No kidding.

# # #

Happy New Year to All!