Training Industry Magazine - Content Development 2017 Special Edition - 19


*	For custom projects, have you
carefully considered the pros and
cons of executing them with current
internal resources versus a vendor
work-for-hire engagement versus staff
augmentation?
2| Is it productive work or busywork?
This consideration takes the "invest wisely"
point to a granular level. How and where do
learning leaders and their staff invest their
time? When used wisely, time becomes
a source of competitive advantage. With
this in mind, high levels of activity do not
always predicate high levels of results.
There are two important questions to ask:
Am I focusing on projects and tasks that
align with business priorities, and am I
performing projects and tasks in the most
efficient manner?
A job task analysis performed by General
Dynamics IT for a client proved this point.
The analysis of a salesperson role revealed
that master performers consistently at
or above quota spent approximately 80
percent of their time and effort on activities
that led to increased and expanded sales,
and only 20 percent of their time on
administrative or other non-core sales
tasks. For salespersons with below quota
sales performance, the numbers were
virtually flipped. Both groups were busy,
but one focused their energy where it
yielded the greatest return.
Efficiency depends on a number of
factors: planning and organizing the
work, identifying and weeding out
inefficiencies, matching level of effort
with expected returns, maintaining focus,
managing time, quality-assuring work
product, and concentrating on end goals
and results.

Adopting the right attitude to achieve
high levels of productivity not only
takes time and practice but a realistic
assessment of where one's mindset may
need to shift. Table 1 shows the distinction
between busyness and productivity select
workplace mindsets.

SAVVY LEARNING
LEADERS CAN INCREASE
STRATEGIC VALUE AND
BECOME MORE ALIGNED
WITH BUSINESS
PRIORITIES BY DOING
MORE WITH LESS.
3| Rethink learning.
Old habits can be hard to break, but
breaking outmoded ones can help
achieve success with fewer resources.
Whether it's the learning group saying
"we've always done it that way," or the

TABLE 1

MINDSET

BUSY

PRODUCTIVE

Orientation
Projection
Work/Results Expectation
Response
Status Quo
Level of Effort
Thinking
Quality
Task Response

Activity
Busyness/talk
More work/more results
Reactive
Accepts
Constant
"In the weeds"
Quality control (at the end)
Always says "yes"

Results
Accomplishment/act
Improved work/better results
Thoughtful
Challenges when appropriate
Matched to outcome/expected return
"Big picture"
Quality assurance (throughout)
Sometimes says "no"

internal client indicating "we expect
it that way," failing to challenge the
status quo, when appropriate, can have
consequences: becoming predictable,
losing the innovation edge, falling
behind technologically and missing
opportunities. It can also result in lost
efficiencies, with projects taking more
time and resources than they should and
that the organization can afford.
How is the learning organization thought
of in the broader context? As "order taker"
that develops training or as a "trusted
partner" that helps to move the needle
on performance? When the focus is on
performance, it naturally challenges
the team to be a catalyst for improving
the end product, which can stimulate
newfound ideas to create learning that is
better, faster and more cost efficient.
One such approach involves analysis.
Analysis efforts often face criticism for
being time consuming, costing too
much, and not always yielding actionable
and practical recommendations. When
performed properly, however, they
can be very manageable and provide
roadmaps for rapidly and more costefficiently
developing
instructionally
sound learning. For example, Rapid
Instructional Systems Design (RISD) reengineers the analysis and design process
by gathering all key stakeholders together,
brainstorming approaches, outlining a
solution arrived at through consensus and
quickly documenting the outcome. In our
experience, RISD results include:
*	 Cutting design time by up to half
*	 Identifying gaps earlier in process
*	 Improving risk mitigation planning
*	Delivering high-impact information
with minimal investment and time
*	 Reducing rework
Pushing the envelope on new methods
not only can result in improved learning
outcomes, but also more productive
means to create them.
Here are some key questions for
consideration:
*	Does the learning organization have the
performance consulting skills needed to
effectively conduct front-end analysis
and back-end evaluation?

TRAINING INDUSTRY MAGAZINE - CONTENT DEVELOPMENT 2017 I SPECIAL EDITION I WWW.TRAININGINDUSTRY.COM/MAGAZINE

| 19
http://www.trainingindustry.com/ezine/ezine.aspx
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Training Industry Magazine - Content Development 2017 Special Edition
