Pre-Covid, I delivered a lot of training. During Covid, as the in-person work (reliant on travel) went off a cliff, I moved to developing training and delivering remotely. In this period, I went down a labyrinthine rabbit hole to learn how we learn - spaced repetition, forgetting curves, microlearning, gamification, visual/aural/kinetic learners, etc.
Now, I am VERY cautious about taking on any projects to deliver or develop training. Why? Because most training fails unless three conditions are met:
🚦 Culture and context are understood 🚦 Training objectives are aligned with incentives 🚦 The medium fits the message
On this last point, for those curious about all the gadgetry and gimmickry in training, prepare to be confused (briefly) and then enlightened (hopefully).
As the images below demonstrate, we learn differently. Some of us visually, some aurally, and some by doing. We forget quickly. We don’t remember much without practice. Helpful, not also unhelpful. It depends on the topic.
Let me give an example. If we’re trying to learn to juggle, what will help most? A video? An audio description? Or practising? What about if we’re trying to understand how to assess geopolitical risk? Would a video work? A podcast? An article? We can’t practice as quickly. Could or should we gamify political risk? “Who won the battle of… what is expropriation?”
The objective informs the medium we choose for the training: educate, inform, warn, refresh, etc.
In some studies, we’ve found that “(a) gamification can foster enthusiasm; (b) gamification can provide feedback on performance; (c) gamification can fulfil learners’ needs for recognition; and (d) gamification can promote goal setting.” But in the analysis of these 32 qualitative studies, we also discovered that, “(a) gamification does not bring additional utility and (b) gamification can cause anxiety or jealousy.”
If we look at kids, we get further clues. Learning appears fun and kinetic until… we start giving grades. Then, some students shift from a focus on mastery to ego (beating others, proving something, managing image).
Should we, then, not use the Kahoot, Menti, etc. tools in training? It depends on the context, objectives, and message. All the gadgetry and gamification have certainly improved staid and dreary PPT assaults, and they can bring levity to dry topics, but they’re not a cure-all.
If you’re tasked with, or considering, training, step back and ask the five whys. Why this topic? Why now? Why these people? Why should they care? Why this format?
Meetings about meetings
I have a friend who moved from a job in government to big tech. In his prior role, there were LOTS of meetings. On joining BigTech he sent meeting requests to critical stakeholders. He intended to get to know them and their needs and establish how he could best support them in his government relations role.
Most didn’t reply or were brief, “What is the agenda? Maybe I can reply by email.”
Consider why the other person is requesting the meeting. Put succinctly, as Jay Ferro noted:
“The three stages of career development are:
-
I want to be in the meeting
-
I want to run the meeting
-
I want to avoid meetings.“
Ambition, ego, and life stage play a part. Understanding that might help placate and avoid unnecessary meetings.