A true learning person also has a “to-learn” list, and the items on that list carry at least as much weight in how one organizes his or her time as the to-do list.

More specifically, The Big Question is about:

• If you have a to-learn list and are willing to share, and willing to share how you work with that list, that would likely be helpful information.
• As Knowledge Workers, work and learning are the same, so how does a to-learn list really differ from a to-do list? How are they different than undirected learning through work, blogging, conferences, etc.?
• Are to-learn lists really important to have? Are they as important as what Jim Collins tells us?
• Should they be captured? If so how?
• How does a to-learn list impact something like a Learning Management System in a Workplace or Educational setting?
• What skills, practices, behaviors do modern knowledge workers need around to-learn lists?

So it’s really a bunch of Big Questions this month. I’m not going to answer any of them, as I’m not so conceited as to think that you haven’t better things to do with your time, than to think about what I do with my time. However, the topic did get me thinking…

First of all, some context – I undertook some research on the text that the idea of the To-Learn List originated from. Learning Journeys contains 37 two- to three-page essays by

some of the best and most well known of human resources and organizational leaders and pioneers. From Stephen Cover to Dave Ulrich, from Marshall Goldsmith to Robert Eichenger, these individuals have done much to shape current thought in the areas of organizational development and leadership.

Amazon.com reviewer

As such, the text is orientated towards the needs of HR and organizational development people, rather than learning & development professionals. No harm: it’s always useful to get a different perspective (or to put it another way – a friend of mine reads a certain national newspaper because he “…likes to know what the enemy is thinking!”). One of the elements of the text that became apparent to me (from reading a part of the text using Amazon.com’s Look Inside functionality) was that the learning perspectives discussed would probably work better for people who are not professionally involved with training others: in this capacity, it indicated some potentially useful approaches on how to engage others in continuous learning, and pointed towards some avenues that might assist in achieving this objective.

As discussed in a previous blog entry on the E-Learning Curve, one of the central components of the impact of learning (and specifically the development of knowledge workers’ expertise in organizations) is the context within which the learning takes place. A central element of this context is the type or format of the learning taking place. In the literature, it is apparent that a dichotomy exists between the paradigms of formal, goal-directed training programs, and informal “learning at the watercooler” (Grebow, 2002); what Michael Eraut (2000) describes as incidental learning that takes place almost as a side effect of work: “it is difficult to make a clear distinction between formal and informal learning as there is often a crossover between the two” (McGivney, 1999, p.1). Another complexity in the discussion is where is non-formal learning located in relation to the diametric opposites?

I support Alan Rogers’ (2004) view that a “new paradigm” for learning exists, in which “most programmes will be partly formal and partly informal” going from formal to informal and from informal to formal in both directions along a continuum (see Figure 1) . “Both forms of education are important elements in the total learning experience” (looking again at non-formal and informal education – towards a new paradigm, 2004).

Figure 1 the Learning Continuum

Similarly, Hodkinson and Hodkinson argue that focusing on the extent to which learning is planned and intentional may be a way of by-passing the distinction between formal, non-formal and informal altogether.” (Colley, Hodkinson & Malcolm, 2002).

So, to return to the topic, my To-Learn List has one entry: to learn.

I would categorize myself as a “learnivore” – I continually acquire new knowledge and information through my Web-, book-, podcast-, and presentation reading, blogging (reading and writing), academic study and research, and work-based learning-related tasks. These activities are drivers for the information I try to take on board in my attempts to enhance my skills, abilities, and expertise.

_____________

References:

Colley, Hodkinson, Malcolm (2002) non-formal learning: mapping the conceptual terrain. a consultation report [Internet] Available from: http://www.infed.org/archives/e-texts/colley_informal_learning.htm [Accessed 28th January 2008]
Coombs, P. (1968) The World Educational Crisis, New York, Oxford University Press.

Eraut, M. (2000) Non-formal learning, implicit learning and tacit knowledge, in F. Coffield (Ed) The Necessity of Informal Learning: Policy Press. Bristol

Goldsmith, M. Kaye, B. Shelton, K (eds.) (2000) LEARNING JOURNEYS Top Management Experts Share Hard-Earned Lessons on Becoming Great Mentors and Leaders. Davies-Black Publishing

Grebow, D. (2002) At the Water Cooler of Learning [Internet] Available from: http://agelesslearner.com/articles/watercooler_dgrebow_tc600.html [Accessed 30th January 2008]

McGivney, V. (1999) Informal learning in the community: a trigger for change and development NIACE. Leicester.

Rogers, A. (2004) Looking again at non-formal and informal education – towards a new paradigm [Internet] Available from: http://www.infed.org/biblio/non_formal_paradigm.htm [Accessed 30th January 2008]

–

A true learning person also has a “to-learn” list, and the items on that list carry at least as much weight in how one organizes his or her time as the to-do list.

More specifically, The Big Question is about:

• If you have a to-learn list and are willing to share, and willing to share how you work with that list, that would likely be helpful information.
• As Knowledge Workers, work and learning are the same, so how does a to-learn list really differ from a to-do list? How are they different than undirected learning through work, blogging, conferences, etc.?
• Are to-learn lists really important to have? Are they as important as what Jim Collins tells us?
• Should they be captured? If so how?
• How does a to-learn list impact something like a Learning Management System in a Workplace or Educational setting?
• What skills, practices, behaviors do modern knowledge workers need around to-learn lists?

So it’s really a bunch of Big Questions this month. I’m not going to answer any of them.

First of all, some context – I undertook some research on the text that the idea of the To-Learn List originated from. Learning Journeys contains 37 two- to three-page essays by

some of the best and most well known of human resources and organizational leaders and pioneers. From Stephen Cover to Dave Ulrich, from Marshall Goldsmith to Robert Eichenger, these individuals have done much to shape current thought in the areas of organizational development and leadership.

Amazon.com reviewer

As such, the text is orientated towards the needs of HR and organizational development people, rather than learning & development professionals. No harm: it’s always useful to get a different perspective (or to put it another way – a friend of mine reads a certain national newspaper because he “…likes to know what the enemy is thinking!”). One of the elements of the text that became apparent to me (from reading a part of the text using Amazon.com’s Look Inside functionality) was that the learning perspectives discussed would probably work better for people who are not professionally involved with training others: in this capacity, it indicated some potentially useful approaches on how to engage others in continuous learning, and pointed towards some avenues that might assist in achieving this objective.

As discussed in a previous blog entry on the E-Learning Curve, one of the central components of the impact of learning (and specifically the development of knowledge workers’ expertise in organizations) is the context within which the learning takes place. A central element of this context is the type or format of the learning taking place. In the literature, it is apparent that a dichotomy exists between the paradigms of formal, goal-directed training programs, and informal “learning at the watercooler” (Grebow, 2002); what Michael Eraut (2000) describes as incidental learning that takes place almost as a side effect of work: “it is difficult to make a clear distinction between formal and informal learning as there is often a crossover between the two” (McGivney, 1999, p.1). Another complexity in the discussion is where is non-formal learning located in relation to the diametric opposites?

I support Alan Rogers’ (2004) view that a “new paradigm” for learning exists, in which “most programmes will be partly formal and partly informal” going from formal to informal and from informal to formal in both directions along a continuum (see Figure 1) . “Both forms of education are important elements in the total learning experience” (looking again at non-formal and informal education – towards a new paradigm, 2004).

Figure 1 the Learning Continuum

Similarly, Hodkinson and Hodkinson argue that focusing on the extent to which learning is planned and intentional may be a way of by-passing the distinction between formal, non-formal and informal altogether.” (Colley, Hodkinson & Malcolm, 2002).

Sp, to return to the topic, my To-Learn List has one entry: to learn.

I would categorize myself as a “learnivore” – I continually acquire new knowledge and information through my Web-, book-, podcast-, and presentation reading, blogging (reading and writing), academic study and research, and work-based learning-related tasks. These activities are drivers for the information I to take on board in my attempts to enhance my skills, abilities, and expertise.

_____________

References:

Colley, Hodkinson, Malcolm (2002) non-formal learning: mapping the conceptual terrain. a consultation report [Internet] Available from: http://www.infed.org/archives/e-texts/colley_informal_learning.htm [Accessed 28th January 2008]
Coombs, P. (1968) The World Educational Crisis, New York, Oxford University Press.

Eraut, M. (2000) Non-formal learning, implicit learning and tacit knowledge, in F. Coffield (Ed) The Necessity of Informal Learning: Policy Press. Bristol

Goldsmith, M. Kaye, B. Shelton, K (eds.) (2000) LEARNING JOURNEYS Top Management Experts Share Hard-Earned Lessons on Becoming Great Mentors and Leaders. Davies-Black Publishing

Grebow, D. (2002) At the Water Cooler of Learning [Internet] Available from: http://agelesslearner.com/articles/watercooler_dgrebow_tc600.html [Accessed 30th January 2008]

McGivney, V. (1999) Informal learning in the community: a trigger for change and development NIACE. Leicester.

Rogers, A. (2004) Looking again at non-formal and informal education – towards a new paradigm [Internet] Available from: http://www.infed.org/biblio/non_formal_paradigm.htm [Accessed 30th January 2008]

–

• Should workplace learning professionals be leading the charge around these new work literacies?
• Shouldn’t they be starting with themselves and helping to develop it throughout the organizations?
• And then shouldn’t the learning organization become a driver for the organization?
• And like in the world of libraries don’t we need to market ourselves in this capacity?

Should workplace learning professionals be leading the charge around these new work literacies?
The short answer is “Yes, with an if…”. Long answer is “No, with a but…”. Yes, learning professionals should be at the forefront of orienting and guiding knowledge workers in the use of read / write Web technologies. Knowledge work is, at it’s heart, about problem-solving, and knowledge workers are employed to utilize their skills to find solutions to organizational challenges. We can say that knowledge workers are performing at their optimum when they:

• use their deepest skills
• work on many projects at the same time
• know how to allocate their time
• can multiply the results of their efforts through soft factors such as emotional intelligence and trust (Francis Fukuyama, Manuel Castells).

If Web 2.0 technologies enable knowledge workers to undertake these tasks, I believe that it is in the remit of the learning and development arm of knowledge organizations to support this.
However, given that any such learning interventions are undertaken within organizations, there is a corporate responsibility to ensure that any learning initiatives to support learning about Web 2.0 technologies be endorsed by board-level approval of the program with all that entails, which should include

1. recognition for the initiative
2. acknowledgement that it may be difficult to capture metrics on knowledge worker performance enhancement attained through these technologies by more traditional assessment techniques
3. that the learning programs themselves will probably be non- or informal in character, as these Web 2.0 technologies are by their very nature, non- and informal
4. implementing Web 2.0 technologies will probably require substantial investments of time, expertise and capital.

Finding solutions to these challenges is difficult, and many organizations may not understand that this domain is too new to be properly understood at this time.

Shouldn’t they be starting with themselves and helping to develop it throughout the organizations?
In my experience, the “throw it over the wall and see where it lands” approach is a non-starter. While learning professionals are typically highly-motivated individuals who expend personal time and effort staying “ahead of the curve” in terms of their own skills and competencies, a “viral approach” to learning in this domain can only have success if the learning professional in question is highly influential within an organization (and probably a C-level executive).

For a “footsoldier” to attempt to modify work practices within a large organization would meet high levels of resistance, particularly from managers who have no desire to change production processes that probably work very well, given the potential disruptions entailed in transitioning to a more collaborative environment.

Shouldn’t the learning organization become a driver for the organization?
Most learning professionals would say “Yes”, most execs would (probably) say “No.”

In my view, organizations function best when the organization’s business goals are aligned with their learning goals; ideally the two should support and drive each other. If learning professionals can persuade the executive team that a Learning organization is an Earning organization, then they will usually receive the support to operationalize innovative learning initiatives.

Like in the world of libraries don’t we need to market ourselves in this capacity?
Yes, yes, and yes again.

If you are familiar with the 1989 motion picture Field of Dreams, you’ll know the mantra of one of the lead characters is “if you build it, they will come.”

Yes, if you build it (the learning initiative) they will come.

…But only if they know it’s there.

I believe that it is the responsibility of learning professionals both in an individual as well as in a departmental capacity to broadcast what they do and they services they offer at every opportunity. Without resorting to spin, lies, and weasel words, the only way your voice will be heard in the bustle of the marketplace (whether internally within an organization or externally facing) is to “say it loud, and say it proud” about your learning and development offerings and services.

Use what ever resources are at your disposal to do so, and don’t forget that as a trainer, you’re probably in a position to influence a wider range of individuals in your workplace than those in any other department, except perhaps for Human Resources and ICT.

–

• Should workplace learning professionals be leading the charge around these new work literacies?
• Shouldn’t they be starting with themselves and helping to develop it throughout the organizations?
• And then shouldn’t the learning organization become a driver for the organization?
• And like in the world of libraries don’t we need to market ourselves in this capacity?

Should workplace learning professionals be leading the charge around these new work literacies?
The short answer is “Yes, with an if…”. Long answer is “No, with a but…”. Yes, learning professionals should be at the forefront of orienting and guiding knowledge workers in the use of read / write Web technologies. Knowledge work is, at it’s heart, about problem-solving, and knowledge workers are employed to utilize their skills to find solutions to organizational challenges. We can say that knowledge workers are performing at their optimum when they:

• use their deepest skills
• work on many projects at the same time
• know how to allocate their time
• can multiply the results of their efforts through soft factors such as emotional intelligence and trust (Francis Fukuyama, Manuel Castells).

If Web 2.0 technologies enable knowledge workers to undertake these tasks, I believe that it is in the remit of the learning and development arm of knowledge organizations to support this.
However, given that any such learning interventions are undertaken within organizations, there is a corporate responsibility to ensure that any learning initiatives to support learning about Web 2.0 technologies be endorsed by board-level approval of the program with all that entails, which should include

1. recognition for the initiative
2. acknowledgement that it may be difficult to capture metrics on knowledge worker performance enhancement attained through these technologies by more traditional assessment techniques
3. that the learning programs themselves will probably be non- or informal in character, as these Web 2.0 technologies are by their very nature, non- and informal
4. implementing Web 2.0 technologies will probably require substantial investments of time, expertise and capital.

Finding solutions to these challenges is difficult, and many organizations may not understand that this domain is too new to be properly understood at this time.

Shouldn’t they be starting with themselves and helping to develop it throughout the organizations?
In my experience, the “throw it over the wall and see where it lands” approach is a non-starter. While learning professionals are typically highly-motivated individuals who expend personal time and effort staying “ahead of the curve” in terms of their own skills and competencies, a “viral approach” to learning in this domain can only have success if the learning professional in question is highly influential within an organization (and probably a C-level executive).

For a “footsoldier” to attempt to modify work practices within a large organization would meet high levels of resistance, particularly from managers who have no desire to change production processes that probably work very well, given the potential disruptions entailed in transitioning to a more collaborative environment.

Shouldn’t the learning organization become a driver for the organization?
Most learning professionals would say “Yes”, most execs would (probably) say “No.”

In my view, organizations function best when the organization’s business goals are aligned with their learning goals; ideally the two should support and drive each other. If learning professionals can persuade the executive team that a Learning organization is an Earning organization, then they will usually receive the support to operationalize innovative learning initiatives.

Like in the world of libraries don’t we need to market ourselves in this capacity?
Yes, yes, and yes again.

If you are familiar with the 1989 motion picture Field of Dreams, you’ll know the mantra of one of the lead characters is “if you build it, they will come.”

Yes, if you build it (the learning initiative) they will come.

But only if they know it’s there.

I believe that it is the responsibility of learning professionals both in an individual as well as in a departmental capacity to broadcast what they do and they services they offer at every opportunity. Without resorting to spin, lies, and weasel words, the only way your voice will be heard in the bustle of the marketplace (whether internally within an organization or externally facing) is to “say it loud, and say it proud” about your learning and development offerings and services.

Use what ever resources are at your disposal to do so, and don’t forget that as a trainer, you’re probably in a position to influence a wider range of individuals in your workplace than those in any other department, except perhaps for Human Resources and ICT.

–