Tag: continuous learning

Accidents happen

Question: Why were you looking at their data? Answer: Just out of interest to see.

We recognize that some of our most significant learning may occur by accident, as a byproduct of some other activity such as task accomplishment, interpersonal interactions, or trial-and-error experimentation. Where informal learning may be sometimes intentional and more possibly planned, incidental learning is semi-conscious. Call it learning by accident. Call it serendipity.

Surprise comes with a new realization, when we are not looking explicitly for answers: The element of surprise may actually be conducive to making the learning “stick”.

Outside of “aha” moments which remain exceptional, incidental learning grows slowly through a process of accretion. New insights come when you do not expect them, whether in formal or informal spaces.

Incidental learning is embedded into work. Incidental learning depends on context and purpose for its significance. Discovering a new way to do something new has immediate meaning only if the learner had been personally frustrated with existing practice or had met failure with existing means.

Why does incidental learning matter? Growing evidence has shown that informal and incidental learning drive performance in the workplace. However, we struggle with how to “capture” or strengthen informal learning – by definition fluid, relaxed, friendly or unofficial in style, manner or nature – and even more so with learning by accident.

Recognizing the value of incidental learning does not mean that we discount or diminish the importance and relevance of other forms of learning, including traditional education and training, especially with respect to the acquisition of foundational technical knowledge and skills.

Photo: Salvador Dali, “Chess Set,” 1971 (Andrew Russeth/flickr.com)

March 26, 2015
Learning habits

What are the learning habits that we perform on a regular basis to stay current? As professionals, we organize our personal learning habits in different ways that reflect our interests, personalities, and career paths. We rely on a variety of information sources, engage in reading, attend seminars and conferences, or take MOOCs or other online courses. And, of course, we connect with others. The content we seek may be directly related to our work – or conversely we may seek to acquire knowledge outside our immediate realm and field of vision.

Some or if not most of our reading of work-related content takes place outside of work, even though some of us may choose to cordon off our private lives and succeed in doing so at least some of the time.

We use these information sources in different ways, striving to question what we learn, sorting and organizing what we gather. We recognize the deeply personal nature and diversity of these learning habits. Informal learning is not limited to the context of work. We may mobilize modes of inquiry or specific values to approach a problem in work, drawing on our personal lives, faith or culture, or family contexts.

Each of us organizes such mostly informal, continuous learning in different ways. Making this strategic is not about prescribing best practice, but about recognizing the value of such practices. Our ability to quickly make sense of new knowledge – and to make it a habit – may be more important than the knowledge itself.

Photo: 10 habits (Audrey Low/flickr.com)

March 25, 2015
How do we solve problems in work?

What do we do when we are confronted with a problem? Problem solving begins when we encounter a new experience. We do this out of necessity, but also because we enjoy it. We also need to be able to solve problems fast. We develop our ability and willingness (including on a political level) to identify, analyze, and solve problems. We accept that tackling problems is painful. It involves risk-taking that may not be supported by the organization. Yet so much of how we learn and grow stems from such experiences.

We know that our organization does not necessarily recognize – much less reward – uncovering problems. We need our line management and leadership to support this willingness to tackle problems. Even with supportive management and great colleagues, in many cases we are alone in confronting a problem, if only due to resource and time constraints. Yet we know that our ability to solve problems depends on the quality, depth and meaning of our connections to others.

We strive to reframe our problems by questioning our assumptions and those of others. The way in which we frame our understanding of a problem and the degree to which we are open to re-framing that view depends on the context and the organization. Our organization’s culture and pressures, including time and resource constraints, may reinforce our reluctance to take time out to reframe, rethinking, and reconsider.

Photo: Casse-tête (Frédérique Voisin-Demery/flickr.com)

March 25, 2015
The value of learning embedded in work

Learning that is embedded into work resolves the dilemmas of (formal) learning that requires stopping work. What we learn as we work, we learn in order to apply, and such a learning process does not usually require dedicated resources.

For those of us who see ourselves as “doers” and oppose our way of doing to that of “thinkers”, we may only reluctantly acknowledge that what we do involves continual learning. It is context, we insist, that provokes a more explicit search for new knowledge, validation, or solution. And that is, in fact, the point: doing is a form of knowing. We rely on experience to address what is familiar. However, even when taking on a task that is similar to one we have done in the past, we may need to adjust, adapt, and change.

When we become mindful about learning, we can use any assignment – even mundane tasks – to more explicitly trigger learning.

Photo: VIA VB7009 Embedded Board – Rear I/O (VIA Gallery/flickr.com)

March 24, 2015
Should we trust our intuition and instinct when we learn?

How much of what we learn is through informal and incidental learning? When asked to reflect on where we learned (and continue to learn) what we need to do our work, we collectively come to an even split between our formal qualifications, our peers, and experience. As interaction with peers is gained in the workplace, roughly two-thirds of our capabilities can be attributed to learning in work.

We share the conviction that experience is the best teacher. However, we seldom have the opportunity to reflect on this experience of how we solve problems or develop new knowledge and ideas. How do we acquire and apply skills and knowledge? How do we move along the continuum from inexperience to confidence? How can we transfer experience? Does it “just happen”, or are there ways for the organization to support, foster, and accelerate learning outside of formal contexts (or happening incidentally inside them)?

Most of what we learn happens during work, in the daily actions of making contextual judgements. Such learning is more iterative than linear. Informal learning is a process that is assumed (without requiring proof), tacit (understood or implied without being stated), and implicit (not plainly expressed).

The experience we develop through informal learning shapes our sense of intuition, guiding our problem-solving in daily work. Our narratives reveal that most of the learning that matters is an informal process embedded into work. The most significant skills we possess are acquired through trial, error, and experimentation. Informal learning has the capacity to allow us to learn much more than we intended or expected at the outset. This makes such learning very difficult to evaluate, but far more valuable to those who engage in it – and potentially to the organization that can leverage it to drive knowledge performance.

The lack of mindfulness about informal and incidental forms of learning is a byproduct of the fact that such learning does not require overtly thinking about it. Undoubtedly, though, there are tangible benefits to reflecting upon individual or group learning practices. As George Siemens argued in Knowing Knowledge, informal learning is too important to leave to chance (2006:131). This is why we need the organization to scaffold the processes and approaches that foster learning in the informal domain.

Reflection aids in informal learning, but carries the risk of embedding errors in the learning process when such reflection is private or too subjective. We must be connected to others to make sense of what we learn. When the institutional environment is highly political, this diminishes the incentive to learn more than the minimum needed in order to satisfy the demands of our senior management. Informal learning requires us to be mindful (to care) about what we do.

Photo: Smoke (Paul Bence/flickr.com)

March 24, 2015
Wishful thinking
Stopping work to learn remains the ideal. After all, many of us carry the memory of residential higher education as a powerful moment of personal growth, at the end of our teenage years and prior to entry into the workforce.

Formal learning in the present includes both in-service workshops and trainings as well as various forms of continued professional development (CPD) offered by training providers and higher education institutions. These were traditionally face-to-face and are increasingly delivered at distance (online).

Why do we wish so earnestly for more formal learning? Our expressed wish reflects our willingness to stay current and improve. However, wishing for more time to stop work and engage in formal learning is likely to remain wishful thinking because of at least four factors:
1. Time – time is the scarcest resource and formal training requires stopping work to learn, in a learning culture that values task completion.
2. Applicability – learning formally then requires additional learning processes to transfer and apply what has been learned (the applicability problem).
3. Relevance – much of what we need to know in our work is in the tacit or informal domain and is therefore not taught formally anywhere.
4. Currency – in many areas of work, formal courses are costly or difficult to update to reflect the most-current knowledge and practice.
Like the wish for more meetings, more communication, or more resources, the yearning for more formal training is an improbable proposition that fails to properly consider the value of continuous learning embedded into the work.

As a team, we need to accept that we cannot control or prescribe learning the way we could in the past. We need therefore to accept that there will be different initiatives and solutions – and that no one solution fits all.

“Unfortunately, we have been too busy to engage fully” is a standard one-liner to justify lack of involvement due to the “high burden of workload that everybody has” in formal learning initiatives or efforts that set aside time for exploratory dialogue. “Nobody has time for it.” We find that wanting more formal time to stop our work and ‘learn’ is a misdiagnosis.

When formal learning events take place, attending them may be difficult to justify due to urgent priorities. Furthermore, the content and format may be disappointing and make it unlikely that someone who attends will do so again.

Nevertheless, what is interesting is that proposals to stop in order to learn, reflect, or discuss tend to arise following specific incidents which make us mindful of the need for such learning – for example, in response to requests from senior management or upon realizing that we have missed a common target due to lack of regular communication across silos. Dedicated time for dialogue, to take stock, or to reflect on what has gone wrong (or right) may in fact serve as a temporary corrective, a signal to acknowledge that something has gone wrong by stopping routine work or business as usual.

We just need to keep in mind that most continual learning is informal, and that some of the most powerful “aha” moments are incidental learning, i.e. we come to a new insight when we least expect it. That suggests alternative approaches to foster the kinds of outcomes we expect from setting aside time that we do not have. Even when we are successful, we need to learn to look further into the links between actions and outcomes.
March 23, 2015
Workshop culture

We live in a “workshop culture”. On the one hand, it is costly and exclusionary. Few can afford to travel, and the organization finds it more difficult to afford and justify the expense of moving bodies and materials to meet. Its outcomes are difficult to clearly identify, much less measure. They often contribute to communication overhead. Their format and content may be superficial or stiffen participants through overly formal approaches, thereby stifling creativity.

On the other hand, occasions to physically meet with colleagues in the network are increasingly rare. “I meet everybody not even once a year,” bemoans a senior manager.

In between, we have learned to blend online and face-to-face communication. Yet, we strongly feel that there is high value to those face-to-face exchanges, even if some of that value may not be immediately tangible. The formal work of a conference may itself be productive because of its process (including reflective practice) and outputs but also because of the informal learning (shared experience) and opportunity to connect and socialize with others.

Workshops, conferences, and other types of formal meetings provide an occasion for “closer chatting”, especially during social activities outside the formal event.

When we organize meetings, we pay attention to the coffee breaks, lunches, social outings, and other “in-between spaces”, recognizing their value to build trust in relationships, pursue individual negotiations, and even agree on what decisions will be made when we return to a formal setting. We may even feel that “when you want to solve something, it’s probably outside the meetings” or that “the most important things are decided outside meetings”.

Yet what we recognize as important in such processes is usually not related to the knowledge acquisition or transmission of formal presentations or training, which are often the explicit purpose of the events and correspond to formal learning. Therefore, we need to rethink now only how we organize workshops and meetings to support and foster the informal and incidental learning that matters, but also why we organize them.

March 23, 2015
Emergencies kill learning habits

We recognize that large-scale, complex emergencies have a dramatic impact on many aspects of our work, including what and how we learn.

Some may feel, based on experience, that emergencies kill learning habits. We put everything on hold – including the things we do to stay current – to focus on the emergency response.

However, the disruptive power of emergencies and their intensity fosters new, informal learning and provokes incidental learning indispensable to solve new problems in new ways. That is real-time innovation.

Therefore, because emergencies and the change they bring are a constant in our work, we need to harness their disruption and intensity to ensure that lessons are learned and applied – before, during, and after. This requires new approaches, tools, and a change in mindset. We need to retain not only what we learned, but also how we learned it.

Photo: Rusting away along the river Congo (Julien Harneis/flickr.com)

March 22, 2015
Applicability

Applicability is the brick wall of formal training approaches. Not only do we first have to stop work to attend a training, but once the training is completed, the challenge is then to figure out how to apply what we learned to daily work. It is estimated that, on the average, applicability of a well-designed workshop using the best participatory methods (such as simulations, dialogue, problem-solving, etc.) is around ten percent.

Nevertheless, we apply new knowledge and skills from formal training, especially on managing teams or administration-related tasks such as finance or procurement, not directly related to our core technical skills.

Yet, many of us have fond memories of formal training – irrespective of whether or not we were able to apply any of our learning to our work. Despite difficulty in recalling both the content of formal training and how we were able to apply, we remain willfully optimistic about its relevance. In some cases, we even express satisfaction upon training for a skill we already have.

We recall days spent in training as enjoyable experiences, perhaps because they release stress related to task delivery, provide space for reflection, and facilitate new relationships and network formation. Most formal events may not be designed as social spaces, but contain them nonetheless. Implicitly, we are referring to benefits of formal training other than applicability to our work – those whose legitimacy may not be recognized by the organization.

Individual expectations around formal training are not necessarily around applicability, even though this is ostensibly its purpose and justification. Despite formal training’s intrinsic flaws, its social spaces give us room for specific kinds of continuous learning that is precious – and difficult to obtain in other ways.

Photo: Nails (Adam Rosenberg/flickr.com)

March 22, 2015
Formal learning of the past

Formal learning in the past includes formal education and qualifications obtained. They serve as credentials of value to establish that we know – part of building relationships of trust – and provide frameworks of reference (“shelves”) to make sense of new knowledge. From the past, we also draw on personal experience, attitudes, and values acquired or developed in formal education but also from personal life, family and community.

As working professionals, we may think of higher education as a “thing of the past”. Nevertheless, formal qualifications matter for our personal brand and remain the prevailing currency in hiring practices. We draw on frameworks, tools and methods we learned in formal study. Foundational elements obtained through formal qualifications may be mobilized as fall-back or to drawn on an “overarching discipline of thought and the rigor of thinking” to help “navigate informal learning”. “We learn foundational elements through courses,” explains George Siemens, “but we innovate through our own learning” (Siemens 2006:131).

Photo: The Longest Carpet Fringe (Theen Moy/flickr.com)

March 21, 2015