During a Recession Is Not the Time to Cut the Training Budget

By Abe WalkingBear

While some guys lose their heads when faced with a tough business environment others stay cool, survive and prosper.

Ok,Ok, the sky is falling so stop running around and instead use that energy and money to survive and to improve on how things are done and on how to prosper from the coming upturn...yes in time the sky will right itself.

Have you ever seen any business consultant's card that didn't claim that   they could lead you to the pot of gold buried under the employees' parking lot?   But here's where it gets funny...they can.

In a book he wrote in the early 60s...1960s not 1860s...Bucky Fuller  writes that humans adapt quickly to change and soon space out the past. Bucky didn't write this but I think that humans have limited RAM, and that many business managers are overloading the RAM they have ...so they stop thinking about things and fall into habits and patterns...no thinking required.  The name of the book? Spaceship Earth.

And to further muddy the water, humans don't operate at their highest  potential when stressed .

I'm tempted to start pointing out specific things a business should do during a hard economic time, but I've done that in other articles.  This article is about new training and new thinking.  The following is from an article I wrote during the last economic downturn.
 
A sales vice president of an international company had referred me to his region's CFO. He encouraged me to contact this woman and explain the scope of my consulting and training services.

After leaving three messages over a two week period, I got a call from the regional A/R Manager, the CFO's subordinate.  I started to explain what I do when the man cut me off.    "We just had the very prestigious firm from the U.K.,  Robem, Blind & Howe, do an evaluation of our business functions and with the exception of a few minor items, they validated our processes" .

On hearing the word "validation" the picture that comes to my mind is finding the right guy to stamp your parking ticket.  Or maybe, if you're lucky enough to still have her, calling your Mom for some kind words and reassurance.  But to pay a consultant to come in and pat you on the back, or wherever, and tell you you're doing good...never.

Candid Coaching

I have a great idea: What if there was a corporate coaching version of the old TV show Candid Camera, only instead of getting pranked, "candid" would refer to truthful, from-the-gut revelations about whatever it is the coach is coaching the coachee about? 

I've never had a coach (including sports-wise, since I enjoy the couch mainly), so this may be bitterness speaking, but I don't have faith in corporate coaching because I don't think coaches impart honest reflections of the job role they're coaching about. The technical skills usually are only a small part of the story in a job; the larger story is how to navigate the politics of the company's industry or that of the office the worker is based in. What business proposals are the best solution to a challenge the company's customers face, but can't be delivered due to the company's internal bureaucracy?  Let's say you get daily complaints about the search function on your Website, but you know your online division isn't capable of changing this functionality any time soon (i.e. any time less than five years), and that the wheels of this improvement project are in progress, but no progress is being made?  Or what if dropping a vendor partnership would help the company, but if that were done, other partnerships in the industry would suffer? 

In other words, there's a lot to say that has nothing to do with technically-speaking knowing what to do; the trouble is the coach may get into trouble for saying so. The coach and his experienced peers know truths valuable to less experienced workers, but these truths are tacit truths--nothing anyone feels comfortable putting into words in a business setting.

For that reason, my hope for corporate coaching rests with inter-corporate arrangements in which professionals sign up to a Website outside their company to link up with professionals in similar roles in other companies. If it's kept anonymous, this might be the answer to the honesty problem coaching faces. It'll entirely take care of the tacit industry truths a coach at your own company might not feel comfortable talking about, and it may even help with the office politics issue. These coaches most likely haven't worked at the coachee's office, but being in the same industry, and in the same job role, there's a good chance they've faced similar true-but-unspoken situations.

Another idea is to create a diary for each job role that's added to by out-going employees. The "diary" is then handed down to those incoming to those roles. Of course the HR department, and countless others, could potentially view this diary, so it wouldn't give the leeway for honesty an external, anonymous coaching relationship would provide, but some interesting tips might get passed down--like who to call, both inside the company and without, when you're really in trouble (nevermind the neat, organized contact sheet you were e-mailed on your first day).

However you approach coaching, consider the fact that a lot of essential, though uncomfortable, information isn't imparted. Do you have any solutions to this dilemma? Maybe coaches could be locked in the broom closet approximately 1 hour before the coach/coachee meeting and injected with Sodium Pentothal. Would that about cover the highs and lows of what you need to know?

So, what are you doing at your company so there's a greater chance coaches provide coachees with information that will truly help them better service customers, and progress in their careers?  Any helpful details that are probably getting left out?

Transitions with Seams

"Seamless transition" is the ideal in change management. Whether on a large or small scale, you don't want anyone you're servicing to notice there's been a change in behind-the-scenes operations. True at the organizational level, and, some would say, also true at the individual level. So when so-called "individual contributors" (i.e. employees stressed out enough already about their own assignments, nevermind anyone else's) morph into managers, there's a hope that business won't be interrupted, and maybe will even become more efficient.

Well, it's true customers or clients may not notice, or care, that the manager handling their business has changed, but it's hard for that fact to slip past the minds of employees working under the new departmental leader. Sometimes it's for the best--a sigh of relief that The Horrible One has gone. I once worked under a person who's departure I used to fantasize about. I dreamed of singing "Ding Dong the Witch is Gone" in celebration (had to change the "dead" lyric to "gone" because I didn't actually wish her bodily harm). Other times a manager nobody thought was all that great leaves to make way for an even worse manager; and once in a while a manager who wasn't that bad leaves, and an even better one arrives. In the case of my "Witch," the second scenario applies: she didn't go anywhere--she's now the boss at my old job! I would say she's the boss of my former colleagues, but in tribute to her leadership style, all those I worked with have fled.

Sadly, this scenario of the bad giving way for the worse is common, and I'm not sure any amount of manager transitioning will solve the problem. If you want smooth transitions, consider who you're promoting in the first place, or who you've been unknowingly giving a free ride in your organization. The Witch (maybe you've experienced something similar) was not known for her abilities among my peers. The manager who came before her thought she was spectacular, but if she had asked her staff--and had we felt at liberty to tell the truth--she would have known better.

For smooth managerial transitions, come up with a way to gauge the opinions of those working under the person you're considering promoting. The trick is finding a way to do it that makes underling employees feel safe enough to be honest. Interviews with HR or training reps that are guaranteed to be confidential is an option--if you can convince those you query that their thoughts truly will be kept under wraps. Another option is for those doing the promoting to stay in touch throughout the year with the employees who will be affected by the management change--in other words, for the decision-makers to know the individuals who work under the managers they oversee. If you spend enough informal time with these employees, sooner or later you'll get a sense for how they truly feel about their boss.

Then, of course, there's the "whoops, my bad" option of helping those who promoted the person to take back their mistake. At the very least, six months after the promotion, check in--however you can--with the new manager's subordinates to see how it's going. Be sure to offer confidentiality if you're tracking these feelings in a formal interview. If you're doing it informally, learn how to read the subtle signs of interpersonal dissatisfaction. For the sake of self-preservation, they probably won't tell you just what a Mount Everest of loathing they've amassed for their new manager, but they probably won't be too enthusiastic to say anything positive, either. If the decision-makers, or at least the HR and training team, have kept in touch with these workers, maybe you'll notice they're a little more beleaguered or pathetic looking than usual (some people, granted, always have a somewhat pathetic look, so that alone may be nothing new; the key is if it's worse than usual).

Sometimes it's not your training, but the people you've chosen to school. They just may not have the potential you thought they had. Their greatest talent may have been no more impressive than the ability to kiss up to the promotion decision-maker. It's not laudable, but at least these "go-getters" know how to get where they want to go--even if they don't do much when they get there.

Do you find the smoothness of your managerial transitions depends mostly on the quality of the people you've promoted?  Or is the training you provide enough to overcome the inadequacies they hid well enough to get there in the first place?

Second Life roundtable / corporate training

It’s hard to believe, but Second Life is officially turning five years old.  Linden Labs (the company behind the Second Life) is celebrating the anniversary with a series of expositions, discussions, conferences and other events.  The whole week, starting June 30, will be devoted exclusively to business uses of Second Life.  I was asked to run a round-table discussion "Starting Corporate Training Program in Second Life: Best Practices, Security Concerns and Future Developments".  We already have a list of respected panelists that includes folks from the industry who implemented Second Life solutions in training and marketing, analysts with well-known technology and market research company, business liaisons from Linden Lab and others. 

Given that you are reading this blog I think it would be inconceivable to miss this opportunity to gather more valuable information in one hour then you otherwise  would be researching for years.  And the best part:  you will be getting information directly from the people who has been involved in business implementations of Second Life solutions. 

Tentatively, we set up round table for Monday, June 30th at 9 AM Pacific / 12 noon Eastern.

Please, e-mail me at info1 @ deltaltraining.com if you would like to attend.

Right now we are researching possibility of streaming video+audio from Second Life using GoToMeeting for those who would like to be present, but their corporate network prevents them from connecting to SL directly.  If this works out, the number of people who will be able to connect using GoToMeeting will be limited to 15, "first come/first served, single computer connection from a company," so if your firewall "filters out" Second Life, but allows GoToMeeting connections, you might want to register asap.

C-Suite Ceiling

This past weekend, the quote that kept coming up about Hillary Clinton's defeat was though she didn't shatter the "glass ceiling" of the Oval Office, she cracked it pretty badly. You'd think, along with Barack Obama's success at winning his party's nomination as the first African-American presidential nominee, we would all feel better about opportunities for women and minorities to make it into the top echelons of corporate America. I'm not so sure how optimistic we should be about these gains transferring to the business world.

For one thing, unlike our government, corporations have no obligation to be democratic. If employees at every company in the world were required to vote for their CEO and other high-level executives, chances are we'd see more women and minorities at the top. But with a small band of decision-makers controlling who rises as corporate leaders, I think widespread change is a long time coming--or at least a decade behind our political system. Voting for CEO isn't always--if ever--a good idea, I bet many of you would argue, and I think I'd agree, but what else can you do to change the typical face of your executive suite?

The first step is figuring out if you have a problem. Women and minorities still lag behind white men in corporate America, so statistically there is less of a chance one of them will rise to the highest ranks. Let's say your company is just 10 years old, for instance, and you're in an industry not typically dominated by women and minorities--a Wall Street financial institution maybe--is something wrong if there are no women in the handful of executives running the show?  Now, what about a 20-year-old grocery store chain or paint manufacturer, and you've never had a woman as CEO or high-level executive. Do you have a problem?  The point I'm making is you have to create benchmarks particular to your own company on what progress is when it comes encouraging women and minorities into high-level job roles. Statistics on the frequency of women and minorities as CEO, COO, and CFO that look across industries aren't always relevant--or even helpful--to figuring out your company's own situation.

So, the first step is putting together a panel at your company to discuss whether the people at your top ranks are representative of employees at the company, and, more importantly, the customers you serve. If your executive suite is dominated by white men, but so is the industry and customer base you service, then at least determine whether the few women beginning to join your company are given the same opportunity to rise. What's the career trajectory of these individuals been like compared to that of other employees?  Do they seem to stagnate in entry and mid-level positions only to leave the company a few years later in frustration?  Any obvious red flags like that?  Also beware of more subtle red flags like exclusion from after-hours gatherings with colleagues. It may be that they're given promotions as fast as any other employee, but are hampered in their progress to the top by exclusion from the "old boy's club"--they just don't have the benefit of networking.

So, you have tons of female and African-American friends, and so do all of your colleagues, so your company couldn't possibly have a problem, you think to yourself, feeling content. You're probably not a racist (at least not a bad one) and most likely neither are (most) of the decision-makers at the top of your company. But it's like that old saying, "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem."  Maybe your organization's laziness about seeking out mentors for women and minorities, and other targeted development opportunities, is a form of prejudice by default. Is there such a thing as passivity as prejudice?  As one of the world's great lazy people, I hope there isn't--or else I'm in trouble, too.

What's the story at your organization when it comes to propelling females and minorities into the c-suite? Does it come down to random chance, or are you making a concerted effort?

New Hire Orientation in Second Life

Last month I was privileged to be a part of a VBusiness Expo panel on corporate training and, along the way, came across several interesting ideas that I wanted to share with you. 

One of the presenters was Scott Randall attacking issues of trying to get specific messages through to your employees (especially those under the age of 35 - Gen Y) in an age of information overload.  His solution - to put it briefly - is to use "semiotic domains", that is "any set of practices that recruits one or more modalities (oral or written language, images, symbols, equations, sounds, gestures, etc.) to communicate distinctive types of meanings."  As one of those domains Scott emphasizes virtual worlds that acknowledge the audience’s learning orientation, engages them on an emotional level and speaks their language. 

There is much to say about virtual worlds in general and, as you know, I am not impartial in this regard.  The reason I became so interested in this presentation is that among other things it dealt with new hires and Gen Y peculiarities.  This is the subject of
Robotic Instructors in New Hire Orientation and Onboarding simulation
we just competed. 

Robotic Instructors are avatars that are operated by a computer program.  They log in Second Life on demand, provide a guided tour or lesson(s) for trainees and log out after the session is completed.  Robotic Instructors can ask trainee to repeat specific steps and provide a feedback.  Importantly, the simulation is completely controlled through a graphic web interface.  Non-programmers, such as instructional designers or training specialists, can modify an existing simulation or even create a new one without a single line of code.  Simulation is located outside Second Life network and thus provides high security for the enterprise applications. 

Gartner predicted that 80 percent of internet users will have a "Second Life" in the Virtual World by the end of 2011, but cautioned enterprise to take "baby steps" -- experiment with virtual worlds, but not start massive projects.  Robotic Instructors simulation ideally answers this recommendation.  With a minimal starting investment and strong opportunity for growth, incredible flexibility and enterprise-level security it might be a good way to test virtual world simulations.