Agile Learning

The recent output from the CIPD’s Learning & Development show in London has made some interesting reading, particularly in terms of agile learning and the perceived lack of it in the workplace. There were also a surprising number of references to the 70:20:10 approach.

What is Agile Learning?

If we start with my definition of agile learning:

The ability to deliver at an appropriate time, the correct learning resource to enable a person to develop or enhance a knowledge, skill or behaviour and consequently improve performance.

We can see from the definition that there are three key points:
• The correct learning resource.
• Improve performance.
• Appropriate time.

Whilst not every organisation has the time or money to conduct a proper training needs analysis, all should be completing skills gap analyses, even if that’s only based on the annual performance review. The skills gap analysis will allow us to identify where performance is lacking and identify which skills are missing leading to decreased performance.

Knowing the skills gap is the first stage in becoming agile, once we know this we can decide on the appropriate solution. This is where it gets interesting. Most L&D consultancies will attempt to persuade you that their methodology is the best for delivering learning, whether that be eLearning, blended learning, or a classroom based session. The reality is, and we all know this, there is no one right way to deliver learning. The most important measure of success is measuring success; has the skills gap reduced and has the performance of the learners improved as a result of the learning intervention?

That leads me to the 70:20:10 approach. Its original publication was in relation to a study by Morgan McCall et al in 1996. In the study they observed already successful executives and asked them to describe how they felt they learned. Not the universal barometer of success we’re all hoping for.
We now see organisations taking this observation and making it a rule or an approach for their organisation. Much like Mehrabian’s communication quotient or learning styles, I fear that the point has been taken out of context so often, that the factoid is now more prevalent than the fact.

Research from the CIPD show said that 91% of employees think that on-the-job learning is useful – we learn best by doing after all, yet only 28% of 2000 respondents said that they received on-the-job learning.

How and When?

So when should we deliver the learning? And how? That’s something that we can’t answer for you here; it’s dependent on so many things, commercial strategy, people strategy, stakeholder support, learner and line manager engagement, budget, time and desire.

The point I’m making is that you cannot simply apply one approach, ratio, quotient or metric to your organisation’s learning if you want to be agile. The credibility of L&D relies upon you knowing your organisation and where to invest your time and energy. Once you’ve done that, becoming agile should be easy for you.

If you would like to have a chat about what agile means for you, drop us a line at enquiries@azimuth.eu.com, or give us a call on 01295 675 300.