Learning programs effectively transfer knowledge to individuals, allowing them to acquire new knowledge, skills, and competencies to enhance personal and professional development. Learning programs can take many forms, including classroom-based instruction, online courses, on-the-job training, mentoring, and coaching. These programs help individuals to learn from the experiences of others, benefit from their expertise, and develop a deeper understanding of a particular subject or field. The success of knowledge transfer through learning programs depends on the program’s quality, the training content’s relevance, and, most importantly, learners’ engagement and experience.
Susan Armstrong, Chief Learning Officer (CLO) at Big Bold Goals, and Nolan Hout, Senior Vice President at Infopro Learning, discuss their firsthand experiences in knowledge transfer through learning programs. They delve into various topics, such as the length of training programs, the comparison between digital and in-person learning, the benefits of pre-built versus custom content, the importance of skilled facilitators, and more.
Listen to the podcast to learn more:
Question:
Could you provide some insights into the path that led you to your current position?
Expert profile:
Susan Armstrong
Susan Armstrong is a renowned expert in leadership, employee engagement, and enhancing the employee experience. She has earned respect and trust of many major corporations and brands for igniting confidence, purpose, and achievement in their leaders and employees. Over the past 25 years, Susan has delivered speeches and training programs to global organizations and several governments, spanning over 50 countries on six continents. Susan is the Chief Learning Officer at Big Bold Goals, a company dedicated to helping high-performance leaders achieve their ambitious objectives. She is also a Managing Partner at Global Training Transformation, a Learning & Development company that offers online programs to elevate training standards worldwide.
Nolan Hout
Nolan Hout is the Senior Vice President at Infopro Learning. He has over a decade of experience in the L&D industry, helping global organizations unlock the potential of their workforce. Nolan is results-driven, investing most of his time in finding ways to identify and improve the performance of learning programs through the lens of return on investment. He is passionate about networking with people in the learning and training community. He is also an avid outdoorsman and fly fisherman, spending most of his free time on rivers across the Pacific Northwest.
An excerpt of the discussion follows:
Nolan:
Hello everyone, and welcome to the Learning and Development podcast sponsored by Infopro Learning.
I am Nolan Hout, your host for today’s episode. Our podcast will delve into achieving knowledge transfer through learning programs, covering various aspects such as the length of training programs, the comparison between digital and in-person learning, the pros and cons of prebuilt versus custom content, and the significance of having skilled facilitators.
Today, I’ll be accompanied by Susan Armstrong, the Chief Learning Officer (CLO) of Big Bold Goals, who works with renowned companies such as GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson and Johnson, and Bloomberg to teach leaders of all ranks how to utilize the strength of conviction to enhance their genuineness and acquire the ability to effectively involve, encourage, and inspire exceptional performance in their workforce.
Greetings, Susan! It’s a pleasure to have you join us.
Susan:
Well, thanks for having me. I appreciate it. It’s my favorite topic, Nolan.
Nolan:
Let’s begin by getting to know you better, Susan, and understanding the career path that led you to become the Chief Learning Officer at Big Bold Goals. Although we’ll eventually explore the issue of incorrect knowledge transfer, I’m interested in learning about your professional journey and whether your background has always been in learning and development.
Could you provide some insights into the path that led you to your current position?
Susan:
Indeed, you’re right that Learning and Development weren’t my initial career choice. Surprisingly, it turned out to be a passion that I didn’t realize I had. During my tenure as the director of a financial organization in Corporate North America, I was responsible for training new hires in customer service and other aspects of the job. This task intrigued me, and I found myself enjoying it. As time passed, my interest in training and development only grew stronger.
I became bored because I had reached a dead end in my organization, and a personal event made me reflect on what I wanted to do with my life. Before the Internet era, I searched newspapers and magazines and attended networking events to identify my innate abilities and job requirements. I concluded that HR was my best fit but recognized the need to specialize. I’m not saying I’m old, but this was before the advent of computers and the World Wide Web.
While exploring HR, I realized that the training function was a part of the human resources department. Having previously conducted training sessions, I found it a highly enjoyable experience, with positive participant feedback. However, being a perfectionist, I decided to pursue it further and become the best. Therefore, I enrolled in a university program specializing in adult education and instructional design.
I realized that creating a training program could be challenging, although I usually don’t find things too difficult. I accepted that I didn’t know how to do it and believed there must be a solution. Fortunately, I secured a contract with a major Canadian bank that allowed me to develop training programs for 500 people, and the income from this work was enough to launch my business for a year.
Nolan:
Do you believe your commitment to prioritizing learning is noticeable when you resume engaging in learning activities? Some individuals may leap and apply for jobs with little preparation, but do you feel your approach is more naturally geared towards thoroughly understanding the subject matter before diving into it?
Susan:
My approach is a bit different. I start by trying something out first, dipping my toe in the water. If I like it, I’ll delve deeper and learn the theory, science, and skills behind it to become proficient. This is why I do it this way. However, I acknowledge that many believe training is simply telling others what to do. Having spent 30 years living and working in North America, I can attest to this.
However, as someone born and raised in the UK and now resides there, I was surprised to discover that when I returned to Europe ten years ago, people there needed to be more familiar with instructional design and effective experiential learning models. They were impressed by my ability to achieve perfect evaluation scores and asked me how I did it.
Although good instructional design is straightforward, I have observed that it is rare in other parts of the world. There needs to be more emphasis on creating experiential programs that prioritize the transfer of learning. As a result, there is a mixture of what I consider to be effective learning methods and what others refer to as training, which often involves lengthy presentations with only a few sporadic activities included to alleviate boredom.
Nolan:
I understand you’re focused on consulting and contracting with large organizations to assist them in launching significant change management initiatives and training programs. Recently, I spoke with a professional facilitator and discussed the impact of the pandemic on trainers. The pandemic has given rise to the belief that anyone can become a trainer simply by having a webcam, being able to speak, and having a basic understanding of Zoom or Teams. Can you share your thoughts on this?
It seemed as though the pendulum had swung too far in one direction. The individuals who possessed the highest intellect believed they could be trained. Still, as someone who understands the importance of effective facilitation, I saw this as a catalyst for the need for skilled facilitators. With so many people lacking the necessary skills, those who possess them now receive significant recognition and demand. In all honesty, it is a matter of supply and demand.
What are your thoughts on the impact of the pandemic on trainers and the belief that anyone can become a trainer simply by having a webcam, being able to speak, and having a basic understanding of Zoom or Teams?
Susan:
There are two key points here. Firstly, Bloom’s taxonomy is crucial for anyone in L&D to understand, as it highlights the difference between simply transferring knowledge and achieving actual learning. My favorite story was taught to me by my father, and he also spent around 18 years teaching me how to play golf before he passed away. Despite his efforts to teach me the proper techniques, such as how to stand, hold the club, and position my shoulders, I still struggle to hit a golf ball. While I know, I struggle to apply it in practice, highlighting the gap that learning and development seek to bridge.
One of my concerns about this issue is that during webinars or virtual meetings on platforms such as Zoom or Microsoft Teams, we often present many slides and discuss the subject matter’s importance without effectively transferring any real knowledge to the audience. It can be frustrating because many believe a 90-minute or two-hour session with a few slides and some questions will suffice.
Yesterday, I conducted a two-hour workshop with limited time to include interactive activities due to instructional design constraints. However, at the end of the workshop, no one wanted to leave, indicating that something was different this time. One participant even returned and commented that this was the best workshop she had ever attended. It is worth noting that a global organization organized this workshop as part of its corporate university program.
I expressed my gratitude for the compliment, but the person clarified that their positive feedback was significant because they usually find workshops dull and want to leave. This indicates that the quality of virtual workshops may be lacking.
Nolan:
To summarize our discussion, our focus will be the fundamental disparity between merely conveying information and achieving a desired outcome. We’ve already touched upon one aspect of this difference: the importance of participant engagement and learning instead of passive information transfer. This is a theme we will continue to explore further.
During my meeting at Brandon Hall, I encountered a few executives who expressed concern about the 1000 prebuilt courses they offer. They mentioned that despite having these courses available, many people need to utilize them, and even those who take them do not show significant learning outcomes. This made me realize that the return on investment for these programs may need to be more promising.
Have you observed or had any evidence of when the ROI of the learning programs has not been promising?
Susan:
I recently conducted research with my global clients on online learning. I inquired about their engagement with online learning and whether they subscribed to any major online learning platforms. While everyone subscribed to these platforms, the percentage of people engaged in online learning was less than 10%, indicating almost zero uptakes. This aligns with previous studies that have suggested that our attention spans as adults are getting shorter, with our attention span at the beginning of the internet and technology era being just four minutes.
The current situation is such that only about two or fewer options are left. Despite this, individuals are requested to participate in an online learning program where they must sit and listen to someone talk to them. It is doubtful how much attention they would pay in such a scenario. I have been involved in online learning since 1999, when I created my first eLearning program. I remember someone asking if I was afraid that eLearning would take my job away, but I never thought so because it could never replace in-person learning.
Despite using Zoom for around 13-14 years and being involved in online learning for several years, it cannot replace in-person learning. However, if done properly, online learning can get us about 95% of the way there because it allows interaction and engagement. During online sessions, I always tell individuals that they need help checking their emails or completing their reports.
The reason why active involvement is important is that learning occurs through trial and error. To achieve this, annotation and breakout groups will be used, and individuals may be randomly called upon, particularly if they do not have their cameras turned on. As adults, we must engage with the material, apply it, discuss it, and make mistakes to learn effectively. Individuals need to participate and make errors to gain knowledge actively. This concerns eLearning and online education because more than simply consuming information is needed to translate to practical application. Do you understand what I am trying to say?
During this podcast episode, Susan and Nolan shared fascinating insights from their real-life experiences on delivering the best learning experiences. A few more questions asked during the podcast are:
- What are some of the trends that are starting to pay off in the training world, particularly with the rise of hybrid formats? How do you recommend adapting to the blurred line between virtual and in-person delivery? What have you seen work best for achieving the transfer of knowledge in this new landscape?
- Do you believe the changes we’re making in L&D require a fundamental shift in our business practices, such as budget allocation, technology use, and platform selection? Are we altering some of the fundamental aspects we assume are present in learning and development, or are we simply applying them differently?
- Do you have anything in mind that you would like to take away or have as a parting thought?