The industry required periodic training for new products to
have an intelligent conversation with customers; so every company conducted
training programs to equip their teams with requisite knowledge which would serve
all kinds of customers. It was early days of automation, e-learning was just
beginning to raise a baby head; early versions were complex, unwieldy, and ineffective
in comparison to conventional classroom instructor led training (ILT). Video
based learning was deemed a shade better though expensive to deploy.
Realizing the early
mover advantage, the CIO had pushed the management to explore new solutions at
a nominal cost which he was able to get from a startup vendor. The system was
deployed quickly, the head of Learning & Development partnered to provide
content, and sensing success co-owned the pioneering initiative. The sales team
embraced the solution which helped them move faster and compete in a tough
market. Awards, accolades and many conferences later, the poster boy had
recreated the way learning happened in the industry.
What led to the success ? Simplistically the partnership
between IT and Business towards achieving a shared objective and a technology
solution that works; realistically it was the fact that L&D knew the pulse
of the people, IT had high credibility and connect with the business and the
vendor ecosystem, and the management was willing to experiment and explore, not
averse to taking risks. Management case studies are full of such stories on
what works which get labeled as “Best Practices” by industry or department.
A decade later, the
same CIO in the same industry with another company unsuccessfully attempted to
repeat his success; the company had shied away from new technology with a
business as usual approach preferring to maintain status quo. After all they
were growing with the market and were reasonably profitable without technology
interventions. The CIO tasked with the agenda to refresh IT had struggled
through the journey with pushbacks and total abdication of responsibility by
the business who had more critique than suggestions.
In the ensuing half a score years, the solutions had matured
to provide seamless access across multiple channels, the learning experience
far easier than the clunky interface of the past. Mobile based rendering with
interactive features and extensive library of content has made learning fun and
easy. Gamification adds to the intensity of engagement increasing levels of
competition between participants. For the industry, ILT is no longer the
primary mode of learning with economics and efficiency in favor of technology
solutions.
In the first case learning was seen as an integral part of
evolution for everyone; learning was encouraged and the company culture and
spirit of harmony created a positive environment thereby increasing the propensity
of success. Technology was just the enabler creating better outcomes; so a new
way of learning was welcomed and embraced with open mind. The platform was not
the best, but that did not matter; technology complexity was accepted as a part
of progress, the organization was undeterred by these metrics.
The recent experience of the CIO was starkly different;
given the dimensions of the new enterprise, he was in a position to choose the
best at his terms. Global solution providers sought his attention to
demonstrate their wares, the enterprise chose the market leading most widely
accepted solution by the industry. It was the deal of the year that had
everyone else sit up and take notice; the vendor made up margin with other
deals that followed the announcement and captured enviable market share in the
process.
Then what challenged execution ? The large ageing workforce
in the monolithic enterprise fought to keep the legacy processes alive which
had served them well for the last few decades. They had seen the industry adopt
technology and excused themselves citing size, complexity and various other
reasons for not following the trend towards technology led business
interventions. Comfort zones prevented new opportunities and learning was
brushed aside lest it become an obstacle in the way of retaining comfort,
employment and past glory.
In difficult times companies have been known to cut training
budgets; L&D is also a casualty during fast pace of growth when everyone
believes they don’t have the time. Learning is also killed by operational
pressures and prioritization of the urgent; managerial attitudes overpower
leadership principles in many enterprises. That unfortunately ensures that
companies stagnate or do not achieve their potential. The medium is incidental,
however the ability to reach a large cross section frequently can only be
enabled by technology.
I close with an interesting insight circulated on social
media over time: CFO asks the CEO, “Why
spend so much on training when people will any way leave ?”; answers back
the CEO, “What if we don’t and they stay
?”
