Author: Kelly Burns
Kelly is an instructional design leader with years of experience developing learning and development (L&D) programs. She also owns Violu Learning, LLC, which provides training and consulting services to businesses and organizations worldwide. Kelly is obsessed with return on investment (ROI) and will travel anywhere as long as she has wifi and coffee.
What learning metric source to use? Part 1: Surveys
Surveys, polls, and observational metrics are all valuable tools to help learning and development programs. However, it is important to use the right metric for the decisions that need to be made. Each of these metrics has its benefits and drawbacks, which we will explore in detail. By understanding the strengths and weaknesses of each metric type, you can use them more effectively to make informed decisions about your learning and development programs. In this first part, I will explain when to use surveys in learning and development programs. In the next two parts, I will explain observation and poll used for training. First, a survey is a tool used to measure opinions or perceptions. It is a questionnaire that asks a set of questions to collect data from a group of people. Surveys are typically used to measure the attitudes or opinions of a population on a certain topic. This means that surveys are subjective, and it may seem like that means they are bad. Not so! They are only bad when they are used for the wrong reasons. Surveys can be valuable for measuring opinions and satisfaction in learning and development programs. They can help assess participants’ attitudes on various topics, which can then be used to make informed decisions about the program. People are at the heart of every learning and development program. Many factors drive people, and emotions and perceptions are part of every decision a person makes. Change management is highly dependent on these levers of human behavior, and surveys give insight into the emotional reasons people do what they do. A person’s perception is powerful information. It can explain behaviors a person takes that could otherwise not be explained. It is also a measure that cannot be argued away. If everyone says your company doesn’t care about the customer, you can’t argue that. Even if the company has a ton of data that shows all the caring actions it has taken for its customers, their perception is their perception. If someone says they hate broccoli, you can’t counter with, “You’re wrong! You love broccoli!” However, understanding that someone doesn’t like an ingredient can explain why someone isn’t eating your award-winning dish. Suppose you are attempting to identify why something in your program is going exceptionally well or bad that can otherwise not be explained. In that case, surveys may provide the insight needed to clarify things. Once you understand where a person is coming from and how they feel, you can take action to counter misconceptions or multiply positive experiences. For example, say your learning and development program is proven effective. Participants are checking all the boxes and meeting all the objectives. However, after participation in the program, they never sign up for another program. It would be helpful to learn that participants thought the training was boring. That information can be learned from surveys. Once you know their perception, you can take action so that perception doesn’t appear as often. Surveys provide a huge benefit in DEI and help identify trends of bias and exclusion. As a learning and development professional, you must be diligent and identify when bias and exclusions occur within your programs. Capturing perceptions allows for a unique view of a person’s biases or their view of your own unconscious biases. For example, you could discover that unconscious bias was a factor in a facilitator’s negative reviews. Surveys are problematic when they are used in an attempt to prove program success or effectiveness. For more information, see my post, Can surveys measure program success? In short, the only thing surveys prove is how someone feels or views things at the time of the survey. So, when should you use surveys in learning and development programs? You should use surveys when you need help explaining behaviors that can otherwise not be explained by non-subjective metrics. Surveys help you understand how someone feels and how they see things. A person’s perception is not something to argue with. If someone says they hate broccoli, you can’t counter with, “You’re wrong! You love broccoli!” However, understanding that someone doesn’t like an ingredient can explain why someone isn’t eating your award-winning dish. Surveys are important tools for understanding why people behave as they do, especially in learning and development programs. By asking questions and listening to participant responses, you can get insight into what is working well and what needs to be improved. Surveys can help you understand how someone feels and sees things, which is invaluable information when making decisions about your training program. Although you can’t argue with a person’s perception, it can be an invaluable tool to help you make positive changes in your program, so it reaches that next level. Stay tuned for parts 2 and 3 to learn more about the use of observations and polls for learning programs. When has a survey helped you make a decision about your training program? Share your story in the comments below!
How to weaponize company culture to get your way
I think we have all had this problem. You have a new co-worker asking annoying questions about your ways of working, or perhaps your direct report is making too many suggestions that seem like a lot of work. How can you stop this type of behavior? The solution is simple! Weaponize company culture! Unsure if this will work? I’ve seen it and been on the receiving end of some of the best shutdowns and career manipulations, thanks to others using company culture to throw a bomb on my work. So if you’re looking to get the most out of your team, why not give it a try? I’ll guide you through some scenarios that used weaponized company culture to solve problematic employee behavior quickly and discreetly. Trust me, it’ll be fun for everyone! Scenario 1 A coworker is new to your organization. He has the expertise that aligns with the project you have had on auto-pilot for a while now. But now, Bob is poking around and pointing out holes in your project’s theory and reports and wants to talk to you about his ideas on improving your project’s ROI. This type of behavior needs to be stopped asap. As far as everyone else knows, your project is a great success, and the last thing you need is Bob trying to undo all of the smoke and mirrors you have expertly put in place to prevent others from finding the truth. What can you do? Company culture to the rescue! Company culture is the perfect tool for handling Bob. You can simply tell Bob that his ideas are not in line with the company culture and that he needs to stop questioning everything. Company culture is all about following the status quo and not rocking the boat. So by telling Bob that he needs to fall in line with company culture, you are essentially telling him to stop asking questions and just do what he’s told. And we all know that that is exactly what Bob needs to hear! Scenario 2 You have a direct report constantly suggesting new ideas for improving your department’s efficiency. They’ve even gone so far as to put together a presentation on their findings and wants to present it to upper management. But you know that if their ideas are implemented, it will mean more work for you and less time spent on the things you enjoy doing. What can you do? Company culture can help! You have to stop this quickly. You need to tell your direct report that their ideas are not in line with company culture and that they must stop trying to change things. Also, tell them some horror stories about others who have attempted to do too much too soon. Let’s be honest, this direct report is probably new to the company and has noticed some red flags that have strategically been buried. Don’t let them dig them up! Put the fear of god into them by letting them think their new job could be in jeopardy if they are found not to fit in well enough. Scenario 3 You have the opportunity to promote one of your reports for a new leadership position, but you have a problem. A person who asks too many questions and expects everyone to try hard might be very qualified for this new position. This new position aligns with their expertise and, quite possibly, past experience. (How would you know? You haven’t ever seen their resume or asked them, which is smart! That way, you can plead ignorance if you get called out on it later!) The last thing you need is a person like this getting the opportunity to get visibility to upper management, making you look bad, or otherwise highlighting your shortfalls inadvertently by doing a job well done. But you need to have a valid reason for not considering this person for the role. This is the type of person to make a stink if they see themselves being treated unfairly, so you need to make sure your reasoning for not considering them a candidate is solid. What reason can you use? You guessed it! Company culture! Company culture is all about fitting in and not standing out. This person clearly does not fit the company culture mold, so there is no way they could even be a candidate for this new role. How could anyone expect to consider a person that is skilled, successful, and overall the most qualified as a viable candidate if they aren’t as complacent and set in their ways as you are? Company culture is the perfect way to keep this person from getting too much visibility or otherwise being put in a position that could provoke change within the company. This scenario is my favorite because it usually fixes the problem once and for all. Once it is established that you have the power to be the judge, jury, and executioner for their career, they will probably quit. Company culture—it can be a permanent fix! You are all set to weaponize company culture! There you have it! Three surefire ways to use company culture to your advantage. So next time someone is annoying, just tell them that they need to fall in line with company culture and watch them back down quickly. Using “that doesn’t fit with the culture here…” is the perfect thought-terminating cliche to keep people in their place! In just that one statement, you can tell someone they don’t belong, establish you know more than they do about the company, and that they should stop what they are doing—or else. There isn’t a better phrase that can do so much!
Emotional intelligence training or corporate-sponsored ableism and discrimination? Part 3 of 3
Have you ever been accused of being angry because you’re not smiling? Maybe they think you’re mad when really you’re just focused or concentrating. Is it your emotional intelligence or the accuser’s that is the problem? Resting bitch face is relatable to many and triggers a bunch of emotions like: Confusion—I’m not mad at all. How could they assume that? Frustration—Do they expect me to have a smile on my face 24/7? Understanding—I understand how they could think that I’m mad. They don’t know I only got 2 hours of sleep last night. And much more… If you are not part of a marginalized population, you may rarely experience or get called out on this type of misunderstanding. But people of color, autistic people, LGBTQ, females, and other historically oppressed individuals experience this more often. Imagine experiencing this type of misunderstanding daily? What if your demeanor, emotions, empathy, etc. were constantly being misunderstood or interpreted through a biased lens? You may try to overcome this misconception by smiling more the next time you interact with this person or implement some other type of fix to repair the relationship with this person. Having to remember to school your face, engage in unwanted small talk, and remember to do other tasks just to minimize these misunderstandings can be exhausting. This is often referred to as “masking”. Masking becomes a part of daily life for these individuals. It is hard to keep up with and difficult to maintain. When their mask slips or is discarded, you will find these oppressed persons being labeled as “aggressive” or “not a good fit” for the company’s culture. And these types of situations are when a troublesome emotional intelligence in the workplace or company culture training or growth plan becomes the most egregious. So, how can you tell if your programs are problematic, and what can you do about it? In part 1, I discussed common myths about emotional intelligence and company culture programs. In part 2, I discussed who suffers the most from these programs and how the programs can go wrong. Now, I’m going to help you figure out if your program is problematic and what you can do about it. Does your program have a problem? Some symptoms can alert you to troublesome programs. I’m going to go over some of the ways to spot problems that occur when you try developing emotional intelligence. Start with the numbers Anyone who knows me knows that I love numbers. They don’t lie. (Although they could be used inappropriately—but that’s another discussion for another day.) So, take a look at the stats that are not impeachable. If your program is not mandatory for all, you can look at the demographics of those assigned to participate in these programs. How do those demographics compare to the demographics of the organization as a whole? For example, if your organization is 70% white and 30% non-white, but those assigned to the program are 20% white and 80% non-white, you have a big problem. Those assigned to these programs should be close to the organization’s demographics as a whole. Those assigned to these programs should be close to the organization’s demographics as a whole. You should investigate if there is an obvious divergence to see if unconscious or conscious bias may be the cause. Some of the demographics you can investigate are race, gender, job level, age, disclosed disabilities, and other data points not based on perception. Also, keep in mind that some of these data points, like disability, are not mandatory for a person to disclose. So, you may still have a problem in one of these areas even if there isn’t an obvious link in the data points. Your data can also be unreliable if your organization is small or you don’t have a big enough sample size of a person’s identifiable demographics. Look at the program’s objectives and outcomes Okay, so this may seem like an instructional designer thing, but every program—even those programs not training-focused—must have measurable goals based on non-subjective outcomes. If your program goals are subjective, you will never know if your program is actually accomplishing anything. Take a look if your program is actually accomplishing the defined goals or if it is simply the last stop to check off a box to justify an employee’s termination or transfer. You need to be able to prove that your program is accomplishing what it says it will. How many program participants complete your program? How many of those participants are then rehabilitated and are no longer deficient in the behaviors that resulted in their participation to develop emotional intelligence? Take a look if your program is actually accomplishing the defined goals or if it is simply the last stop to check off a box to justify an employee’s termination or transfer. Looks for needs vs. wants Look at the program’s objectives, defined problem space, and recommendations for evidence of preferences being framed as a requirement for job success. For example, welcoming a customer when they enter a store may be required of a retail business trying to attract and maintain customers. But should an employee greeting their manager with “Good morning!” be a requirement? The manager may prefer to be greeted and may consider it rude for an employee not to do this, but forcing an employee to participate in the ritual will not result in the employee being able to better perform the duties of their position. It may result in the manager liking the employee more, but is that necessary? As mentioned before, masking can be exhausting. If an autistic employee already has to engage in masking to complete their retail job well, requiring them to maintain that mask for every interaction will cause real harm. If this is the justification, you are asking a person to go against their nature, comfort, and mental health to make another employee happier. The focus should be on training the manager to understand that not everyone who reports to them needs to kiss their ass to do their job well. Is the program needed if the employee is performing well in their job functions? Will changing this behavior result in better job performance? In reality, it may have the opposite effect. A person only has so much energy. If they have to expend their energy on making the manager happy, they may not have enough to make customers feel welcome. Now, this could harm their job performance. Solving problematic programs If you have found that your program is problematic, what can you do? Well, let’s go through some tangible actions that can be taken to hopefully make things better. Start at intake Look at how people get assigned to participate in your emotional intelligence or company culture program. Is there an opportunity for bias to play a part? How subjective are the criteria for inclusion in your program? If a manager or co-worker refers someone to the program, that referral should be questioned. Implement a process of questioning and justification before the assignment becomes set in stone. The referring party needs to be able to prove how the offending behavior results in the employee being unable to perform the requirements of their job and how fixing this behavior would result in this job requirement being met. It is important that each of these behaviors is connected to an actual problem that directly correlates to a job task or function not being met. Not something that a daisy chain effect could justify. For example, if someone comes to you saying that a person’s aloof demeanor results in co-workers not wanting to partner with them on a project, then that is not enough. The blocker is the co-worker’s preference to work with someone friendlier or personable. Neither of which is required for a project to get done. However, if a person’s behavior results in losing a client, that does impact their job and reflects poorly on the company, as maintaining cordial relationships with the client is mandatory for positions requiring that interaction. Just because no one is complaining doesn’t mean there isn’t a problem. Don’t assume there isn’t a problem Just because no one is complaining doesn’t mean there isn’t a problem. Usually, the people assigned to such a program may not feel in a position to complain because their job is already in jeopardy. You may be able to help by just taking a look at the program with fresh eyes. Don’t be fooled. Choosing not to evaluate the program is a decision in itself. You should get feedback from people often oppressed by these types of programs. Ask for feedback from people of different backgrounds, races, disabilities, and genders before they are assigned such programs. Asking after will give you unreliable results. Again, getting accurate feedback from someone fearing losing their job is hard. So, get diverse feedback early and often. Become an advocate Stand up against those who think it isn’t a problem or that it isn’t a big enough problem to require a solution. Speak against those who would prefer to keep their heads in the sand by drawing a line in the sand. Doing what is right isn’t always the easiest, but it is a worthy side to hang your hat. Start with a program audit. Does the program address real problems that directly prevent a person from completing their job functions, or does it address the person not acting in a “normal” way that is expected? If it is the latter, your program needs to be fixed. If your content is focused on making a person act more neurotypical, caucasian, or in contrast to a person’s cultural upbringing, change it. A person should be valued on skills related to the job’s needs, not the person’s ability to conform to the majority’s preferences. Speak against those who would prefer to keep their heads in the sand by drawing a line in the sand. Keep receipts When you find stats that show the bias of a program, publish it. Share it with others, not just with the decision-maker. It’s easier to disregard an issue if the pressure isn’t turned on. So, CC your supervisor and others you share the info with. If you get pushback on fixing identified issues, follow up with an email confirming the dismissal of your concerns. Send out an email to summarize the interaction, the information you presented, the persons informed by name, and their justification for non-action. Also, provide a date for revisiting the concern if you get a “not now” kind of dismissal. Sometimes when people know that their name is attached to a decision will result in better consideration of the issue you are presenting. Taking some action now is better than no action at all Don’t wait until you have time to completely overhaul a program before making any changes. You would be surprised at the positive effect of utilizing Socratic questioning for program referrals. Simply asking a person to define how the person isn’t completing their job function can be a great catalyst for change. You may not be able to make a problematic program perfect tomorrow, but you can make it better than it was. So, if you see a problem, do something! After all, you want these programs to make the workplace better for all instead of them being used as a tool to remove workers with the most need for protection due to a misunderstanding or outright bias.
Emotional intelligence training or corporate-sponsored ableism and discrimination? Part 2 of 3
There is often an assumption that emotional intelligence training programs are positive with no negative consequences. However, this is not always the case. These programs can sometimes have negative consequences, and you may never hear about them unless you look closely or fall victim to them yourself.
Emotional intelligence training or corporate-sponsored ableism and discrimination? Part 1 of 3
Let's explore the difference between true emotional intelligence training and ableism-based behavior admonition. We need to reform not only the content of emotional intelligence training but the conditions that lead to the assignment of emotional intelligence training.
Mindset of a Teacher vs. Instructional Designer
To be successful in corporate instructional design, teachers need to understand the differences between teaching in a classroom and designing instruction for adults. While both involve working with people, there are major distinctions that must be taken into account. In this article, we will explore some of those key differences between the mindset of a teacher vs. instructional designer. Teacher vs. instructional designer approach When teaching students in a classroom setting, the focus is on providing a personalized learning experience that meets their individual needs. Teachers must be able to adapt their teaching methods to ensure all students can keep up with the class. In contrast, when designing instruction for corporate training participants, the focus is on the overall group and providing them with a learning experience that is relevant and timely for their needs. Teachers need to be able to understand the needs of the group and create content that is accessible for all. Teachers need to focus on providing students with a comprehensive understanding of the material so recall knowledge and show that they have remembered it. This doesn’t often involve proving that students can apply the information they are learning in a real-world setting. In contrast, when training employees for job performance, the focus is on teaching them specific tasks they will perform on the job. What matters to a teacher vs. instructional designer Classroom assessments are an important tool for teachers. They help teachers understand how well students understand the material, what areas they need more help in, and what type of reinforcement students need. In addition, classroom assessments can also be used to measure student progress over time. This information can then be used to improve instruction and help students achieve their academic goals. When it comes to performance improvement, corporate trainers need to focus on helping employees apply the skills they have learned in a real-world setting. This often involves providing employees with opportunities to practice their learned skills. In addition, trainers need to be able to identify any areas where employees are struggling and provide them with additional support. Ways a teacher vs. instructional designer prove success Reporting student grades to prove success is a common practice in the classroom. However, this method can be difficult to replicate in a corporate setting. In the classroom, teachers can assess how well students understand the material by testing them and grading their work. This information can then be used to improve instruction. However, when it comes to proving success in a corporate setting, trainers must focus on showing ROI. ROI, or return on investment, is a metric that is commonly used in the corporate world to measure the effectiveness of training programs. It is calculated by dividing the benefits of a training program by its costs. This information can then be used to make informed decisions about whether or not to continue investing in a particular training program. When it comes to proving the success of a training program, instructional designers need to be able to provide evidence that employees apply the skills they have learned in a real-world setting. This often involves providing employees with opportunities to practice their learned skills and observe their behaviors and actions. In addition, instructional designers need to be able to identify any areas where employees are struggling and provide them with additional support. Content knowledge familiarity of a teacher vs. instructional designer When it comes to the knowledge of subject areas between a teacher vs. instructional designer, teachers are often familiar with the material they are teaching. They have probably studied the topic in-depth and can provide students with a comprehensive understanding of the material. In contrast, instructional designers typically need to navigate new and ever-changing subject areas. This often involves researching the latest trends and developments in their field. As a result, instructional designers may not be as familiar with the material they are teaching as teachers are. Instructional designers need to be comfortable collaborating with subject matter experts to learn about the subject. This involves working with experts to identify what knowledge and skills employees need to be successful in their roles. It can be a big transition from being the expert to being the questioner. But, once you embrace it, you’ll learn a ton and gain exposure to new and exciting fields. Summary of teacher vs. instructional designer mindsets It’s evident that there are several key differences between teaching vs. instructional design. Teachers need to be able to understand the needs of the group and create content that is accessible for all. In addition, they need to be familiar with the material they are teaching. For instructional designers to succeed in a corporate setting, the focus must change from getting the grade to proving ROI. And you have to get comfortable with collaborating with experts as instructional designers need to learn about the subject that they are designing instruction around. Making the transition from teaching to instructional design can be a rewarding experience. As a teacher, you are uniquely positioned to help your students learn and grow. However, when you make the transition to instructional design, you can help employees learn and grow in their careers. In addition, you are also able to help companies see a return on their investment in training programs. Once you understand the different mindsets of a teacher vs. instructional designer, you are on your way to a successful career transition.
3 Reasons to track ROI when no one is asking
No matter how great your supervisor thinks your work is, you always need to worry about ROI. Maybe your boss loves you, constantly praises your work, and brags about you to others. But In some cases, a boss's love can actually put your program at risk.
Gain stakeholder buy-in
It's always a good feeling when stakeholders come to you with additional training needs or ideas for solutions. But what if they don't? What if they go elsewhere? Don't worry, there are ways to make them seek out your learning solutions.
- 1
- 2
