There are some perennial problems faced by Learning & Development teams, which prompt them to repeatedly ask, “Does what we spend our time and money on equate to (at least) the requisite value to our organization?”
Before we go any further, it’s important to say that L&D is usually very popular and seen to be doing good things. After all, who doesn’t enjoy a good course? Who doesn’t value learning more about themselves, either through a personality questionnaire or 360° feedback? Who doesn’t value the work of a team whose main purpose is to help people grow? Often, there isn’t a perception problem—but there is a reality problem. Let me explain.
As I mentioned above, L&D departments have found it incredibly difficult to demonstrate return on investment (ROI) of solutions, whether course curriculum, flagship development programs, or platforms and content. When considering an employee’s time, all these solutions are expensive to design, implement, and stop work to use/complete. To what extent do we really know these are making enough difference to justify the cost?
Employees engage in company learning initiatives to improve their ability to do their work and to improve their prospects. However, not having enough time to learn or believing that L&D’s offerings don’t provide value for them is an oft-cited problem.
So, is all the good will surrounding L&D negatively impacting its ability to deliver results—rather than just programs and content?
A recent survey conducted by 360Learning sought to understand the expectations, motivations, and efficacy of organizational learning while trying to uncover the mismatches that are holding the profession back. The findings of this survey did reveal some important factors.
With 1,957 employees surveyed across the US, UK, France, and Germany, alongside 1,004 L&D professionals, it was hoped that greater understanding could be gained about what was working, the obstacles that employees and L&D face, and how to find a way to better match employees’ needs with appropriate solutions.
Learners will not find any more time for learning unless it’s integrated into their work.
Two thirds of employees believe that learning as they go is the most effective way of fitting learning into their schedule. This contrasts with just over 20% who schedule a little time for learning each day and less than 14% who commit to a day of learning each year. In addition, employees who responded to the survey state that the two main barriers to learning at work are lack of time and training that isn’t offered in a way that fits their workflow. Around 50% of respondents say they would make more time for learning if they could do so on the job.
This backs up what I experienced at Disney in the annual employee engagement survey. When asked, “Do you have enough time for learning?” almost everybody said “No.” Fingers were pointed at me to fix this, but how when employees aren’t measured on how much they learn–just how much they can achieve?
In contrast, L&D mainly deals in programs and content that require employees to stop work to learn, rather than integrating work and learning.
Learners overwhelmingly know what is most effective, but does L&D?
There also appears to be a mismatch in what learners deem to be the most effective types of learning vs. those in which L&D actually invests.
Firstly, 75% of employees say they pursue learning at work simply to do their jobs better. Knowing why employees pursue learning at work can give us an indication of what they expect to find when they engage. But just 29% of respondents in the UK (and only slightly more in the US) say online training (eLearning, virtual training, and MOOCs) is effective, despite this being the main type of training they receive.
The types of training rated most effective across all countries are:
- Learning from peers
- Coaching and mentoring
- Instructor-led training that is delivered on the job
In an example of how things aren’t working, among respondents who have been promoted to manager, only 4% in the UK and 12% in the US say they’ve received any training in the weeks prior to starting their new roles. So, they landed in their jobs without preparation and 20% say they waited for an open spot in a training program before they got the help they needed.
And what was stated as the biggest flaw in manager training? Respondents agree that it is too generic and not specific to the practical situations that learners face as managers.
None of this is likely to be a complete surprise. Employees want help to do their jobs better. They believe that learning from peers and colleagues is the most effective way of improving, and generic online learning doesn’t help them very much. But how could it? Off-the-shelf solutions can’t possibly help people understand how things should be done at their organizations. Employees know this, which is likely the reason they don’t readily engage as much as L&D would hope.
What is L&D saying?
Globally, 7 out of 10 L&D leaders confirm the effectiveness of providing learning at the point of need. Providing employees with the actual help they need—when they need it, integrated into the tools they use while working—means that employees are more likely to engage. Also, content is more likely to be aligned with the friction employees are experiencing, and (because it is timely) it is more likely to influence how the work is done.
The good news is that over two thirds of UK L&D leaders surveyed believe their teams are effective in providing corporate training at the point of need, and 47% say LITFOW (learning in the flow of work) is a priority this year.
Unfortunately, 37% of US L&D professionals say they are limited in their workflow learning initiatives by budget and resources. In the UK, this figure is 49%.
Other obstacles for L&D include limited support from leadership for LITFOW, limited understanding of learners’ preferences, and technology limitations.
What can we take away from this?
Employees now expect to have help at hand whenever it’s needed. Google, YouTube, smartphones, and apps have trained us to expect this. It’s not that employees’ concentration spans have shrunk; rather, it’s that we’re all information-rich and time-poor. We’ve had to develop an intolerance for things that don’t offer us immediate value, or worse, that waste our time.
Progressive L&D leaders are working with employees to understand what they are trying to do and integrating useful resources into employees’ workflows to help them do more of the right things—in the context of their roles, their teams, their departments, and their organizations. The ultimate goal is to succeed in ways that stakeholders expect. This can pay immediate dividends, whereas an over-reliance on off-the-shelf or standardized programs and content offers fewer, if any, returns. Why? Because these offerings are not focused on what workers are trying to do.
Workflow learning is not just another thing that L&D needs to deliver. It’s more than that. Done right, workflow learning can be used to more predictably and reliably influence performance—and therefore outcomes—by being present at the moment of need to influence the work itself. When L&D is anxious about the value it adds to the organization, workflow learning should be seen as the surefire way of getting bang for its buck! In addition, L&D can boost employee engagement by leveraging the fact that employees see workflow learning as a way to learn more and improve personal performance.
Rather than asking if your L&D solutions deliver a return on investment, are you ready to start making a planned impact on the KPIs that matter?