Ask, Not Tell

I got a new iPod nano (Gen 4) and was fascinated by the high resolution when I played video on it.    It is great to watch it on the iPod nano whenever I have nothing else better to do e.g. in a traffic jam.   Among all the video, I subscribe to the TED conference video podcast.   Basically, the podcast consists of numerous inspiring presentation made by thought leaders in different fields.

There is one by Hans Rosling with topic as ‘Debunking third word myths with the best stats you’ve ever seen’.  Hans used the bubble chart creatively to illustrate how various countries has been changing sociologically.    This makes me re-think how a visual aid could illustrate a point (instead of bullet points).

I admit that Hans probably has better software or even a support team.  But still, there is a big gap between his visual aid and the usual bullet points we are encountering everyday.   There must be something we could do to make visual aid work better.

Another interesting point raised by William Rothwell is that all training intervention should have a post-course test.  And we should develop the test before the course content.     On the contrary, I understand that most will first design the course content after understanding the course objectives (which Dr Rothwell calls Instructional Objectives with a strict definition on) .     We may or may not have a post-course test.  And if there is one, we do it by reviewing the content.  We select the key pieces of knowledge with which we want to check the learners’ understanding.   We then put them in the test.

Dr Rothwell’s point s quite an insight to me:

• It makes a lot of sense to have a post-course test in order to check the training effectiveness.   It helps engage our stakeholders (or simply the one who pays for the course)   I am not sure whether test can be appliable to all kinds of course e.g. presentation skills.  But for the very least, we should always consider putting such a test.
• It also makes sense to have an end (post-course test) first before developing the mean (course content). It is more objective-focus.  What to achieve (Objective) > How to measure the result vs the desired achievement (Test) > How to get there (Content)

I have attended a class by William Rothwell last Nov.  To me, the experience carried new perspective how I can look at training as a career.  Well, not an entirely new perspective, but the experience made the perspective more obvious to me.   In fact, I have been writing a number of posts on this realisation – ‘training’ is not just about speaking in the classroom.  It is about an attempt to change human performance.

In a specific ‘how to’ term, ‘training’ is about how to perform the responsibility to change human performance in the corporate setting.  It is about how to secure resources from the corporate budget.  It is about how to understand well and set a correct expectation what is the desired human performance change.    It is about how to maximize return with given resources. Read more

I was asked this question very often. Most asked me this because they are considering becoming one. To me, the answer is ‘Yes’. But to them, there is no simple ‘Yes / No’ answer. Let me share the pros and cons as I perceive. It may or may not be applicable to you. But hope that they can give you some insight:

Pros

Continuous Learning – Teaching is the best way to learn something. For example, thanks to being a SPIN trainer, I have been acquiring the questioning skills effectively. Whenever I want to influence, I will consider the option of asking rather than telling.

Traveling – I love travelling so long as it is not too excessive. You may find it weird – I like to be in the airports observing people from all walks of life. And I like working on the plane where I absolutely get no interruption.

Focus – Though I can multi-task, I need time when I can focus on doing one thing. I focus on facilitating when I am in the training room. There is no phone call, no email, nobody coming to your desk in the training room. I do not get disrupted. It allows me to think through topics with my learners.

Group Learning Environment – I simply love facilitating group process. And in some sense, I feel that I am gifted to observe well and give clear instructions.

Cons

Sustainability – Depending on the topics you specialize in, you will become out-dated with your training topics as time goes. For example, it will be the case if you focus at product knowledge. After a few years, you will lose touch with the products available in the market. And you will no longer have live and updated stories to tell.

Traveling – Sometimes, I travel more than I want.

Inflexibility – It is another side of the coins – You cannot multi-task in the classroom. You cannot answer phone call from your stock-broker or real estate agent. More importantly, if anything bad happens to your family members, you may not be informed at once. Even if you are informed, you cannot just leave to attend the matter.

Generally Lower Return – An in-house trainer generally earns less than what the frontline counterpart does. In the industry I work in, the internal trainers generally earn less than the salespersons.

A new year starts today.   Moment like this always makes me think.  My brain is flooded with questions like ‘What am I doing?’, ‘Am I on the right track?’, ‘What can I do more or better or differently?’….  Very much, I am an analytical style of person.  Yes, I think a lot.

My thought is also on this blog as well.    In 2008, there were more issues than before which I have to handle.   As a result, I have not been updating this blog as frequently as before.    I wish I can improve on that in 2009.   In addition, I would like to make this blog more personal, rather than technical as before.   I used to share only ‘learning points’ here.  In the future, on top of that, I will also share my random thoughts on training, facilitation and presentation.

I wish all ANT readers to have a wonderful 2009!!