Critical and Productive Conversations

I was working with a client this week helping to define a process for eLearning development and to streamline communication between team members. He made a comment about wanting  to:

“Stop all the to-ing and fro-ing between emails and just get it right first time.”

It made me think about which conversations are more critical than others when we work together. Should we ever seek to reduce conversations between people for the sake of efficiency?

Be aware of the type of conversation you are having
Some of our conversations are social and help us to build relationships. Some are more focussed on getting the job done and some are difficult and tricky where we are giving feedback or bad news. Perhaps what my client was getting that was that some of the conversations that were happening were just not that productive.

In work, most of us strive to have productive conversations, where the result is that we move forward somehow – build a better relationship, solve a problem, help to prove someone’s performance etc.  I think it is important to be aware of the type of conversation you are having.

10 Tips for more Productive Conversations
Inspired by my twitter friend @tomspiglanin here are my top 10 tips for having productive conversations in the workplace.

1. Listen as much as you talk – we were given two ears for a reason!
2. Approach each conversation with a sense of curiosity and react to how it plays out, rather than how you think it SHOULD play out.
3. Be careful with “why” questions – they tend to put people on the back foot and then push them into defence/justification mode. Try using “How” or “What” instead – “What makes you think that…”
4. The word “but” deletes what comes before it….”I liked that design, BUT…”
5. Better to use the word “and” – “I liked the xyz part of your design, and I would bring that out even more by…”
6. Even if you disagree with the person, don’t say directly “I disagree”.  Pick one thing you do agree with and build on that. (see #5)
7. Try to move things forward with every conversation – if you find yourself talking about the same problem over and over again, name it and ask how you can move forward “I think we tried to sort this out before – how can we work together to solve it now?”.
8. Using the word “we” tends to be more inclusive and less confrontational that referring to “I”.
9. Be aware of your tone – do you sound impatient, angry or stressed? Smiling is a quick way of improving your voice tone and your mood if you are feeling stressed about the conversation.
10. Always end each conversation with a next step – what will all parties do next as a result of this conversation?

Book Recommendation
Words that change minds, Shelle Rose Charvet

Nurturing Performance Culture – is there an ‘ap’ for that?

Business exists to make profit. People work in business to help the business make profit. People through training, adherence to company policies, performance support and their individual efforts, strive to perform well. If a company has its managers trained in coaching and performance management techniques, then there is no question that their people will be set up to perform well. Right?

Unfortunately, no. There is a layer to both overall business and people performance that is often missed. And that is the underlying business culture. Put simply, some workplaces are setup to encourage what we call high-achievers and some just aren’t. Some businesses just don’t know what to do with high-achievers and tend to focus their attention on under performers or worse still on the ‘average’ worker. There are many reasons for this and most of these are plain ordinary human failings. Let me tell you a story.

A good friend of mine works for a large multinational financial organisation and recently re-located. In her last place of work, she rose quickly through the ranks and was soon out performing all her peers. For a while she did well and was often subject to overt praise and rewards from her team manager. Her high performance continued but she grew weary of her efforts. According to the company’s internal performance management system she got the same type of rewards as her peers, despite consistently and significantly out performing them. The rewards I might add were extrinsic such as gift vouchers and monetary bonuses.

When she re-located, she moved to a different country, but to the same company and the same job. The company used the same performance management system and balanced score card. Accounting for some initial “wanting to please the new boss” time, this workplace had a radically different outlook to high performance. In fact more of her new team were considered high performers and the overall profits from this part of the business were significantly more than her previous team. So that is two sections of one company, with the same training and performance support procedures in place but one section out performs the other.

When I asked my friend what she thought the difference was, here is what she said:

• Performing well was “expected” as initial targets set were much higher.
• A “can do” attitude was transmitted from the team managers to each team member.
• Average performers were paired with high performers in team-based tasks.
• It was ok to be good at your job.

Additionally, intrinsic rewards such as an email sent from senior management to highlight outstanding performance or talking about how you performed well, were used alongside extrinsic rewards.

So it is ok to be good at your job. Yes I really said that. In my friend’s last place of work, high-achievers weren’t the most popular members of the team. You got attention if you underperformed, and you got lots of praise if you were just average – i.e. met your targets. My friend had outperformed her peers and the business had no place else for her to go. What a waste. Luckily though, in her new place of work all that has changed. Her new team manager has employed good people skills to recognise her talents early and has fast tracked her into an executive training programme.

So much of business is about people skills. More and more we are forgetting that. Don’t get me wrong – I am more geeky than most, but remembering to constantly seek out, highlight and praise high performance can do more for our business than the latest ap or technogadget . When was the last time in your business that you personally sought out and praised high performance? And I’m talking high performance – not just the average that you expect.

Or maybe there is an ap for people skills that I have missed? 

PS – If you want to remind yourself of the research around extrinsic v extrinsic rewards, click here to see Dan Pink’s YouTube Video – The surprising truth about what motivates us.

Xtranormal Learning & Prototyping

Xtranormal launched in late 2008, one of the first tools of its kind to allow you to quickly create animated character sequences.  Since then the product has developed steadily, with more characters and backgrounds being added and a nice upgrade from Xtranormal State to Xtranormal Desktop released in December 2011.

Xtranormal Desktop is quite an accomplished wee application. Like the web version, it is free to use but you pay for the characters and backgrounds. In terms of features, it has improved the camera, gestures and movement tools. With a little bit of jiggery pokery, you can get good realistic movement in a scene to add to the dramatic effect. Here is an example that I’ve been toying with:

►

I’ve been surpised though – I’ve mainly seen Xtranormal used for funny skits and comedy sequences. Maybe it is just me who likes using it for drama-based learning! Imagine too – the above video with a decent voiceover – it would be much more effective.

This video was part of a larger Scenario tool on negotiation skills that I prototyped with a client. It’s quick and efficient to create Xtranormal sequences like this. It also helps the client to visualise the prototype much better compared with using “flat” documents.

I can also see a use for Xtranormal to help people to learn about planning and directing a video shoot.  It has various tools to allow you to easily change camera angles, expressions, gestures and character movements. Playing with these tools gives you an appreciation of planning a real-life video shoot and the importance of storyboarding.

If you are interested in having a look, my prototype for the Influencing & Negotiation Scenario tool is here – just a few screens mind, but you’ll get the gist.

Influencing & Negotiation Prototype (Opens an Articulate Presentation)
(Note: You can skip through screens using PgDn as it is running a little slow & only the Marketing Manager path is started)

I’ll blog more about Xtranormal and show you the features that I use to set camera angels, make character movements and change gestures.

Have you used Xtranormal for learning scenarios or in any other way for learning? How effective did you find it?

Working with Subject Matter Experts (SME)

Having just finished quite a few eLearning projects I am in a reflective mood. What went well, what could be improved? These things I ask myself at the end of all projects. In this post, I am reflecting on working with Subject Matter Experts (SMEs)

As an Instructional Designer, I believe that the relationship with the SME is pivotal to the success of the project. Complaints aimed at “poor” eLearning are often labelled information dumps, clickity-click-bling or simply snore-fest page turners. Of course, I have never designed any eLearning like this! My belief is that many poor eLearning programmes are the result of poor ID-SME engagement. There are a wide variety of reasons why this engagement can be poor. Many of us are under more and more time and budget pressures these days so it is important to analyse some of the reasons that we can tackle.

SMEs come to us from all walks of life. I have often wondered who or what makes the ideal SME? The most engaged SMEs that I have worked with are often those with a true passion for their subject and a keen interest in passing this passion on. When you get a highly engaged and passionate SME, IDs all over the world breathe a collective sigh of relief.

SME Traits
But IDs have a responsibly too. To engage our SMEs we need to take time to understand them a little better. Over the years, I have noticed a few typical SME traits:
• Extremely busy people.
• May not be very IT literate or know much about eLearning.
• Want to tell you EVERYTHING about their subject.
• They are very good practitioners in their fields.
• Much of their knowledge and skills are tacit or unconscious.

SME verus Learner
To be a SME, by definition you are unconsciously competent. You perform well without the explicit realisation of all the steps, skills and knowledge that you are using. Contrast this with the needs of a novice – they are unconsciously incompetent or at best consciously incompetent.

So there is a gap between what the SME is expected to deliver and what the target audience needs. Many people assume that because you are a SME that you’ll understand what the target audience needs. But if you are teaching novices or less experienced people, then it may have been a long time since the SME understood that type of learning need. So what’s the answer?

Building Credibility
I think before IDs meet with SMEs for the first time, we owe them the respect of reading ourselves into their subject a little. If we speak to representatives of the target audience – especially people who are recent learners, it will give us an insight into what worked for them and the on-going challenges they face. I’d like IDs to actually curate content and start to analyse it before engaging with SMEs. Most of the best IDs that I know are excellent content curators. I believe this builds credibility with the SME, helps with engagement and also makes better use of their time during meetings. It’s about asking intelligent and informed questions not just saying “tell me all about xyz”.

Getting the Right SME
Another challenge that I have noticed is making sure you actually have the RIGHT SMEs. Many organisations provide SMEs based on who has availability to support the project. I can’t tell you how wrong this is on so many levels. Yes, I know we live in tough times and we need make the best of what we have – but trust me, the WRONG SME is never, ever going to result in good eLearning. It is important to ask questions at the start of a project – “Are you happy to sign off this content for your organisation?” and “Who else needs to be involved?”.

Explaining to SMEs what sign off actually means is important. Ideally if more than one person is involved in signoff, then each of those should be involved in the project as a SME. Considering a mix of SMEs is useful too – for example, if your more experienced SME can’t commit the time you need, then consider involving them just at key points such as initial concept planning and final storyboard review. It is up to us IDs to get the best from our SMEs and make best use of their time.

Managing Expectations
It is of utmost importance to have an honest conversation with your SMEs about time commitment and expectations. Discuss expections and what you will do in return. Help SMEs to see what the end-goal might look like – is there a similar project you can show or let them play with? Do all the important project management stuff – get realistic time commitments and set deadlines. Be respectful of the time SMEs give you and use it wisely. I see the ID-SME engagement as a relationship dance just like any other – exchanging insights into each other’s worlds and stepping into each others shoes many times. The ID is the SME for eLearning design and our SME is the boss of the content.

So what are your experiences working with SMEs? Do you have any good tips? I also love horror stories! I hope to write more about this again.

What Makes Good Learning?

I read copiously – books on learning, psychology, how the brain/memory works, communication, managing people, business, you name it I have devoured it. My job is all about creating and helping others to create “good” (e)Learning. I’d like any learning that I am associated with to truly inspire people to learn and to help improve individual and organisational performance. But it’s not easy finding good, reliable and scientifically proven guidance on what helps us to learn most effectively.

In the last few years, we have heard a lot more about many learning theories that most of us grew up with being labelled as urban myths; no scientific basis whatsoever. An example of this is the notion of Learning Styles. According to many who know better than me, they simply don’t exist. Take a look at this YouTube video, from Professor Daniel Willingham, University of Virginia.

It’s true that some of us may have a preference or a stronger ability, for example, in taking in visual information. However, there is no scientific basis to say that tailoring your content to suit different learning styles will have any significant impact on the effectiveness of your learning. Professor Williningam’s Book on “Why Students Don’t Like School” is an interesting read too. Motivation is another urban myth. Many still use Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs to address motivational aspects of learning and teaching, but Maslow’s experiments have been roundly criticised as to their scientific validity. Maslow’s Triangle is still used a lot in the business world, especially in the areas of coaching and personal development. Apart from the scientific validity of the experiments, one of the criticisms is that human needs may not actually be hierarchical. More recent research into motivation focuses on the notions of autonomy and goal orientation as being key for learning.

And so I keep asking myself, what are the scientifically-proven effective theories and good practices for learning? Donald Clark, who is an advocate of the scientific method, goes some way towards this in his blog – “10 Facts About Learning That Are Scientifically Proven”

As an example – a term I have recently become acquainted with is the notion of spaced retrieval. (Donald Clark calls it spaced practice). It came up once in a random conversation (as you do!) with an Occupational Therapist friend of mine. She’d been talking about her mum who had a stroke, having difficulty remembering how to take her medication correctly. She explained how she was using “spaced retrieval” to help her mum. Over a period of about 20 minutes, she asked her mum to repeat what each tablet was used for. After each repetition, she waited a few minutes, then asked again. After each repetition, she waited a little longer until her mum was able to remember without making any mistakes. Spaced practice/retrieval speaks to how working memory and long term memory works.

We can only take in a very small amount of information before we become overloaded – known as cognitive overload. Breaking learning into bite-sized chunks, doing something with it to make it stick and practicing, making mistakes, is how I learned to ride my bike. I mean, I didn’t read a book or watch a video on how to ride a bike and then suddenly become Lance Armstrong! I watched my brothers and friends, listened to my Dad, I wobbled, fell off, got some help and feedback along the way and eventually got there. It was the repetitive feedback loop, learning by doing and being able to make mistakes safely that helped me get there. So this is what makes good learning! It seems that a multi-disciplinary approach is needed here.

Good learning is about understanding brain science, psychology and motivation to name but a few important concepts. How nice would it be to have a group of people from these different research areas come together and collaborate on research into how we learn best? However, intuitively I think most of us know how to learn best – after all the survival of the human race depends on us learning and developing. I think if we tap into our early experiences of learning to help inform the scientific method, we are less likely to use theories and practices that don’t contribute to how people learn best. In future blogs, I hope to experiment and give examples of (e)Learning programmes that I have designed, which incorporate good practice learning theories and techniques. I would love to hear about your experiences of what makes good learning. What works for you and what doesn’t?

Sometimes it doesn’t need (e)Learning

The role of an Instructional Designer is multi-faceted. On good days you get the opportunity to input into the highest levels of an organisation to change something for the better. On more challenging days, you are asked to produce content that you know is less than fit-for-purpose, based on an impossible deadline and poor organisational support. Most jobs have these sorts of challenges though, so it’s up to a good ID to solve them – right?

Well yes and no.

I am writing this blog based on recent Twitter and blog postings from very experienced ID colleagues Cathy Moore and
Patti Shank. Both ladies certainly know their ID stuff. Cathy’s Action Mapping methodology and website are great ID learning resources and Patti’s similar outlook on no-nonsense ID also pin-points a solid view of the role of the ID.

I also find myself reflecting on the role of an ID as I am the start of three new eLearning projects in 3 very different organisations. Two of these organisations are new to online learning. It is interesting to listen to their views on what they want. After various meetings and project scoping documents, my remit can be summarised as:

“We want eLearning that is at the cutting edge of what is possible”

Of course, determining what is actually meant by cutting edge eLearning and doing it within their budget and IT infrastructure is another day’s work! Yet I hear this request many times, both from my clients and from colleagues embarking on new projects.

My answer to this is that we need to take a step back and look at and business objectives first. I usually suggest that we don’t look at content until we are all singing off the same hymn sheet in terms of what we think the eLearning will do for them.

I like to ask 3 important questions to ask before I design any Learning programme:

1. What will it do for the business/organisation if we design this?
2. What might happen if we don’t  design it? (Are there good and bad consequences here?)
3. What do you see people doing differently  everyday in their jobs after taking this new course? (List the specific knowledge, skills/behaviours and or attitude changes)

Sometimes as an Instructional Designer it becomes just about the content. That’s where I believe we go wrong. We need a reverse engineering approach to eLearning content design. And you know what?  Sometimes we may actually come to the conclusion that a learning programme is not the best answer to that particular problem! Sometimes for example, we need to make organisation changes to internal procedures and policies before any learning programme has a chance to succeed. As an ID I have been in the position where I have made these sorts of suggestions.

I believe we do ourselves a disservice as IDs if we only show our skills in relation to content design. We are people who are used to analysing and structuring information. We can bring that same analysis to the business organisations that we work with. That is perhaps where clients misunderstand how useful we can be to them and where we miss an opportunity to help our clients.

Start with the business first, get the business right and the direction of learning programme becomes clear.

What Does an Instructional Designer Do?

This is a long one – apologies in advance!

My Background

I’ve been working as an ID since early 1998, starting with the newly formed, but now defunct GartnerLearning. That company was in turn bought over by Thompson Netg, where I remained for a further 2 years, learning my trade.

Those early days were interesting. The focus of ID back then was in technical writing and graphical presentation, rather than interactivity or designing to facilitate organisational improvements. Mostly my training consisted of mentoring, reviewing more experienced people’s work and any reading that I undertook myself. At that time I was introduced to the common ID theories by Merrill, Mager, Bloom etc…Even at that early stage, I was stuck by the thought that the skills and knowledge to be a good ID are so diverse that it might take one years to become competent. I was right!

In late 1999, I began an MSC in Advanced Learning Technologies by distance learning through Lancaster University. This was actually my first experience of being an “eLearner”.  Now I view this experience as invaluable. I am struck by how many eLearning people I meet who don’t actually like being an eLearner themselves, or have had the chance to experience being on the other side.

My background previous to my GartnerLearning/Netg experiences was an eclectic one. Originally a Computing graduate, I worked in the area of Database design. I then got involved in organisational change initiatives mainly as a result of trying to understand organisational structure in order to design good database information systems to support the organisation. My undergrad degree was a general computing and business course, where I not only learned the principles of software engineering, but I also studied business and people management principles. It was in the mix of these three general areas that I found my passion – learning and helping people and organisations to change.

 My ID Approach

At this point in my career, I can see how my background and experiences have helped to shape the type of Instructional Designer that I am. I have a passion for learning and for understanding how things work – including people and organisations. So that is always my starting point. I talk to my clients with the expectation that anything I design will actually improve people and organisational performance. If that is not going to happen, then I’d always question the client on the appropriateness of the project.

1. Problem/Solution Analysis

It’s interesting to me though, in that my approach to ID is probably still a software engineering or systems approach to design – understand the business problem/situation first and then try to identify the best solutions.

When I am discussing solutions with the client, I often say that the solution may not always be an eLearning course. These conversations can be challenging as mostly when a client has decided to talk to an eLearning company or ID, they have already made up their mind about the solution! I remember once being involved with a large public sector organisation to design an eLearning programme for Data Protection. Staff had already been to so many training programmes on the principles of Data Protection but so many high profile mistakes were still being made. It surprised me that no-one thought to ask the question about why the previous training programmes hadn’t worked and what else might be needed now.

2. Target Audience & Content Analysis

So, I stay in the problem definition/solution analysis phase longer than most. It is my ID mantra to solve the right problem in the right way. Most eLearning courses that I design involve more than just eLearning content. I look at organisational structures, roles, policies and procedures to ensure that the newly designed courses actually have a chance of making an impact.

In the case of our Data Protection eLearning programme, this analysis yielded many surprising results about why people were failing to get data protection right. From simple interventions like not having enough re-cycling facilities to poorly operating paper shredders, we came up with many interventions that hadn’t been looked at before.

Once I have identified the right problem to be solved in the right way, I then set about looking at target audience and content to identify the learning that is really going to make a difference to solving that problem.

This is the key in any ID process – we don’t (or shouldn’t) just “throw” all the content we have at the problem. We must take time to understand what the target audience already knows and what they need to know now in order to make the lasting change that solves the identified problem.

I believe many eLearning design processes miss this vital step – especially inexperienced IDs and people engaging in rapid eLearning processes. Selectively identify content that is going to make the most difference to the learner takes time and skill, as well as patience! The ID really has to step into the shoes of recent learners, experienced learners and work closely with the Subject Matter Expert to tease this information out into coherent and useful chunks.

I follow a fairly common ID approach of analysing the target audience needs, and use a nice strategy learned in my GartnerLearning days – DIF analysis:

• D –What is difficult for the target audience to understand?
• I – What is important?
• F – What frequently comes up this area?

I work with the Subject Matter Expert to really understand the content and by the end of this process I know the content so well I can actually teach it to others. And that’s what IDs do – teach, or rather facilitate the learning process for others. It makes sense that if an ID is to do this, they should have a good grasp of the content.

3. Content Design

Once I understand the content, all its nuances and challenges for the target audience, I set about devising a Curriculum Plan and a set of storyboards for each area of the Curriculum Plan.

If budget is tight or the client advocates a rapid approach, I storyboard directly in an authoring tool such as Articulate or Captivate. If we have more time to pour over words and ideas for images, media and interactivity, I storyboard in Microsoft Word or Microsoft PowerPoint. The latter is easier for some clients as it helps them to visualise what a screen looks like. Power point is trickier though from a Project Management point of view in terms or recording client changes and managing the review process.

As lead ID in many projects, I often double-task as Project Manager. This of course is not an ideal situation, but has been brought about by squeezed budgets and increase client expectations.

As PM, I organise review and sign off process for Curriculum Plan before moving on to Storyboarding. Each Storyboard is also signed off before moving onto the next stage – Content Build.

4. Content Build

In Content Build, depending on our budget, I either build the content myself and have some graphic design support, or I hand it over to a developer/designer to complete the build.

The key at this stage is to ensure that the build matches the signed off Storyboard. I usually pilot a short section of each built learning object with the client to ensure we are on track with their expectations.

At content build stage, we also plan for and add any media elements. For example, if we are using some drama-based learning elements, as lead ID I will often direct and manage any video shoot to complete the media requirements.

5. Continuous Evaluation

I build in evaluation and sign off at all stages of the process. From ensuring we have identified the right problem to having the Curriculum Plan reviewed by recent learners, not just a management group, I ensure we get the right input to verify all of our decisions.

Even during storyboarding, we have representative learners reviewing the interactive ideas.

What I find works best at storyboarding stage is an actual face to face workshop, with  all the necessary people meeting to review and make changes to the storyboard in real time.

Some IDs prefer to have clients review and comment remotely and then incorporate the changes. I prefer the more hands on approach if time and budget allows.

6. Return on Investment & Critical Success Factors

As part of the Curriculum Plan, I often agree a set of Critical Success Factors with the client. Most clients find this challenging as it can be difficult to isolate a particular organisation metric that could be measured by the impact of an eLearning course alone.

In general we tend to agree metrics such as X% of the organisation will complete the course by end of XX. I also try to influence the client to add more impactful measures such as %improvement in specific areas or %reductions.

Conclusion

In conclusion, my role as an ID is a varied and electric one, which probably is based on my eclectic route in Instructional Design. I see myself as an organisational consultant, trainer, teacher, learner, designer and project manager. I truly enjoy the creative nature of the role and feel very lucky that I get to live out my passion most days!

The ID process described here is mainly for formal, structured eLearning content.

My work has changed a lot in the last few years, where I am increasingly designing short, independent learning sequences such as a 10 minute “key points” video or a short branching scenario to practice a particular area of learning.

Clients are increasingly asking for short nuggets of learning like this to build up a series of learning objects which can be used by staff in a more flexible and informal manner. These objects don’t get tracked within an LMS, rather they are just freely available as performance support. I personally like this approach and hope this is how my role as an ID/Learning designer will develop.