INTRODUCTION: THE SIX Ds “Managed well, the learning function can become an indispensable, strategic partner with a significant impact on an organization’s goals.” —Davip VaNcE aes FACTS OF MODERN BUSINESS are irrefutable: (1) the pace of change is accelerating and (2) competition is ever more global and intense. In today’s environment, “the organization’s ability to learn faster (and possibly better) than the competition becomes its most sustainable competitive advantage” (de Geus, 2002, p. 157). This book is dedicated to our conviction that corporate learning initia- tives are vital, add real value, and help create competitive advantage. At the same time, we are convinced that such initiatives can and should add much greater value than they do today. The Six Disciplines describes a process and Principles for extracting greater returns from the investments organiza- tions make in learning and from the efforts of learning professionals, Learning happens all the time— at work and elsewhere, planned ———————__— and organically. Corporate taining — Learning can and should add departments exist to help ensure that even more value than it employees learn mission-critical skills does today. at the right time and place so that the —_—_————— organization achieves its objectives. Indeed, “the only reason learning functions exist is to drive business outcomes” (Smith, 2010, p. 10).The Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Learning Unfortunately, relatively few corporate learning functions achieve David Vance’s vision of “indispensable, strategic partner with a significant impact” (Vance, 2010). To the contrary, numerous studies suggest that training and development is not highly valued by business managers, A survey conducted by the Corporate Leadership Council of the Exec. utive Board, for example, found that “more than 30 percent of line managers believe that shutting down the L&D function would have no impact on employee performance” (Corporate Executive Board, 2009). Clearly, something is amiss between learning’s potential and its current perception. Fifteen years ago we started on @ quest to understand why most learn- ing initiatives fail to realize their full potential for strategic contribution, Our goal was to develop methods and tools that would allow them to do so. Since then we have worked with hundreds of organizations, large and small, in many industries around the world. We have been part of break through learning initiatives that delivered results of undeniable value and that helped propel their organizations to a higher level of performance, Unfortunately, we have also observed many well-intentioned training ini- and a commitment to continuous improvement. We distilled the practices that drive high-impact learning into six dis- ciplines, which we described in The Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Learning (Wick, Pollock, Jefferson, & Flanagan, 2006) and updated in a second edi- tion four years later (Wick, Pollock, & Jefferson, 2010). We chose a name that started with a “D” for each discipline to make them easier to remember and apply. They have subsequently become known as the 6Ds® (Figure 1.1), Many organizations throughout the world have adopted the Six Disciplines as the organizing principles for their taining and development efforts. The 6Ds have proven to be a powerful and enduring approach to defining, designing, delivering, and assessing corporate learning. This third edition of The Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Learning has been exten- sively revised to incorporate new insights, research, and best practices,Introduction: The Six Ds 3 FIGURE I.1. THE 6DS THAT TURN LEARNING INTO BUSINESS RESULTS SN A WORD ABOUT TERMINOLOGY We need to say a bit at this point about terminology. This book is about optimizing the planned learning that organizations, typically companies, provide for their employees. The 6Ds principles, however, also apply to not-for-profit enterprises and government agencies. For simplicity, we use the term “business,” “company,” or “corporate” to refer to the sponsoring organization and ask the reader to substitute another term if appropriate. A knowledgeable and com- petent workforce is essential for any organization, whether or not it is expected to produce a profit. Indeed, given the generally more limited resources of not-for-profit, organizations, their need for efficiency and effectiveness is even greater. We will often use the word “training” to refer to an intentional effort to teach people how to do something, since the term is still widely used and understood. Trying to replace every instance of “training” with “learning” would have created some awkward and potentially confusing prose. By “training” we mean purposeful efforts to teach people how to perform job roles in which the requisite skills are well understood—for example, sales, customer service, supervision, safe work practices, and so forth. Our use of “training” does not pre-suppose any particu- lar methodology or technology; we intend it to include the whole spectrum of purposeful learning—from e-learning to classrooms, structured to social, mobile to mentoring. Education, in contrast, we define as preparing people to deal with novel chal- lenges in which the best path forward is unknown (and often unknowable) in advance. ‘As such, education tends to focus much more on the application of principles and theories rather than specific skills. Development, as in “learning and development” or “training and development,” has a longitudinal aspect. That is, development entailsIs Training Necessary Any More? Based on interviews of successfull managers, Lombardo and Kichinger for- mulated the 70/20/10 model, according to which: “Lessons learned by Successful and effective managers are roughly © 70 percent from tough jobs * 20 percent from people (mostly the boss) * 10 percent from courses and reading” (Lombardo & Eichinger, 1996) itstill makes sense to invest in training atall, or to suggest that “only 10 per cent of learning and development’s budget, time, art resources should be (Rem on one-off learning sessions that equip employees with new skills” (Robertson, 2014). measured accurately across a whole career. Third, even if the percentages could be determined, they are likely to be misleading since they do not take into account the criticality of the Tearning. A small percentage does not necessarily mean unimportant orIntroduction: The Six Ds 5 Thus, 70/20/10 is a broad gen —————————___—. eralization, not a prescription for the Most learning takes place ideal ratio. That most learning takes outside of training initiatives. place outside of training initiatives — should come as a surprise to no one: it is where most people spend the vast majority of their time, Nor does 70/20/10 diminish the value of the right training at the right time for the right people. Even the original study noted that “formal coursework, how- ever, was sometimes included by executives as an event that made a signif. icant difference to them” (McCall, Lombardo, & Morrison, 1988, p. 180). The 70/20/10 ratio actually suggests that formal training is efficient; it sup- posedly contributes 10 percent to success, although the average employee spends about thirty hours a year in training—less than 2 percent of his or her time at work (ASTD, 2013). What the model does do is serve to remind workplace learning profes- sionals that people are learning all the time. Unless the training, coach- ing, culture, and performance management systems are all in alignment, corporate-sponsored learning initiatives are unlikely to have much effect. Case in Point 1.1 Training Is More Important Than Ever Vikram Bector is the chief talent officer for Reliance Industries, Ltd., the largest private sector Company in India. He has also served as chief talent officer for Tata Motors, where he helped establish the Tata Motors Academy, and as chief learning officer for Deloitte, India. “The need for training has never been greater,” Vikram told us, “especially in high-growth markets like India, China, and Brazil. Young managers are being buoyed along by the rapidly rising tide of growth. They are often promoted without adequate training or experience for their new roles. In many cases, they don’t know what they don’t know. That increases their risk of failure, which hurts their careers, the people who work for them, and the organization as a whole, “We are also seeing more and more young people coming into the workforce Who are not adequately prepared to succeed in business. Although they are often university-educated and tech-savvy, they are not industry-ready. Many lack the background knowledge, work habits, and social skills their employers need. Businesses and universities must work together more closely to ensure that graduates are ready for their first jobs and beyond. “It's not just the employees who aren’t ready; many businesses aren't either, They have not kept pace with the changing business climate and economy. Organizations need to look at changing the nature of work, re-create it, and remodel it to suit the needs and“The Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Learning assignments, mentorship, and the ability to learn, grow, and do different things. Too many Companies still create mundane and repetitive jobs and then are surprised when their best talent leaves. They need to understand that ‘great talent wants to work for great organiza- tions and clients,’ “The widespread use of technology and unlimited information available on the Internet i not an adequate substitute for training that teaches people how to lead, manage, satisfy Customers, and otherwise perform their jobs, For many jobs, we need to reinstitute more of an apprentice model in which younger employees are observed and mentored on the job by those who have already mastered the discipline. There ie really no substitute for such experience, “I don’t see the need for training decreasing. | am convinced that the most successful Gees ma. Mil be those who use training as a core element of their business strategy and Geliver the right training to the right people when they need it.” The importance of incidental learning notwithstanding, planned and Structured learning is still vital in organizations (see Case in Point 1.1). ° Consistency—making sure that all associates are taught the same approach and that these are consistent with company values and Policies as well as legal, regulatory, and safety requirements, ° Hffciency—done well, training groups of employees is more efficient than training each individually or letting them discover everything they need to know on their own. A planned program of learning can be especially important for making new employees productive quickly with company- and job-specific knowledge and skills, * Quality—knowledge of instructional design and access 10 subject matter experts enables workplace learning professionals to design higher quality and more effective interventions than relying solely onIntroduction: The Six Ds 7 * Awareness—people don’t know what they don’t know. So even if infor: mation is available, they may not know they need it. Salespeople need to learn new products; operators may be unaware of the dangers of certain actions; managers may need 360-degree feedback to help them identify blind spots. Companies invest in training. ——<——————__ and development to improve perfor we are in the business of mance (Figure 1.2) in areas key to facilitating improved their success and competitiveness. usinessresiiel The value of a taining department, — therefore, is determined by the effec- tiveness and efficiency with which it contributes to better performance, not the number of initiatives, kinds of training it provides, or technology it employs. Workplace learning professionals need to shift their focus from delivering training to delivering improved performance. Fred Harburg said it well: “We are not in the business of providing classes, learning tools, or even learning itself. We are in the business of facilitating improved business results” (Harburg, 2004, p. 21). Once workplace learning professionals accept that their mandate is to deliver performance improvement, rather than training per se, they FIGURE 1.2, THE PURPOSE OF TRAINING IS TO IMPROVE PERFORMANCE Effectiveness ——8 The Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Learning embrace a broader spectrum of methods, media, and approaches, which includes not training when the goal can be achieved mre effectively in other ways. When Is Trai jg the Answer? This book is about maximizing the value of performance improvement efforts that involve learning and development. That is not to say, however, that training is the only path to performance improvement or necessarily the best path. Indeed, the misuse of training as an improvement strategy wastes significant time, money, and effort and contributes to the relatively essary or appropriate solution. On-thejob performance is influenced by factors at three levels: the Worker, the work, and the workplace (Addison, Haig, & Kearney, 2009, P. 6). All three are themselves influenced by the political and business cli- mate (the world) in which the organization operates. The key elements of each level are given in Table 1.1. What this means is that job performance is always the result of the interaction between individual capabilities and environmental influences. any combination of levels. For example, a worker might have the necessary knowledge and skills to perform proficiently, but be thwarted by inefficient Processes (the work) or by counterproductive policies (the workplace). Training initiatives (planned learning interventions) are efforts to improve performance by enhancing individuals” capabilities. That assumes TABLE |.1. THE FOUR LEVELS OF FACTORS THAT IMPACT PERFORMANCE (AFTER VAN TIEM, MOSELEY, & DESSINGER, 2012, p. 6). The Worker Individuals’ knowledge and skills, capacity, motivation, and expectations The Work Work flow, processes, and procedures The Workplace Organization, resources, tools, culture, mission, and values The World Political and economic climate; societal values, norms, and cultureIntroduction: The Six Ds ° that the impediment to performance is at the individual worker level Training is an appropriate and potentially effective response if, and onl if, a lack of skills or knowledge is the root cause of the gap between actual and desired performance. As Table 1.1 illustrates, however, ——$—$>———>-___—_—__» there are many other systemic fac- job performance is the result tors that contribute (positively or neg- of interaction between atively) to performance. “We often individual capabilities and find that a project brought to us as environmental influences. a Worker/Individual Level problem, eee such as, ‘These people need train- ing,’ ‘as to be solved at the Workplace/ Organization Level” (Addison, Haig, & Kearney, 2009, p. 56). If the real issues are at the work or the work- place level, then trying to improve the worker is a waste of time and money and a source of frustration for all concerned. The problem is that many managers see training as the solution to every sort of performance challenge, even when the real issues lie elsewhere (Pollock, 2013) Learning professionals in our 6Ds. Workshops estimate that 20 to 50 percent of the training they do is doomed to failure because the real issue is not a lack of skills or knowledge among those being trained. Mager and Pipe (1997) suggested that the key question to. ask when trying to decide whether training is an appropriate response is: “If their lives depended on it, would they be able to perform adequately?” (Figure 1.3). If they can, then itis a problem of “Will 12,” not “Can I?” That's important to know because “If a genuine lack of skill is not the problem, then you can forget training as a potential solution” (Mager & Pipe, 1997, p. 93). FIGURE 1.3, THE KEY QUESTION IN DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT TRAINING WILL HELP IMPROVE PERFORMANCE Training will help close Skill ama knowledge gaps. RED FLAG! RS Training will not solve this. x SES SE COULD THEY perform if their lives Aepended on it? “Saw10 The Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Learning Whenever Mark Thompson, president and chief engagement officer of McKinley Solutions, is asked to provide a specific course, he says, “Sure, that could help.” But then he asks to meer over a cup of coffee to dis. The point is that the first and most important decision that needs to be made is whether or not training is an appropriate solution. If it is the Wrong solution, then it won’t work, no matter how well it is designed and executed. Use the flow chart (Exhibit 1.2) to help you identify the real issues. Ifa lack of skills or knowledge contributes to the performance gap, then use the 6Ds to design, deliver, and document the results of a planned learning intervention. If the real issue is in the environment, Processes, or performance management system, help management address the real issues and don’t waste resources on training (Jaenke, 2013). Learning and the Moment of Truth Regardless of how employees learn new skills—in a live class, virtually, through a simulation, on the Job from a co-worker or manager, or any number of other ways—that learning only adds value if it is applied appro- Priately at the “moment of truth.” The moment of truth occurs when an employee has the opportunity to apply the new knowledge and skill in the course of his or her work. Employees have two choices (Figure 1.4): com. mance won't improve, and the investment in learning was a waste of time and resources (see Learning Scrap below).Introduction: The Six Ds Exhibit 1.1 Flow Chart to Help Identify Appropriate Performance Is the performance issue real and worth fixing? €ould employees perform to standard if their lives depended ont? Forget training as a solution. Review the other root causes below. ‘Are employees clear about the Performance standards? Bo employees get clear feedback about their performance? Improvement Intervention Stop and address other issues, Would a really, good job aid be sufficient? Be sure there really isan issue and that the benefit of resolving itis worth the cost and time, Not all problems are as big as ‘they are perceived to be, ‘The citical question here is: Could the employees perform to standard if they truly had to? If they can, then forget training and figure out the real cause. Even when the root cause isa lack of knowledge of skil, training isn’t always necessary. In some cases, all people need is a good job aid, step-by-step Procedure, smart app, etc. Create, pilot, and deliver training + support, Create, test, and deploy job aid, Be sure expectations are clearly ‘communicated. Itmay be that people are not performing to expectations because the performance ‘expectations are nat clear or have net been clearly communicated oF reinforced. Be sure employees get unambiguous feedback. It may be managers, not employees, who need training. People need unambiguous feedback on their performance to perform well itmay be that employees haven't been told clearly what they are doing well and what must be improved,2 The Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Learning Are there rewards or recognition for Performing well? Be sure good work is, acknowledged to ‘maintain motivation, ie There need to be incentives for Performing well, These need not ‘be monetary; simple recognition of a job well done is motivating, for most pegple. Be sure substandard Performance has negative consequences. Are there negative consequences for substandard work? Wf poor quality 6r incomplete Work is tolerated, it will soon become the norm. if employees are not held accountable for using training, they probably won't, a Sj Meeieraauce: | | artemis resources needed they need. ae [Sere | | it Are the systems Re-engineer tree ae a or processes Processes to support bad system, and the system will cpemal? top performance bad ss, and th gst From Pollock, Jefferson, & Wick, 2014, used with permission, =| The problem is that doing something a new way, especially the first few times, requires more effort than persisting in the old way. It takes sus- tained effort to climb up the experience curve, which is why we have drawn the “new way” as a flight of stairs in Figure I Te ay may initially take longer and even produce inferior results until the person achieves proficiency. In contrast, the “ dictable. It has the force of gravity behind it; back into old habits. Indeed, habits are so Powerful that “unless you delib- routines—the [old] Pattern will erately /ighta habit—unless you find new unfold automatically” (Duhigg, 2012, p, 20). ‘old way” is easy and pre- no effort is needed to slideIntroduction: The Six Ds B Figure 1.4. THE “MOMENT OF TRUTH” (S WHEN AN EMPLOYEE DECIDES HOW TO PERFORM A TASK How shall | accomplish this task? Which path an employee chooses depends on the answers to two crit ical questions: “Can I do it the new way?” and “Will I make the effort?” (Figure 1.5). It makes no difference how much an employee learned or how the knowledge was obtained; unless he or she answers “Yes, I can” and “Yes, I will” at the moment of truth, the learning adds no value to the organization (Pollock & Jefferson, 2012). Corporate-sponsored learning needs to be conceived, designed, and delivered in the right way, at the right time, to the right audience, in a conducive work environment to ensure that both the “Can I?” and “Will [2” questions are answered in the affirmative (Figure I.6). Otherwise, the effort isa failure and the learning is just a pile of scrap. Figure I.5. WHICH PATH AN EMPLOYEE CHOOSES DEPENDS ON THE ANSWERS TO TWO QUESTIONS: “CAN I?” AND “WILL 1?”14 The Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Leaming Figure 1.6. EMPLOYEES MUST ANSWER “YES” To BOTH THE “CAN 12” AND “WILL 12” QUESTIONS FoR LEARNING TO ADD. VALUE ea Learning Scrap A product that fails to meet the customer’s expectations and that therefore must be discarded or reworked is manufacturing scrap. Scrap is costly in terms of the raw materials and labor wasted, as well as the damage that creating value (Table 1.2). As Deming (1986) famously pointed out: “Defects are not free. Somebody makes them, and gets paid for making them” (p. 11). No manufacturer nowadays can compete successfully against companies TABLE 1.2. COSTS OF MANUFACTURING SCRAP Tangible (Qut-of-Pocket Costs) Intangible Costs Materials Customer dissatisfaction Labor Damage to brand reputation Rework/recalls Opportunity costs Overhead Plant capitalIntroduction: The Six Ds is with more consistent quality and lower scrap costs. For these reasons, manufacturers have worked relentlessly to drive down the scrap rate by applying continuous-improvement methodologies. Many have achieved the goal of six sigma quality—less than one defect in 300,000 units. What does manufacturing scrap have to do with training and develop- ment? In the first edition of The Six Learning scrap is expensive. Disciplines, we coined the term “learn= |e —————— ing scrap” to refer to training that employees attend, but never use in a way that improves their perfor- mance (Wick, Pollock, Jefferson, & Flanagan, 2006). Unused learning is the training equivalent ofa defective product; it fails to meet the customers’ expectations—in this case, the business leaders’ expectations of improved performance. Learning scrap—like manufacturing scrap—is expensive. It puts a company at a competitive disadvantage. The costs are similar (Table 1.3). Learning scrap squanders the tangible costs of labor (of both trainers and trainees), travel, materials, technology, vendors, and so forth, as well as the opportunity costs of having people waste time in programs learning things they cannot or will not use. As with manufacturing scrap, learning scrap also incurs the cost of cus- tomer dissatisfaction. When managers, having invested their people’s time and departmental resources in some learning initiative, fail to see subse- quent improvement, they are dissatisfied. They conclude that the training failed and are therefore reluctant to invest again in the future. Altogether, companies waste billions of dollars producing learning scrap and probably several times that in lost opportunities. How much of training today is scrap? That indeed is the elephant in the room, TABLE 1.3. COSTS OF LEARNING SCRAP Tangible (Out-of-Pocket Costs) Intangible Costs Materials Customer dissatisfaction Labor Damage to brand reputation Retraining Opportunity costs Overhead Training facility capital16 ‘The Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Learning The Elephant in the Room That training often fails to improve performance has been recognized for decades. As far back as the 1950s, Mosel pointed to “mounting evidence that shows that very often the training makes little or no difference in development, not more than 10 percent of those expenditures actually result in transfer to the job... Researchers have similarly concluded that much of the training conducted in organizations fails to transfer to the work setting.” Has anything changed? To find out, we have asked thousands of work- place learning Professionals this question: After a typical corporate training program, what percent of Participants apply what they have learned well enough and long enough to improve their performance? Swartz, 2010). Of course, these are only estimates, Training professionals admit that their responses are simply a “best guess”; very few have actually measured how often training is transferred and produces improved performance. An ESI International study of learning transfer reported a similar obser. vation: 60 percent of more than 3,000 respondents admitted that the clmak patho’ for evaluating transfer was either anecdotal feedback or “simply a guess” (Haddad, 2012). Even the most widely cited figure—10 Percent—was also just an estimate (Georgenson, 1982), Although precise measures are often lacking, the strong percep) ———————_——____. tion among both business leaders The failure of training to and learning professionals is that improve performance is the most training efforts fail to deliver elephant in the room. improved performance. That explains _—_——