What relationship do the attendees have to each other?

Is it a manager and some employees, or multiple managers? Do some of them report to others? Do they work well together? What has their past working relationship been like?

What desired outcome do the attendees likely have in mind?

What have these people asked of you in the past? What organizational plans are related to this meeting? How ready are you to commit to the likely plans this meeting will produce?

What are the attendees’ biggest concerns lately?

What has been happening in their part of the organization? What are the current challenges they face? If you were one of them, what would be keeping you up at night?

What organizational objectives are related to this meeting?

How does this meeting relate to the organization’s strategic plan? What priority do the related business objectives have on the strategic plan? Are there other objectives that compete or conflict with the ones affected by this meeting?

What relationship do you have with the attendees?

How have past interactions gone? What has gone well with these people before? What hasn’t gone well? What do these people think of you personally or professionally?

What do the attendees think of the training group or training in general?

What have past training projects been like? Do these people believe in performance-based training? What expectations have they had about training in the past? How do they think your group fits into the organization?

What image should you present to the attendees?

What is the key message you want to give them? What are your group’s current and long-term goals? How do you believe your group fits into the organization?

You don’t have to answer every question in this article, just pay attention to the seven main ones. However, the additional questions may help produce some useful answers to the main ones. A few extra minutes of thought before a meeting can produce many hours of extra productivity afterwards. May your meetings be merry and meaningful!

Alan

If your e-learning is a virtual classroom session that learners take in small groups, you can still produce realistic exercises and tests; be prepared for some challenges in implementing them, though. You may be using a platform such as WebEx, Adobe Connect, or the like. Asking people to interact with each other to practice a skill through these applications is less intuitive than doing so in person. It might take longer, and learners might be distracted by the software interface being used at the time.

If your e-learning is a tutorial that learners access individually, your options become much narrower. Most e-learning designers end up relying on quizzes as their tests. They use questions such as true-false, multiple choice, matching, re-sequencing, and so on. What they end up with are knowledge tests that can no longer be called practice; the skills part of the tests no longer exists. One way to improve the value of these knowledge-heavy tests is to use situations as the basis for your questions.

Situational questions reproduce the work circumstances relevant to the training. They tell a story and ask the learner to react appropriately. They allow people to decide how the course content applies to the job. Here is an example. If your training was on a new privacy policy implemented at the customer service level, you might see multiple choice questions formulated according to the two below. Question 1 is a pure content-based question. Question 2 is a situational content-based question.

Question 1: Which part of the new privacy policy applies when a customer asks to see another customer’s data?
A.    Section 1.3
B.    Section 1.5
C.    Section 1.7
D.    Section 1.8

Question 2: If a customer wanted to order the same model as a friend and asked you to look up that person’s order history, which response would you choose?
A.    “Sure, let me look that up and I can tell you everything that your friend has ordered with us.”
B.    “I can tell you the model name and number that your friend ordered, but nothing else.”
C.    “I can’t share that information with you.”
D.    “Our privacy policy doesn’t allow us to share any customer information with others.”

In situational questions, the work context makes the information that much more relevant and applicable. They prepare people for the actual work issues the training was meant to address. In short, they make your quizzes more realistic and less boring. As an added bonus, they are generally easier to write. Simply ask yourself: “How are people supposed to use this information on the job?” and “How can I reproduce those situations in my test?”

What tips do you have for creating better tests in your e-learning tutorials?

Alan

Conversation 1

SSM: Hey Terry. I thought I’d stop by to talk about that new project I e-mailed you about.

TTM: Oh hi, Sam. Sure thing, come on in.

SSM: So our new TPS report procedures will be finalized next month. It looks like all my sales people will need training on them.

TTM: Okay, so the deadline for delivery is 30 days. Do you still have about 150 people across all regions?

SSM: That’s right. It shouldn’t take more than an hour to deliver this training, so we can get everyone trained within a week of the new procedure launch.

TTM: Hmm, looking at my available resources, I’m not sure I can meet those deadlines.

SSM: This is priority one, Terry. It’s got to happen.

TTM: But, what about that consultative sales course you want delivered by end-of-year?

SSM: Oh, that’s still priority one as well.

TTM: I also have a project going for Chris in Customer Service about the new product launch.

SSM: Oh yeah, I don’t want to override Chris. That’s also priority one.

Let’s give Terry a new prioritizing tool – using organization objectives – and go back in time. Here is the conversation again.

Conversation 2

SSM: Hey Terry. I thought I’d stop by to talk about that new project I e-mailed you about.

TTM: Oh hi Sam. Sure thing, come on in.

SSM: So our new TPS report procedures will be finalized next month. It looks like all my sales people will need training on them.

TTM: Okay, so the deadline for delivery is 30 days. Do you still have about 150 people across all regions?

SSM: That’s right. It shouldn’t take more than an hour to deliver this training, so we can get everyone trained within a week of the new procedure launch.

TTM: Hmm, looking at the strategic plan, I’m trying to decide which organizational objective this project relates to.

SSM: Strategic plan?

TTM: Yes. Here, have a look. Would you say this relates to the objective about reducing costs by 5% this year?

SSM: Well, yeah. That’s the whole reason we redid the TPS reports in the first place.

TTM: So it fits between the new product launch and the push to increase new customer business.

SSM: Makes sense.

TTM: So Chris’ new product launch training would be priority one. This TPS report course looks like priority two. And the consultative sales course we’re working on now becomes priority three.

SSM: I guess that’s how it’s going to have to be.

I’m not suggesting that all competing projects can be easily resolved using a list of organizational objectives, but it does help to keep the discussion rational and unbiased. It also allows training professionals to manage client expectations in a realistic way. Let your client see a list of prioritized organizational objectives and relate the new project to one of them. This will help you and your client set deadlines and allocate resources in a way that addresses the needs of all stakeholders across all projects.

How are training projects typically prioritized in your organization?

Alan

Ingredients

1 can of cranberry sauce

1 envelope of dry onion mix

1 tbsp. vegetable oil

3 tbsps chili sauce

1/3 cup sugar

¼ cup vinegar

4 lbs. chicken parts

Directions:

1. Mix the ingredients together in a bowl, except for the chicken; set aside.
2. Place chicken in bottom of a large casserole dish
3. Pour sauce mixture over the chicken
4. Cover and cook. Bake at 325 for 1 ½ hours.

This is great served over rice.

Alan

[Image via Fire Recruit]

Did you miss a recipe?

First day of recipes: Potato Latkes
Second day of recipes: Apple Crisp
Third day of recipes: Chili
Fourth day of recipes: Salad
Fifth day of recipes: Glazed Pecans

The reason they react this way is because they aren’t thinking about this statistic correctly. First, let’s get the statistic out there: the average time required to create an instructor-led training (ILT) program is 45 to 1. This means a one-day ILT program takes about 45 work days to create. Design time for other types of training varies.

So let me guess; you’re thinking, “Oh, we’re way under that. I wish I had that much time to create my training.”

Here’s the thing; this is not a suggested amount of time to spend on course design/development. This is an average of historical data for actual past projects; it’s how much time organizations are currently spending creating classroom training, on average. And just so you know, we’re talking work days here, not calendar days. The total number of days invested by every person involved in the project can be added up, then divided by the number of days required to deliver the course. This is how a design ratio can be calculated on a past project.

If you tally up all the time invested by all players, you won’t be far off the average. This means every bit of time from everyone who worked on it; the designers, the subject-matter experts, the writers, the graphic artists, the proofreaders, the reviewers, the managers, the consulted learners, the validators—and the list goes on.

Keep in mind, this is an average; some training projects are way above or way below this. The ones that are way below the average are most likely projects where parts of the work didn’t need doing; revision projects, training on skills that didn’t need analyzing, projects that reused a lot of existing content, activities, or materials. The projects that are way above the average are probably due to these factors: difficult or brand new skills to teach, a lack of subject-matter experts, or design issues like complex testing requirements or sub-optimal delivery locations or class sizes.

You may also be way above or below the average design ratio due to your own processes. If you use a performance-based training approach, you’re probably being more efficient. If you focus on lean instructional design, you’re shaving more design time off your ratio. If you apply a structured design model that avoids rework, you’re also ahead of the curve.

In a perfect world, we would make no mistakes and our design ratios would be significantly lower than the current average. But in the real world, we must use best practices to minimize wasted effort and produce leaner, more performance-based training.

Alan

I look back on that day and realize that the training was over when the course was over. We went back to the office and caught up on our backlogged work. We didn’t apply what we had learned in the course. Nothing changed back on the job.

Over 20 years later, I understand the truth: training shouldn’t be over when the course ends. Training should be over when employees are performing their jobs better. Sounds good, doesn’t it? Imagine that; training actually having a positive impact on the organization!

In order for this to occur, a few things must happen in your training:

• People need to learn which standards apply to their jobs.
• People need to learn the specific actions that will allow them to meet those standards.
• People need to practice performing those actions in a manner similar to the reality of the job.

Many courses fall short of the items listed above. That networking course explained network architectures and protocols. It never taught us how to choose a network type or communications scheme, or how to set up a network. It was heavy on information but light on meaningful instruction and practice.

This is the essence of performance-based training: it focuses on how-to information. It avoids topics as the course content. It includes realistic practice. It involves managers and supervisors in post-course follow-up. Best of all, it isn’t over until people go back to work and perform their jobs better than they did before they attended training.

Alan

Now make this a professional conversation, rather than a social one. How does your CEO feel when employees are talking? It surely depends on what they are talking about. So what are you talking about, as a training professional? Are you bringing up topics that light your executives’ interests? Or are you droning on about something that puts them to sleep?

The training industry is often guilty of boring clients to death. We report back on attendance figures and test scores. Executives stifle a yawn and thank us for our hard work. The numbers seem irrelevant, and sink to the bottom of the ocean of data they receive.

What we need to do is change the topic. We need to relate our training to the things that matter to them. Which courses are contributing to the organization’s strategic direction? What workplace performance changes are courses focused on producing? How are those changes moving the organization towards its business goals? The attendance figures and test scores might mean more to executives if they knew the answers to these questions.

Your organization has a strategic plan. It might be neatly documented in an elaborate portfolio. It might be unofficial, and exist in the heads of decision makers. Trainers everywhere need to find out what it is. They need to connect themselves to it. They need to be a part of it. They need to show executives that training efforts are focused on the same things they care about. There is one clear way to thrive as a training department, and that is to have the same obsessions as your CEO.

Alan

A man was asking his lawyer for legal advice about leaving his wife. He explained that they had become estranged. He felt his wife was now cruel and cynical with him all the time. He was so angry with her he even asked his lawyer how he might make the breakup as painful as possible.

The lawyer advised him to treat his wife very well until the day he announced his intention to divorce her. If she felt he was truly a wonderful man, she would be even sorrier for losing him. The man thanked his lawyer and went on his way.

Three months later, the lawyer bumped into the man at the grocery store. The legal counsel asked his client about his plan. Was it going as intended? Was he ready to devastate his wife by leaving her?

“Leave her? Why on earth would I want to leave her? She’s the most wonderful woman in the world!” exclaimed the now ecstatic man.

Reciprocation is usually thought of as the returning of a behavior in kind. We usually think of it as a pleasant surprise. But as trainers, we can engage in some planned reciprocation. Call it preciprocation, if you will.

No matter how rough my morning has been, once I walk into that classroom, I’m ready to preciprocate. I know my disposition will affect my learners, so I make a conscious effort to be positive, receptive, and friendly.

Thinking about it now, I have to say this story, and the effect it’s had on me, have served me very well in the classroom over the years. I hope it helps you shape your behavior, and consequently, that of your learners.

Alan

Precedents are prior instances that set the tone for how to proceed in future instances. They’re like unwritten rules that people will follow, often without conscious effort. Here’s a list of precedents you can set in your training that can produce a better learning climate:

Start on time: If there’s one thing I’ve noticed that incites people to show up on time is the idea of walking in after the session has started.

Take breaks as scheduled: The temptation to finish a lesson before the break is strong. But if it’s time for a break, just take it. It doesn’t matter where it occurs within any particular lesson. This will help people have confidence in your ability to manage time.

Accept all learner input: How you react to people’s comments affects their willingness to continue commenting, and therefore, participating.

Handle problems promptly: If you show a willingness to resolve problems as they appear, learners will have more confidence in you and be more willing to follow your directions.

Minimize the role of slides: Most people hate “Death by PowerPoint” training. If you create opportunities to share experiences, compare opinions, and try out new ideas, you set a tone that makes people excited to be there.

What precedents have you set for your training that have proven to be successful?

Alan

I’ve seen a lot of training programs. I’ve examined the materials from dozens of past clients, and watched hundreds of people deliver training. One variable that consistently challenges trainers is how to organize their training. Some people use chapters, which then contain modules. Some people like to organize units into sections. Some people use lessons which are grouped into branches. There’s no end to the names you can use for the divisions of your training content.

How your content is organized has a direct impact on how easily people can navigate your materials. It also affects how well people can learn your content. When a course is organized logically and simply, learners can focus on learning rather than trying to figure out the training’s structure.

Unfortunately, there are no uniform definitions for most of these words: units, sections, chapters, branches, modules, etc. They all have roughly the same definition: a grouping of related information within a larger whole. There is one word, however, that we should all agree upon as instructional designers: lesson.

A lesson is a discrete unit of instruction. This implies two things. Firstly, it means a lesson is instructional in nature. This means that it does three things:

• It gives learners information about a job.
• It provides learners a chance to apply that information in the same manner as it would be used on the job.
• It then allows learners to receive feedback on how they did in the application.

The second implication for the definition of a lesson is that it is discrete. This means it is self-contained. It can be taken out of one program and plopped into another with little or no changes, therefore, the content it covers must be whole and complete: It must contain one complete job task or one complete informational topic as its content. (The preference is to focus on tasks and avoid topics, but that’s an issue for another blog post.)

As long as you use lessons as your smallest unit of instruction, all other organization systems become secondary. You can group your lessons as units within sections, or as modules within chapters, etc. Which terms you use at this point becomes inconsequential. Each lesson sets learners up to succeed not only in the training, but hopefully also back on the job. The rest, as they say, is gravy. Just be careful not to over-complicate the rest of your course structure. It’s probably best to use at most two other terms and avoid a confusing or intimidating hierarchy in your training’s setup.

How is content organized in your organization’s training programs?

Alan

Need to design a course, but not yet ready to enroll in a workshop?
Langevin’s Instructional Designer Starter Kit is right for you!