TechLearn Insider

Life of a Training Manager: The Theorem of Changing Times

By Kaliym A. Islam

Not long ago, I participated in an on-line debate with a professor from Baylor University. My topic that day was ‘Is Kirkpatrick Obsolete?” Upon hearing the title of my discussion, the professor accused me of trying to beat up on a senior citizen.

Contrary to the professor’s belief, I am a great fan of Dr. Donald Kirkpatrick, a visionary who set the stage for an important discussion about measuring the impact of training programs.

To be honest, however, his approach to assessing training programs is not working today. Those who participated in The Accenture 2004 Survey of Learning Executives told us this when they agreed that as a profession, we must “overcome a number of legacy restrictions: processes, metrics and techniques that were fine for an approach to learning a decade or two ago, but which are no longer adequate.”

Based on this important feedback from the leadership of our industry, we are at least justified (and some might argue compelled) to re-examine the application of Dr. Kirkpatrick’s approach to assessing the impact of training programs. To be fair we should conduct this re-examination in relation to the realities of today’s business world, and in comparison to some other processes or practices that were used forty years ago and are still in existence today. Let us therefore consider three common activities that many of us engage in today that were also around forty years ago: banking, running a business, and managing people.

Banking

Forty years ago, it took well over a week for a check to clear, there were no ATMs, and banks were closed on the weekends. Today, the banking experience of individuals is quite different. The advent of the Internet and improved technology has significantly affected how banks interact with their customers and how customers interact with banks. Today, for example, the expectation is that you can get access to your money instantly, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. This expectation didn’t exist forty years ago.

The changing expectations (of the stakeholders of the banking process) have forced the banking industry to change some of its approaches to banking. These changes in approach (to process) have forced evaluation criteria to change as well.

The Theorem of Changing Times

In short, what has happened to the banking process over the last forty years is an example of “The Theorem of Changing Times.” The theorem states that new technology equals a change in stakeholder expectations, and that changes in stakeholder expectations equals new approaches. New approaches equal the application of new techniques, which equal a new evaluation criterion. The theorem further states that the consequence of failing to apply new techniques is simply failure.

In the banking industry, technology advances drove a change in stakeholder expectations. This change in stakeholder expectation drove the need for new approaches to be developed. These new approaches then drove the need for new techniques. The new techniques ultimately required a new approach for evaluating success of the banking process. With this groundwork set, let’s see how the theorem of changing times applies to both business and management processes.

Business

Forty years ago, there were virtually no specialty stores, and no on-line shopping. In many companies, internal processes were done manually. There were no PC’s on the desktops of workers, no e-mail, and no voicemail. Outsourcing and off-shoring were virtually unheard of.

Today, the perceived value of a business transaction is vastly different from what it was forty years ago. Imagine not being able to leave a message for a businessperson anytime day or night, or not being able to converse with a company representative via e-mail. Who can imagine doing business today with a company that doesn’t have a website, or a 24-hour hotline.

Businesses are run differently today largely because the expectations of business stakeholders (be they customers, investors, or workers) are different. This change in stakeholder expectation has forced businesses to use new approaches, which have driven the need for new techniques that require a new method for evaluating their success. Who can forget what happened during the dotcom era when analysts attempted to apply a pre-dotcom approach to assess the value of dotcom companies?

Managing People

Forty years ago, there were virtually no women managers in the workforce. Workers tended to stay with one company for their entire career. The manager had all the answers, and there was a hierarchy and siloed approach to managing people, and a “my way or the highway” management style dominated the workplace.

Today’s workforce is much more diverse and, although white males still dominate, management is also more diverse. Managers are no longer expected to have all the answers. Organizations are flatter and highly matrixed, with emphasis on leadership and influence rather than managing and controlling.

Changes in technology have contributed to changes in workforce demographics. This new demographic has new expectations. These new expectations have caused a need for new approaches to management, which in turn have forced managers to apply new techniques. These new techniques require new approaches for evaluating the success and effectiveness of managers.

Organizations now use tools such as 360-degree feedback and self-evaluations to help determine how successful their leaders are, or the impact a manager is having on the organization. Output alone is no longer the sole or most important measurement. Managers who are still applying techniques from forty years ago are struggling in today’s workplace.

Training Not Exempt

For a long time many thought that training and development was exempt from the Theorem of Changing Times. Training professionals have traditionally been comforted with the belief that training was a “necessary evil” that would never go away, and that the rules that applied to other business processes did not apply to training and development. As was the case with the other business processes, however, technology has changed this paradigm.

Technology, e-learning, the electronic delivery of training, and the popularity of such mobile devices as PDAs and iPods, however, have had a profound effect on the expectations that stakeholders have of training. Stakeholders are now holding training organizations to the same standard they apply to other parts of their business.

The change in stakeholder expectation is driving the need for new approaches to be developed, new techniques to be used, and a new method for evaluating the success of training programs to be employed.

Simply looking at the new paradigm of training and development from a capital investment perspective paints a clear picture of the “new” environment.

When classroom-based instructor-led training was the only delivery option for organizations, the capital investment for training programs was in things such as word processing, presentation and other such software licenses; computers; overhead projectors; whiteboards; and markers.

When organization wanted to reduce the amount of training it delivered, or even to outsource or offshore it’s training, there was a limited financial risk. The software licenses could be distributed to other employees in the organization. The same was true for projectors, whiteboards and similar types of investments. The computers tended to be leased, but even if they weren’t, they could be redistributed for use by other employees, donated for tax credits, sold, or just written off. In short, there was a minimal economic risk for the investment in training.

Brave New World

With improved technology and the advent of e-Learning, the capital investment in training programs now includes learning management systems and authoring software. It might also include the purchase of MP3 devices.

Other departments in the organization cannot easily absorb these investments, nor can they be easily donated in the event that the organization decides to reduce or abandon its training development efforts.

This new economic reality, which was driven by advancements in technology, have given rise to a change in the expectations of the stakeholders of training programs, especially those business stakeholders who fund the training function and now incur a much greater risk. This new paradigm is putting pressure on training departments to show and prove the impact that training has on the organization.

Since different stakeholders evaluate impact differently, perceptions vary.

This dynamic environment will force training departments to move away from the static approach that Dr. Kirkpatrick pioneered over forty years ago, and move to more fluid undertaking where, on a project by project basis, training managers are measuring the things that matter to the people who write the checks.

---

Kaliym Islam is director of learning product development and technology services for the Depository Trust & Clearing Corp.