|
By Bill English, MCSE,
MCT, MVP
Chief Learning Officer (CLO). If you’ve not
heard of this newly-minted “C-Level” position,
then hang on to your hat: companies are hiring
CLOs left and right to help them manage their
overall learning efforts, regardless of the
subjects and domains that need to be taught.
And these CLOs have their own magazine too,
titled Chief Learning Officer.
Learning is the current buzzword. Not
surprisingly, last year Microsoft grouped
TechNet, the CTEC (Certified Technical Education
Center) channel and Microsoft Press under a
single umbrella called Microsoft Learning.
Interestingly, the latest edition of the CLO
magazine was filled with articles espousing the
use of technology to achieve “just in time”
learning while pounding on the growing view that
“instructor-led training” is waning (translate –
inefficient, outdated, etc…) in the face of
technology-based delivery methods. Bob Mosher,
Director of Learning Evangelism and Strategy for
Microsoft Learning wrote:
I have always felt that
the learners are way ahead of many of us in the
training industry when it comes to what meets
their instructional needs. Because of how hard
we work at developing and scaling our learning
programs, we’re often not the most responsive
and flexible groups when it comes to change.
The reality of living in today’s economic and
technological times is that change comes quick
and more frequently than ever. Training as an
industry tends to move and adapt at a much
slower pace. Although the pedagogical methods
we’ve worked on for years are instructionally
sound and defendable, they can quickly become
outdated and ineffective as our students adapt
their learning to fit today’s complex work
environment.
Contrast that with the latest market research
(ironically, offered in the same magazine) from
the American Management Association (AMA). Taken
from a 2002 study by the American Society for
Training and Development, their research
indicates that over 70 percent of
organizations consider classroom training to be
the best choice for employee instruction. In
addition, a 2003 study conducted by ERC Dataplus
and the Human Resource Executive magazine
found that 96 percent of companies that did not
scale back training due to the economy relied on
classroom instruction. Why?
ü
Instructor-led training allows
employees to concentrate on learning by taking
them away from their desks and everyday demands
ü
Savvy, experienced instructors
help trainees apply what they learn to
real-world needs by enabling them to ask
questions and relate the answers to their job
ü
Classroom instruction allows
people to interact with other people – and learn
from those with different backgrounds and
perspectives
ü
Group settings are ideal for those
who wish to solve problems and discover new
knowledge and acquire new skills
In
addition, the AMA research found that
self-training had these shortcomings:
ü
Difficult to get employees
motivated to learn on their own
ü
No access to continuous
personalized support
ü
No other learning tools other than
the course materials for the student to use
ü
No extensive hands-on practice so
new skills can be immediately applied to the job
There is no doubt that we need to constantly
update our base of information to perform our
jobs and the delivery methods are becoming more
technology-based. Moreover, there is much to be
gained from a cost perspective by using
technology-based learning. But in the long run,
a live instructor – someone who knows their
content domain as well as anyone else in the
market – is still the preferred and best
education money can buy – at least that’s what
the research is telling us. And the objections
to classroom instruction – including lack of
time during the workday to devote to learning,
budget constraints and travel hassles – fail to
recognize its’ significant advantage. |
In
only a short time, under the guidance of a good
teacher, trainees can quickly acquire solid,
lifelong skills and develop new, positive
behavior while losing bad habits. Without
interaction with a skilled instructor, the
student may never experience this transition.
Hence, who delivers your instructor-led
class is (usually) more important than the
course materials themselves. Static information
can be gleaned anywhere – but the application,
explanation and synthesis of the information is
fundamental to your learning experience. A
great instructor should be able to help you do
this.
For
example, part of the reason, in my opinion, that
CTECs have taken such a beating in the last few
years is because they failed to realize that
their instructors were the product, not the MOC
(Microsoft Official Curriculum) courseware. Too
many of these CTECs focused on “butts and seats”
and saw their training as a commodity rather
than a profession. The difference is profound.
In addition, too many of these instructors were
paid too little and often moved on to better
paying jobs rather quickly, leading to constant
turnover in the instructor staff. This led to
an environment where new trainers who knew
minimal amounts of information were placed in
front of seasoned professionals who had a
hankering for instructors who had “been there,
done that”. You couldn’t have scripted a better
scenario to create customer dissatisfaction.
And dissatisfaction doesn’t lead to repeat
business.
Given the continuing explosion in information
that we are expected to know, it seems logical
that one can only read so many white papers
before one is burned out on reading. And
advanced learners need information more quickly
than what most technology-based instruction
methods provide. Moreover, given that most IT
people have multiple systems to support – all of
which are increasing in complexity as newer
versions are released – it seems that they are
looking for the best way to learn as much
practical information as possible in the
shortest amount of time.
This
is where instructor-led education can shine
if the instructor is able to coalesce the
complexities of the software into concrete,
practical explanations. For example, a growing
segment of the market is enamored with the
SharePoint Products and Technologies from
Microsoft, but much of the market is in
confusion on how to best deploy this product.
Outstanding education will take the complexities
in the design of this product and make them
understandable.
How
do you know if you’ve got a good instructor?
Well, first, take a look at their resume. Are
they known leaders in their industry? Can they
quickly demonstrate their expertise in the
content area they are going to teach? Do they
understand the customer scenarios that led to
the features of the software? You see, good
instructors know not only where to point and
click, but also how to map your business
processes to the technology with a view to
making the technology support and fit your
business.
I
live in the SharePoint Products and Technologies
space. My company, Mindsharp, focuses on
SharePoint education. We go the extra mile to
ensure that our education is focused on helping
you understand how to use the software in your
environment.
For
example, in our 4-day Design and Architecture
class on SharePoint Products and Technologies,
we not only cover the most important decision
points to achieve an outstanding SharePoint
deployment, but our students walk away with a
personalized roadmap for their own deployment.
In our opinion, this is education at its best:
learning how to use the technology to support
your business goals and knowing what to do when
you get back to the office. We believe that
technology education has to be more than just
learning where to point and click or how to
troubleshoot an individual problem. We believe
that technology education needs to help the
student do more in their environment because
they understand how to use the software to
support the overall business goals. In other
words, when people know how, then they can do.
By
the way, if you’d like to learn more about our
company, Mindsharp, please visit our web site at
www.mindsharp.com.
|
