So you’re thinking of adopting lean manufacturing at your workplace, huh? But what will you tell employees and managers? How will you explain lean to them? In this article, we’ve got some ideas, suggestions, and tools for you to use. We think these can help you introduce lean to rank and file employees and managers. Then you can go on to get into these ideas in more detail and to introduce more ideas over time. But that doesn’t mean we’ve got the perfect list. So if you’ve been through this before, feel free to share your own ideas and thoughts. That’s what the comments section is for at the bottom of this article. You’ll also notice we included the names and links to a few classic lean books. Again, feel free to recommend some of your own faves in the comments section. Convergence Training is a training solutions provider for manufacturers. We offer a many libraries of e-learning courses, several learning management systems (LMSs), custom training solutions, and more. Contact us for more details. You may also want to download our free Guide to Effective Manufacturing Training while you’re here. So You’re Going Lean… Let’s say you’ve heard about lean. You’ve read about it and you’ve studied it, and you’re excited by it. Even better, you’d like to introduce it at your workplace. But how and where do you start? What are the things to mention on the first day, or the first few days? (Of course, there are many excellent books that walk you through the whole process, which is beyond our scope in this article, but we’ll share a few beginning ideas.) Here’s what we’re going to cover: What is lean? What is value? What is waste? (We’ll introduce muda, mura, and muri, and then focus on muda) Eliminating waste The "original" seven wastes Other forms of wastes The first steps of implementing lean 5S Job standardization Kaizen So let’s do it, huh? What Is Lean? Lean is a method for making a manufacturing process more efficient. That process of "making a manufacturing process more efficient" is performed by identifying and focusing on value creation and getting rid of stuff that doesn’t contribute to value creation. So What Is Value? Value is determined by your customers. If they’d be willing to pay for a process or action so that it’s part of the good or service they’re buying, it’s contributing value. If they wouldn’t be willing to pay for it, it doesn’t contribute value. And Then What Is Waste? Waste is anything you’re doing that doesn’t create or increase value. (Remember, that’s value as determined by your customers and their willingness to pay for it.) Reducing and/or Eliminating Waste Once you’ve identified value, you can begin to identify, reduce, and eliminate the waste that doesn’t contribute to value. And that’s what makes you more efficient. Click the arrow button below to review what you just learned and then quiz yourself. Three Types of Wastes: Muda, Mura, and Muri Lean thinkers have broken the idea of "waste" down into three general categories, each known by a Japanese word beginning with the prefix mu-: Muda: Something that doesn’t add value to a process. Mura: Unevenness in an operation. Muri: Overburden, unreasonable conditions. Let’s look at each more closely. Muda This is the "classic" sense of waste that we’ve discussed throughout this article-anything in a process that doesn’t contribute value. Muda can be broken down into two more categories: Muda type 1: Doesn’t add value as determined by the customer but is still necessary and therefore can’t be eliminated now. Muda type 2: Doesn’t add value as determined by customer, is not necessary, and can be eliminated now. As you probably guessed, lean efficiency efforts focus by definition on muda type 2. Mura Mura means unevenness or inconsistency. An example would be having a production line in which materials "pile up" at one production stage, creating an inventory of unused materials. Muri Muri means overburden or unreasonableness. An example would be a machine or worker that’s overworked. The Relation: Muda, Mura, and Muri Muda, mura, and muri are three different concepts. Yet, they’re related, and eliminating one can help you eliminate the others. Click the arrow below to review what you learned and then quiz yourself on muda, mura, and muri. So now you know there are three general types of waste. We’ll focus on muda (which, as you probably remember, is something you’re doing that doesn’t add value) for the rest of this article. But don’t lose sight of the other two, and maybe we’ll write more about them in the future. The "Original" Seven Wastes (Seven Muda) Seven types of waste (muda) were originally identified by Toyota’s Chief Engineer, Taiichi Ohno, as part of the Toyota Production System (TPS). They were also reprinted in the classic book Lean Thinking by James Womack and Daniel Jones. That book is a recommended read and it’s where I’ve taken the list from. The "original" seven wastes are: Excess Transport: Excess movement of the work in process, which wastes time and other resources. Excess Inventory: Excess inventory is a waste of cash and space. It requirements management and can become obsolete over time. Excess Motion: When people have to spend more time walking from place to place for their job, or looking around for things in a messy environment. Waiting: Time is money, and sitting around waiting is wasted time/money. Waiting can be caused by many things, including breakdowns, production bottlenecks, shortages of supplies, materials, and parts, poorly conceived processes without good "flow," slow or absent workers, and more. Over Production: Creating more than demand. This is commonly considered the worst kind of waste, because it creates other forms of waste too. For example, if you produce too much, you’ve then got to use transport to move it to storage and use space to store it, plus it represents cash used to create it that you can’t use for other purposes. Over Processing: Work that’s part of your process but that adds no value as determined by your customers. Defects: Defective goods and/or rejects are a waste of time, money, and supplies. If you take the first letter of each of these wastes, you’ll get the acronym TIMWOOD, which may make it easier to remember. Click the arrow button below to review what you learned and then quiz yourself on the original seven wastes. Additional Forms of Waste As you’d imagine, since the original seven types of waste were listed, people have come up with others. These include: Products that don’t meet customer demands or specifications Unused human talent Wasted space Working with no metrics or to the wrong metrics Not allowing workers to contribute ideas and suggestions and be part of "participative management" Improper use of computers (wrong/poor software; poor or lack of training; time wasted "surfing," etc.) Maybe you can think of more examples of waste? What are some of your own ideas-write them below in the comments section! The First Steps of Getting Lean, Removing Waste, and Increasing Value One simple way to introduce lean to the workplace is begin with three aspects and build from there. (Remember, if you have tips of your own for this, please leave them below in the comments section, we welcome them.) Those aspects are: 5S Job standardization Kaizen Let’s look at each in more detail. 5S It’s very common for companies just implementing lean to begin with 5S. 5S is a method for making a workplace more organized and efficient. Having a more organized, efficient workplace allows a company to increase value, decrease waste, and be more efficient. It also improves safety, which is a great bonus. 5S is a five-step process. Each step was originally named with a Japanese word beginning with the letter "S." The English translations also begin with the letter "S," conveniently. We’ve got the steps explained for you below. Step 1: Sort (Seiri) The first phase of 5S is to sort. Sorting means taking stuff from the workplace if it’s not needed for your work processes. You can put that stuff in long-term storage, or maybe you’ll dispose of it. Red-tagging is a process to help you sort. You just go around the work area and put a red tag on everything that’s unnecessary. Then, collect everything with a red tag on it, put all red-tagged items in a central holding area, and move each red-tagged item from the central holding area to an appropriate location (storage, trash, etc.). Step 2: Straighten (Seiton)-Also Known as Set in Order After everything that’s unnecessary has been removed, you should organize everything that’s left so it’s all in the best possible location. This means putting things where they’re easy to access when they’re needed and so that their location helps to increase efficiency and decrease waste. While sorting, consider marking areas with tape or paint so it’s obvious what goes where. This is part of what’s known as the visual workplace, which is a very important concept in lean. Want more information about visual workplaces and visual communication? Check the book The Visual Factory by Michael Grief. Below is a short sample from the 5S e-learning course by Convergence Training. It explains the second S-straighten-and demonstrates putting things in their place and using visual communication to mark their place. Step 3: Shine (Seiso)-Also Known as Sweep or Sanitize Once you’ve sorted and straightened, then clean up the workplace. That’s what "shine" means. Step 4: Standardize (Seiketsu) So now you’ve sorted, straightened, and shined. The workplace is looking good and you’re seeing more efficiency already. But don’t stop now.  It’s time to standardize to make sure things stay this way. This means developing best practices to keep things as you’ve got them now and creating consistent procedures for performing jobs efficiently. To do this, include sort, straighten, and shine in people’s job responsibilities so they’ll be done consistently. Remember, if you don’t do this, things will return to "same old" quickly enough, and your gains will be lost. Step 5: Sustain (Shitsuke) The final element of 5S is to sustain. That means to keep it going. Change isn’t easy, and if you don’t keep feeding the lean fire, things will break down. A great way to keep it going is to continue talking about it and make sure all employees feel involved. Welcome their feedback and insights. Signs, posters, meetings, and other methods of communication can also help keep the 5S method and practices fresh and make sure things don’t spiral out of hand again. And it’s important that management continue emphasizing their commitment to lean. Employees will notice this and act accordingly. It’s not easy to change a company’s culture. Keep beating the lean drum. 5S Review Click the arrow button below to review what you learned and quiz yourself on 5S. Job Standardization Job standardization is the process of developing the single best way for a worker to perform each job task, documenting that method, teaching workers to perform the task that way, and then making sure that’s really how employees do perform the task. Managers and the employees who perform the task as part of their job should develop the standard method for doing the task together. Managers shouldn’t dictate this, as employees typically know the task better than managers do. You may find this book on the Training Within Industry (TWI) "Job Instruction" article of interest if you want to explore this topic further. Kaizen Kaizen means something like "change for the better." (For more information, read our longer articles on kaizen and kaizen events). Lean manufacturing depends on kaizen so that the company is always trying to improve, be better, create more value, and eliminate more waste. The goal of kaizen isn’t to make a single big change with drastic results. Instead, it’s to create a never-ending series of small changes, each of which leads to small improvements. The total effect of all those small changes, however, is a large improvement. Kaizen flips the traditional pattern of "change from above" upside-down. In kaizen, employees are given the power to make suggestions. In fact, one of management’s key roles in a kaizen culture is to train workers about kaizen and to encourage workers to make suggestions for continuous improvement. Once workers understand their role in kaizen and get used to doing it, they’ll become more active, engaged workers. As a result, the process of continuous improvement will begin moving forward, little bit by little bit. When employees see their suggestions implemented, and see the improvements that result over time, they’ll get even more excited and will become even more active participants in the kaizen culture at your workplace. Soon you’ll have a runaway snowball of kaizen! Kaizen will help you create a continuous self-improvement cycle-lather, rinse, repeat. If you’d like to explore this topic more, you may enjoy this article on kaizen and/or this article on the related-yet-different concept of kaizen events. Kaizen and Standardization: Standardization, Modification, Evaluation, New Standard But wait. You may be wondering if job standardization and kaizen aren’t direct contradictions. That’s a good question, if you were. But actually, the lean idea of kaizen is closely linked with the idea of standard work. In lean, it’s considered important to have work done in a standard way, as we mentioned. But that doesn’t mean the standard way to do work can never change. If a worker comes up with an idea to make word more efficient (by increasing value and/or decreasing waste), the change is put into effect. Then the change is monitored and the results of the change are measured. Those measurements are compared to earlier measurements of the same work process before the change occurred. If the change truly did increase value, it’s kept and a new standard is created. If the change didn’t increase value, it’s scrapped, and the company returns to the old method and/or looks for a new way to modify the process. This process continues as long as the company does. Click the arrow button below to review what you learned about 5S, job standardization, and kaizen and then quiz yourself.   Conclusion: What Else Should You Tell Employees about Lean? So what do you think? How did we do? Did we include the "right" stuff for introducing lean to your workers? If not, what might you add, what might you remove, or what might you change? And what stories can you tell us based on your personal experience of implementing lean at real workplaces? What worked well? What didn’t? Where were the big challenges and sources of opposition? Where were your big victories and successes? Thanks for reading. We look forward to reading your comments.     The post What Is Lean? Introducing Employees to Lean Manufacturing appeared first on Convergence Training Blog.

A Harvard Business Review article "What’s Lost When Experts Retire" reminded me about the dire need to rethink our roles as learning professionals and leaders: My sense is that our current of definitions and understanding of expertise may be at odds and stacked against helping novices to become experts.  These are some ideas I have pondered on. I continue to plow the literature on expertise and find it most exhilarating and inspiring. Gladwell’s 10,000 Hours to be an Expert - No Short CutsIn Outliers, author Malcolm Gladwell writes that it takes 10,000 hours to achieve mastery. His study reported cases on how mastery requires practice and dedication. Furthermore, Gladwell discovered that no "naturally gifted" performers emerged as experts. So there are no short cuts.  I subscribe to Gladwell’s conclusions that mastery requires thousands of hours. However, this outlook is the far-end spectrum of what expertise is. If we look at expertise as an final end result of capability and mastery, then we may be stuck. Experts are rare and hard to find and expensive to recruit and retain in organizations. How Developers Stop Learning: Rise of the Expert BeginnerErik Dietrich, a software architect has studied programmers and he observed the phenomenon of the "Beginner-Expert." In How Developers Stop Learning: Rise of the Expert Beginner software developers are in high demand and the rapid phase of movement in organizations creates the new type of "Beginner-Expert." These are perceived experts in very narrow skill areas who appear to have earned the reputation of being "experts."  However, they have only been a few years on the job and have not advanced in their proficiency levels, yet, have entrenched themselves in silos of expertise areas. Dietrich believes this presents a problem because it leads to some form of incompetence, referred to in Dreyfus model of skill acquisition.  I shall continue to digest Dietrich’s observations and reports. What is interesting to me is to review Dreyfus’ model of skill acquisition. The model is a stage or linear growth model of competency. The novice is "rule-based" and "have no exercise of discretionary judgement" while the expert "transcends reliance on rules and guidelines."                                                         The Dreyfus ModelThe Dreyfus model is a good foundational model. It is a static way to capture competency. When compared to today’s rapid phase of change and technologically abundant environments, the model could lead to a restrictive understanding  about how we can leverage the knowledge of novices, advanced beginners and those who may not be experts, as defined by Dreyfus. My view is that there must be a way for organizations to further cultivate and maximize the knowledge of novices and experts alike.  See more.Periodic Table of ExpertiseHarry Collins and Rob Evans from Cardiff University espouse "Interactional Expertise." Collins and Evans’ "Periodic Table of Expertise" Essentially, as an oversimplified explanation, the Periodic Table of Expertise shows:  • Dispositions - expertise comes from constant self-reflection and assessments of one’s      scientific findings and discoveries. Experts persistently subject their thinking to      those of others, hence, the need for interaction with other experts and further      scientific discoveries.  • Ubiquitous Tacit Knowledge - is expertise knowledge derived from simplified      understanding, narrow meanings and access to the primary source of the knowledge.   • Specialist Tacit Knowledge - is expertise that is developed through rigor and depth of     understanding of scientific findings with the capacity to present contradictions and     limitations of expert knowledge.   • Meta-Expertises - suggest the different roles of experts  • Meta-Criteria - suggests the ways expertise is developed and qualified   The model suggests that the value of expertise may occur at different levels depending on one’s current competencies. It allows a far broader consideration of the different values of knowledge and contributions. What drew my attention is the idea that different ways people developed expertise is a product of how much they contribute and interact with others and allow modifications and refinements of individual expertise. Critically, it requires that we must always know the limits and contradictions of our own expertise and the ability to clearly articulate these limits.  I understand this to mean, that we all have some level of expertise knowledge. However, we have to constantly test it and subject it to other unknowns.  In so doing, the value of our contributions are applied by others with the accompanying unknowns.  A good illustration would be this. Many bloggers or reporters of knowledge oversimplify, underestimate and only represent one side of a viewpoint or a scientific finding. They fail to inform their audience about the limits and unknowns.  Collins and Evans propose this in their book: See the PDF draft of the book. Expertise Based on "What We Know and Can Do Now" - a Contributions Approach  I propose that expertise is not a destination, but rather a momentary state of our value and ability to contribute. By keeping this thought, we may have an opportunity to train and assist learners and workers to look into their current competencies and knowledge while reflecting  on how they may add further value. We can also call this the Contributor-Expert" or "Inverted Expertise Model." What is paramount is that we as learners  must constantly subject our knowledge to the unknowns and limitations so the recipients of such knowledge may be aware of both the value and the limitations. I will continue to study, reflect and report to you my progress. Until then, let me know what you think. A contributions approach has many advantages and will likely reinforce what efforts we invest in training and learning.   These are a few of the ideas to consider.   • Learners can think of themselves as immediate contributors and add value  • Opportunities allow them to have self confidence  • They think about immediate applications of what they know because they are      expected to contribute  • Learning is accelerated because they practice, show, preach and share what they know      now  • Learners must subject their knowledge to limits and unknowns. References"What’s Lost When Experts Retire", Dorothy Leonard, Walter Swap.Gavin Barton-Harvard Business Review (December 02, 2014)Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell (June 7, 2011)How Developers Stop Learning: Rise of the Expert Beginner, Erik Dietrich ( 2013)Periodic Table of Expertises,  Harry Collins and Robert Evans (March 6,2013)Dreyfus Model for Skill AcquisitionRay Jimenez, PhDVignettes Learning"Helping Learners Learn Their Way"Ray Jimenez, PhD Vignettes Learning Learn more about story and experience-based eLearning

  Have you experienced turbulence during your most recent air travel? Or when was the last time you drove into a city street where the speed bumps were so horrendous you had to have your car in full stop to avoid damage to it? This is how it feels like psychologically, when your learners have to take a memory test or knowledge check. It is jarring. It is utterly annoying. Most of all, it often does not help in learning. What Stops Frictionless LearningMost designers and learning specialists would agree that we are seeing the need for more "frictionless" learning - unimpeded and fast learning and access to knowledge and information. Learners are learning while going through their workflow and yet, are constantly in search mode. So, the closer we bring the learning to application, the better the ideas are immediately applied. What stops "frictionless" learning experiences are checkpoints or control points we call "tests." The goal of testing is to help learners learn and ascertain their retention and application of ideas. This is well and good. However, we see more complaints from learners that tests are mere "CYA" actions in compliance courses and "just-to-make-sure-you-covered" the content type of tests. In these situations the tests become hazards to better learning. Differentiate Administrative Control Tests from Learning Tests  Many courses and elearning are designed to show proof of compliance. Usually, they protect the interests of the company in the event there are legal challenges and certain evidences are required by the courts. In this case, we need to call these tests "administrative controls." It is best not to confuse these tests with learning tests, where learners go to through questions to apply ideas. The dangers of not differentiating administrative types of tests from learning tests is that we may make the mistake of swapping them or regarding them as one and the same. The risk is that while we do our best to train people, our tests sabotage their "frictionless" experience.Setting up Design for Unobtrusive Tests with Real-Life EventsA premise to make tests unobtrusive is to add real-life events as examples and references in your lessons. These are anchors that learners can relate to. Content devoid of real-life illustrations, ends up as mere factual information. This is what memorization tests deal with - just  factual content. Without real-life events, our tests will end up being just about memorizing facts. Examples of Unobtrusive TestsTests become unobtrusive when they are relevant, useful, based on real life and applicable to the learners’ work. In short, it helps them understand the content in real-life context. Let us say that the content is about ethics in purchasing:  "When John arrived home he was greeted with a huge package which contained expensive gifts. Upon checking the card, it was obvious to him that Peter, his favorite vendor, sent the gifts. John has seen his bosses accept gifts even if a policy exists to the contrary."If you were John, how would you respond?Application Question: "What should John do?"Reflection Question: "Should John return or accept the gift? What are the risks?"Interpretation Question: "What parts of the policy allows accepting gifts and what aspects prohibit accepting gifts?"Interactive Question: "Should John go and check his personal liability and that of the company in relation to this policy?"Process Question: "At what point should John call the attention of his boss and report about the gifts?"Problem-solving Question: "What should John do if Peter insists that he should keep the gifts?" Unobtrusive tests are found in many elearning courses. They are like speed bumps or turbulences. But we have plenty of opportunities to remove these stumbling blocks.   ReferencesRemove the Sting of Compliance Courses: Make Them Short, Succinct, Easy to Learn Weaving Stories and Factual Content for Seamless Lessons Kill Boring eLearning with Story-Based LessonsRay Jimenez, PhDVignettes Learning"Helping Learners Learn Their Way"Ray Jimenez, PhD Vignettes Learning Learn more about story and experience-based eLearning

Send us your favorite leadership quote and receive a free Driving Forces assessment. Email your answers to pm@russellmartin.com  "You are not here merely to make a living. You are here to enable the world to live more amply, with greater vision, and with a finer spirit of hope and achievement. You are here to enrich the world. You impoverish yourself if you forget this errand." -Woodrow Wilson

 We are required to influence 360 degrees in all organizations to be successful. But how can you collaborate with so many different people at the same time? Barry Oshry wrote a fascinating book called Seeing Systems. In his book, he shows us the personal bias that dominates our thinking in large organizations. We unconsciously adopt blindness to accepted 'systems'- whether you are an executive, middle manager or individual contributor, you get acclimated to the destructible dance of your level. This bothered me at first, since we all want to think we make unique decisions and have unique perspectives. Since, I met Barry years ago, I have found what he shares to be true and notice it often in our consulting and training work. In this overview article of Barry's work, you can see that the diagram has four types of conditions based on an individual's role: Top, Middle, Bottom and Customer. Continuing with the descriptions from the article: We are Top when we have designated responsibility (accountability) for some piece of the action whether it’s the whole organization, a division within it, a department, a project team, or a classroom. "The Developer" We are Bottom when we are experiencing problems with our condition and/or with the condition of the system, problems that we think higher ups ought to be taking care of but are not. We can be Bottom at any level of the organization. "The Fixer" We are Middle when we are experiencing conflicting demands, priorities, and pressures coming at us from two or more individuals or groups. "The Integrator" We are Customer when we are looking to some other person or group for a product or service we need in order to move our work ahead. "The Validator" In truth, all of us move through all of these conditions as we work in our highly matrixed organizations. It may seem like things are crazier today, but these dynamics have been in place since corporations were built. It is not a new system. To manage this well requires clarity of the perspective of each role: Tops seek to strengthen the capacity of what they are accountable for. We inform, involve, ask, give and coach. Under stress, Tops sabotage themselves by taking all the responsibility away from (less effective?) others.  Bottoms seek to identify and  fix things that are wrong. Bottoms sabotage themselves by blaming the higher-ups for messing things up.  Middles are the web, connecting and coordinating the parts. They share, diagnose, and coordinate.  Middles sabotage themselves by aligning to one part of the organization and losing the other (disperse / integrate). Customers evaluate the quality of the delivery, and so, improve everything. They partner, set standards, provide feedback and look for the right people to talk to. They sabotage themselves by denying any responsibility for anything going wrong, entitled and deserving of perfection. This LearningFlash will provide you with challenging thoughts to provoke your own choices about collaborative leadership. If you would also like a deep dive into the "How To" of  leveraging your specific strengths and influencing 360 degrees, consider attending our annual public workshop "The Power of You," which will be held at The Children's Museum of Indianapolis on April 20th and 21st. We have a few openings in this workshop so sign up quickly here. Some recent testimonials from this powerful, vision changing learn-shop: "I learned to be sensitive to other's style and emotional state and how to adapt to approach them in a more effective manner." "I learned I cannot change others, I can only change myself.""I really enjoyed this class. The topics were relevant and important. The examples were an excellent reinforcement." Added bonus: it's a great time of year to head to the Indy 500 to check out the preparations for the 100th Running in May. Find out more here.In this April LearningFlash, I will share mental perceptions, techniques and tools for learning to flow between these conditions and be more effective leading, managing projects and growing teams. Today's highly matrixed work requires the ability to influence 360 degrees- self, up, across, down and wide. Enjoy and challenge yourself with these thoughts to clarify how you play in these systems.  

A Harvard Business Review article "What’s Lost When Experts Retire" reminded me about the dire need to rethink our roles as learning professionals and leaders: My sense is that our current of definitions and understanding of expertise may be at odds and stacked against helping novices to become experts.  These are some ideas I have pondered on. I continue to plow the literature on expertise and find it most exhilarating and inspiring. Gladwell’s 10,000 Hours to be an Expert - No Short CutsIn Outliers, author Malcolm Gladwell writes that it takes 10,000 hours to achieve mastery. His study reported cases on how mastery requires practice and dedication. Furthermore, Gladwell discovered that no "naturally gifted" performers emerged as experts. So there are no short cuts.  I subscribe to Gladwell’s conclusions that mastery requires thousands of hours. However, this outlook is the far-end spectrum of what expertise is. If we look at expertise as an final end result of capability and mastery, then we may be stuck. Experts are rare and hard to find and expensive to recruit and retain in organizations. How Developers Stop Learning: Rise of the Expert BeginnerErik Dietrich, a software architect has studied programmers and he observed the phenomenon of the "Beginner-Expert." In How Developers Stop Learning: Rise of the Expert Beginner software developers are in high demand and the rapid phase of movement in organizations creates the new type of "Beginner-Expert." These are perceived experts in very narrow skill areas who appear to have earned the reputation of being "experts."  However, they have only been a few years on the job and have not advanced in their proficiency levels, yet, have entrenched themselves in silos of expertise areas. Dietrich believes this presents a problem because it leads to some form of incompetence, referred to in Dreyfus model of skill acquisition.  I shall continue to digest Dietrich’s observations and reports. What is interesting to me is to review Dreyfus’ model of skill acquisition. The model is a stage or linear growth model of competency. The novice is "rule-based" and "have no exercise of discretionary judgement" while the expert "transcends reliance on rules and guidelines."                                                         The Dreyfus ModelThe Dreyfus model is a good foundational model. It is a static way to capture competency. When compared to today’s rapid phase of change and technologically abundant environments, the model could lead to a restrictive understanding  about how we can leverage the knowledge of novices, advanced beginners and those who may not be experts, as defined by Dreyfus. My view is that there must be a way for organizations to further cultivate and maximize the knowledge of novices and experts alike.  See more.Periodic Table of ExpertiseHarry Collins and Rob Evans from Cardiff University espouse "Interactional Expertise." Collins and Evans’ "Periodic Table of Expertise" Essentially, as an oversimplified explanation, the Periodic Table of Expertise shows:  • Dispositions - expertise comes from constant self-reflection and assessments of one’s      scientific findings and discoveries. Experts persistently subject their thinking to      those of others, hence, the need for interaction with other experts and further      scientific discoveries.  • Ubiquitous Tacit Knowledge - is expertise knowledge derived from simplified      understanding, narrow meanings and access to the primary source of the knowledge.   • Specialist Tacit Knowledge - is expertise that is developed through rigor and depth of     understanding of scientific findings with the capacity to present contradictions and     limitations of expert knowledge.   • Meta-Expertises - suggest the different roles of experts  • Meta-Criteria - suggests the ways expertise is developed and qualified   The model suggests that the value of expertise may occur at different levels depending on one’s current competencies. It allows a far broader consideration of the different values of knowledge and contributions. What drew my attention is the idea that different ways people developed expertise is a product of how much they contribute and interact with others and allow modifications and refinements of individual expertise. Critically, it requires that we must always know the limits and contradictions of our own expertise and the ability to clearly articulate these limits.  I understand this to mean, that we all have some level of expertise knowledge. However, we have to constantly test it and subject it to other unknowns.  In so doing, the value of our contributions are applied by others with the accompanying unknowns.  A good illustration would be this. Many bloggers or reporters of knowledge oversimplify, underestimate and only represent one side of a viewpoint or a scientific finding. They fail to inform their audience about the limits and unknowns.  Collins and Evans propose this in their book: See the PDF draft of the book. Expertise Based on "What We Know and Can Do Now" - a Contributions Approach  I propose that expertise is not a destination, but rather a momentary state of our value and ability to contribute. By keeping this thought, we may have an opportunity to train and assist learners and workers to look into their current competencies and knowledge while reflecting  on how they may add further value. We can also call this the Contributor-Expert" or "Inverted Expertise Model." What is paramount is that we as learners  must constantly subject our knowledge to the unknowns and limitations so the recipients of such knowledge may be aware of both the value and the limitations. I will continue to study, reflect and report to you my progress. Until then, let me know what you think. A contributions approach has many advantages and will likely reinforce what efforts we invest in training and learning.   These are a few of the ideas to consider.   • Learners can think of themselves as immediate contributors and add value  • Opportunities allow them to have self confidence  • They think about immediate applications of what they know because they are      expected to contribute  • Learning is accelerated because they practice, show, preach and share what they know      now  • Learners must subject their knowledge to limits and unknowns. References"What’s Lost When Experts Retire", Dorothy Leonard, Walter Swap.Gavin Barton-Harvard Business Review (December 02, 2014)Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell (June 7, 2011)How Developers Stop Learning: Rise of the Expert Beginner, Erik Dietrich ( 2013)Periodic Table of Expertises,  Harry Collins and Robert Evans (March 6,2013)Dreyfus Model for Skill AcquisitionRay Jimenez, PhDVignettes Learning"Helping Learners Learn Their Way"Ray Jimenez, PhD Vignettes Learning Learn more about story and experience-based eLearning

  Have you experienced turbulence during your most recent air travel? Or when was the last time you drove into a city street where the speed bumps were so horrendous you had to have your car in full stop to avoid damage to it? This is how it feels like psychologically, when your learners have to take a memory test or knowledge check. It is jarring. It is utterly annoying. Most of all, it often does not help in learning. What Stops Frictionless LearningMost designers and learning specialists would agree that we are seeing the need for more "frictionless" learning - unimpeded and fast learning and access to knowledge and information. Learners are learning while going through their workflow and yet, are constantly in search mode. So, the closer we bring the learning to application, the better the ideas are immediately applied. What stops "frictionless" learning experiences are checkpoints or control points we call "tests." The goal of testing is to help learners learn and ascertain their retention and application of ideas. This is well and good. However, we see more complaints from learners that tests are mere "CYA" actions in compliance courses and "just-to-make-sure-you-covered" the content type of tests. In these situations the tests become hazards to better learning. Differentiate Administrative Control Tests from Learning Tests  Many courses and elearning are designed to show proof of compliance. Usually, they protect the interests of the company in the event there are legal challenges and certain evidences are required by the courts. In this case, we need to call these tests "administrative controls." It is best not to confuse these tests with learning tests, where learners go to through questions to apply ideas. The dangers of not differentiating administrative types of tests from learning tests is that we may make the mistake of swapping them or regarding them as one and the same. The risk is that while we do our best to train people, our tests sabotage their "frictionless" experience.Setting up Design for Unobtrusive Tests with Real-Life EventsA premise to make tests unobtrusive is to add real-life events as examples and references in your lessons. These are anchors that learners can relate to. Content devoid of real-life illustrations, ends up as mere factual information. This is what memorization tests deal with - just  factual content. Without real-life events, our tests will end up being just about memorizing facts. Examples of Unobtrusive TestsTests become unobtrusive when they are relevant, useful, based on real life and applicable to the learners’ work. In short, it helps them understand the content in real-life context. Let us say that the content is about ethics in purchasing:  "When John arrived home he was greeted with a huge package which contained expensive gifts. Upon checking the card, it was obvious to him that Peter, his favorite vendor, sent the gifts. John has seen his bosses accept gifts even if a policy exists to the contrary."If you were John, how would you respond?Application Question: "What should John do?"Reflection Question: "Should John return or accept the gift? What are the risks?"Interpretation Question: "What parts of the policy allows accepting gifts and what aspects prohibit accepting gifts?"Interactive Question: "Should John go and check his personal liability and that of the company in relation to this policy?"Process Question: "At what point should John call the attention of his boss and report about the gifts?"Problem-solving Question: "What should John do if Peter insists that he should keep the gifts?" Unobtrusive tests are found in many elearning courses. They are like speed bumps or turbulences. But we have plenty of opportunities to remove these stumbling blocks.   ReferencesRemove the Sting of Compliance Courses: Make Them Short, Succinct, Easy to Learn Weaving Stories and Factual Content for Seamless Lessons Kill Boring eLearning with Story-Based LessonsRay Jimenez, PhDVignettes Learning"Helping Learners Learn Their Way"Ray Jimenez, PhD Vignettes Learning Learn more about story and experience-based eLearning

Action mapping can be a very helpful tool when developing training. It helps to streamline training by delivering the information that is needed to get the results desired. The resulting training is scenario-rich, and project sponsors can see how the training directly relates to the business goal. Action mapping looks similar to mind mapping but it is significantly different. When you mind map, you chart information as it comes to mind. There is no concern with how items relate to one another. Action mapping, on the other hand, charts items that relate to the identified business goal and its dependencies. Everything relates back to the business goal. Cathy Moore is the Queen of Process Mapping and she provided a great guide here. Her four step action mapping process includes: Identify the business goal. Identify what people need to do to reach that goal. Design activities that help people practice each behavior. Identify the minimum information people need to complete each activity. Give action mapping a try on your next training project.

The day when a single person can work alone, without any help from others, is fast disappearing. Some individuals may still be able to freelance and work alone from time to time but most of us will have to work with others in order to get anything done in a networked society. About five years... Read more »