Wow, two posts in one day. Someone today reminded me of my belief structure, my philosophical compass, my gut. It struck me and energized me to be me for the first time in about a month or so!
I was reminded, while trying to contemplate what the heck this business does or looks like in the near future – it must remain true to guiding principles
My curriculum development and design can be summed up in a phrase – white space.
I have clients. Those clients matter to me. What they want and need is the cornerstone to what I believe in business – build the relationship first, do the right thing and reward will follow. Identifying a client’s interests and what they feel is the best course of action to accomplish their business opportunity from a learning and development perspective and then delivering that is what I do for a living. I am a student and teacher of how people learn best then turn that learning into doing.
I have spent the last 23 years training all sorts of people in several industries, although to be fair, primarily retail. In that time, I have been acutely aware of how people learn; more so, in the past two years. I have been extensively researching this current generation coming into the work place and what engages them. Enough of setting the stage; what is “white space”? Fair enough.
I believe people learn best when they have to think for themselves. Go figure. “White Space” represents the idea, that any learning and development program I create has less content and more space to write notes. My research is based on a study where it was stated which is better, setting up the learner to win, eliminate the possibility of failure or the opposite? It is in failure and not being given the answer outright that we not only strive for the answer but ultimately own both answer and outcome. The responsibility of the learning, according to me, has got to exist in the learner. Many organizations have a belief the accountability lies with the facilitator. The “trainer” has to deliver the content, own every act in the learning and must follow an intentional recipe to accomplish a goal or objective. While I agree there must be an overall understanding of topic and end-result, I vehemently disagree with a pre-dispositional approach to learning for two big reasons. One, it suggests the learner doesn’t have the ability (or opportunity) to have to come up with their own realization – only a manufactured one. And it also goes against the grain of what learning is: improvisational and experiential.
Here is the catalyst for my belief: Training Trainers. One of my previous employers, a retail training and consulting company, threw the book at me and said – deliver this tomorrow. No notes, no guide, just the message. Figure it out. I am not saying this was the best method for learning how to train a topic, but I will say it forced me to figure it out very quickly. Did I make mistakes? Yep. Did I do things differently as a result of “biffing it” a couple of times? Yep. Am I the trainer today because of it? Yep. No facilitation guide, just a context, an audience and desired outcome. The facilitator must find that out on their own. Have you ever been to a training session and realized the facilitator did not really own the material or have a sense of the true relevance of how the information met the needs of the audience?
More importantly and to the credit of another, I did the T3 (train-the-trainer) with a trainer in 2009. I did give him some notes when we exchanged facilitation from me to him. How did he learn? It wasn’t the guide! It was being there and hearing the delivery. It was not being given the answer but having to come up with his own method and cadence. He had to think on his feet and feel how good or bad the thing went in the program. He had to make his own path through the delivery. He had to find his own way out of the forest. There were three ways and he picked the one that was best suited for the situation, not the one dictated by the Michelin guide. Result, I would put him in front of any group in the world and watch him kick butt. He had to come up with his own way, his own answers on the best way to accomplish “x”. “White space” allows for that. It doesn’t matter whether it is training trainers or working with your team, let them come to the answers and their own conclusions.
”White space” scares the hell out of people. For them (most commonly administrators), the formula must exist. Formulas are safe. Now to be fair, their objective is to ensure nothing keeps the organization from delivering a meaningful program. If the author cannot be present, we have to have a plan B. I get that. It’s just when they have to ask “where’s the formula”, followed by my response “there is none” and then the next most common response, “I don’t get it”. Excuse me and with all due respect, I don’t think that is the focus. What they do not get is that the formula is not in place for a reason. Learning or “getting” it in a way which matter most happens is when the words become thought or activity or debate or discussion and lives in a state of belief, not words.
I am not patting myself on the back for this concept. I am not the best thing since sliced bread. I love what I do with a passion and therefore have a very specific philosophy on what I feel works best. I stand firm in my belief the best learning occurs in the learner, when they figure their “it” out. My intent and mindset is mine. It comes from my 47-year-old filter. Believe it or not, “white space” or scripted content, which one would you be challenged to learn based on your own abilities? Life is unscripted.
How much “white space” do you allow in your life?