NHRD April 2013.pdf - National HRD Network

However, the proof of TEL is in delivering
on the ground and technology has played a
balancing role between the content, learner,
facilitator, and reach by responding to
1) Online on-demand learning at the
fingertips
2) Personalized learning for dynamic
individual development needs
3) Distributed co-learning requirements
4) Contextualized learning
Embarking on the TEL journey: Initial
Steps
As more organizations experience and
understand the potential of mobile learning
eventually we will see a gold rush when
the tipping point is reached. This only
indicates what the future of learning is
likely to be - move away 70-20-10 and make
way for 10-90 learning. The new thinking
is 10% formal learning and 90% informal
learning with the support of technology.
This requires organizations to consciously
work on a) rethinking how the learning
domain is evolving, and b) shifting mindset
to informal learning.
a) Rethinking Learning
As the learning & development space
evolves and tightly aligns lockstep with
business efforts to remain competitive
and react with agility to external economic
pressures, sustaining workforce capacitycapability
to be equally as agile and resilient
to ‘change’ will require a rethinking of how
learning is happening. Some of the trends
that are likely to have a long-lasting impact
on the way organizations think about
learning capacity and capability are –
a) business-readiness, b) evolution of selfservice
technologies, and c) empowered
tech-savvy generation.
Often, we come across L&D professionals
commenting that the learning attitude is
missing in the participant groups. While
this may be true, the larger question then is
– if this is a given and a constant, is the L&D
professional learning to change / adapt in
the context of the new givens and/or the
existing constraints. L&D professionals
will also be required to have a more
hands-on approach to use analytics to drive
L&D offerings from the current ‘learning
outside of work’ to one where learning is
“embedded into work”. This requires a
mindset change from ‘analytics- wary’ to
‘analytics-savvy’. Yet another aspect of
looking at this challenge is how the two
key stakeholders – the learner and the L&D
professional view their respective roles. It
is common knowledge that humans tend
to evaluate self with respect to the effort
expended and returns on effort. While
the mindset of the L&D professional is
an overt focus on self-effort), the learner
is looking for something which matches
his/her imagination (returns on effort to
learn). Therefore, the mindset to look at
L&D effort will always fall short of the
expectations of the learner who is looking
for his/her idiosyncratic value.
In the context of evolving trends, what
limits the march of L&D into the technology
led era? Several complex factors have
a contributory effect, but a few things
stand out – a) overemphasis on facilitator
led L&D approaches, b) Internal IT
dependency architecture, c) Excessivefocus
on technology as a magic-wand for
L&D, and d) Organizational onus to make
individuals learn. These factors have to be
flipped around from the above two – a) social
learning, b) WhereverWheneverWhoever
learning, c) shifting from technology to
applications, and d) onus on the individual
to keep updated. This will require the
organizations to move the model from
one which emphasizes on push versus
one which emphasizes on the pull. The
L&D professional needs to sync up by
14
April | 2013 NHRD Network Journal