Personal Learning Strategy

In becoming a leader, or a self-directed learner, one must be able to learn effectively.  Learning effectively not only requires learning in a classroom setting, it also entails learning from experience, learning while doing, learning from others, and being able to teach or mentor what you have learned. Thomas (2008) identified a personal learning strategy as: "something to be owned and enacted by an individual, driven by his or her personal vision, tailored to his or her learning style, aimed to extract insight from the broadest possible range of experiences, and dedicated to achieving meaningful results" (p. 86).

Personal Vision

Identify what your own vision is. This requires asking hard questions such as: why you want to do what you are doing (ex: why you want to lead), what type of leader do others perceive you to be, what type of leader do you want others to identify you as, what does a day as a good leader look like, and how do you get from where you are today to where you desire to be?

Thomas (2008) listed McClelland's individual motivation assessment to help one determine how best they are motivated to lead.  McClelland's types of motivation, based on an individual's specific needs, include achievement, affiliation, and power. An achievement motivated leader would be motivated by achieving excellence and doing things well, with an emphasis on performance. An affiliated motivated leader includes one who is concerned with social relationships, wanting to be liked, with preferences to being part of a group. A power motivated leader wants to influence relationships and be in charge. This exercise in determining your own personal motivation is first to identify your own personal type. Next you want be cognizant of the other types of motivating forces so you will be able to recognize them. By determining a person's needs you will be more capable to influence that individual.  Further information on McClelland's, and other motivational theories (Herzberg's Motivators and Hygiene Factors, McGregor's XY Theory, and others) can be found at http://www.learnmanagement2.com/DavidMcClelland.htm and http://www.managementstudyguide.com/mcclellands-theory-of-needs.htm

Persoanal Learning Style

Thompson (2008) highlighted the importance of what he called adaptive capacity. Adaptive capacity refers to "an individual's ability to adapt and his or her ability and willingness to learn" (p. 103). Understanding how you learn best, and how you learn best in differing situations, will aid you in developing your personal learning strategy.  There are a number of learning style tests available.  One familiar test is Kolb's Learning Style Inventory consisting of four types of learners: converging, assimilating, diverging, and accommodating. Converging learners prefer practical applications and solving problems, assimilating learners focus on planning and creating models, diverging learners are more imaginative and open to new ideas, while accommodating learners use trial-and-error and are more prone to taking risks.  More information on Kolb's learning styles can be found at Clark's web page; other types of learning styles are also available such as the Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Learning Styles (VAK), and the Learning Style Survey. Each of these learning style theories are designed to be used as a reference point for the individual, one's type of learning style should not direct the way one approaches learning. Rather, concentrate on the different types of learning styles, know your own style, and work on building your abilities in those styles that you are weaker in.  Broaden your learning spectrum.

Extract Insight & Learn from Experience

Developing a personal learning strategy also includes being able to extract meaning and purpose from your experiences. Being honest, having integrity to do whats right, taking the lead, or allowing others to lead, and engaging others through shared meaning provide opportunities to extract insight from experience. Thomas (2008) emphasized not only learning from experience, but also to learn while doing: "when you don't have time to practice and yet you seek to improve your performance, you have to learn how to practice while you perform" (p. 62).

Providing a personal learning strategy helps to provide one with a guidebook for their journey.  A personal learning strategy can be changed, it is not written in ink. Actually, a personal learning strategy should be malleable, allowing one to change it as they grow. One other benefit for having a personal learning strategy is that it helps prevent one from becoming stagnant: "Skills can stagnate from underuse; they can be blunted through misuse; and they can be superseded by advances in the field. They must, therefore, be renewed" (p. 222).

References:

Thomas, R. J. (2008). Crucibles Of Leadership: How To Learn From Experience To Become A Great Leader. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.

Innovation - Organization and Human Resources

Traditionally, organizations designed their training and transfer of knowledge to their employees on an as-needed basis, or what management thought was needed for their employees.  This type of system has become to be known as a 'push' system, directions coming from the top-down.  As organizations are experiencing globalization, more complex working environments with an ever-expanding resource of information, they are being forced to adjust to what is termed a 'pull' system (Hagel III, Brown, & Davison, 2010), representing a flatter organizational hierarchical structure.  

This age of complexity has also been referred to as the knowledge economy (macro), or the knowledge organization (micro) as termed by Drucker (2007). This knowledge organization is designed to focus more on contribution rather than on power, is structured according to the flow of information, and is multidimensional - breaking traditional organizational silos (Drucker, 2007). 

With a flatter organizational hierarchy structure the organization fosters innovation from both top-down and bottom-up communications.  To better foster innovation from the bottom-up communication chain McFadzean (1999) recommended the following to motivate employees to think creatively:

1. Motivate employees: reward employees for good practice.
2. Motivate think: give employees time to think about their own pet projects.
3. Motivate creative: train employees in how to think more creatively.
4. Employees creative: encourage the use of creative problem-solving techniques during meetings.

When conducting team and/or collaborative activities for innovation, Hunter et al. (as cited in McFadzean, 1999) offered the following guidelines:

1. Get to know the other people.
2. Be clear about the group purpose, values, ground rules and practices.
3. Contribute to discussions, group decision making and task allocation.
4. Share thoughts, ideas, feelings and concerns.
5. Listen generously to other people.
6. Speak concisely and to the point.
7. Maintain focus and ensure that the process will lead to the fulfillment of the meeting's goals.
8. Be proactive. Make suggestions, propose alternatives, look at what's missing in the discussion and add it.
9. Be flexible. Avoid taking a fixed position. 
10. Ensure that you understand the conversation that you are contributing to.
11. Do not avoid conflict. Disagreement and conflict are an important part of the development of the group.
12. Keep to the ground rules and encourage others to keep to them as well.
13. Fulfill the commitments that have been promised in the appropriate time frame.

Encouraging and fostering ideas from employees will be required more as the organizational hierarchy changes from a top-down structure to a more bottom-up structure.  Drucker (2007) described that innovation needs to come from "the places that control the human resources and the money… from the existing large aggregate of trained people and disposable money" (p. 152).  The guidelines presented above will assist with the human resources portion of innovation.  Innovation is an organization function, consisting of all employees, stakeholders, and shareholders. "The innovative organization manages to innovate as an organization, that is, as a human group organized for continual and productive innovation (Drucker, 2007, p. 154).

Reference:

Drucker, P. F. (2007). People and Performance: The Best of Peter Drucker on Management. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Hagel III, J., Brown, J. S., & Davison, L. (2010). The Power of Pull: How Small Moves, Smartly Made, Can Set Big Things in Motion. New York, NY: Basic Books.

McFadzean, E. (1991). Encouraging creative thinking. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 20(7), 374-383. Retrieved from Emerald. 

Learning and Performance Quarterly

There is a new open access journal now available from the Department of Learning Technologies at the University of North Texas titled; Learning and Performance Quarterly. The student-lead team, faculty supported, that has put this publication together has done some great work. This peer reviewed publication is worth checking out for information relating to learning and performance. Plus, this publication takes an international perspective to learning and performance issues.

The primary goals for this open access journal are stated as follows:

• Create interdisciplinary partnerships between scholars, scholar practitioners, and practitioners;
• Provide a platform for emerging and established scholars and scholar practitioner to dissemination research in the area of learning and performance;
• Serve as an incubator for learning and performance innovation;
• Nurture future scholars and scholar practitioners;
• Decrease the gap between theory and practice;
• Increase exchange of knowledge between education and business;
• Develop knowledge solutions platforms to increase learning and performance; and
• Servie as curators of knowledge solutions for organizational systems (Retrieved from http://www.sageperformance.com/ojs/index.php.LPQ/about/editorialPolicies#focusAndScope).

For more information on the journal you can access the following links.  Additionally, if you are interested in submitting an article feel free to follow the link provided.

LP Quarterly, Vol. 1, No. 1 is Published

http://www.sageperformance.com/ojs/index.php/LPQ/issue/current

Stay connected with up to date call for submissions at:

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/LPQuarterly

Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/LPquarterly or follow @LPQuarterly

Team Learning - Psychological Safety

One key internal mechanisms that aids teams to operate effectively is the psychological safety that team members gain while operating within the unit of the team.  Edmondson (2012) identified the general premise of psychological safety: no one team member can perform perfectly in every scenario. Team members vary on their knowledge and experience, additionally work places and tasks vary on levels of complexity.  As the level of complexity increases psychological safety becomes an even more critical team construct.

Kostopoulos and Bozionelos (2011) identified psychological safety where team members are safe for interpersonal risk taking, meaning that teams and team members are able to take risks without any repercussions if they fail.  The learning process, rather than the results, is what is important to the team - as long as the team members continue to learn by trying new methods to solve problems they should feel free to explore without being penalized in any manner.  Psychological safety provides a healthy learning environment by facilitating exploratory learning and creating an environment conducive to critical thinking and open discussion (Kostopoulos & Bozionelos, 2011).

Edmondson (2012) identified some benefits provided by psychological safe work environments for teams:

• Encourages speaking up
• Enables clarity of thought
• Supports productive conflict
• Mitigates failure
• Promotes innovation
• Removes obstacles to pursuing goals for achieving performance
• Increases accountability (p. 126, Exhibit 4.2)

Schein (2010) identified that a change leader "must reduce learning anxiety by increasing the learner's sense of psychological safety" (p. 305).  Schein (2010) identified eight activities that a change leader must empliment to provide a psychological safe team environment:

• A compelling positive vision
• Formal training
• Involvement of the learner
• Informal training of relevant "family" groups, and teams
• Practice fields, coaches, and feedback
• Positive role models
• Support groups in which learning problems can be aired and discussed
• Systems and structures that are consistent with the new way of thinking and working (pp. 306-307).

When each of these eight activities are created, simultaneous, a clear psychological safe work environment will be provided for teams to operate in - providing a safe learning environment for team members to function in.

References:

Edmondson, A. C. (2012). Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.    

Kostopoulos, K. C., & Bozionelos, N. (2011). Team exploratory and exploitative learning: Psychological safety, task conflict, and team performance. Group and Organization Management, 36(3), 385-415. dpi: 10.1177/1059601111405985

Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational Culture and Leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Learning from Training: Learning Theories

Learning is perceived to be both a cognitive construct and a social construct.  Some may argue that learning is predominantly cognitive while others would argue that learning is primarily social.  In either case, regardless of which epistemology you prescribe to, learning from training works best when both cognitive and social activities are incorporated.

Learning as a cognitive construct:

Merriam, Caffarella, and Baumgartner (2007) identified the cognitive perspective of learning from the camps of Piaget, Kuhn, and Dewey.  This perspective views learning as: "meaning… by the individual and is dependent on the individual's previous and current knowledge structure. Learning is thus an internal cognitive activity" (p. 291). This stream of learning theories view past experiences, existing knowledge, and interactions with the environment as critical to new learning.

Learning as a social construct:

Merriam et al. (2007) identified the social perspective of learning from the campus of Vygotsky and Driver. This perspective views culture and social interaction as being critical to learning.  "This approach involves learning the culturally shared ways of understanding and talking about the world and reality (Merriam et al., 2007, p. 292).  From this perspective culture, artifacts, and social interaction with others is critical to new learning.

The learning spectrum:

Merriam et al. (2007) describe these two learning theories as a type of spectrum, with cognitive theories on one end of the spectrum and social theories on the opposite end of the spectrum.  Realistically, the location one is on this learning spectrum is situational. In some situations the learning could be more cognitive, while in other situations this learning could be mostly social.  

Training and Learning:

Viewing the composite of learning from the middle of the learning spectrum one would view learning as both cognitive and social.  Situationally, this would be the optimal position to maximize learning from training.  Specific learning activities have been identified that would take advantage of both the cognitive and social theories of learning.  Listed below are a few activities / theories that could be used during training to optimize learning.

• Activity Theory (AT): Activity theory 'conceptualizes learning as involving a subject (the learner), and object (the task or activity) and mediating artifacts…. Activity theory… combines the individual and the social (including culture and history) in understanding an activity such as learning' (Merriam et al., 2007, p. 292).

• Action-Based Learning: Action-Based Learning is "a dynamic, real-time method of training that brings a group of individuals together to identify the cause of real problems and arrive at possible solutions…. requiring those solutions to be put into action and the results fed back to the group" (Kirkpatrick, & Kirkpatrick, 2010, p. 116).

• Evaluative Research: Evaluative research can be used in a training environment as a means to combine both a groups knowledge and experience through social interactions.  Evaluative research "involves statements about cause-and-effect relationships" (Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2010, p. 12). One example of an evaluative research model is a needs assessment where "a set of procedures for identifying and prioritizing needs related to societal, organizational, and human performance" (McKillip, as cited in Gall et al., 2010, p. 515) is conducted.  Another type of evaluative research would be responsive evaluation, responsive evaluation "focuses on identifying and describing stakeholders' issues… and concerns" (Gall et al. 2010, p. 516).

• Action Research: Action Research is research conducted in the workplace, where the problem exists.  Gall et al. (2010) identified seven steps to an action research project:
• Selection of a Focus for the Study (or training)
• Data Collection
• Analysis and Interpretation of the Data
• Taking Action
• Reflection
• Continuation or Modification of Practices
• Preparing a Report of the Findings (or group presentation)
• *parenthesis include items added, not in original referenced material*

Summary:

Effective training could maximize learning by focusing activities along the middle of the learning spectrum. Various activities are available from the education and research literature that could be used in training situations that provide learning opportunities for participants.  The above activities are only a few of those available that could be used in a training exercise.  Those listed are identified to maximize learning as viewed from the middle of the learning spectrum.

References:

Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. (2010). Applying Educational Research (6th ed.). Boston, MS: Pearson.

Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2010). Training on Trial: How Workplace Learning Must Reinvent Itself to Remain Relevant. New York, NY: American Management Association (AMACOM).

Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in Adulthood: A Comprehensive Guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Teaming

Teaming, according to Edmondson (2012) in her new book teaming, is viewed as a learning process involving "iterative cycles of communication, decision, action, and reflection" (p. 50).  From this organizational learning perspective, teaming is a dynamic process determined by the mindset and practices of teamwork - "teamwork on the fly" (p. 13). Here, teaming is the the change agent for the organization, the engine of organizational learning.

From my perspective, I viewed Edmondson's (2012) idea of teaming as that of an Action Research approach to addressing tasks, projects, or specific problems. Kurt Lewin, the father of social psychology, believed that action research would help resolve social conflict in the workplace, improving the overall human condition (Burnes, 2007). "Lewin believed that the key to achieving this was to facilitate group learning through democratic participation and so enable individuals to understand and restructure their perceptions of the world around them" (Burnes, 2007, p. 215).

Action research is the fundamental principle behind many models of change. French and Bell defined action research as:

"The process of systematically collecting research data about an ongoing system relative to some objective, goal, or need of that system; feeding these data back into the system; taking actions by altering selected variable within the system based both on the data and on hypotheses; and evaluating the results of actions by collecting more data" (cited in Rothwell & Sullivan, p. 42).

Edmondson (2012), expands on this action research model to include acceptance of the individual as well as including the collaborative efforts of the group.  This is reflected in the four specific behaviors for successful teaming that Edmondson (2012) provided:

• Speaking Up: Teaming depends on honest, direct conversation between individuals, including asking questions, seeking feedback, and discussing errors.
• Collaboration: Teaming requires a collaborative mindset and behaviors - both within and outside a given unit of teaming - to drive the process.
• Experimentation: Teaming requires a tentative, iterative approach to action that recognizes the novelty and uncertainty inherent in every interaction between individuals.
• Reflection: Teaming relies on the use of explicit observations, questions, and discussions of processes and outcomes. This must happen on a consistent basis that reflects the rhythm of the work , whether that calls for daily, weekly, or other project-specific timing (p. 52, Exhibit 2.1).

References:

Burnes, B. (2007). Kurl lewin and the hardwood studies: The foundation of OD. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43(2), 213-231.

Edmondson, A. C. (2012). Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Rothwell, W. J., & Sullivan, R. (2005). Practicing Organization Development: A Guide for Consultants (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pheiffer.

Evaluation

Evaluation is often at the end of systematic performance models.  The Instructional Systems Design (ISD) model, sometimes referred to the ADDIE model, includes the following stages: analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation.  Other disciplines practice models similar to the ADDIE model.  Six Sigma practices the DMAIC model: define, measure, analyze, improve, and control. In the DMAIC model measure would be comparable to evaluation.  Human Resource Development (HRD) practices analyze, propose, create, Implement, and assess.  In the HRD model, assess refers to assessment which is the same as evaluation in the ADDIE model. 

These systematic performance models are often viewed as linear, stet-by-step, models.  By viewing these models this way they become ineffective at improving performance for the long-term.  Each model is presented to be cyclical and interactive.  This means that each model is designed as a continuous improvement cycle with dynamic interactions between each stage.  In the case of evaluation, this stage affects each of the other four stages in the process.  Evaluation begins during the initial analysis phase and continues through each stage, then re-cycles again, as improvements to the new improved cycle are incorporated.  Wang and Wilcox (2006) support this view indicating: “the larger view of evaluation may not be treated as a separate phase during the process…. It is indeed an ongoing effort throughout all phases of the ADDIE process and culminating at the last phase” (p. 528).

Shrock and Geis identified evaluation as a “process of collecting information and feeding it back to those who need the information so that the system can succeed” (as cited in Stolovitch & Keeps, 1999, p. 185).  Evaluation should be designed to provide feedback during each stage in the process so that improvements can be made to the process.

Evaluation comes in two forms: formative evaluation and summative evaluation.

Scriven (1991) identified formative evaluation to be used “to provide information on improving program design and development” (as cited in Wang & Wilcox, 2009, p. 529).  Wang and Wilcox identified that the purpose of formative evaluation was “to identify weakness in instructional material, methods, or learning objectives” (p. 529). Formative evaluation can be used to evaluate the instructional methods during a training program. 

Following the training program summative evaluation will be used to determine the long-term effectiveness of the program and its instructional methods, including learning transfer.  Brown and Gerhardt (2002) described summative evaluation as those “efforts that assess the effectiveness of completed interventions in order to provide suggestions about their use” (p. 952).  A training program can be evaluated by its impact on the organization and its long-term effectiveness through summative evaluation.

A successful evaluation is one that utilizes both formative evaluation and summative evaluation.  Evaluation needs to be viewed as an iterative process that affects each of the stages in the training process that it is measuring.  Each systematic performance improvement endeavor needs to be addressed as a continuous improvement cycle with a strong emphasis on evaluation.  Evaluation is the key component that makes the systematic performance improvement process a continuous effort, allowing improvements to be made to the process during each stage.

REFERENCES

Brown, K. G. & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002).  Formative evaluation: An integrative practice model and case study.  Personnel Psychology, Vol. 55, pp. 951-983.

Stolovitch, H. D. & Keeps, E. J. (1999).  Handbook of human performance technology: Improving individual and organizational performance worldwide (2^nd ed.).  San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Pfeiffer.

Wang, G. G. & Wilcox, D. (2006).  Training evaluation: Knowing more than is practiced.  Advances in Developing Human Resources, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 528-539.