Wednesday, March 16, 2011

Reflections on #lrnchat: How do learning professionals sell their ideas/strategies/services in their organizations?

Each week that I am able to participate in #lrnchat discussion I post a summary of the discussion to my blog. I do this both for my personal development as well as sharing with the Learning and Development Profession at large. This summary is based on my own interpretations of the chat; others who participated may have differing opinions or interpretations of the discussion. I welcome those that do to add your ideas to the comments.

The topic of this week's #lrnchat session was “How do learning professionals sell their ideas/strategies/services in their organizations?". 

I always find looking at the questions that are used to loosely guide the chat as a nice way to see the overall theme of the chat. Here are the discussion questions that were presented to the group:

Q1) What parts of your job are the most difficult to “sell” to your organization?
Q2) What sales strategies are you using to sell your idea to the leadership in your organization?
Q3) What sales strategies are you using to promote learning programs to learners?
Q4) What sales strategies are you using to promote your own expertise and services within the organization?

In most organizations, the learning and performance function does not drive strategy.  At best it is a part of the strategic plan; at worst it is simply a tool to be utilized by the strategic plan.  I would guess that most learning and development professionals find themselves somewhere in the middle of that scale, with the majority closer to the ‘tool’ side of the curve.

It’s for this reason that all learning professionals need to incorporate sales skills into their skill set.  While we are the professionals in building effective performance improvement plans, we need to earn the respect of those that are driving the strategy so that we can become more involved in the process – the proverbial ‘Seat at the Table’ we often talk about.

If you don’t have this metaphorical seat yet, then sales is part of your job.  In truth, even the most Senior Learning Officer in an organization with the most supportive and innovative learning culture still needs to ‘sell’ on some level.

This week’s #lrnchat explores how we ‘sell’ our role to the stakeholders of our organization, keeping in mind that our stakeholders involve not only the executive team, but our learners and ourselves as well.

The discussion started by considering what parts of our job are most difficult to ‘sell’ to our organizations.  Here are some of the common responses:

*  The amount of time it takes to develop learning
*  The importance of allocating time to perform a proper analysis of the learning and performance issues and needs
*  The ‘Training’ does not equal ‘Learning’
*  That the Learning and Development Team should not be ‘fulfilling orders placed by stakeholders’

I think that these are a few common barriers of our profession that we have been battling for a very long time.  I also see a certain amount of insanity there, in that one definition of insanity is doing the same thing time after time and expecting a different response.

In all of the examples shared, you could insert the phrase “My organization doesn’t understand…” in front of the statement and hear the echo of the thousands of professionals who have made the statement before.  For example ‘My organization doesn’t understand the amount of time it takes to develop learning’.

What’s missing in that statement is a single but critical word that changes the paradigm: Why.  Adding the word WHY to the statements literally changes the structure of the sentence from a statement to a question, as in ‘Why doesn’t my organization understand the amount of time it takes to develop learning?”.  That change is important, but it’s secondary.

Of greater importance in the change is the placement of your finger, more specifically the direction in which it is pointing.  When I say ‘My organization doesn’t understand the amount of time it takes to develop learning’, the ‘finger of blame’ is pointed at the organization.  If I’m waiting for the organization to change, on its own, to the benefit of the learning function, I will likely grow old waiting.  Adding the word WHY and changing it to a question shifts the focus internally and forces us to ask “What changes could I make to help the organization see us differently?”

One of the things I found very interesting is the correlation these responses had to previous #lrnchat conversations around what is holding us back as an industry.  Most of the barriers described in the two discussions were identical.  It begs the question of what are truly the weights that hold down our profession.  Do we have the energy, drive, and focus to shift organizational L&D away from the ‘old’ methods of ‘push’ and ‘teach’ and are simply struggling with selling it?  Or have we really not sold it enough within our profession to gain mass acceptance?

From there the discussion moved towards what strategies we use to sell our ideas to organizational leadership.  While there were a number of strategies shared, there was one that was easily the most common: If you want to sell your ideas for learning to organizational leaders, you need to do so using their language.

Senior organizational leaders may say they fully support learning; many of them even back up their words with actual supportive actions.  But let’s face it.  That support only exists while the learning and performance function is perceived as providing value to the business.  If the bridges are built between senior leadership and L&D, consider yourself lucky. 

For most though, there is a perceived gap between Learning and Development’s efforts and business impact.  To bridge that gap, L&D professionals need to speak to what is important to business leaders, and that isn’t in an LMS report.  If you’ve ever been in a sales role, there’s a simple rule that always rings true: You don’t sell features; you sell benefits.

If you want senior leadership to buy what we are selling, find out what is important to them.  Find out how they describe it – right down to the words they use.  Sell to that.

One additional strategy I use inside organizations is to be very active outside my organization.  It’s difficult to sell the potential benefits of a specific learning program, especially if it involves using tools and techniques not used at the organization before.  A current example of this is using social media tools for learning.  Many organizations are hesitant to do this.

Having an example to show leaders makes the potential benefits of a program much more real.  Being active in the learning and development community at large not only helps build your skills, it also provides examples that can be used inside organizations.  Here are two quick examples.

I recently set up a Facebook Fan Page that functions as a companion site to this blog.  There are two primary reasons I set up this page.

First, it allows me to extend the outreach of my blog and gives people who follow it another option to do so that may better fit their preferences.  Secondly - and more to the point here – it allows me to explore the potential of Facebook as a learning tool.  As tools and features of Facebook begin to further tap its potential as a tool for learning, I will be ahead of the curve, and will have a living, breathing example to use as part of my sales pitch. 

(Shameless plug: If you check out the fan page, I encourage you to become a fan by clicking the LIKE utton if you find value in these posts.  I am looking forward to exploring some of the additional Facebook functions that are available to pages with larger fan bases)

Another example is the potential of Yammer.  Selling it as “Twitter within the firewall” isn’t going to resonate with senior leaders.  It’s much more powerful to be able to show an example of how Yammer works.

Enter the Social Learning Community, recently launched by Jane Hart of the Centre for Learning and Performance Technologies.  This Yammer-based community is a tremendous resource for learning professionals to share and develop knowledge and skills.  It also serves as a perfect example to use when selling Yammer’s potential to an organization’s senior leaders.

In short, don’t wait for your organization to say “Go explore XYZ and see if it’s of value”.  Go explore different tools as part of your own professional development, and that outside knowledge will help you sell the benefits of potential solutions within your organization.

From there the discussion moved on to the sales strategies we use to sell learning to the learners. There was a very strong shared sentiment that this question was misguided, and that instead of selling learning to learners, we should be building self-sufficient learners.

I agree with this sentiment.  I also think that ‘building self-sufficient learners’ is a milestone that is further down the road of an evolving learning culture than most organizations have travelled.  There are a number of stops along the way from a pushed required learning culture to one based on self-sufficient learning.  Depending on where your organization is on that road, selling learners to learners may need to be part of your strategy.

So how do you sell learning to learners?  Part of it is simple marketing.  Make sure learners are aware of what programs are available.  In addition, try not to advertise your programs with L&D phrases like “At the end of this program, participants will be able to…”.  Those are features of the class, and as I wrote earlier, you sell the benefits.  Tell a story of a problem potential learners can identify with, and explain how your learning program can help overcome it.

While it’s not a conscious sales strategy, there is something I do that has greatly enhanced the buy-in I get from learners.  Employees in the organizations I have worked for quickly learn that my support of their performance improvement does not conclude at the end of a learning event.  It’s a continuous process with occasional ‘events’ built in.  I know that my continuous support between ‘events’ has helped build the all-powerful word-of-mouth, which in turn has increased voluntary ‘event’ registrations.

The discussion concluded by exploring what sales strategies we use to sell our own expertise and services within our organization.  While this phrase was not specifically stated in the discussion, it sums up most of the responses: “Toot your own horn”.

Don’t wait for someone to sing your praises; do it yourself.  If you get a complimentary email, forward it to leaders.  Try to get involved in key projects, do an amazing job, and then make sure leadership knows how you contributed. 

Personally there are two major strategies I use to sell myself to my organization.  The first is fairly common: I under-promise and over-deliver.  The key to that strategy is the under-promise part.  It’s not about setting a low bar; it’s about committing to the expectations and then delivering beyond that.  It’s having a customer ask for a salad and steak dinner, and delivering salad, filet-mignon, plus a free dessert.

The second strategy I use is somewhat subtle, and admittedly taps into a dynamic that is frustrating to an internal L&D professional: The assumed superior expertise of the outside consultant.

I don’t say that as a slam against outside consultants.  I’m just acknowledging a realistic dynamic.  As soon as an external provider is brought in, there’s a perceived increase of importance and expertise simply because “we brought someone in”.

How does this connect with how I sell myself?  It goes back to my earlier point of being involved in the learning community outside your organization.  When I share my contributions to the field outside our organizations it taps right into that dynamic.  I recall telling a senior manager years ago about a speaking engagement I was asked to give to a local training organization, and he said “You really know your stuff don’t you?”

Why yes.  Yes I do. 

And so do you.  Remember that.  Then find out what's important to the senior leaders of your organization.

If you remember those two things, the 'sales' part of your job is much easier.

Until next week #lrnchat-ers!

Tuesday, March 15, 2011

When Learners' Eyes Are Smiling...


Just a little (relevant) holiday fun...
When Learners' Eyes Are Smiling

There's a tear in your eye,
and I'm wondering why,
for it never should be there at all.
I've been talking a while,
and it's not that worthwhile;
All progress has come to a stall.

When learners’ eyes are glassy,
like morning dew,
and in fact one or two are asleep.
Engaged learning is clearer,
take a look in the mirror;
Close your eyes and take the leap.

When learners’ eyes are smiling;
you can bet they are engaged.
When all you do is talk and talk,
by boredom you will be upstaged,
When learners hearts are happy,
in the space in which they learn,
The value that they gain while there
is the only true 'return'

These rules are a part,
be it screen or flip chart;
Even e-learning follows these rules.
If I just have to read,
and intake what you feed.
I’ll miss all of the learning jewels.

For to get me to care
I must first be aware
That there’s something I should care about.
And then get me involved
and I should be evolved;
In performance without a doubt.

When learners’ eyes are smiling
‘Tis them who are in control.
If you need a place to start this
Look at who decides to enroll
When learners’ hearts are happy,
All of learning’s a social affair.
And when learners’ eyes are smiling
What they learn they want to share!

Happy St. Patrick’s Day Everyone!

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Blogging: Why did I wait so long?

It was October 7th 2010.  I was sitting at home, in front of my computer, about to click the ‘CREATE ACCOUNT’ button on Blogger.com, and found myself hesitating.

Earlier in the week, during a discussion about blogging in the weekly #lrnchat chat on Twitter, I had publicly stated “That’s it, I’m going to start my blog”, which added a level of accountability to an internal debate I’ve had about blogging for upwards of about three years.

I’m generally an early adopter when it comes to technology, but it wasn’t until I discovered the power of a Personal Learning Network via Twitter that I truly embraced Social Media.  A few months ago my opinion about blogging was very different, and like Twitter before it, was largely based on ignorance.

Here are some of the main reasons (or as I now see them to be – excuses) for procrastinating on starting my blog. 

The Excuse: I’ve got too much to do already without adding ‘blogging’ to my list.
The Reality: You're never too busy to do something you love and find important.

We're all busy, but we should always leave time in our schedules for the important things that have no urgency attached to them.  Personal development is definitely something we should be placing some of our focus on, and blogging is an excellent resource for that. In addition, blogging should be something you do because you enjoy it, not because you have to.  It's like the old joke...

Patient: "Doctor, it hurts when I move my arm like this"
Doctor: "Then don't do that."

If blogging feels like a chore, guess what?  You can stop blogging.

The Excuse: Nobody is going to read it!
The Reality: What if somebody reads it? Wait... What if Nobody reads it!?!?!?

The core of this excuse comes down to one word: Insecurity.  I had this idea in my head that a blog is something that I'm delivering to the world, and it is.  What I forgot in that equation though, is that I'm at the core of that particular world.  I needed to blog for myself first, and give back to myself and my personal development.  If it turns out that someone wanted to join me for parts of the journey, that would be a welcome bonus. If no one besides me found it of value, that would be OK too.

I found that once I let go of the baggage of "Who will or will not read it?” the pressure disappeared. 

The Excuse: I've got nothing to say.
The Reality: We all have something to say.

In today's collaborative world, we all have something to contribute.  A blog can have a theme, or it can be random thoughts. There's really only one rule in my mind: Write what you feel like writing about.

Special thanks goes out to my wife for helping me overcome this hurdle.  I recall discussing this with her and when I said "I really don't have a lot to say..." her subsequent involuntary twitching reminded me that in the right context, I often have a great deal to say.

Once I made the leap of faith – which is the best way I can describe how it felt – I was fairly quickly asking myself “Why have I been denying myself this resource for so long?”

Blogging has provided me with more benefits than I ever expected.. Here are just a few examples:

Personal growth via reflective writing

Reflection is a great tool for learning.  I incorporate it into the programs I design and practice it myself. A blog is an outstanding resource for this.

I regularly write posts that reflect on the weekly #lrnchat discussions taking place on Twitter.  These chats among peers in the Learning and Development field are excellent and a great source of professional development. The posts I write reflecting on the chats reinforce and add tremendously to those learnings. 

Expands my network in a valued community

Networking is becoming more and more important every day.  For both knowledge and professional growth, who-you-know is often more important than what-you-know. A blog is a great tool to expand your network.

One of the great features of blogs is the ability to add comments.  It adds a collaborative edge to the learning, and helps incorporate you and your writing into a new or existing community.  I've enjoyed meeting and interacting with new people via comments they left on my blog.

Provides the satisfaction of contributing

While I admittedly blog primarily for myself, I also take satisfaction in knowing others have read and found value in some of what I write.  When my blog is referenced by a colleague, it is a tremendous compliment.  It is also a privilege to be able to contribute to the ever-expanding pool of resources that I pull from every day.

As I think back to October 7th, with my cursor hovering over the CREATE ACCOUNT button like two magnets resisting a connection, I realize a few key things:

1.      I fell into the trap of the unknown, in which we create an illogical fear based on our ignorance.
2.      I completely underestimated the value blogging would provide me.
3.      While I blog for me, I cherish the connections my blog has enabled me to build with others.
4.      Though I did not realize it at the time, I did not have reasons for not starting a blog; I had excuses.

I recall taking my daughter to the pool this past Labor Day. It was cold, but it was the last day the pool was open, so my daughter insisted.  As kids do, she jumped right in without so much as a pause.  I walked to the edge, stuck my big toe in the water and lovingly said to my daughter “OK then… Have fun!”

We debated for few minutes; her repeatedly telling me the water was not cold and me pointing out the ice cubes floating by behind her. She won the debate by using my own words against me…

“Daaadddyyyy. You always tell me I should try things and not just decide I don’t like them”

If you’re considering starting a blog, jump off the edge and into the deep end of the pool.  In a best case scenario, you’ll find a similar love and satisfaction for it that I have.  And in a worst case scenario?  You jump back out of the pool, towel yourself off, and move on. 

Which, for the record, is EXACTLY what I did that cold Labor Day afternoon.

Monday, March 7, 2011

Reflections on #lrnchat: Disambiguating Terminology

Each week that I am able to participate in #lrnchat discussion I post a summary of the discussion to my blog. I do this both for my personal development as well as sharing with the Learning and Development Profession at large. This summary is based on my own interpretations of the chat; others who participated may have differing opinions or interpretations of the discussion. I welcome those that do to add your ideas to the comments.

The topic of this week's #lrnchat session was "Disambiguating Terminology". 

I always find looking at the questions that are used to loosely guide the chat as a nice way to see the overall theme of the chat. Here are the discussion questions that were presented to the group:

Q1) How does confusion about learning terminology affect your work?
Q2) How do you manage when a vendor uses a term that conflicts with its usage in your organization?
Q3) Terminology: It drives me crazy when people say ________ but they mean ________?
Q4) When has confusion over a learning term led to problems because people weren’t speaking the same language?
Q5) How would you implement learning terminology standards across the industry?


Key Learning Points

Language is part of the foundation upon which verbal communication is built.  The shared understanding of what a specific word means enables communication to be much more effective.  For example, take this statement: "I'm walking to the store". 

'Walking' is a pretty universal term. Our strides may be different, but the core definition of what it means to walk is widely accepted.  The shared definition of the term saves me from having to provide a more detailed description such as: "I'm moving to the store by advancing my feet alternately so that there is always one foot on the ground in bipedal locomotion".

Unfortunately, not all language is shared.  The deeper you go into any single group or community, the more specific the language becomes.  It is still a shared language; the difference is that the size of the group sharing the language is shrinking.

Need proof?  Let's look at the 'walking' example again.  Our shared definition of what it means to walk means we don't have to define it.  But what if we delved deeper into a group of walkers?  There's deeper definitions to walking that include: Bushwalking, race-walking, weight-walking, hill-walking, and the ever-popular Long Island sport Mall-Walking. 

Need more proof?  Go check out the WikiPedia page on walking.  There's a huge amount of detail there, and it shows that there's a lot more going on during the simple act of walking then I ever realized.  To me it was a simple act of putting one foot in front of the other; to someone more specialized in walking, it's much more than that.

Compare this to the language we use to describe what Learning Professionals do.  Do our stakeholders define us by the simplest definition of 'Training'?  Do we go into the other extreme and alienate ourselves from our stakeholders by speaking in the jargon of our field? 

This week's #lrnchat focused on the challenges that are created by the language of learning professionals, and those that have a stake in the work that we do.

The discussion started with a simple question: How does confusion in learning terminology affect the work that we do?

I think the direct answer to this question is built into the question itself.  When you have confusion around terminology, it is likely going to have some sort of adverse affect on the work that is being done.  That adverse affect could be as simple and common as inefficiency and stalled projects, or something much more impactful.  Either way, confusion of terminology will likely have some sort of negative impact on the work.

Accepting of that, I find more value in exploring the origins of the confusion itself.

I expect that the origin of the confusion likely stems from the origins of the Learning and Development function itself.  In most organizations, the function originated from a top-down, organizational need to onboard individuals.  Even as the function evolved, it was still mostly top-down pushing of skills the organization needed employees to apply.  All of this fell under the legacy term: "Training".

The more learner-centric, pull approaches being applied today in most cases did not originate at the organizational level; it originated from the smaller sub-group of the organization's L&D group.  Within that subgroup terms like Learning, Performance, e-Learning. Social Learning, and Community of Practice have shared understanding; outside the sub-group though, it's all still 'Training'.

There was discussion during the chat on how we go about educating stakeholders on the terms that we use to discuss learning and performance programs.  I don't agree with that approach.  I do believe that the terminology is important; I feel that changing the terminology requires less focus on the terms themselves and more focus on changing the way people look and define what you do.  I discussed this idea in a recent post.

Another way Learning Professionals can bridge this communications gap is to be very conscious of the learning terminology we use with stakeholders.  We often forget that our ‘terminology’ is often a stakeholder’s ‘Jargon’. 

An interesting question was asked during the chat: When does terminology become jargon?  I think the concept of jargon is more black-and-white than this question implies, and is linked to the perspective of the individual.  If someone is ignorant to what a group-specific term means, then from that individual's perspective, the terminology is jargon.  Jargon isn't defined by the term or the usage; it's defined by the knowledge of the person it is expressed to.

From there the discussion moved on to how we manage vendors that use different terminology than is used within our organizations. 

I've never been concerned about the terminology vendors use in their discussions with me.  Even when a vendor is using different terminology, our shared understanding of the work is usually sufficient to bridge the gap so we are on the same page.

Where I do feel it is critical to focus on terminology is when vendors need to speak to stakeholders.  It that is going to happen, then it is important that they understand the language that is in use at the organization - including the language that you might be trying to put into use at the organization - and speak to that.

Part of the equation of changing the language of employee learning at an organization is to ensure that the learning professionals (internal and external) are consistently using the chosen language themselves.  Marcia Conner echoed the risks of not doing so: "For years I ignored people using 'Training' and 'learning' interchangeably. Now I see it's holding organizations back".

The discussion then shifted to a simple and thought-provoking fill-in-the-blank question regarding terminology: It drives me crazy when people say ________ but they mean ________.

A question like this tends to up the snarky-quotient of responses, and this one did not disappoint.  Here are a few of my favorites examples:

@Quinnovator: When people say ‘game’ but mean ‘tarted up quiz show’
@JaneBozarth: When they say training but mean presentation 
@Mary_a_Myers: It drives me crazy when people say INTERACTIVE but they mean READ & CLICK NEXT
@britz: It drives me crazy when people say JUST IN TIME but they mean JUST IN CASE
@marciamarcia: It drives me crazy when people say YES but they mean NO
@JaneBozarth: When they say evaluation but mean assessment. And vice versa
@marciamarcia: It drives me crazy when people say “learning” when they mean “training.” Both are important & mean diff things!
@NYChase: When people say “eLearning” but really (just) mean PowerPoint uploaded to the LMS
@odguru: When they say ROI but they mean CYA

The discussion then shifted towards examples of when confusion over a learning term led to problems because people weren’t speaking the same language.  Most participants seemed to agree that this is a fairly common occurrence.

I once had a conversation with a stakeholder on a program he was looking for me to develop.  There was something in place before I joined the organization, which I would define as a presentation.  As we were discussing how we might do things differently, specifically talking about ways to get the learners involved, the stakeholder was focusing on my use of the word 'engaging'.  His perspective - which is not unique outside of the L&D community - was that people were required to participate in the training and did not need to be engaged.  We were looking at this concept of engagement from two different perspectives.

Ultimately, my perspective didn't matter.  After all, it was his program, not mine.  Still, I had the responsibility to ensure it would be a success, and we needed to get on the same page during this discussion.  Ultimately, it was a slight slip on my part that got us there.

"You're right - they are required to participate.  Wouldn't it be better if they gave a $h!t while they did?"

Thankfully I have a good enough relationship with the stakeholder that not only did my comment warrant a chuckle, it also bridged our language gap.

The discussion concluded with an exploration of what we might do to implement learning terminology standards across the industry. 

Personally, I wouldn’t bother to try to standardize the language outside of the community of professionals. The language of the industry is almost irrelevant if the stakeholders don’t speak it.  As Clark Quinn stated during the chat "actually, our terminology hurts us because we’re not speaking ‘business’".

I think standard terminology is important, but it’s a distant second to clarity of your message.  Learning terminology is something I use with my peers in the learning community, and something I avoid to help conversations with everyone else.

Ultimately I think focusing on the confusion caused by learning terminology targeting the symptom, not the disease. It's true that confusing terminology is a problem - one that is itself a subset of a larger one.  The root cause of the terminology confusion is not having effective conversations in the first place. 

It's for that reason that I try not to use the terms at all outside of the learning community.  When I speak with stakeholders, I just talk about what it is we need people to DO.

Until next week #lrnchat-ers!