I’ve written about Intentional Design previously and not surprisingly it targets both learning AND performance. Maybe the better title for this post would’ve been Are You Curating for Learning or Performance? I chose intentional design in this title because it’s not an either/or effort…we should be curating for both…but methinks if traditional L&D is the curator-in-charge the focus is not going to include Performance…not Point of Work focused…nor Moment of Need responsive. That’s why I offer this thought…Are our curation efforts as intentional as our design?
That question sets the stage for the discussion around…“What really are our intentions?”
Which begs the question… “What is our scope? Is it a learning solution? Is it a tactical performance solution? Or is it a hybrid solution that is agile enough to serve both purposes?”
Intentionality is borne out of perspective and scope, where in the traditional L&D sense…solution scope shapes perspective and/or limits relevance, effectiveness, and applicability at the Point of Work. Methinks that fact alone is enough to spark a step-change in L&D.
The question now becomes “Are we intentional enough?”
Intentional Design targets both…
- Learning…as in assets that facilitate effective, relevant and accessible knowledge transfer…AND
- Performance…as in sustained workforce capability to execute at the task-level at the Point of Work and at diverse Moments of Need.
Those two targets imply a design structure and often technology that facilitates integration into the workflow…and…design that is agile enough to align with moments of need at the Point of Work.
Integration into the workflow implies we must have pre-design knowledge of that very workflow at the task-level…AND…
- When & where performance crashed?
- Who failed & why at that crash point?
- Were there upstream process issues that triggered the crash?
- What content assets were they consuming when the crash occurred?
- What technology was involved (personal & enterprise) in the crash?
- What was being measured that served as evidence of the crash in the first place?
All these answers must be known before anyone can be intentional about designing a solution to fix a performance gap…or a learning gap…or both.
From a curation perspective, it is even more critical to know these things because the assets to be curated should be aligned with actionable information intended to close the gaps present at crash points…both known and anticipated.
The skills to accomplish this level of discovery are not part of the current L&D paradigm; possibly supporting known crash points are within reach, but what about anticipated? The skills to curate effectively require a level of intimacy of actual workflows and onboard performance savvy that are often out of scope and out of capability for many in L&D today.
Is what I’m suggesting sounding disrespectful and a harsh indictment? Hell no…it’s a call to action.
If we really want to be intentional with our solution design, we absolutely must become intentional about assessing performance and addressing it with evolved skills, methods and technology.
That last statement is the main point of this rant, and is at the core of the needed STEP-CHANGE facing L&D today.
If your L&D team needs to step up to step-change in 2018, it might be time for us to road map a path to get there. I welcome all thoughts, conversations and inquiries that rants such as this one may stir up.
Is it going to be a great 2018. Will that include your L&D team?