Product – Running Training Like A Business 2.0

Revisiting the Learning Stack

A framework to help identify amplifiers and limiters of learning

I find frameworks extremely helpful. I also find blogging useful for memorializing ideas and belief at a given time. So going back and revisiting a blog post about a conceptual framework is really enjoyable for me. Before I started the Running Training Like a Startup project and blog I had been capturing my L&D musing on a blog I titled Learning Hacks.

In 2013 I authored a post on the Learning Stack. A framework for thinking about the amplifiers and limiters of learning. My focus has always been the macro and meta of corporate L&D. I found the framework a useful way for me to organize the huge volumes of new research and experience being released. It also provided useful context for more discrete elements of learning. In today’s environment, as L&D pros look widely for levers to enhance impact I felt it was time to take another look. You can see the original post here.

Six years later, with so much more known and accepted in areas like neuroscience, learner personas and game dynamics, I am curious how the framework holds up. Take a look. Tell me what you think. I look forward to your feedback.

Why Not Re-skill?

Why Not Re-skill? Recruitment vs. Re-Skilling

A survey from the Consumer Technology Association, the trade association representing the $398 billion U.S. consumer technology industry, which supports more than 15 million U.S. jobs and more than 2,200 companies stated the following:

37% of those surveyed will displace workers due to technology advancements in the next five years.
Of those with displacements, only 52% of the displaced population will be re-skilled and retained!

My question is simple. Why will only half of the companies surveyed re-skill workers and choose instead to take the long, expensive, and risky path of recruitment? Existing workers have already proven to be a culture fit. They have cleared the hurdle of basic orientation to the way the company works. They have already demonstrated the ability and desire to add their value to the company. The tangible costs of new employees along with the intangible cost of layoffs to brand and public perception seem to far outweigh any costs associated with re-skilling. So why the decision to jettison half of the displaced? How do executives view this trade off? What does this say about how L&D delivers re-skilling and the perceived value of it?

I look forward to your thoughts.

All About the Product

Rapid and effective product development requires key roles. In the book I discuss the need for a product manager to oversee the raid iteration cycle required by minimal viable learning solutions. This article from techbeacon.com further explains the roles of product owner and product manager. In many cases the CLO fills the role of product owners while the solution architect acts as the product manager. In all cases keeping the voice of the customer (learner) close the product development team is essential.

You can see the article here