Training Industry Magazine - May/June 2020 - 26

evidence that has been uncovered
over the years studying employee
engagement initiatives. At some point,
considering all the sophisticated
programs and resources that have
been leveraged to address the
challenge, we need to accept the fact
that there are those - regardless of
the organization's formal and active
commitment - who are highly unlikely
to ever fully engage at work.
Much the same with sustainment
efforts dedicated to building leaders, a
key piece of the puzzle is the learner's
receptivity to building skill as opposed
to simply acquiring knowledge. We
have all endured a class that we had to
take but did not value. When the formal
instruction was done - so were we.
Will learners who proactively commit
to thoughtful practice post-training
and intrinsically value the prospect
of improving their skill as a leader
provide evidence of a positive return
on the investment (ROI) in training?
They will. Will those who don't provide
similar evidence? Highly unlikely.
In fairness, it is important to keep the
inherent limitations of this project in
mind. First, and as we are all aware,
there is no objective measurement for
leadership. If you play chess, you either
win or you don't. When you dive into a
pool and swim, you either post your best
time or you don't. If you have increased
your ability to effectively respond to the

| 26

needs of your team during change, can
we now crown you a leader? It isn't that
easy, and it never will be.
Additionally, please do not lose sight
of this project's duration: eight weeks.
During that period, participants receiving
reinforcement formally invested:

the project. The two met three times a
week for an hour. During that period, Dr.
Ericson would recite random numbers,
and Steve would repeat them back from
memory. In their first session, Steve
maxed out at eight numbers. After
200 sessions, Steve could consistently
and accurately recite 82 numbers. Dr.
Ericsson had this to say about Steve:

Condition A: 60 minutes
*	 30 minutes for microlearning "Steve was a cross country runner that
liked to challenge himself. Everyone who
content refreshers
*	 30 minutes for two skills coaching knew him would tell you he trained as
hard as anyone... and that his motivation
sessions
was to improve his own performance,
Condition B: 30 minutes of microlearning not necessarily to win races.
Condition C: 30 minutes of coaching
If the period of analysis had been
extended would we have increased
evidence of further impact? We believe
the answer would be "yes."

CONCLUSIONS

The transfer of learning to behavior
change that produces results of
significance
requires
extended
opportunities for high-quality practice.
That quality is a function of many
things, but none is more important
than a dedicated learner. This reality
was never lost on Anders Ericsson. His
early work at Carnegie Mellon focused
on the impact of practice on improving
memory. A student by the name of
Steve Faloon signed up to participate in

From that point forward, I made it a
point to only recruit subjects that had
trained extensively as athletes, dancers,
musicians or singers. None of them ever
quit on me!"
Reinforcement matters, and it matters
most to learners who truly aspire to
develop their skills. In that regard, consider
the notion that leadership training should
be reserved for those who truly aspire to
be leaders, and that ROI analysis should
factor in a learner's intent to practice
before they ever have the opportunity to
participate in the event.
Sam Shriver, Ed.D., is the executive vice
president at The Center for Leadership
Studies and has over 35 years of direct
experience with Situational Leadership®,
executive coaching, human behavior and
leadership development. Email Sam.
Training Industry Magazine - May/June 2020

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Training Industry Magazine - May/June 2020
