Business leaders are placing tremendous pressure on Learning & Development (L&D) practitioners to demonstrate that their learning efforts and initiatives are worth the allocated budget. This is one of the biggest\u2014and never-ending\u2014challenges facing those involved with any aspect of workplace learning.<\/p>\n
UNABLE TO CONNECT<\/strong><\/p>\n There are many reasons L&D practitioners are unable to connect their efforts with actual workplace applications. One that stands out is that L&D practitioners tend to focus on \u201cthe learning\u201d<\/em> rather than on \u201chow the learning results affect business performance.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n L&D practitioners like to talk about being \u201caccountable,\u201d but they often fall back on the \u201cthree monkeys approach\u201d: If we do not speak, see, or hear it, this pesky accountability issue will go away.<\/p>\n Regretfully, many L&D practitioners remain under the impression that if proper learning takes place, then everything else will take care of itself. Those involved with learning quickly discover how to integrate and apply Kirkpatrick\u2019s Four Levels of Evaluation. Yes, organizations explicitly hire L&D practitioners for their expertise with Level 1 (developing training that resonates with learners) and Level 2 (learning retention). Not one business leader expects anything different. What they expect, however, is that their L&D practitioners ensure that the first two levels contribute to improving job performance (Level 3) that will lead to business improvement (Level 4). This is what business leaders call \u201caccountability.\u201d<\/p>\n WOLF IN SHEEP\u2019S CLOTHING<\/strong><\/p>\n Herein lies every L&D practitioner\u2019s challenge: getting employees to learn the right skills and, ultimately, apply these skills to the job. In an attempt to answer this need, some propose what appear to be relevant solutions such as measuring learning\u2019s \u201creturn on investment\u201d (training ROI) and how well learning meets business expectations (ROE). But these solutions often fall short of evaluating how well learning contributes to on-the-job effectiveness and its role in helping to achieve business objectives.<\/p>\n That said, here\u2019s a news flash: Your business leaders have a growing need for innovation, creativity, and the capacity to manage continuous market changes. Your business leaders are under tremendous pressure to foster knowledge-driven business environments. Leaders increasingly are depending on organizational knowledge (and by extension, those responsible for it) to help them develop strategic and business advantages to maintain relevance, let alone survival, within their market space.<\/p>\n As a result, rather than being viewed as a secondary role, workplace learning has risen to the top of many business leaders\u2019 to-do lists. Even though this is just about every L&D practitioner\u2019s dream, it also comes at a price\u2026the need for \u201caccountability.\u201d<\/p>\n From our business background perspective, workplace learning is on thin ice with business leaders. The biggest impediment to conducting effective evaluations is the workplace Learning community\u2019s \u201civory tower\u201d mentality. There is a pervasive arrogance within the Learning community that \u201clearning\u201d should never tarnish itself with business.<\/p>\n What many L&D practitioners fail to acknowledge and accept is that their leaders view \u201clearning\u201d as simply another business activity. For some reason, many believe this undervalues workplace learning. On the contrary, it brings the realization that, like every other business activity, learning must prove value and account for how it contributes to achieving the organization\u2019s objectives. And while leaders recognize learning\u2019s relevance, they will marginalize and possibly eliminate it altogether if it does not deliver value, directly or indirectly.<\/p>\n