Learning Conversations

Following my Prince2 training, I've gained a new appreciation for the role of the Project Manager. They might not be the person who gets up in front of the cameras, but a good PM is the lynch pin of a successful project.

The one thing that caused major confusion on the course was the idea that, unless special safeguards are in place, the PM should never come from the Supplier-side of the project.

Prince2 Organisation

That appeared to run counter to most people's experience. It seemed logical that the PM is best coming from the supplier, since they understand what's needed and when.

Take a house building project for example. An inexperienced client would love to have a builder who offered to project manage all the sub-contractors.

However, there's a major conflict of priorities here. The PM should always have the client's interests at heart. If they get their pay cheque from the supplier, then that may become difficult.

Prince2 does allow exceptions to this rule - but only if additional project assurance processes are put in place, to make sure the project is being run correctly.

No wonder good, independent project managers - skilled in specific domains - are worth their weight in gold!

There was a time, not too long ago, when the only exposure normal people had to Information Technology was at work.

We didn't have the internet or email in our homes, but we may have had it at work.

Everything was tightly controlled - to conserve valuable bandwidth and resources (both digital and human).

At that point, we had nothing to compare against. If we were given a green DOS screen to carry out our work that was fine. We might have thought some of the commands were a bit hard to remember but nothing that couldn't be fixed by a cheat sheet.

Now, however, we are often carrying around in our pockets IT systems that are more powerful and more connected than those provided by our employers. With them we can immediately look up information, ask questions of our peers around the world, share ideas through video, collaborate on documents, carry out complex operations on our bank accounts, and even remotely control equipment in our homes.

All these applications have one thing in common: If they are to take off they need to have as few barriers to usage as possible.

Aral Balkan has written extensively on user interface design. I've copied his key points below, but look up the source article if you want the detail.

1. The Client Is Not The User
2. Don't Give The Client What She Thinks The User Wants
3. You Do Not Know What Your User Wants
4. Only Users Know What Users Want
5. Test Early, Test Often, Then Test Again
6. Talk One Language
7. Respect User Effort
8. Make Difficult Decisions
9. Let The User Work
10. Prevent, Don't Scold
11. Give Sufficient Feedback
12. Show, Don't Tell
13. Don't Lose The User
14. Don't Sell What You Can't Deliver
15. Don't Keep Them Waiting
16. Innocent Until Proven Guilty
17. Usability Approach to Accessibility

For some more ideas, see Jakob Nielsen's post on design mistakes.

Applications that rely on users to keep using them follow these principles closely. These include the consumer applications we have on our personal computers, phones and tablets (whether browser-based or not).

But it also includes the new breed of corporate "Cloud"-based Software-As-A-Service applications, such as Kashflow, Salesforce, Cornerstone etc. If people don't use them the client will think long and hard about renewing their license each year.

Those applications that sit inside our corporate firewalls seem to be excluded from these design principles. They might be fit for purpose, but often they don't encourage use.

A couple of examples that I've come across in my travels:

1. A Learning Management System that doesn't allow people to link directly to a particular course. This means that, to market courses (whether virally or otherwise), all you can do is give people the link to the corporate self-service portal, and then provide instructions on where to go next. At least six clicks (in various esoteric parts of the screen) and two popup windows later, you might get to where you want to go.
2. An internal document library that was so hard to use that employees would use Google to find out information about the organisation rather than trawl through the official internal documents.

It goes back to Aral's first five points. IT depts need to get closer to us, their users. It's not that we can go elsewhere at the moment, to be honest. But it's about inspiring confidence to ask them for future developments, and about getting most value from what we already have.

If that doesn't happen, there are plenty of providers of consumer-grade systems out in the cloud who can do what corporate IT offer. And then it's just a matter of deciding whether you risk your data there... (but that's for another day!)

I came out of learning technologies event today (at the extraordinary Kensington Roof Gardens - a wonderful venue!) with a lot of questions rattling around in my head.

Donald Taylor was giving a very succinct overview of the state of organisational learning and development. In it he said:

Yes, courses are necessary - but they are not sufficient.

Wow! Dig into that and you've got the whole problem we have currently with organisational learning summarised in eight words.

Organisations expect courses, managers don't like to pay for courses, L&D teams are funded based on the courses they deliver, learners don't value courses (unless they lead to a qualification).

So, all we get is courses. Which we, in L&D, know aren't the whole answer. (At least, I hope you're at that point. If not, see: Michael Wesch's video "A vision of students today". If you're still not convinced read this article on long term memory - especially the bit about the Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve)

As well as courses, L&D should be involved in the following:

But, who will pay for all this? All the time L&D is seen as a transactional part of the business, supplying products (courses in our case) to order, then no-one.

If L&D is going to be able to drive some of the thinking away from courses, it needs to have a seat where decisions are made. This would allow L&D professionals (not trainers!) to offer solutions that really would make a difference.

To get that seat at the table will take time, and quite a few changes within L&D departments - not least taking the risky position of saying "Why?" when someone asks you to put on a course.

This is a great little video from Red Sky Vision, via Jane Hart.

Social Media @ Work from Red Sky Vision on Vimeo.

From the blurb:

There is disconnect between how immersed and digitally connected employees are outside of the workplace, and how their internal communications are being delivered. On the ground, employees are still posting printed communications on the water cooler when they can be engaged, led and informed via the latest digital channel.

And a great quote from the video:

"Organisations are inherently risk averse. My grandfather ran a business where he didn't want everybody having a telephone. He was afraid they'd spend all day talking to their mother."

Sounds silly now, doesn't it. Just as it will sound silly in a few years when we talk about Facebook, Twitter et al being blocked, or about not having organisation-specific social media tools.

Approximately 2/3 of corporate intranets now have some form of social media capability.

See Norman Lamont's presentation below for another take on the same theme:

About twice a week at the moment, I'm to be found travelling on East Midlands Trains between Derby and London.

Usually it's a pretty good service, but occasionally things go wrong and my journey gets delayed. That's fine - these things happen.

What I can't excuse, though, is the total lack of communication from the train managers about the compensation that passengers are entitled to. You can tell that most people don't know, because, at the end of the journey, they're putting their tickets in the gates to get out of the station. Without tickets as evidence, no train operating company (TOC) is going to pay anything.

To be honest, East Midlands Trains "Delay-Repay" policy is pretty generous. But you have to ASK FOR THE CLAIM FORM. No-one will volunteer any information about it.

In my experience it's the same with every TOC. They all have a compensation policy, but they won't tell you.

As you'll know from my previous post, I've spent the last week on a rather intensive Prince2® training course.

It was an interesting experience...

It was the first time I've done a course that was solely focussed on the exam at the end of it since my degree (and that one wasn't a pleasant experience). But this course was only four days long, followed by a 2 1/2 hour in-depth, but open-book exam of our understanding of the concepts.

I've always had mixed feelings about exams, but I think this one really worked as an assessment method. Mainly because it was open-book, so it really was testing how well we understood how the Prince2 principles, themes, management products and processes all fitted together.

Where the course fell down (and this is no reflection on the provider, as it's just the nature of this particular qualification), is that there was no space to explore with each other how Prince2 could really work in practice.

I really felt like I could do with another couple of days after the exam to work through some case studies or simulations. Or, even better, one of my own projects.

But Prince2 is designed to be tailored to specific projects, so what works for one person wouldn't necessarily work for someone else.

So, the next few weeks and months are going to be a bit of a "journey" to make Prince2 fit my own projects, with guidance from those people around me who are more experienced...

Thankfully I'm in a place where Prince2 is pretty much embedded already (so I now realise), so there are a lot of people I can call on! They have been warned!

The other thing I was thinking about was how people using Prince2 would benefit very much from a hyperlinked version of the OGC manual. There's a lot of flicking backwards and forwards, but with little cross-referencing to help. If anyone knows of an existing site please let me know.

And finally, as I was working through the material I kept thinking about how useful it would be to have a piece of software (preferably web-based) that helped project managers to manage all the processes. It wouldn't necessarily have all the pieces within it (eg. there are already very good quality, document, planning and configuration management tools that would just need an interface) but it would provide a central location (a portal even) for the project team to see their view on the project.

The only one I'm aware of is Aspyre, which is very good, but I'd be interested to know what else is out there - especially if it was open source.

A while back I received a T-shirt as part of a promotion for a new IT training service. It's not a bad T-shirt at all; quite comfortable and easy to wear.

But wearing it in public makes me feel rather uneasy, as the words on it run counter to what I believe is true:

 

Learning Made Easy

 

It's just that learning - that process through which connections are made in the brain - isn't easy...

It takes concentration, dedication, and, often, mistakes, over a period of time. If something is easy to learn, then that should raise questions about the value of that thing.

I'm going on a course next week. The first for a long time. It's on the PRINCE2™ project management methodology.

Given what I've read of the pre-work, this is going to be a hard week. There's a lot to get my head around, to apply to my current practice, and to remember for an exam on Friday.

But that's a good thing. It means that the Practitioner certificate I'm hoping to gain will mean something. It will have value. Similarly, the expectation is that what I learn on the course will add value to the work I do.

If I was told that learning PRINCE2™ methodologies was easy, then why would I go on a five day course? I'd look it up and muddle through (as I have done up to now!)

But, because I want an in-depth understanding, so I can use PRINCE2™ properly and appropriately, I'm going to make an effort.

Learning isn't easy. Not for the learner.

The people at Fusion Universal - one of the most innovative online learning companies I know - have kindly sponsored me for the Big Issue London to Paris Bike Ride.

If you or your company would like to add to the sponsorship fund, please go to the secure fundraising page.

There's a lot of talk in L&D teams these days about using mobile technology (usually tablets) in the training room. It's similar to the discussions schools had (or in most cases didn't have!) when the last government's Interactive WhiteBoard funding came in.

In many cases, the talk is focussed on the glitz that technology brings. "It'll make us look modern... up-to-date."

There's often very little discussion about the real place for technology in learning.

The classroom is probably the worst place to put technology. You're wasting the valuable time where you've got a group of people in the same room. That time should be spent conversing, listening and discussing, not interacting with screens or with people outside of the room.

Yes, there will be times when the facilitator (or one of the delegates) wants to demonstrate something, or show a video to help with a particular point. But that should be the exception.

In general, I would argue that the ideal position is that all technology (apart from pens and paper) is left outside the classroom. And that includes Powerpoint!

It means you focus on the people and the conversation in the room, rather than on what's happening outside.

What this means is that, when there's content to be digested, reflections to be written up, or conversations to happen with people outside of the classroom, this should happen outside of the time allocated for the classroom.

For example, let's take a workshop that's designed to "train" people how to do performance appraisals...

Before the workshop:

Produce materials (audio, video, written, whatever) that will get people thinking about the process, and about the issues they'll need to address.

Make it totally clear that the workshop will not be re-presenting those things.

During the workshop:

Highlight the key issues, get people talking about the questions raised, and practice the bits that need practicing (eg. how to give feedback). Use a printed mind map or concept map if you need something to hang the discussion on.

After the workshop:

Encourage delegates to reflect in a public space on what they've learnt. You could even make this a condition of getting an attendance certificate!

Using this approach will make far better use of the time available, and be far more effective in terms of what delegates are able to do afterwards. It also means that your classroom sessions will become seen as a much more valuable part of what you're offering.

Of course, this is an ideal situation, that depends on a whole host of cultural and organisational factors. In reality, there's probably still a place for technology in the classroom, for the moment anyway...

Just published the first video from the PEEL (Personnel Experts in Employement Law) Club.

It was done on a shoestring, with a Kodak Zi8 camera with an Audio Technica ATR microphone.

Thanks to Leon Cych for the kit recommendation. There aren't many low cost cameras that take external microphones. But it's essential for this sort of event where you can't get close to your subject.

The editing was done on iMovie 6, with a GarageBand audio clip for the title music.

Next time, I'll need to make sure I include some shots of people other than the speaker, as it can get a bit monotonous looking at the same talking head for 13 minutes! (And that's no comment on Prof. Pat Leighton - even I found what she was saying quite fascinating as she delved into the complexities and implications of the new employment laws)

I'd welcome any comments on how to improve the editing / camera work. What you've got here is a 13 minute summary of a 3.5 hour workshop!