AchieveGlobal's blog

DEBATE: What sort of training do younger workers--digital natives--need to master skills of leadership, sales, and customer service?

by Jack McDaniel The generation coming up in the workforce is learning to learn in a virtual world. IDC research shows “that 45% of companies have workers blogging, 43% use RSS feeds, and 35% of companies have employees using wikis.” IDC also reported that company executives and CIOs are often unaware of employee use of tools on the other side of the firewall. As corporations, we need to embrace the tools workers are using, make it safe to use them, and give workers opportunities to use them to learn. Secondary and post-secondary schools are increasing the number of on-line and virtual classroom sessions. Would any of us feel comfortable sending our kids to a school that did not teach and incorporate computer skills and virtual research techniques? The next generation expects to learn virtually. In addition, as companies are becoming much more global, with work groups that span the country, if not the entire world. Managers manage virtual teams, the service industry is becoming more and more a remote business (with offshore and virtual customer service groups), and sales are moving more toward on-line, with greater emphasis on reducing travel budgets. Corporate decision-makers may be located in three different states, or countries. If the next generation needs to learn to bridge distance and communicate virtually, so why wouldn’t training (including real-time skills practice) be virtual? The new generation is equipped to learn via elearning techniques, they are more comfortable learning via simulations, and they have virtual social skills that will need to be refined for the business world. So the best way to train them is in their native environment… online. If you're a digital native, or hope to be one in your next virtual life, watch this video in which Todd has no chance of winning this debate with me on AchieveGlobal Island in Second Life.

DEBATE: What sort of training do younger workers--digital natives--need to master skills of leadership, sales, and customer service?

by Todd Beck You can all throw gray goo or nuke me, or however else you choose to grief me, but I’ll say it anyway: I think generational differences are over-hyped. People are people, and have been for thousands of years through renaissance and revolution and countless arguments about how parents just don’t understand. We’ve always needed help improving personal interactions, and we always will need help. In fact, if the simplest information exchanges are moved to technology, then face-to-face (or phone-to-phone) will inherently become the really meaty discussions. So what training do today’s workers need? The interpersonal skills needed 50 years ago will be needed 50 years from now. People need to be able to ask questions to better understand needs, create messages that push the right buttons (pun intended), read how the other person is responding, help the other person manage emotions productively, and motivate desired behaviors. Perhaps most important, they need to learn that all these skills apply to all these media. That the way you interact with me via instant messaging has to create the same feeling I get from you when we’re face-to-face. And only classroom will allow me the chance to practice those vital face-to-face interactions. Check out this video where I grief Jack during our debate on AchieveGlobal Island in Second Life.

DEBATE: What is the best way to engage learners and motivate them to apply new behaviors in the workplace?

by Todd Beck I’d like to separate the two points—“engage learners” and “motivate them to apply new behaviors in the workplace.” The motivation part is no secret--it’s all about what’s in it for me. So when a behavior leads to more money, more recognition, less work, and fewer complaints, then a learner will absolutely apply that behavior. Motivation is not a training issue. It’s a management issue that determines the success of training. And it applies equally to classroom or elearning. I think, though, that learners infer a lot from the organization’s willingness to invest in training, and if elearning is seen as the cheap, low-priority method, then learners infer that the skills taught are low-priority. There’s something about my boss scheduling me to leave work and spend time in class that says, hey, this behavior must be important either to my boss or to somebody even higher up. And that means it’s important to me. As for “how to keep learners from being bored,” I think either classroom or elearning can do that equally well, if properly designed. If you're bored, you should check out this video where Jack and I engage each other in debate on AchieveGlobal Island in Second Life.

DEBATE: What is the best way to engage learners and motivate them to apply new behaviors in the workplace?

by Jack McDaniel Regardless of the learning modality, the best ways to engage learners are to 1) make the content relevant to their jobs, and 2) make learning highly interactive. Simple techniques, such as a case study real to the learner instead of a generic situation or a skill practice that resonates with the learner’s real-life situation, can make a world of difference. This kind of learner engagement can be accomplished easily in either classroom, virtual classroom or self-paced elearning. But it’s in the follow-up and reinforcement where the learning modality can make a difference – and using technology is clearly superior. Just look at the effectiveness of blogs, EPSS, discussion forums and communities of practice. A comment about this question: While it's true that relevant content engages the learner, organizational commitment is even more critical. This commitment reveals itself in the importance that the organization puts on learning, the rewards that come from improved performance, and endorsements and follow-up from the executive team down to the manager. Management teams must be engaged. They must help coach and reinforce the behaviors before, during, and after the learning, regardless of the modality. If learner engagement is relevant to your business, watch this video in which Todd and I continue this debate on AchieveGlobal Island in Second Life.

DEBATE: Doesn ' t it make sense for people to learn leadership, sales, and service skills by communicating with each other, face-to-face, in a classroom environment?

by Jack McDaniel It does make sense for people to learn “human skills” by communicating with each other, but not necessarily in a face-to-face classroom environment. A 2006 IDC report indicated that 70% of learning happens informally, outside a face-to-face classroom environment. This includes looking something up on Google, asking a question over the next cubicle, having water-cooler conversations, and communicating by IM, text messages, and so on. Of the remaining 30% of learning, ASTD reports that 30% of that (one hour in every three) is involves elearning, often in a collaborative format. Josh Bersin’s data indicates that over 11% of firms already use collaboration through “communities of practice” to encourage employee learning, with interest building in on-demand approaches such as blogs, wikis, and discussion forums. So yes, we are social beings and will continue to rely on learning from each other; however, there’s a lot more than face-to-face classroom training to meet our needs. Data indicates that only 11% of people who watch this video think Todd's argument is stronger than mine. Seems to me I'm totally winning this virtual-world debate on the AchieveGlobal Island in Second Life.

DEBATE: Doesn ’t it make sense for people to learn leadership, sales, and service skills by communicating with each other, face-to-face, in a classroom environment?

by Todd Beck Yes, it does make sense to match the medium with the message. I read in a Wall Street Journal survey related to business schools that about 80% of corporate recruiters—businesspeople like you—said that online programs are not as effective in developing skills as classroom programs. In fact, nearly 40% of recruiters rated online programs as "not at all effective." Josh Bersin’s 2008 research on elearning found that less than 2% of you were training customer service skills mostly online. Only 4% for interpersonal skills, and a whopping 0% were doing sales training completely online. That’s intuitive from a learning perspective—we learn interpersonal behaviors by seeing and doing. eLearning’s virtual reality apparently just isn’t real enough for most learners. Speaking of virtual reality, you can watch this video where Jack's avatar gets pwn3d by Todd's avatar as we continue this debate on AchieveGlobal Island in Second Life.

DEBATE: With shrinking training budgets, what is the best way to invest in human capital development?

by Todd Beck In tough times, the smart thing to do is to focus on return on investment, not just how to lower the investment. Because whatever the economy, you get what you pay for. You know, it’s interesting that in 2008 MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) raised its classroom tuition a full 4.1%. And almost every other university and community college out there is raising tuition for classroom instruction. But MIT offers absolutely free the elearning equivalent of classroom instruction, including lectures and study materials via the Internet. That’s validation that the return on classroom investment is seen as going up, while the return on elearning investment has continued to decline.  In a soft economy, you need to decide if you want to invest to survive or invest to thrive. Classroom is still very much a smart investment. Enjoying the debate? Check out this video where Jack and I battle in real-time but in Second Life on AchieveGlobal Island.

DEBATE: With shrinking training budgets, what is the best way to invest in human capital development?

By Jack McDaniel The best way to maximize an investment in human capital development is through leveraging technology-based learning. Not only do you get consistent quality of training – especially since elearning 2.0 has made possible exciting new instructional design tools and techniques – but you also get the performance support tools necessary to reinforce learners as they change their behavior. We all know that coaching and reinforcement are critical to assimilating skills, yet budgets usually cut the funding in this area. If we teach the learner where to go for coaching and reinforcement, and if those tools are available just-in-time, then technology gives us a win-win situation. Learners have access to the same materials that they experienced during the initial learning and learners know where to get them – anytime, anywhere – all at a reduced cost to the organization. The organization can then use part of the dollars saved in employee travel costs – and lost opportunities because they’re out of the office – and invest that in a blend of live virtual and self-paced coaching and reinforcement programs. I'll leave you with a recent quote from an executive with a Fortune 500 company:

“We would prefer to have training reach 100% of our population and be 50% effective, than to only offer training to the 20% that we could afford to cover face-to-face. And we do not feel that the newer elearning is less effective than traditional classroom, so the choice is a no-brainer.”

If you're excited about the possibilities elearning 2.0 can bring to your organization, watch me pummel Todd mercilessly and with pithy elocution in this video  as we debate the issue on AchieveGlobal Island in Second Life.

Is classroom on life support? YES!

By Jack McDaniel Technology is here to stay, it just keeps improving, and we eagerly embrace that. How many of us are comfortable without access to email or our cell phones? We’re all proud to be part of the “frenzy of fascination” that Todd mentioned. Technology is helpful. We conduct business in new ways, more efficiently. Perhaps more importantly, the upcoming generation of businesspeople are demanding that they communicate, work, and learn leveraging the techniques and technologies that they’ve grown accustomed to. They embrace collaborative environments, virtual classrooms, self-study elearning and knowledge-based systems like EPSS. The Sloan Consortium annual learning benchmarking reports that more than 90% of all post-secondary institutions in the US currently offer some variety of elearning, and that online enrollments are increasing at a rate of more than 18% per year, compared with traditional enrollments at a rate of 4%. Schools that do not currently offer on-line capabilities are considered sub-par. As humans we’re wired to be social, and social communication – including learning – is being shifted to online modes, freeing us from the constraints of formal face-to-face classrooms. Simply put, we’d no more accept a steady diet of classroom learning than we would accept giving up our email, cell phones, Facebook, or LinkedIn accounts. So yes, face-to-face classroom training is on as much life support as Pong or rotary dial telephones. NOTE: Is elearning vs. classroom a debate happening in your organization? If so, watch this video in whichTodd and I battle it out on AchieveGlobal Island in Second Life.

Is classroom on life support? NO!

By Todd Beck This is a hot topic in the 21st century, and yet has been argued for decades--maybe since back when radio started broadcasting educational content. Today's threat is the internet and virtual instructors, so people keep asking: Is classroom on life support? To find the answer, I will take on Jack McDaniel (AchieveGlobal's Media Projects Director) in a no-holds-barred, deathmatch cage fight--well, more of a structured debate with some trash talk thrown in. Jack has deep experience with writing, instructional design, and Web development. He'll claim classroom is dead. I will take the position that classroom is alive and well. After brief remarks from each side, we'll answer a series of questions. Who will win? Stay tuned. Here's my opening position: I love technology. I research technology. I’m one of those people who friends and neighbors come to for advice and help with technology. Heck, I work on my computer all day and then go home and play on my computer all night. But the other day I took one of those assessments where it measures where you are personally on the change adoption continuum. And as you listen to me speak today it will be no surprise that the assessment showed that, when it comes to change, I’m a pragmatist. A solid focus on what’s practical—what will generate the highest return on investment. And I don’t apologize for that. You and I are businesspeople. We get paid to generate business results. So when I think of behavior change, and I look at everything that impacts the likelihood that an employee will complete training, will commit to new behaviors, and will apply new behaviors on the job, I see classroom as the long-standing champion that has been and might forever be the most effective way humans learn. Elliott Masie recently wrote that “there is a frenzy of fascination and way too much hype” about technology. “And, much of this frenzy does not map back to the requirements of learning development and design.”  (Learning TRENDS by Elliott Masie - August 29, 2007) People are people, so why should it be that you and I should be physically wired to benefit from classroom learning for thousands of years, and then suddenly during this “frenzy of fascination” somehow have our basic learning preferences change? Classroom is how humans learn. Classroom is not on life support. Classroom is life support. ....Jack--it's your turn. Bring it on!