Soon to be sticking out like a sore thumb in the potato chip section of a grocery store near you is Pringles, recently determined not to be a chip (crisp) at all but a cake. Thanks UK! Apparently the UK courts don’t know that I try to avoid cake. A cake that conveniently fits in the cup holder of my car. Did you know we eat one billion dollars of Pringles each year? I know right?

I’m sure you have (or have had at some time) some ‘pringle-like’ content in your training. You know the one…the course/class that is actually training for something that does/did not require training.

Remember the mandatory ILT for a group because one person has crappy customer service skills? (And they didn’t think the training applied to them anyway). Remember the off-the-shelf soft skill e-learning to address morale-type issues that are actually the result of a bad manager (yet no training for the manager…waahhh?).

Although you won’t be the most popular kid on the block this is probably one ‘fight’ worth fighting. At least I’ve always thought it was. Why? Because your training solution will fail – that’s what people will see. And you’re employees won’t be happy with you. Training that didn’t work. Yuk. No one wants that. You want to be helpful. You want to improve the performance of the work force. No time to be a yes man/woman. But being a realist, if you must provide training, at least don’t cave without stating your position. “I’m not confident it’s the right solution because…blah blah blah…I’m just sayin’.”

A process for handling (and rejecting) incoming requests should be part of your trainer DNA. Here are some suggestions for triaging those incoming requests.

1. is it a learning strategy item? (if not, why? is it new? should it be discussed? should it be politely turned down because of other strategy-linked priorities?)
2. is it tied to the organization’s business plan? (if not, why? is it new? should it be discussed? should it be politely turned down because of other strategy-link priorities?)
3. is it a problem that requires training intervention? (ask five “why” questions…Q: why do you think you need this? A: because we have complaints from the customers. Q: why? tell me about it. What prompted it? A: well, we received a complaint that was elevated to the C-level so I got a call to get some customer service training in here. Q:(thinking…aah, now we’re getting to it)…hmmm…one complaint? that doesn’t sound like much of a problem given the fact your employees are on the phone all day. why do you think you need this again? A: basically, I don’t. but I do have to address this promptly. Q: Why not a discussion with the one person that the complaint is against? Is it a pattern? If so, will training help this person or is it a performance issue or are they in the wrong job? A: I’m not sure that customer service is right for this person but she’s been coming along. Q: Why don’t you think about it – and the money that can be saved – by not making everyone attend training they may not need. A: OK. I’ll call you back.
   
4. is it funded or can funding be obtained? (the greatest solution in the world won’t fly if there’s no funding for it.)
5. if it’s not a strategy item…don’t turn it down right away. Is it something that can save the company money and be done quickly and inexpensively? (flexibility, value is a must)

I do hope you enjoyed the cheesy tie-in (or should I say Pizzalicious because that’s my fave) of Pringles and training. Proof that I am way uncool and always thinking about training. Sigh.

If you’re trying to think of ways to illustrate and sell the whole 2.0 thing at your 1.0 organization, this “Meet Charlotte” slideshow from The Shed might do the trick. It’s downloadable from SlideShare. And, it looks like the nice folks at The Shed will let you customize it so long as you link back to the original. Nice.

[added after original post because I was blind enough to not attribute to the original creator : ( ]
The original inspiration for this style of presentation was “Meet Henry” from Ethos3 which officially reached cult status.

The popular” Meet Charlie” slide presentation by Scott Gavin, using the Ethos3 model is also excellent.

I’ve created one (below) for learning 2.0 reusing content from The Shed . You are welcome to use it/improve it but please attribute it to me, The Shed, and don’t forget the original creators at Ethos2.

| View | Upload your own

I’m a pretty typical suburban U.S. mother – a soccer Mom a/k/a “hockey Mom” of the minivan variety (read: boring vs. the sexy/gas-guzzly SUV variety). I limit my three kids to no more than two activities a ‘season.’ So right now we’re into the seven-month (ice) hockey season, short indoor lacrosse and indoor soccer seasons which carry over into the outdoor season, year-round ballet, and school year-long music lessons (what seasons?). Many are critical of this, even my own parents who become ‘exhausted’ when reading the schedule.Â

I’ve written about hockey before because it’s one of my favorite sports. Our youth hockey organization has a great group of parents I enjoy being around. Not so in many other organizations. Last year at a neighboring rink, some fans got into a fight and one ended up with a head injury in the hospital. This is youth hockey. Not the NY Rangers.

This is probably why hockey is the only sport where I have to watch a mandatory training video on how not to be a jerk.

I got thinking about why hockey is different – why it requires anti-jerk training. I think it’s probably due to violence-driven litigation at the youth level and the draw associated with the (condoned/’enforcer’-type) player fighting associated with the sport at the professional level. You know, the “I was at a fight and a hockey game broke out…”

It reminds me of mandatory compliance-type training that speaks to our common sense. We might just as well align our ‘common-sense’ compliance training with the adult education program (“relax, it’s just a game) in hockey.

“Relax, it’s just a password video or “Oops don’t get us sued” e-learning. Training for the masses based on the actions of a few. Ugh.

Meanwhile, I only screamed once or twice during the four games I attended this tournament weekend. Mostly just “skate Drew skate!” as he chased after a breakaway (he’s a defenseman). Better take the mandatory training again. Ugh

Photos: Mom from this Mom t-shirt shopand harassment from this law firm. Gotta love the irony.

It all started with a Wiki. You know. You start one and it becomes all consuming. “Wow, it’s two o’clock already?” or “you guys are on your own for dinner” type of consuming. It’s like starting a blog.

The Brandon Hall Wiki we use internally (actually we have tried several over the past couple of years) is MediaWiki which was written for Wikipedia. This past week though, I’ve been busy exploring other Wiki platforms.

A class I am taking requires me to set up three knowledge bases on learning theories. Some people used PowerPoint, some used Word, a couple had pages on their Websites but I decided to use a Wiki even though this isn’t a collaborative project. I used pbwiki, a wiki designed for educators, and loved it. Nice templates for classes. Easy. (I won’t share my school wiki because I think it sucks right now. After I’ve been graded with an “A,” maybe).

I’m using WikiSpaces for some workshops on Emerging Learning Technologies. I like this platform too. I found that multiple people can’t edit at the same time though, so have set up pages for each attendee to work in. There’s some nice, easy to use plug-ins. I thought since others will be leading the workshop at different times during the year, it’s nice to get the agenda and content out there along with a place for people to work. It’s not done yet either. Of course, that’s the nature of a Wiki. I guess that’s what I like.

This “never done” aspect of collaboration raises some interesting questions when it comes to a class Wiki that is graded. When I turn the knowledge base assignment in (provide a link via the university’s Blackboard LMS dropbox), can I continue to work on it? When does the professor actually review it? It’s a roll of the dice for procrastinators. (I think it would feel like cheating).

My daughter (11) set up her own Wiki this week using WikiSpaces. She was home from school and watching what I was up to on the workshop Wiki. I had her act as a workshop participant and go through my little 10-minute explanation/demonstration on – you guessed it…wikis. I asked her, what do you think? She said, “Mom, can I have one?” (successful training!)

It’s always fun for me to watch a child  learn. She has excellent computer skills and her choice of uploading photos of Beefaroni and a Sphynx labeled ‘things I like’ cracked me up (those running for the award ‘Mother of the Year’ apparently feed children Beefaroni). I imagine she’ll have a fully functional Wiki to share with her friends shortly. (FYI for your kids…parental controls on our PC running with Vista allowed her to set up an account but not access her Wiki. WTF? Anyway, she was up and running in 10 minutes and I removed controls).

And, finally, I’ve been in the Complexive Wiki that George Siemens and Tony Karrer set up for the Corporate Learning: Trends and Innovations online conference. It is also on the MediaWiki platform.

In the event you don’t know what a wiki is, here’s one definition:

A Wiki allows web pages to be created and edited using a web browser, usually by multiple people. Wiki software is classified as collaborative software; software that helps people work on a common platform. Wiki software runs the Wiki on a Web server and the Wiki engine implements the wiki technology. Most Wiki engines are open source meaning the code is openly available to the public.

(Here’s a nice comparison of Wiki software and Wiki farms.)

What’s your Wiki favorite?

Preparation and organization. How much of your day do you think you spend on those two tasks? It’s all I’ve been doing lately and I’m a bit weary of both because they involve doing something now for something in the future. I’m weary I guess because I don’t feel like I’m doing anything. I feel like an animal gathering and storing food for the winter.

For many years, I hired outside instructors to teach advanced technical job-specific skills. Trainer A was a man in his 50s who did all his training face-to-face. He used flipcharts and occasionally offered his students videotaped vignettes to watch as part of an activity. He was meticulous in his preparation and organization. All binders were lined up perfectly. Everyone was given the same number and type of pencils. The name tents were set up perfectly. Everything was prepared and organized to perfection. His reputation was outstanding and his evaluations were always top-notch. He did not use a PC, didn’t have a Website, and communicated by phone instead of email. He had an interest in e-learning that might resemble the interest a polar bear, in the comfort of his recliner, would have about a report on global warming. He was not ready for change.

Trainer B was a woman about my age who also did all of her training face-to-face. Her expertise was in interpersonal skill training. She was as meticulous, actually more so, in her preparation and organization as Trainer A was. She would arrive 1 or 1 ½ hours early and rearrange the room, prepare flipcharts, ask questions about the group very, very detailed questions. She also used binders, flipcharts, and video. Her reputation was outstanding, her evaluations were exceptional, and she worked for many Fortune 100 companies. Her company had a Website and some post-workshop activities were available online and via email. Her interest in e-learning might resemble the stress a polar bear would experience when faced with shrinking ice. (What the ??? is this about?). She was starting to get ready for change.

Trainer C was a man about my age who also did all of his training face-to-face. Like Trainer A, his training served a niche market  hard to find technical content that was very job-specific. He traveled the continental U.S. and trained nearly 200 days per year. His preparation and organization was an art form. He experienced virtually no stress when faced with things I would’ve  freaked out about. He used a PC, projector, and online games in his classroom along with binders, and tent cards. His interest was keen on e-learning. I guess he’d be the Al Gore of polar bears alerting the other polar bears of changes looming by doing something about it. About the time I was working with him, I was rolling out a synchronous learning platform. He asked if he could work with me on it to deliver some of his training at a distance. He didn’t charge my organization for this and delivered a couple of pilots. He asked endless questions about online teaching and read everything I sent his way. His preparation was outstanding and he commented on the amount of time spent with this new channel for delivering his training. He was ready for change and doing something about it.

These three trainers, with different levels of readiness for advancing learning by incorporating technology, could easily have been some managers or learners at the organization. Or, any of us.

So, as I prepare and organize for workshops I’ll deliver, I’m reminded of these two videos that can remind everyone why we need to take seriously how we prepare and organize our learning activities.

http://www.youtube.com/v/P7J_ereCiTo

http://www.youtube.com/v/aEFKfXiCbLw

Photo: http://climateprogress.org/2006/12/27/polar-bears-endangered-by-global-warming/

Jonathan Schwartz is chief executive officer and president of Sun Microsystems. He blogs. His post today alerted me to the fact that it is System Administration Appreciation Day.

I had the pleasure of working with some great SysAdmins over the years. Training new employees on software meant I saw IT frequently whether it was in the PC lab, at the new employee’s desk, or at my own desk. They bailed me out of some potentially catastrophic situations, educated me, and refrained from laughing at me until I was clearly out of sight.

• You need an extension cord? That’s really facilities area but yeah, I’ll bring it up.
• Janet, is that plugged in? It sounds like it’s not even plugged in…no Janet, don’t worry about it…happens all the time.
• We don’t have any record of that new employee. We’ll have to get them set up in the system. I’ll do it now. How do you spell their last name?
• What do you mean there’s no PC at that desk? I don’t have anything from the supervisor…OK, I’ll get it set up by lunch time. Where is their desk?
• You need what installed?

Overtime, I guess they didn’t enjoy seeing me as much as I enjoyed seeing them so they gave me the <drumroll>SysAdmin Password</drumroll>. I know, right? Shiny, shiny.

To all of the trainers who also wear the hat of SysAdmin – who have crawled under desks 5 minutes before a training class – may I say – American style – Have a Great Day! As for me, I’m going to email some old SysAdmin friends and thank them. Should I use all CAPS? I know they love that…

I enjoy reading Dave Pollard’s how to save the world blog. His post Getting People to Give a Damn struck a cord after reading my colleague Gary Woodill’s comments about training professionals coasting to retirement. Lynn Marentette made several interesting comments in response to that post including people don’t know that they don’t know, or what they need to know. In effect, they haven’t found a reason to give a damn. What don’t you know? What don’t I know that I need to know? What don’t I give a damn about because I haven’t been shown why I should give a damn?

Michael Moore is an expert in getting people to give a damn. See the clips from his new movie, Sicko. What if the training industry made a documentary of outrageously bad training, bad decisions, and failed initiatives?

Now, I know there’s a lot of good classroom trainers and phenomenal teachers and am grateful to have had many show me the way to giving a damn. My point is not to minimize the need for instructor-led training.

So what to do? Dave Pollard’s action plan includes informing by showing so that people would care if they knew, they will and personalization. One cause Dave suggests attacking from a rather long, important list, is the need for a self-directed education system, with facilitators and coaches instead of bums-on-chairs lecturers. He suggests answering two questions:

This is about activism and passion isn’t it? We talk a lot about it – I’m doing it now -  informing (in a way, maybe) but not by showing and certainly not making it personal. So, my short-term action is leading an e-learning 101 session in Toronto next week where I’ll step out from behind the comfort of a keyboard and in front of a group, put on my favorite damn strappy sandals and get freakin’ personal. Maybe somebody will be ready to give a damn and it’ll be a catalyst for change.

Back in the day when I was your age , I used to have to go to work at the same time everyday and work 40 hours. And, I used to have to walk uphill 5 miles to get to school… (no, wait, that was my parents). To which I said [insert teen apathy and sarcasm here] really? That’s amazing! (roll eyes) I’m certain the rolled eyes I would receive would be digital).

Yup, there’s talk of ditching the 40-hour workweek. A Tekrati article about a report from Gartner research says Gartner is suggesting CIOs at organizations create the 20-hour job description (addressing a growing problem without radically restructuring well-established management models) to attract and retain skilled and highly qualified workers.

Because development often goes hand-in-hand with “attracting and retaining” employees under the umbrella of Talent Management, I read this overview with an eye toward what it might mean for learning professionals. The report indicates the advice from Gartner to CIOs is meant to address three trends:

• higher numbers of employees working fewer hours per week,
• employees using more and more types of digital devices and services, and
• employees using technology in a more fully blended personal-work scenario.

So what might this mean for learning and development?

• More employees working fewer hours suggests the need for less time-consuming training, smaller bits of information, and more flexibility as to time, place, and space.
• Employees using more digital devices and services suggests the need to not only provide engaging, relevant learning experiences for personal devices but training on how to actually use those devices and access and use various Web services. This is why those RSS and Wiki videos are so good. This is also why it is so important for learning professionals to use the tools themselves. Teachers didn’t call in a specialist to teach kids how to use a pencil correctly during math class.
• Employees using technology in a more fully blended personal-work scenario suggests the need for culture change. I think this one is the biggee. We can’t use personal digital devices or Web services if we have major issues around access, security, firewalls, etc.

Yes, let’s deep six this archaic 40-hr stuff. But why 20 hours? Why put any restraints on hours? Crazy talk I know. I think it’s probably too radical for those with ˜well-established management models. But learning professionals could get out in front here.

I’ve written before about various industries floundering due to their lack of adoption of new technologies and their inflexibility. Today it was a Jake Ludington’s post How to Save Newspapers that caught my eye.

I think I take a special interest in the reports on the state of the mass media industry because my undergrad degree was in communications/journalism/broadcasting. I wonder what my curriculum might look like if I started my undergrad degree today. Blogging? RSS? Quick, inexpensive video? Search engine ranking tactics? Nope, just checked…running my fingers through my hair in aggravation!

Jake said newspapers are no longer printed paper businesses but news gathering and distribution companies. I say that training/learning departments are no longer traditional training providers but knowledge gathering and distribution departments. To thrive, Jake says newspapers need to reach the widest possible audience engaging all viable means of delivery. The same is true for learning departments.

Is it inevitable that learning professionals will lose their jobs just as some journalists, photographers, copy editors, and their managers are? What can we learn from Jake’s observations about the newspaper industry?

Learners need to be able to find you. The learning department needs traffic and search capabilities. There should be no silos “everyone, everywhere should know what “knowledge” you have available and should be able to access it whenever they want. If your LMS can’t do this or if you need an LCMS to manage the content or if you need to mash together a bunch of tools,  figure out how to do it. This is pull time not push time!

Learners need engaging content. The learning department needs to gather and distribute content in new (non-traditional) formats based on what their learners expect. Open the channels of distribution! One orientation program I can think of was revamped from straight face-to-face to a traditional blended format (f2f + e-learning). Blended in this case meant taking the stuff you’ve got to know like security procedures, compliance, etc. and putting it online in text form. Then  get this- learners took the online portion together in a classroom with no interaction. The ‘instructor’ checked email while waiting for them to finish the e-learning course reading. This is like taking the newspaper and putting it online to be read at a designated place and time. This type of program had new employees looking at one another with WTF expressions. It was not engaging and offered nothing new and something worse than before.

Think Global About Your Locale Become an expert on your organizational communities. Communities in this context are departments, work groups, locations, etc. Promote those communities across the entire organization. Quite often, the learning department is the best kept secret within the organization. I didn’t know you had that! I didn’t know you could do that! Other times, the learning department is their own worst enemy- competing internally (my stuff is better than yours), hoarding information, controlling – its development, creation, distribution). As if the content created by others will be anymore right or wrong. Get everybody involved and be the hub.

Think Local about Your Locale Become an expert on the learners within your organizational communities. What’s the nitty gritty day-to-day stuff that’s having an effect on their performance? Get the little picture. Get learners talking about their work. Blogs with RSS feeds, Wikis, networks, text chat, etc. come into play here.

Keep Your Best Assets Perhaps is we stopped evaluating our performance with old-fashioned measurement tools (Kirkpatrick, etc.) we could focus more on building communities, nurturing communities, creating new channels of distribution, and opening up those channels. Do you have active and engaged learners? Are you doing your fair share of grunt work in making that happen? Taking the time to figure out how to blog, podcast, create quick videos, or utilize virtual communities is time well spent. This is the new job! Become an asset or don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

Walter Mossberg has been a reporter and editor at the Wall Street Journal since 1970. He is based in the Journal’s Washington, D.C., office, where he spent 18 years covering national and international affairs before turning his attention to technology. He holds degrees from Brandeis University and the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. He was and still is a heck of a reporter.
From his blog: Everyone can now be a video producer. YouTube and other Web sites are filled with short amateur videos created on typical home computers. Even print journalists like me have joined the trend. For the past couple of months, I’ve been recording brief video commentaries to post along with my columns on The Wall Street Journal’s Web site, WSJ.com.

Walt saved himself. I’m a researcher saving myself. Are you a learning professional saving yourself?

If you don’t have a thorough understanding of Web 2.0, Malcolm Brown wrote a good article in this month’s EDUCAUSE Review with a table (below) that compares the characteristics of Web 1.0 and Web 2.0.

Table 1. Characteristics of Web 1.0 and Web 2.0

Brown writes that “Web 2.0 models the very active engagement that is central to the learning paradigm and Web 1.0 models the teaching paradigm.” He suggests layering the ‘new’ (2.0) atop the ‘old’ (1.0). I’m not sure if layering is the right way to describe using 1.0 and 2.0 together. Don’t we do that now? I don’t know of anyone who’s thrown away 1.0. His goal, I think, is to get us thinking less about replacing 1.0 with 2.0 but instead, using the best of 1.0 and adding the best of 2.0 [ideally to improve learning outcomes]. I think his message too is one of cautiousness and adaptability- don’t be a train-o-saur and don’t be a techno-borg. I think cohabitating is a better metaphor (too racy!). Anyway, I like the chart and the message.