So, we’ve seen that instead of choosing the best talent to get into your organization, it is probably wiser to focus on a good candidate. One of the goal is to make sure the candidate you have chosen can become “productive” as soon as possible in your organisation. Which is why your people development processes play a key role in making sure your HR function really supports your organisation business needs.
First of all, in many companies we are not even able to talk about learning, as the focus is purely on training activities. What is the difference between the two words? It is not just a minor meaning difference, it is all about a different approach, and the debate is quite old on which one to prefer. The key difference between the two approaches is the attitude you adopt. Training is all about “inputing” contents into the heads of the employees (hoping that something remains). Learning, instead, is about creating an environment in which the employee becomes an active “learner”, and is able to absorb the information and knowledges it actually needs to perform its duties.
As you see, it is not just about changing “name”. Even if you organisation has somebody called “L&D Manager”, if all what you have is a catalogue of courses, mainly technical and mandatory, and the decision to take part in them is taken by HR or by managers only, all what you are doing is pure training.
Another element that confused me has always been the fact that both Training and Learning are very often used in conjunction with the word “Development”. Why? Isn’t Learning all about developing people? Hasn’t the word development already have the need to have learning activities embedded in their processes? In the frame of job divisions, often many organisations have also been able to split Development from Training. In this case a development function deals with what… career programmes? Succession Planning? What is exactly its focus?
I’ve never went to deep into this, because the more I tried to investigate this issue, the more I was puzzled by the responses I would be getting.
What I am suggesting involves however two necessary supporting facts:
We definitely need a new development approach that can holistically address the development need of your whole organisation. We need to plan the portfolio of activities, and we need to be able to measure the results. And we need to make sure nobody is left behind in the quest adding value to your organisation.
How? Well putting in place all the development tools that HR has developed over time, such as:
The list can be extended of course. But what is key is that all these tools are needed to create the vast portfolio of development activities your organisation needs. Because what you need to be capable of doing is take any people of your organisation and accompany through the different steps of organizational evolution, until s/he becomes really a valuable element for the results of your company. But you need to make sure that all these tools are aligned and integrated, to insure the maximum effect, avoid unnecessary costs, and (sorry if I repeat) measure, measure, measure. Easy, uh? 🙂
This is the third post in a series of six articles:
https://youtu.be/O8aDOR2Po50 In this tenth video of the series Leaders for Humanity, hosts Antoinette Weibel and… Read More
https://youtu.be/WZIv-PS7Vo8 In this eighth video of the series Leaders for Humanity, hosts Antoinette Weibel and… Read More
https://youtu.be/r5GfGeiryPc In this seventh video of the series Leaders for Humanity, hosts Antoinette Weibel and… Read More
https://youtu.be/5-qE_WhZ2OE In this sixth video of the series Leaders for Humanity, hosts Antoinette Weibel and… Read More
https://youtu.be/TywLA6p0vjg In this fifth video of the series Leaders for Humanity, hosts Antoinette Weibel and… Read More
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6ADNHtY6jc I've recently had the pleasure of speaking about The Intentional Organisation with Carlo Marchesi,… Read More