I’m excited to announce that the highly-anticipated Talent Acquisition Factbook 2015: Benchmarks and Trends in Spending, Staffing, and Key Recruiting Metrics was published today.[1] This research report is particularly timely for contemporary Talent Acquisition (TA) leaders. With the job market continuing its recovery, TA leaders are applying a laser-focus on how they attract and engage the talent they seek. Why, you might ask, is this different than any another time? It boils down to this—candidates are not simply coming along for the recruiting ride—they’re driving the car now that the Internet has revolutionized candidates’ ability to search for jobs and market their skills. Potential candidates can learn detailed information about an organization just by performing a quick Internet search. Candidates can find open positions located anywhere in the world, and those with critical skills in scarce supply can easily find organizations willing to pay them more money to switch employers. Further, with the advent of social media came the ubiquitous ability to passively look for jobs (even when happily employed) by posting one’s employment experience on a social or professional networking site Of course, this is not new news. We have spent the past several months researching ways for recruiters to become more effective—from focusing on improving the candidate experience, recruiting the long-term unemployed, to maximizing campus recruiting efforts, implementing veteran hiring initiatives (publishing in May), and developing stronger relationships with hiring managers (publishing in July). So, where does the TA leader begin today? The Talent Acquisition Factbook 2015 should help TA leaders determine where they need to focus and may help them build a credible business case for further investment. This research helps answer the big questions TA leaders have regarding cost per hire, sources of hire, time to fill, and new hire voluntary turnover, e.g., In 2014, U.S. companies increased their average talent acquisition costs 7% from 2013, driven in part by an increase to nearly $4,000 cost per hire in 2014. Professional networking sites went from 4% of the recruiting budget in 2011 to 12% on average in 2014. By contrast, agencies and third-party recruiters took a hit, claiming 18 percent of the recruiting budget in 2014, down from 38 percent in 2011. Despite the increased spending on professional networks, the research shows that company websites drive more hires than other sources, followed by job boards, and internal candidates. Overall, companies are finding it takes 52 days on average to fill open positions—up from 48 days in 2011. High-impact TA functions have 40 percent lower new-hire turnover and are able to fill vacancies 20 percent faster than companies with more tactical recruiting functions. Interested in learning more? Download the complimentary WhatWorks Brief and join Jennifer Krider and me for an online webinar, "Benchmarking Talent Acquisition: The Shift to Candidate-Driven Recruiting," on June 9th at 2 p.m. EDT/19:00 BST. As always, feel free to add a comment below, connect with me on Twitter @RAEricksonPhD, or by email at rerickson@deloitte.com P.S. Bersin’s annual conference, IMPACT, is being held next week in Miami. The conference is sold out but you can follow the hashtag #IMPACTHR on Wednesday and Thursday, April 29-30, to hear Bersin by Deloitte analysts present new research and in-depth case studies by practicing corporate leaders   [1] For more information, Talent Acquisition Factbook 2015, Bersin by Deloitte / Jennifer Krider, Karen O’Leonard, and Robin Erickson, Ph.D., April 2015. Available to research members at www.bersin.com/library                 This publication contains general information only and Deloitte is not, by means of this publication, rendering accounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified professional advisor. Deloitte shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person who relies on this publication.  

  Ninety percent of American adults have a cell phone and 58 percent have a smartphone,[1] generally defined as a cellular phone that performs many of the functions of a computer. A smartphone likely has a touchscreen interface, can access the Internet rather than just the cell network, and has an operating system capable of running downloaded applications.   In addition to the communication support (voice, email, and text) prevalent in mobile devices, and ignoring for the moment the camera and video technology generally included, smart phones provide users with a great many transactional or operational tools.  One can pay a bill or scan a check, book a car service, secure a boarding pass, monitor one’s home security system, and much more. What about at work—and those transactions relevant to talent and HR?    Increasingly many of applications are tied to human capital management solutions: 93 percent of the HCM solution providers in our recent study supported mobile applications. Significantly, many reported "developing for mobile first," meaning that their new product development targeted mobile devices, then were moved "backward" to laptops and PCs.   The vendors tell us that the functionality they offer is increasingly being enabled and used by their customers. These always-handy, "in-your-pocket" applications can provide immediacy and 24x7 accessibility to both managers and employees. For Kronos, as an example, 98 percent of client applications within talent acquisition have mobile apps enabled.[2] SuccessFactors’ monthly active users increased 95 percent year of over year.[3]  Workday reports that it has experienced a 400 percent increase in transaction volume coming from mobile devices.[4] Today’s vendors offer mobile solutions well-equipped to provide a positive experience for job applicants in seeking positions and applying for them with their mobile devices. These solutions can streamline the application process, potentially providing a positive experience for HR and the hiring managers as well. It is the ease of use, tabulation of relevant metrics, and efficiencies gained that can make a business impact through the use of smartphones. Onboarding is a critical ingredient in enculturation and new hire engagement. Tools that ease that early path to job productivity are also often viewed as instrumental in reducing unwanted attrition.  Not surprisingly, onboarding support was the area of greatest projected growth in smartphone app use in our recent study of end users and their plans for smartphone use in HR and talent in the year ahead.[5] HR professionals are likely to find increasingly more sophisticated apps in the future, covering many aspects of HR that are currently managed and used on "tethered" technology—such as desk-bound technology. Indeed, as the market is inundated with smaller, different devices such as smart-watches and other wearables, smartphone use for human capital management is likely to be just the first step into more portable, accessible, and lower cost workforce management. Join me on June 16, 2:00 p.m. ET / 19:00 BST for a web seminar entitled Getting Smart with Smartphones: Solutions for Human Capital Management for further discussion.   This publication contains general information only and Deloitte is not, by means of this publication, rendering accounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified professional advisor. Deloitte shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person who relies on this publication. As used in this document, "Deloitte" means Deloitte Consulting LLP, a subsidiary of Deloitte LLP. Please see www.deloitte.com/us/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of Deloitte LLP and its subsidiaries. Certain services may not be available to attest clients under the rules and regulations of public accounting. Copyright © 2015 Deloitte Development LLC. All rights reserved.   [1] http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/mobile-technology-fact-sheet/ - Pew Mobile Technology Fact Sheet. Pew Research Center.  January, 2014 [2] Source:  Kronos, 2015. [3] Source: SuccessFactors (SAP), 2015. [4] 3 Things to Expect from Workday’s New Mobile Experience November 4, 2014 by Joe Korngiebel http://blogs.workday.com/3_things_to_expect_from_workdays_new_mobile_experience.html?campid=ussm_tw_a_co_14.1431 [5] Smartphones for the Workforce: What HR Practitioners Tell Us About Planned Use. Katherine Jones, Bersin by Deloitte. In  Press.  

Talent analytics presents the second largest capability gap for organizations, trailing only the need to build better leadership. Three in four companies (75 percent) in a recent Deloitte study believe that using analytics in HR is "important," but just 8 percent believe their organization is "strong" in this area. So, despite a great deal of media attention and high-profile uses of analytics, our survey confirms that most HR organizations have been slow to get started. One of the top challenges to building an effective analytics capability is a lack of skills in HR for gathering, analyzing and interpreting data. HR teams need dedicated staff for these activities, and these roles require new and different skill sets. Data from Burning Glass shows that the demand for HR analytics roles is still strong, but the growth in job postings slowed in 2014. As shown in Figure 1, postings for HR analytics roles (which include a variety of data- and analytics-oriented job titles) grew substantially between 2010 and 2013. The number of job postings grew 63% between 2010 and 2011, and a robust 21% from 2012-2103. In 2014, the site listed 13,335 job postings for HR analytics roles, which is still strong, but just 3% higher than the prior year.   Source: Burning Glass    Part of the reason for the slowing growth in HR analytics job postings may be the difficulty in finding people to fill these roles. Due to high demand for analytics skill sets over the past few years, it is taking longer to fill these types of positions - and becoming more expensive. According to the latest BurtchWorks survey, salaries for entry-level data science roles rose 14% over the past year - to a median base salary of $91,000. Given the time and expense of recruiting external candidates, some organizations are starting to upskill their existing HR staff and/or borrow staff from other functions for their analytics work. So the difficulty in finding talent for these roles is one factor. But I believe the larger issue boils down to the fact that many HR organizations have not been able to develop a plan or get buy-in for their analytics initiatives. Many simply don’t know where to start. Recent data  from a survey by Harvard Business Review Analytics Services and Visier shows that one-third of HR organizations are not investing anything in improving their analytics capabilities. (See Figure 2.) For the companies that are investing, some of the efforts are encouraging - such as hiring a CHRO with a strong analytics background, or hiring an HR leader with finance or business experience. But just 9% and 16% of organizations, respectively, say they have taken these steps to improve how data is used to make workforce decisions. In addition, one in five organizations said they approved new HR analytics positions. Given the lack of analytics skills in HR, I’m surprised the figure isn’t much higher. This number is lower than the data from our study  in 2013, when 31% of HR organizations said they had hired additional staff for their measurement and analytics efforts - hence more evidence of the slowdown in job growth for HR analytics roles. One other figure here is interesting: 9% of organizations said they have moved analytics out of HR. If HR leaders continue to drag their feet with analytics, this may be the fate of an increasing number of organizations over time: a centralized analytics function or COE that covers all disciplines - HR, Finance, Marketing, Operations, and other functions. This is what I talked about in my blog "Will HR Lose the Battle over Analytics?" A centralized, cross-functional team has many advantages. But for HR, this would mean losing control over the crown jewels. In this model, HR will need to compete with many other functions to get the data and analyses they need (and think about how well this works today with IT.) To avoid this fate, HR organizations should assess where they are today and what they need to move forward. Most analytics teams get their start with a few small wins. Identify a business leader who wants to partner with you on an analytics project to solve a problem in the organization. If you don’t have any analytics staff currently, pull together a few people to do the project - someone who understands the business problem, someone can pull together the data, and someone with strong statistical modeling skills. This doesn’t have to be a formal team - just find people who want to apply analytics to an important business problem. Or hire a consultant or contractor to help. Show how the results can add value to the organization, and you’ll be on your way. Eventually you will need to hire talent to grow your analytics capabilities, and our research and skills evaluation tools can help. Analytics is a journey, so why not start now.     Figure 2: Investments in HR Analytics    Source: Harvard Business Review Analytics Services and Visier, 2015.

Next Monday, May 25th, is Memorial Day. Many of us, myself included, are looking forward to long weekends with family to launch the start of the summer. But Memorial Day has a deeper meaning—it’s a national holiday in the United States for remembering the people who died while serving in our armed forces. Many families and volunteers will spend time this weekend decorating the graves of soldiers with flags and flowers. Life in the military can be hard on soldiers and their families, both when actively serving and when returning home. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the U.S. veteran population was more than 21 million strong as of 2014.[1] Given the advanced technical training, effective leadership skills, and strong work ethic that soldiers develop while in the military, one would likely think that veterans would be highly sought after in today’s competitive job market. However, the data says otherwise. The Bureau of Labor Statistics stated that the unemployment rate for Gulf War II veterans was 9 percent as of November 2014—25 percent higher than that for nonveterans at 7.2 percent.[2] Further, the unemployment rate for veterans has been higher than the nonveteran unemployment rate since the start of the recession.[3] And, according to a survey conducted by the Center for Research and Public Policy, the most serious concerns among veterans upon returning home include the applicability of military training to education / jobs (at 84 percent), job placement (at 82 percent), and career counseling (at 79 percent).[4] Many organizations today are already committing resources and implementing programs to help veterans find work. In some cases, organizations consider supporting veteran hiring initiatives an integral part of their employment brand. To help those employers go further and for the 55 percent of employers surveyed that do not yet participate in veteran-specific recruiting initiatives,[5] I have written a complimentary research report to provide inspiration and help in the development of a business case for veteran hiring initiatives. From the Armed Forces to the Workforce: Why Veteran Hiring is Both the Right thing to Do and a Smart Move to Make includes detailed information about what select companies are doing in terms of five types of veteran initiatives: Implementing significant veteran hiring targets Providing business skills training Developing military-friendly hiring websites Attending military job fairs Offering internships and scholarships. The report also includes detailed lists of resources for both organizations and veterans: Organizations that educate companies on how to build veteran-friendly hiring practices Veteran job boards Services and publications to prepare veterans for employment Both of my grandfathers served in the Army in World War II and my father served in the Army Medical Corps, so writing this report has been a labor of love. With the volume of veterans entering the workforce continuing to increase (240,000 to 360,000 veterans each year[6]), it is my hope that the information shared in this report about what makes veterans such valuable employees—as well as what other companies are doing and the many resources available—will inspire more organizations to embark on their own veteran hiring initiatives. It is, after all, not just the right thing to do but also a smart move to make. Download the report here and please share with your networks on social media: http://bit.ly/1ee9WBz As always, feel free to add a comment below, connect with me on Twitter @RAEricksonPhD, or by email at rerickson@deloitte.com P.S. Please join me and my colleagues at two upcoming Bersin Talent Acquisition webinars in the next three weeks: Partners in Process: Recruiters and Hiring Managers Align for Improved Talent Acquisition Performance on May 28, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. ET / 15:00 BST with Denise Moulton, Senior Research Analyst, Deloitte Consulting LLP Benchmarking Talent Acquisition: The Shift to Candidate-Driven Recruiting on June 9, 2015 at 2:00 p.m. ET / 19:00 BST with Jennifer Krider, Senior Research Analyst, Bersin by Deloitte, Deloitte Consulting LLP; and Mike Walsh, Senior Product, Marketing Manager, Glassdoor         This publication contains general information only and Deloitte is not, by means of this publication, rendering accounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified professional advisor. Deloitte shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person who relies on this publication.     [1] Source: "Employment Situation of Veterans Summary," United States Department of Labor / Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 20, 2014, www.bls.gov/news.release/vet.nr0.htm.   [2] Source: "Employment and unemployment among all veterans, Gulf-War era II veterans, and nonveterans," United States Department of Labor / Bureau of Labor Statistics, November 10, 2014, www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2014/ted_20141110.htm. [3] Source: "Why is joblessness for veterans so high?" MoneyWatch / Constantine von Hoffman, May 23, 2014, www.cbsnews.com/news/why-is-joblessness-for-veterans-so-high/.   [4] Source: "Veteran Unemployment," Forbes.com / John Ebersole, November, 15, 2013, www.forbes.com/sites/johnebersole/2013/11/15/veteran-unemployment/.   [5] Source: "Veterans Talent Index," Monster.com, 2014, www.monster.com/about/ veterans-talent-index.   [6] Source: The Fast Track to Civilian Employment: Streamlining Credentialing and Licensing for Service Members, Veterans, and Their Spouses, Executive Office of the President / National Economic Council and the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, February 2013, www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/military_credentialing_and_ licensing_report_2-24-2013_final.pdf.

Application integration is essential. It is not just a technical issue, but also a business issue. Companies require one source of the truth about their people and processes in order to manage, monitor, and measure progress and success. Yet understanding how software solutions that are used in business actually connect with each other remains elusive. There are many reasons why companies want their HR software platforms to be integrated, including the following. Data and Analytics—In order to run meaningful reports, understand the state of the business, and implement talent analytics[1], companies need the equivalent of a "single system of record". Well-architected systems integration helps to make sure that all data is coordinated, easy to find, and accurate. User Experience—People don’t want to log into multiple HR systems to get their work done. If systems are not integrated, employees and managers often have multiple systems with multiple user interfaces to use, making HR systems difficult to learn and potentially, not well-adopted. Accuracy and Compliance—Most HR programs have some legal and regulatory requirements. Did a certain employee complete the mandatory compliance training, for example? If systems are not well integrated, then these processes may not be easy to track, and it may be impossible to verify or report on compliance issues. IT Cost—When systems are not integrated by vendors, IT may have to pick up the bill "Integration projects" may be put on the back burner, further complicating HR’s ability to provide services to its stakeholders. Integration is clearly an essential consideration in deploying an HRIS system. Beyond the compliance requirements of a core HR system, HR professionals may want to integrate data from background checks; competency, skill, or behavioral assessments; benefits administration; payroll and tax services; or, workforce management functions, such as clock-ins/-outs. Making the Incompatible Compatible Application integration between unlike products is not trivial. Products created at different times or by different vendors use different data models—basically, they store information in what can be vastly different ways. Consider naming conventions as an example. One application may ask for first name, last name, while another may do the reverse; but it could be that neither has consistency in dealing with hyphenated names. One application may refer to the company name by a three letter acronym, while another uses the words written out; as the data is passed between applications, will it appear as two distinct companies? Therein lies the difficulty with integration—getting the data between two or more points the way the user expects to see and use it. It is for this reason that integration is so important and, without sound practices, analysis of data is challenging across applications. The majority of HCM software providers have long supplied standard, documented application programming interfaces (APIs) for practitioners to use in connecting to a variety of their custom and third-party products.  APIs are tools that specify how some software components should interact with each other. Generally, an API is a library that includes specifications for routines, data structures, object classes, and variables—all of which are used by an IT staffer or a third-party technologist to create the integration between two applications, processes, or services.  The vendor in these instances has tested and certified the APIs for the use they will serve in the user’s environment.  Some bundle these as "connectors" which can be used to integrate two specific disparate applications—these may be chargeable, as is their implementation for the customer. Many users today integrate their talent management applications with their HRIS system of record, third-party products, such as other talent products from other providers, and services, such as prehire assessments and background checks, benefits, tax and payroll providers. These applications or services may or may not also be in the cloud (that is, accessible over the Internet via a browser or mobile device), rather than running natively in your data center. Users have choices in the way they choose to integrate all these disparate applications. Given the heterogeneity of the technology requirements today, many software providers support a third-party integration partner ecosystem to provide a choice to application users which need to integrate applications to an HRIS, or other third-party on-premise or cloud solutions. The integration of two very different systems, not only with each other, but with all of the related business applications and services on which HR professionals rely, is complex—hence time-consuming—and has to maintain the accuracy and integrity of employee data. Almost any data can be amalgamated via flat-file data transfer, but that is generally insufficient in providing the degree of integration companies rely on today. Third-party transport and data-routing tools exist, but often they too lack the deep integration that many organizations seek. Mind you, both of these measures serve to move data from one application to another. Middleware presents another viable option for integration. With the advent of SaaS and the rapid growth of cloud computing, middleware has had to address on-premise to on-premise data movement and consolidations, but also on-premise to the cloud, and even further, cloud-to-cloud integration. Many of today’s users of Cloud-based talent applications have tools available to ease the task. Documented APIs exist, and third-party applications and tools are available—many of which are certified by the vendors. Increasingly the vendors—recognizing that few of their customers live in a homogeneous software world, provide packaged integrations that are tested and often certified to address some of the many integration requirements of users today. Because these are not simplistic plug-and-play tools, they are likely to continue to require customizations as they are implemented to meet unique customer requirements. For managing talent, users often seek the ability to efficiently integrate data from their sourcing or hiring management software into onboarding, then to the employee profile, learning, and career preference applications - and then to their performance management and succession planning solutions, to name the more common. Acquiring all solutions from one integrated suite provider is one way to achieve integration; however, when your requirements cannot be met with that strategy, know that it is not an insurmountable show-stopper; you can look at other avenues.  It may cost you time (and perhaps expense), but the effort in amalgamating your data will likely prove worth the effort.   As used in this document, "Deloitte" means Deloitte Consulting LLP, a subsidiary of Deloitte LLP. Please see www.deloitte.com/us/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of Deloitte LLP and its subsidiaries. Certain services may not be available to attest clients under the rules and regulations of public accounting. This publication contains general information only and Deloitte is not, by means of this publication, rendering accounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified professional advisor. Deloitte shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person who relies on this publication. Copyright © 2015 Deloitte Development LLC. All rights reserved.   [1]   For more information, Big Data in HR: Building a Competitive Talent Analytics Function - The Four Stages of Maturity, Bersin & Associates / Josh Bersin, April 2012. Available to research members at www.bersin.com.

We just finished our 8th annual IMPACT research conference in Florida, and our theme was Bold HR - pushing the envelope on talent and HR practices, reinventing what we do, and starting with a fresh sheet of paper.   Let me start by saying that theme turned out to be perfect. We had more than 500 committed, passionate, hard working HR and L&D leaders joined us from around the world (US, Europe, India, Australia, Taiwan, Quatar) and everyone agreed that this is a transformational period for HR and learning leaders everywhere. In my keynote I cited some important research: Among 3,300 HR and business leaders, today the average gives HR a C- in our ability to directly impact the talent challenges in our companies  Nearly 1/3 of all new CHROs are coming from non-HR backgrounds, demonstrating how CEOs want new thinking brought into the HR function Zenger Folkman research shows that business leaders who are "Bold" in their thinking (vs. those practicing "Good Judgement") are 11X more likely to succeed in today's business environment. So the message is clear:  in order for HR to thrive and add value in today's new world of work, we have to be bold in our thinking, bold in our strategies, and bold in the redesign of what we do. What does the world Bold Mean? Let's look at the dictionary: "Not hesitating or fearful in the face of actual or possible danger or rebuff." "Courageous and daring." "Not hesitating to break the rules of propriety." "Thinking beyond the usual limits of conventional thought or action, being imaginative." How Bold are you in your HR strategies and programs?  Is your team able to innovate and reinvent your HR and talent programs? Are you courageous and imaginative in your recruiting or management practice? Our research suggests that if you aren't being bold, you're probably falling behind. The Four Principles of Bold HR  As we spent the last year preparing for our conference, I identified four key principles for Bold HR today. (You can download our overview here.)  First is B: Build the Irresistible Organization The first principle is to focus heavily on the employee engagement and culture. Today, as I discuss in Forbes, "Culture is the New Black." Every program, strategy, and investment you make should focus on helping people become more productive and engaged. Mo Jesse, the CEO of Earl's Kitchen and Bar, told the story of how he dramatically turned around their chain of restaurants by focusing heavily on empowering their people. Rather than try to "fix the menu" or "hire celebrity chefs," Mo spent time listening and learning at the grass root level, and focused on making Earl's a fun and empowering place to work. Within two years their revenues and margins grew and customer satisfaction started to skyrocket. Our research clearly shows that employees today are more demanding than ever - so the #1 thing we must do, regardless of our role in HR, is focus on building programs and strategies that make work fun, engaging, and more enjoyable. Making work easy is actually very hard work - but as our research and stories showed, when we trust and focus on our people, the business responds rapidly. As I described in my keynote, building an Irresistible Organization is not always easy. Today it means creating great jobs, hiring for fit, supporting managers and leaders, creating opportunities for growth, building a flexible and fun environment, and delivering on inspirational leadership. These are difficult tasks to do well, and every company will create engagement in their own unique way. Part of this new world of engagement is a focus on real-time feedback and giving employees a voice. We talked extensively about this topic throughout the conference and an exciting set of new vendors with real-time feedback and engagement tools has emerged to help. The second is O: Own the Leadership Agenda One of the biggest areas you impact the business is in your ability to help select, coach, and develop leaders. More than 87% of companies rate "gaps in their leadership pipeline" as a critical business issue and the challenges of leadership are a perennial problem. Today, as Millennials make up the largest segment of the workforce, we have to think about leadership from the bottom up. First line leaders (who typically make up 40% or more of the leaders in your company) are continuously under stress as they learn their new role. If you take the time to coach and develop leaders early in their career you build brand ambassadors for life. Facebook, for example, has a business rule:  a movement into leadership will not be a promotion. This simple idea helps make sure that people who move into team leadership or managerial roles are doing it because they truly want to add value through the success of others. We, in HR, have to constantly focus on helping the company identify great leaders and make sure the organization understands that leadership is not a destination, but rather a journey. Today there are literally hundreds of vendors, models, and consultants to help you build great leaders. Bold HR means you innovate, identify the characteristics of great leaders in your own company, and build a leadership development program that speaks to your own company's culture. By the way, the leadership development market (over $14 billion) grew by more than 14% last year - part of owning the leadership agenda is making sure that your CEO and other leaders feel comfortable to invest continuously in this area and they put their personal time into helping you push the leadership agenda. Third: L - Leverage Learning Everywhere The third part of Bold HR is to focus heavily on learning.   Income inequality and the fast-growing economy has shown that now, more than ever, people are in a mad scramble for skills to help them improve their professional careers. MOOCs, video learning portals, online learning academies, and learning marketplaces are everywhere.  (LinkedIn just acquired Lynda.com for $1.5 Billion, 10-times sales.) This disruptive growth in online learning has forced corporate learning departments to catch up. Our research shows that corporate learning has exploded as an issue (moved from 8th to 3rd biggest topic in business leadership this year) yet only 14% of chief learning officers feel fully aligned with their business leaders. Today HR organizations must reinvest in learning and provide engaging, relevant learning experiences (and assignments) to employees at all levels.  Millennials expect developmental assignments and job rotations every year, and most companies are struggling to redesign their strategies to make this work. At the IMPACT conference, our award winning program was a fantastic early-career global management program at Marriot. Through this program young employees spend their first two years on rotational assignments at various hotels around the world, learning management jobs in various parts of the hotel. This program is so exciting that it's now a huge tool for recruitment and employment brand. Fourth, D - Demand data. The fourth dimension to Bold HR is to get good at data. Listen, we in HR are the last part of business that hasn’t totally gotten our data act together.  Nobody would run finance or sales without good data, so now its time to do the same with HR. This new area of People Analytics is far more serious than the "HR Analytics" we’ve done in the past.  As one of our top HR leaders put it, we have to "spend time where the money is being made"  We are being asked to directly advise on critical business questions: Why are some sales teams outperforming others? Why do we lose certain high performers? Why do some nursing units or service teams deliver better outcomes? And why do some parts of the organization suffer from higher fraud or errors than others? The answer to all these questions lies in people analytics, and that is our bold new charter for the coming years. And One Final Thing  Let me leave you with the most important element of all:  YOU. You and your HR leadership have to "be bold." I was at a large consumer goods company a few months ago and the CHRO and I were talking about the issue of their HR "personality." This is a very well known company with a reputation for being one of the best places to work for ambitious marketing people around the world. And they have some of the smartest and most passionate HR people I have met. She told me that the biggest challenge her team has is "standing toe to toe with business leaders" and giving them the feedback and advice HR believes they need. While HR professionals certainly don't run the business, we are often the ones with the information and insights business leaders need to dramatically improve performance. If we can't boldly and confidently deliver our message, we won't be heard. This is an exciting time for the HR profession. The global economy is growing, recruitment is more competitive than ever, and a new generation of workers is demanding opportunities and changes to the way we work. Now, more than ever, is the time for HR to be bold, reinvent, and lead our organizations into the new world of work. I want to thank all the participants, vendors, and support people who made IMPACT 2015 our best-ever conference. We look forward to working with you on your own Bold HR strategy in the year ahead.

Josh Bersin has led the market with a message for HR practitioners at all levels:  Be Bold! Take the reins, mobilize the troops, and capture the HR and Talent field in your organizations.  The mantra for the HR community includes - perhaps for the first time—words such as "innovate," and "become data-driven," to "boldly go where no HR team has gone before." Hyperbole aside for a minute, the charter remains; but stepping up to the proverbial plate requires fearlessness and gumption; willingness to take a risk, and the courage to lead. Today’s HR leaders recognize this. Boldness is not just for the HR department however: companies that supply software for managing HR also face the need for such decisive action.  One example is SilkRoad, a SaaS-software company that launched a core HR product a few years ago that failed to meet the standards the company sets for itself.  Here is where the bold part come into play: management decommissioned the product and went back to the drawing board; rather than trying to be all things to all people, the new product which emerged, SilkRoad HRMS, is far more focused, leaving areas to third parties where third parties may do them best, such as payroll and benefits management. Product providers can be bold in their market strategies as well. Consider innovative ways to look at HR, such as "how much core HR is enough?"  What does a core HR software solution need to look like for, for example, a mid-sized company that has no international employees?  When talent profiles sprouted in the last decade, many of us analysts hypothesized that that employee profile could "take over" the system-of-record employee profile in the core HR system.  For many of the vendors that today provide  both core HR and talent  management systems  (such as talent acquisition, learning, career, performance, and succession management), that integration has happened:  there is one employee profile that contains both employment information and talent information.  But the innovation comes in with those suite providers who are talent-only - often linking to a third party HRIS system.  What employee information is indeed sufficient?  Some talent solution vendors see an opportunity to support their users—again, mostly less complex business environments—with one employee profile stemming from an integrated talent suite. Think about it: One single point of truth for information about a given employee without the complexities that sometimes accompany an HRIS.  The boldness of replacing a traditional HR system with a talent management system and an employee profile—no matter how complete—may not be sufficient in organizations that rely on the HRIS to determine ACA eligibility, as only one example.  But you must admit it is intriguing at a time when companies are looking for less complex ways of managing their businesses. I’m not forgetting HR however; consider emboldening your team. Look where you can reskill or upskill your department with the skills they will need for the rest of the decade.  Improve business acumen across the HR team. Upskill analytic skills. Enhance proficiency with today’s technology. Collaborate tenaciously with other divisions in the organization.  Build internal project management and change management proficiency within your team. Re-envision HR; re-envision the solutions you use every day, or if you are a solution provider, that you create. Consider revision -a word that does not mean "do over"—but "to look at with new eyes." Let’s be bold enough to re-envision and  revise.   This publication contains general information only, and none of the member firms of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, its member firms, or their related entities (collective, the "Deloitte Network") is, by means of this publication, rendering professional advice or services. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified professional adviser. No entity in the Deloitte Network shall be responsible for any loss whatsoever sustained by any person who relies on this publication.   About Deloitte Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by guarantee ("DTTL"), its network of member firms, and their related entities. DTTL and each of its member firms are legally separate and independent entities. DTTL (also referred to as "Deloitte Global") does not provide services to clients. Please see www.deloitte.com/about for a detailed description of DTTL and its member firms. Please see www.deloitte.com/us/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of Deloitte LLP and its subsidiaries. Certain services may not be available to attest clients under the rules and regulations of public accounting.   Copyright © 2015 Deloitte Development LLC. All rights reserved. Member of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited

Hello! I am the newest member of the Bersin by Deloitte analyst team and it is a pleasure to make your virtual acquaintance! My research focus is leadership and succession management and I look forward to lively conversations around these important and interesting topics with you. A little bit about my background: prior to joining Bersin, I pursued a dual career as leadership researcher and consultant and I worked closely with organizations in both the USA and Europe (I am Austrian!) to drive methodical and practical business research. I consider leadership as both a social process as well as an organizational phenomenon and I am excited about our future research endeavors that will help us understand how best to leverage human leadership capital for individual and collective business outcomes. The way we think about leadership has changed dramatically in the past few years. Hierarchical structures, centralized decision-making and a "subordinate" workforce are expiring principles, as markets and business challenges rapidly change and organizations are required to engage a new type of workforce: future employees. Future employees - who, by the way, may already be working at your organization! -  will have grown up in a fully digitalized, connected and diverse world  in which new forms of work habits  and values  have emerged. Their requirements for being engaged, motivated and inspired may differ from what most organizations have seen before. The question for companies has become: How to build leaders who are able to connect with this kind of workforce so that strategies are executed and business goals can be met? Participants needed for new leadership research study! Reading a lot of secondary literature, my current research suggests that one effective response can be to develop a highly responsive, adaptive and flexible type of leadership, on the organizational and the individual leader level. In the coming weeks, I am conducting research interview to this effect and I am currently looking to talk to HR and business leaders who want to participate in our research! If you are interested in a 30-minute phone call with me, or know a senior HR or business leader who is, please send me an email: aderler@deloitte.com. I look forward to hearing from you! 

Will we make social (or peer-to-peer) learning worse by creating incentives for community managers and members that are based exclusively on activity targets such as the following? number of downloads, views and hits average ratings number of contributions (or uploads) There is a systematic relationship among purpose, methods, and measures.  Imposing only activity targets (or measures) into the social learning ecosystem will create a de-facto purpose and constrain the methods of learning.  Such contingent metrics (i.e., if you do this you will get that) will shift the focus from the higher purpose of social learning (i.e., how do I do learn more and perform better and help others to learn more and perform better?) to surpassing previously achieved activity metrics (i.e., how do I survive in a social learning system?). An obsession on activity targets will always increase costs and create more waste.  Such a focus is detrimental to content quality, community motivation, and community attitudes.   The community will focus on the incentives from achieving activity targets (or the rewards) rather than on improving how they learn, collaborate, and network. Imposed activity targets will manipulate and often destroy collaboration, blindly promote a single and arbitrary purpose, deter risk taking, and reduce creativity. A better approach is to derive targets from the purpose of the "learning ecosystem" according to the point of view of community managers and members.  Put the targets (or measures) in the hands of the people managing and participating in the learning ecosystem and you will see increased creativity and innovation, and a step change in the level of success. Remember to also think about how to intrinsically motivate the community.  Permit community autonomy, create a shared sense of community purpose, and create confidence in the role of the community towards helping people to achieve mastery and success. I recently viewed a recorded lecture from John Seddon that has greatly influenced my thinking about the role of activity targets in a social learning ecosystem.  The lecture is one hour in duration and it is focused on the organizational system rather than on a social learning system.  I believe many of John’s observations and findings relate to the social learning ecosystem and I encourage you to view his video. John Seddon Video Tagged: learning community, measurement, social learning

As a learning and development professional you are probably always on the lookout for ways to create more value - particularly for any ideas that don’t take a lifetime to develop and cost the Earth! But not all learning solutions of value need come at a great investment. The most powerful - and least leveraged - learning solution is peer-to-peer learning. Workers learn more from mentors, coaches, peers, and members of their professional networks than from any other source. Recent advancements in social media make it possible for you to take peer-to-peer learning to a new level with a surprisingly low commitment in terms of time and money. Is it safe to use social media for learning? Is peer-to-peer learning safe? A major concern or fear expressed by business leaders is that widespread and facilitated peer-to-peer learning will create an unusable mess of low-quality and inaccurate exchanges and content. Business leaders typically demand that all training content must be reviewed, approved, or tested before it is published and delivered. No wonder employees often receive too little training, too late. Are learning professionals suffering from a "one size fits all" content quality policy? What sort of training situations must have high quality content in the first instance? The answer is any situation where there is no room for error. We expect and need our surgeons, nuclear power engineers, and police officers to go through high quality learning programs. Otherwise we might see a rise in wrongful death or injury, legal battles, and other severe consequences. The point is that only some training situations require high quality content in the first instance. Is the concern about content quality in a peer-to-peer learning system legitimate? What are the chances that some employees will pick up and follow an incorrect approach suggested by another employee, and that this would result in a wrongful death or injury, or a legal battle? Guess what? This already happens today when employees provide inferior advice and suggest inaccurate methods of working, through e-mail correspondence, phone calls, and face-to-face discussions. There are no controls in place to ensure that employees share only high quality, approved, and relevant content in an e-mail, phone call, or face-to-face discussion. The good news is that social media will bring many discussions and content exchanges, good and bad, to the surface where the information in those exchanges can be seen and appropriately addressed. Good social media policies will help contain corporate risk and liabilities. And an appropriate mix of content quality control points will help identify and remove low quality content. Tools and methods are available to help create safer peer-to-peer learning solutions. Want to know more?  Read my article on Learning Solutions Magazine: learning solutions Tagged: collaboration, informal learning, peer-to-peer, social learning, social media

This podcast by Teemu Arina effectively illustrates the imperative for change and how social media are shaping our future workplace. Tagged: social media

Should online communities have a better reputation?  Should you join and participate in one more online community?  Are online communities profoundly changing the world for the better? Here are four examples of how online communities have changed my world: I was organizing a conference in London UK for a client.  I researched the internet (blogs, discussion threads, social networks, etc.) and found 2 very interesting speakers to participate.  One was from Finland and one was from the USA.   The first time we met in person was at the conference.  We continue to network and collaborate to this day.  One of the speakers connected me to an incredible career opportunity. I created a post on my blog and promoted it via Twitter and some of my Linked In groups.  I received an invitation on Linked In from someone who wanted to join my network.  I accepted the invitation after reviewing his profile, and confirming a mutual interest and benefit.  This contact invited me to help create a new social learning website for a professional community, introduced me to some other people who included me in a conference event, and provided a professional recommendation for me on my Linked In profile.  I recently arranged a 6 month contractor role in the home country of this contact and we are planning to meet in person for the first time.  He has a yacht and wants to take me sailing. I targeted a few companies where I would like to work.  I used Linked In to identify people in leadership roles in these companies and introduced myself.  Two of the leaders willingly spoke with me to explore opportunities to work together.  I did not go through the traditional RFP process and spent very time and money on business development and marketing activities.  I am presently discussing a 6 to 12 month contractor role. I participated heavily on the blog of a well known thought leaders in my field.  I contributed to discussion threads, commented and rated contributions made by others, and helped connect some of the other community members to each other and to "content."  One of the leaders reached out to me.  This leader acted as a coach and mentor, and a reference.  Eventually this leader hired me for a contractor role.  The first time we met in person was just 30 minutes before meeting our client for the first time.  We are now talking about a longer term partnership. How have online communities changed your world? The authors of "the 2020 workplace" make the following predictions for online communities: You will be hired and promoted based upon your reputational capital (for example - successfully turning professional communities into increased business value for the organization and creating a stronger personal brand). Recruiting will start on social networking sites (at least 80 percent of recruiters will tap into online communities as the first stop to recruiting global talent). Corporate social networks will flourish and grow inside companies (corporate participation in social networks may be as critical in the 2020 workplace as managing cash flow). I was inspired to write this post after receiving a link from one of my network members (Kim Burt) to Richard Millington’s blog post where he shared examples of how online communities have changed his world. Tagged: collaboration, learning community, social networking

I read an interesting article from the New York Times.  Below are some points that I thought were worth bringing to the surface.  Feel free to read the entire article:  http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/07/health/views/07mind.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1 In recent years, cognitive scientists have shown that a few simple techniques can reliably improve how much we learn from studying.  But they directly contradict much of the common wisdom about good study habits, and they have not caught on. For instance, instead of sticking to one study location, simply alternating the room where you study improves retention. So does studying distinct but related skills or concepts in one sitting, rather than focusing intensely on a single thing. We walk around with all sorts of unexamined beliefs about what works in learning - most of which are flat wrong. Take the notion that people have specific learning styles.  Some are "visual learners" and others are auditory; some are "left-brain" students, others "right-brain." In a recent review of the relevant research, published in the journal Psychological Science in the Public Interest, a team of psychologists found almost zero support for such ideas. Cognitive scientists do not deny that honest-to-goodness cramming can lead to a better grade on a given exam. But hurriedly jam-packing a brain is akin to speed-packing a cheap suitcase, as most students quickly learn - it holds its new load for a while, then most everything falls out. Forgetting is the friend of learning.  When you forget something, it allows you to relearn, and do so effectively, the next time you see it. That’s one reason cognitive scientists see testing itself — or practice tests and quizzes — as a powerful tool of learning, rather than merely assessment. So, alternating study environments, mixing content, spacing study sessions, self-testing or all the above — will turn a grade-A slacker into a grade-A student. Tagged: research

Step 1 - Strategize: There is no one "right" Social Learning strategy, and there is no one right way to develop one.  The approach to strategy development depends on several factors such as your organizational structure, existing learning programs, organizational learning culture, and the value executives place on informal learning.  The most powerful approach to strategy development, from my experience, is to develop one that is business-driven - aligned to larger company goals like increased innovation, increased collaboration across traditional organizational silos, reducing reliance on the aging workforce, compressing time to performance, etc.  The strategy should paint a compelling picture of the future state of Social  Learning, clearly articulate the business case for change, and outline the roadmap for how you will get from "here" to "there" (including what must change, stop, and continue). Deliverables: A Social Learning strategy and approach document. User Stories for selected networking, collaboration, knowledge management, and learning technologies to help stakeholders imagine and see "how it looks in action." A list of expected challenges, uncertainties and risks with a supporting mitigation plan. Defined methods and tools to monitor and evaluate Social Learning behaviors and benefits realised. An end-to-end High Level Approach and Process Definition for "Implementation and Support." Benchmarking data (in order to validate the overall strategy and approach). A list of critical success factors and key planning assumptions. Step 2 - Implement: Select, procure, install, develop, prepare and test the ‘Social Learning’ eco-system’ (technology, sites, policies, procedures, governance, and team members).  I advise you to conduct a proof of concept and pilot test before committing to an enterprise wide implementation. Deliverables: Mobilize a Social Learning eco-system (technologies, governance, policies, procedures, services, and roles).  Initially you might consider focusing on the most important communities of practices or workforce roles - where the business has the greatest need.    One type of community that merits organizational hosting and orchestration is referred to as "Horizontal."  Such communities are comprised of people who work according to end-to-end methods, on methods that cut across regions, departments or business units, and methods that require a high degree of collaboration and consistency.  Examples are supply chain management and financial management. Another type of community that merits organizational hosting and orchestration is referred to as "Vertical."  Such communities are comprised of people who share a common job role focus and who tend to work within the same department or business unit.  Examples are front line managers or sales representatives. Assign at least one community manager to each Horizontal or Vertical community of practice.  This role is critical to the success of the Social Learning system.  The people in this role will provide oversight on usage and policy compliance, manage content, manage community engagement, track and report trends-needs-benefits-impact, and help resolve issues. Provide basic training for "users" on the administration and use of each selected platform or technology. Implement a Change Management plan to increase awareness, understanding, commitment, and buy in.  See step 4. Step 3 -  Source and Develop Content: Develop, source, and repurpose "content", and place it on the Social Learning system prior to the go live date. Deliverables: Select and develop 5 and 10 subject matter experts (SME), from each of the targeted communities of practice, to create content, and to comment or rate content shared by other community members. One of the first duties of the selected SMEs is to front load the Social Learning system with "content".  The content will be presented in the form of blogs, wikis, discussion threads, podcasts, documents, etc.  The "targeted users" will need a reason to use the new Social Learning system on day one.  Front loading the system with "content" will help create some attraction and persuade many of the "targeted users" to log on - and then come back again and again.  The SMEs will also need some training and orientation in order to perform other duties such as monitoring discussion forums, connecting people to people and people to content, and promoting "good" content via ratings, adding the content to their favourite’s page, and providing special mention of the content on their blogs. Populate the home page with engaging information: Latest news about the community and individual members. What’s new?  Recent contributions made by community members. What’s popular?  Show members what other members are viewing and doing. Who’s new? Showcasing members who have recently joined. Who’s popular? Featured members, member interviews, member rankings and other techniques that show members who are most popular and favored. Notifications highlighted in the top bar to show users when community members have commented on their posts. Step 4 - Engage the Business: Engage with the business to build stakeholder sponsorship, leadership support, and to understand the cultural challenges and work environment realities.  This will help you to drive the desired ‘Social Learning’ behaviors and outcomes. Deliverables: Stakeholder Map for each of the targeted communities of practice and workforce roles, as well as for IT, HR, Communications, and Knowledge Management teams. Documented concerns, uncertainties and expectations of stakeholders and community members, and an associated communication plan and engagement approach. Creation and delivery of communications and engagement deliverables and activities (including the change management plan from step 3). Service description for supporting the targeted communities of practice or workforce roles, and a dedicated point-of-contact for each. Step 5 - Monitor and Evaluate: Monitor use of technology, networking patterns, knowledge sharing and consumption, and discussion threads in order to evaluate the business case, identify best practices, unblock challenges, and improve the ‘Social Learning" approach and outcomes. Deliverables: A list of required ‘data’, proposed ‘data’ sources, developed tools, and a data collection plan with clear timeframes and responsibilities. Report(s) of key findings, conclusions, results, and recommendations.  Community participation profile optimization progress report.  Measure the percentage of community members that are acting as a Consumer, Creator, Connector, Carrier, or Caretaker and compare this result to the target profile.  In addition, assess how well community members are fulfilling each of the 5 aforementioned roles (they might need additional training, tools, guidance, or motivation). Tagged: learningstrategy, social learning

Over the past decade the story of enterprise learning has increasingly been dominated by the rise of the "learning" part and a de-emphasis of the "enterprise" part.   It’s kind of an adaptation of a famous line from John F. Kennedy’s inaugural address:  Ask not what training experiences your organization can give to you, but what learning and knowledge you can give to your organization. But the move to bottom-up learning is no easy evolution.  It’s not an either/or question.  Increasingly, conversations among learning executives are dominated by the discussion of balance: when does a company need to tell and when does it need to listen? Fortunately, there is a certain type of learner that eases these challenges, emerging spontaneously within the workforces of many companies: they’re what we call "superlearners."  Unusually self-reliant and media savvy, superlearners are leading the way for their companies by exemplifying the attributes, learning behaviors and collaboration-based activities needed to win in this current era of never-ending change. But superlearners present some challenges of their own companies.  They’re more apt to become frustrated and leave the organization.  They challenge accepted ways of doing things; they have no great love for authority and may flout the rules.  Yet harnessing their energy and the manner in which they multiply the availability and value of knowledge across the enterprise will increasingly become a task of learning and HR executives. Read more: CLO Magazine Article about SuperLearners Tagged: informal learning, social learning

Here is a transcript from a recent 60 second science report from the Scientific American: Groups with Good Social Skills Outperform the Merely Smart Groups of two to five members who interacted with each other best outperformed groups whose individual members had higher intelligence scores. Karen Hopkin reports: If Alice is smart, and Bob’s even smarter, working together they would A) be twice as smart, B) be half as smart or C) form a task force and get nothing done. According to new research, the answer is none of the above. It would actually depend on how well they get along. What makes a group good at what it does? A team of scientists put their collective heads together and divided volunteers into groups of two to five. And they asked these groups to perform a variety of tasks, from brainstorming answers to questions like "What can you do with a brick?" to team typing blocks of complicated text. What the researchers found is that the intelligence of individual group members was not a good predictor of how well the group as a whole performed. The teams that did best rated high in social sensitivity: their members interacted well, took turns speaking and included more females than groups that did poorly. The study is in the journal Science. [Anita Woolley et al., citation to come.] So if you’re looking for a recipe for group smart, don’t automatically reach for the biggest brains. Try adding some heart. And at least one person who knows what to do with a brick. Thank you Frédéric Domo for sharing this via Linked In. Tagged: learning community, social learning, social networking

The stats helper monkeys at WordPress.com mulled over how this blog did in 2010, and here’s a high level summary of its overall blog health: The Blog-Health-o-Meter™ reads Fresher than ever. Crunchy numbers A Boeing 747-400 passenger jet can hold 416 passengers. This blog was viewed about 6,800 times in 2010. That’s about 16 full 747s.   In 2010, there were 13 new posts, growing the total archive of this blog to 56 posts. There were 4 pictures uploaded, taking up a total of 437kb. The busiest day of the year was April 6th with 164 views. The most popular post that day was Key Social Learning Roles. Where did they come from? The top referring sites in 2010 were elearninglearning.com, twitter.com, downes.ca, Google Reader, and elearningtech.blogspot.com. Some visitors came searching, mostly for social learning, what is social learning, bt dare2share, training approaches, and daretoshare. Attractions in 2010 These are the posts and pages that got the most views in 2010. 1 Key Social Learning Roles April 2010 6 comments 2 BT Dares to Share - Social Learning Case Study March 2009 3 Measuring Networked (or Social) Learning April 2009 3 comments 4 5 Steps to Enterprise Social Learning October 2010 1 comment 5 Eric Davidove December 2008

Series: Analysis via paradigming • Next post in this series » Here’s how Joe Harless helped me figure things out. When I took his Job Aid Work Shop, he recommended a technique for analyzing tasks. Joe called this paradigming.   It works best on procedural stuff, though I’ve also used it to find my way around very complicated systems. Section 1:  complex theoretical discussion Each step in an on-the-job task has two parts.  (I like to say I’m a Reform Behaviorist, so you might see some behavioral-psych roots here.) The stimulus, meaning the starting state. The response, or what you do when you perceive the stimulus. As in: S: email from Queen Elizabeth (notice: it’s a noun-a thing) R: open email (a verb-an action) The response leads to a new stimulus (opened email) which calls for a new action. S: opened email (mail that has been opened—Ss are always nouns) R: decide next action "Decide?"  Yes; I use that a lot.  It’s a good launch pad for chains of activity or decisions. S: "Read text" (the quotes show it’s a decision—a noun) S: "Open attachment" S: "Forward message" And so on.  More later; one more complex theoretical idea awaits: In paradigming, there are only three kinds of steps: the basic chain, the discrimination, and the generalization. Section 2: three examples The basic chain is simply a sequence of actions with no decision making. At a higher level, of course, you might collapse a lot of behavior into a single step: S1: Vacant land — R: purchase land. S2: Purchased land — R: construct 12,000-square-foot house. S3: Completed — R: furnish tastefully. Sometimes, you need to distinguish between different stimuli that each call for a different response.  That’s a discrimination. Remember, this is a step in a larger process.  In the example, the previous step might have been "receipt from purchase" and the response might have been "identify form of payment." What you’re discriminating among here are the different possibilities for form of payment.  I left some out because the image would get too large, but you’d put in as many stimuli as exist: check, debit card, form not legible, and so on. The third kind of behavior is generalization: you have more than one stimulus and they all lead to the same response. Section 3: So what? For me, paradigming offers several payoffs: It’s a great way to track down loose ends and uncertainties in a complicated process. It ensures that I don’t forget about something that puzzled me. It magically becomes the scaffold for job aids. I’ll create an example or two of paradigming in action, and of that scaffolding, in another post. The posts in this series: Figuring things out (the plodding edition) (that's this post) Analyzing tasks with paradigming

I was thinking the other day: Chan eil mòran lochd ’s an crìdh a bhios a gabhail òran. There’s not much guile in a heart that’s always singing songs. You caught me—that’s Gaidhlig (Scottish Gaelic), not Gaeilge (Irish Gaelic, often just "Irish").  No matter; the Scots are the Irish who found boats.  (The Australians are the Irish who got caught.) As part of my ongoing Guile-Reduction Project, I wanted to share a handful of songs connected somehow to Ireland.  I’m posting early so you have a chance to get music like this over the weekend. The Rambles of Spring Tommy Makem and Liam Clancy, singing at Bunratty Castle in 1981.  Especially good if you’re still recovering from late-winter snow. My Own Dear Native Land A favorite (as if the others aren’t) not just because I’m a fan of Cherish the Ladies,  but also because the singer is Detroit-born Cathie Ryan. Mo Ghile Mear Assembling the list, I didn’t expect to find this bunch of  all-stars singing an Irish classic about a Scottish icon-Bonnie Prince Charlie.  (Lyrics and translation here.) ‘Sé mo laoch, mo Ghile Mear, ‘Sé mo Chaesar, Ghile Mear, Suan ná séan ní bhfuaireas féin Ó chuaigh i gcéin mo Ghile Mear. He is my hero, my dashing darling He is my Caesar, dashing darling I’ve had no rest from forebodings since he went away, my darling… The Green Fields of Canada Mary Dillon’s acapella version of the emigrant song. The sheep run unsheared and the land’s run to rushes The handyman’s gone, and the winder of creels Away across the ocean go journeyman tailors And fiddlers that flicked out the old mountain reels… (You can hear a lengthier version sung by Heidi Talbot, and I encourage you to; the site has ads you can avoid by shutting your eyes.) Brid Óg Ní Mháille Some might choose to advance to the 45-second mark to skip the intro and get right to the Corrs’ version (in Irish) of about a lost love.  Still, the video maker did include English and Spanish translations. Oh,  Bridget O’Malley, you’ve left my heart breaking You sent the death pangs of sorrow to pierce my heart sore A hundred mean are craving for your breathtaking beauty For certain, you’re the fairest of maidens in Oriel… The Foggy Dew Sinéad O’Connor and the Chieftains with perhaps the best-known song about the 1916 Rising in Dublin. The bravest fell, and the requiem bell Rang mournfully and clear For those who died that Easter-tide In the springing of the year. An Mhaighdean Mhara Mairéad Ní Mhaonaigh of Altan sings an old lament, The Mermaid.  (Irish lyrics and English translation here.) The Spanish Lady Maighread and Triona Ni Dhomhnaill singing a ballad filled with Dublin place names-and with numbers. Raglan Road More Dublin place names in Patrick Kavanagh’s song.  Performers include Donal Lunny on bouzouki (nearly as Irish as the bodhran), Liam O’Flynn on the uillean pipes, Sean Keane on fiddle, and vocals from Mark Knopfler. Jimmy Mo Mhíle Stór (Jimmy, My Thousand Treasures) Cara Dillon singing an English version of this song about (yet another) far-away sailor.  You get her rendition of The Verdant Braes of Skreen at no extra charge. You can compare Dillon’s Jimmy with this one, more traditional and in Irish, by Kathleen Macinnes. Or with this one which I really like (despite the anime video someone inflicted on the sound track).  The band’s the Chieftains, and the singers are Cookie, Heather, and Raylene Rankin.  Cape Breton girls, from Mabou, about twenty miles from my home town, so of course we’re related.  Their dad was my fourth cousin. Finnegan’s Wake The Clancy Brothers and Tommy Makem perform the Dublin street ballad in which James Joyce saw "the entire cycle of life, death, and resurrection…"  From their iconic Carnegie Hall concert. Song for Ireland Mary Black was the first singer on Mo Gile Mear, above.  Here she sings Dick Gaughan’s song.  You should listen. Talking all the day With true friends who try to make you stay Telling jokes and news Singing songs to pass the night away Watching Galway salmon run Like silver dancing, darting in the sun… The Parting Glass A sendoff from The Wailin’ Jennys. Slán abhaile, slán go fóill (safe home, good luck).

If making good connections were easy, then when you checked Amazon, you wouldn’t get this: One problem stems from discrimination hidden in the word "connection"—we use it for different and sometimes conflicting kinds of relationships. My professional connections used to happen via ISPI, inmy local chapter or at the annual conference, which I’ve attended at least a dozen times.  I’d be nearly paralyzed by potential—smart people working on challenging projects, eager to talk about what they’d learned (and even what they couldn’t figure out). Lately my connections start with meeting virtually.  First my blog, then my Facebook presence, and now Twitter have opened doors I’d never have expected. I’m still figuring this stuff out.  That ambiguity in the word "connection" is like the verb "think."  When I started practicing my French in Second Life, I’d sometimes apologize for my slowness and explain (in French) that I needed to think before I spoke.  I’d say, "Il me faut penser…" ("I have to think…") Listening to my friends, I learned that they’d say "Il me faut réfléchir." In the dictionary, one translation of réfléchir is "to think," but others include "to reflect, to think about." I suppose you could learn another language just by reading it, or just by watching video in that language-but you’ll learn faster with conscious reflection, and you’ll learn faster when you connect to people and ideas in that language. So what’s this got to do with emoticons? Well, I had messy handwriting as a kid. So what’s that got to do with emoticons? The summer I was 11, I took a typing course.  I type fast (especially for a male in my generation).  When I first got online in the early 1980s, I liked to think I could convey my meaning in words fast; trying to type an emoticon just slowed me down. That works well if I’m using text with highly verbal English speakers.  When text-chatting in French, I now use emoticons a lot more, because I feel the need to make myself clear. My French is mediocre and a bit erratic, so people can misunderstand me when I try to joke or tease.  The emoticon  ^^ — which is apparently the French equivalent of :-)  — seems to portray upturned corners of a smile.  (Just so you know, mon ami.) In other words, it’s something I can use to build a connection.  Strangers get to know me, and they can decide, "He’s a guy with a sense of humor."  And it’s worked. I hadn’t been using my French much.  Then yesterday I spent about an hour and a half talking to someone I know, someone I’d met once, and a third person who just wandered up.  It was like those hallway conversations at a conference, except one of us had green-black wings, one of us had blue skin, and all of us could fly if we felt like it. Connecting, thinking about how I connect, reflecting on what happens afterward-this stuff works.  But I’m still not going to call those things "smilies."

Series: Analysis via paradigming « Previous post in this series • Next post in this series » This post is my contribution to the March 2009 edition of the Working/Learning Blog Carnival, a more-or-less monthly collection of posts about learning at work (how learning happens in the workplace) or working at learning (how professionals manage their own learning).  Click that March link for a list of all the participants in this month’s session, or learn more about the carnival in general. (Want to take part in a future edition?  Let me know.) In an earlier post, I described some basic elements of paradigming, a tool for task analysis that I learned from Joe Harless.  Today, I’m sharing an example of using a paradigm to figure out a complex task. You build a paradigm out of steps.  The graphic at the right shows the three kinds of steps (click to enlarge).  Each step has one or more possible triggers for action (the stimulus) and at least one action to take (the response).  Those three kinds of steps: One stimulus leading to one response (the basic chain).  If the stimulus is "telephone rings," the response is, "Answer and say, ‘Oligarch Lumber; how may I direct your call?’" More than one possible stimulus, each leading to a different response (the discrimination): If the customer asks for millwork, transfer the call to millwork. If the customer asks for order status, transfer the call to sales. If the customer asks about installation, transfer the call to the service desk. More than one possible stimulus, each leading to the same response (the generalization): If the customer has a billing question, or if the customer wants to cancel an order, transfer the call to the service manager. You can combine these steps-in fact, that’s a key reason for paradigming: to identify the steps and decisions in a complex task.  In this post, I want to show examples of this kind of analysis.  Here’s a paradigm based on an actual task in a complicated inventory-management system. (You can click the image to have the full, 800-by-1200 version open in a new window.) "Done" can be a stimulus When you want to review and adjust any forecast exceptions: You start from the main menu (S1 in the paradigm) and select option 2. That displays screen QR12 (S2), where you enter the SKU and store code. When that’s done (S3), you select option 7. I use "done" as shorthand for the result of the previous response.  Much faster than "SKU and store code entered." What happens here?  No idea. Picking up at S3: when the SKU and store code are entered, in the Restrict Record field, you enter I2. According to the documentation, the response should be a list of forecast exceptions (S5.2 in the sample). But what if there aren’t any exceptions? I have no idea, and the documentation (or the subject-matter expert) hasn’t said.  So I note a possible stimulus and circle it for follow up (S5.1). Maybe there are always exceptions.  Maybe there’s an error message.  Maybe there are several.  When we find out, we’ll update the paradigm.  Now, at least we know what we don’t know. "Decide" as a response, a decision as a stimulus Many times a stimulus leads to a number of different actions depending on the decision or choice the performer makes, as with S6 in the sample paradigm.  To underscore this, and to break out the possibilities, I often use "decide" as the response. One principle is that a response is always a verb-and that’s true here.  "Decide" is an action ("hey, Dad, watch me decide how to handle this exception forecast"). Another principle: a stimulus is always a noun.  It’s a thing.  S7.1, S7.2, and S7.3 (call them S7x) represent the possible choices-the things you can do-when you’re looking at an exception forecast: see the next one in the queue, see the previous one, or work with the current one. Notice that S7.1 ( "see next" ) isn’t an action; it’s a decision, the result of the "decide" action to the left.  The action that this decision triggers is "Press PF7."  And S7.3 ( "work with the current forecast" ) triggers another "decide" action, which leads to the most complex discrimination in the paradigm.  But first: what if there’s a loop? Here we go again Especially in computer applications, there’s a lot of looping back.  S9.x results from trying to see either the next or the previous forecast.  You can’t tell if there is a next or previous until you press the appropriate PF key.  Then you either see another forecast, or you get a message (the full text: "Roll Up / Down Beyond Last Record," a model of engineering obfuscation). In either case, you’re at the same situation as at S6: you’ve got a forecast on the screen (either a new one, or the last one you were looking at).  So you have to decide what to do.  For example, if you’d asked to see the next one, you now know there isn’t a next one.  You can decide to work with the current one, or go back to the previous. "Man, that’s complicated!"  Yep. S8x is a dense cluster of stimuli.  It contains a three-item discrimination (S8.1, S8.2, S8.3), since each of those items leads to a different response. S8x also contains S8.4 and S8.4, a generalization within the overall discrimination.  Whether you have spiky history or large standard error, you take the same action. (For simplicity, we’re assuming that only one of these conditions applies to any forecast.  In reality, if you could have more than one of them, you’d have to figure out (a) how do I know I have more than one? and (b) what do I do?) I’ll jump ahead a bit here:  Notice that after you respond to any of the first five S8s, you will (apparently) update the forecast, and something will happen.  All this time you’ve been working on the current forecast, and we know (from S6.x) that there’s a way to ask the system to show the next one. But what happens if there isn’t a next one?  My real question is: how can I tell if there aren’t any more forecast exceptions to work with? I don’t know, and so for the time being I have a placeholder — S8.6.  The question mark, the comment in parentheses, and the highlight circle all remind me, and anyone I’m working with, that this is a question we haven’t yet answered. More loose ends You see more unanswered questions at S11 and S12.  I’m going a bit beyond simply the technique of paradigming, because the point of the post is not so much the tool as the analysis it support. At S10, I’ve just tried one of three actions (S8.1, S8.2, or S8.3).  Now I press PF9.  What happens then?  Does the forecast remain on the screen?  Do I get a confirmation?  Does the system display some other screen? I don’t know, and so S12 is a placeholder. Even if the right answer is "Forecast Adjusted," I’ll need to know whether there are other forecasts waiting (and how to get back to them). In the final example, the generalization that includes S8.4 and S8.5 is stated in very general terms.  How large is a large spike?  How high is high standard error?  What do I do if I need to "adjust history and remodel?" The answers could complicate the paradigm-I might have to provide guidance like "if standard error is over 0.8…" The thing about complicated tasks is: sometimes they really are complicated.  At the time I worked on the forecasting system, this was the way it worked. Nobody was going to become skilled at forecasting inventory on his own, except through trial and error that would be very expensive for the employer. Developing the paradigm helped the client to understand the complexity of the job.  It also convinced them that a lot of this stuff didn’t need to be learned (as in, committed to memory).  In the next part of these series, I’ll talk about paradigms as potential road maps for building job aids. The posts in this series: Figuring things out (the plodding edition)Analyzing tasks with paradigming (that's this post) The paradigm: a road map to a job aid

Series: Analysis via paradigming « Previous post in this series • An aside: if you need a little Irish diversion to get through the day, try last week’s side-trip post: No ‘Danny Boy’ and Not Much Guile. One of the most productive uses of a paradigm (the task-analysis technique this series of posts has dealt with) is to suggest the content and even the form of a job aid for the task in question. Here’s a paradigm that was part of a large inventory-management system.  The task involved setting a a code to kick off a data extract that in turn would generate an electronic data interchange form.  (You can click the image for a larger version.) There’s a simple chain, then a discrimination between four possible choices. You chose one code depending on the type of output you want.  Regardless of the code you type, you press enter to put the new status to in effect (which, in the less-than-clear language of this system, meant you’ve finalized the replenishment order). Here’s the job aid.  Notice how it reflects the analysis in the paradigm.  (Click for a larger version.) The simple-chain steps become cookbook steps.  The discrimination becomes a decision table (if X, then do Y). I’m working up a more complex example based on a more complex paradigm.  For the last post in this series, I’ll highlight how different patterns of activity result in different kinds of job-aid steps. So: if you’ve got a complicated job, could you end up with lots of job aids? Sure. It’s not a given that you’ll want to build job aids-but it’s pretty likely, and it’s more efficient (as I noted here). Doing the kind of analysis that the paradigm calls for, you learn enough about the task to look for the usual create-a-job-aid suspects: Infrequently performed tasks, Tasks with many steps Tasks with complicated steps Tasks with a high penalty for error Tasks likely to change, Tasks without a significant need for speed. Job aids don’t necessarily take the cheat-sheet form you see above.  In the real inventory project, yes, they did-a bunch of job aids in a spiral-bound book the inventory manager kept near the computer. They could just as easily come in digital form, like embedded, context-sensitive help. The real point is that you can’t decide whether to teach the task (try and have people memorize the steps) or to support performance with a job aid until you know what the steps are, including discriminations and generalizations. One way to capture those is through a process like paradigming. The posts in this series: Figuring things out (the plodding edition)Analyzing tasks with paradigmingThe paradigm: a road map to a job aid (that's this post)

I’m (still) reading Steven Pinker’s The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window  into Human Nature.  In chapter 8, Games People Play, Pinker highlights a set of "cooperative principles" that people use in conversation-principles that you could follow if you wanted to collaborate more effectively with others, especially at a distance. These principles come from the philosopher Paul Grice, in a 1975 paper, Logic and Conversation (pdf). My personal bias is that many philosophers pay so much attention to logic that they get mired it it in a way that ordinary people don’t.  To the hyper-logical, "a horse is a horse" is a tautology.  As Pinker notes, though, in ordinary conversation that’s simply a way of saying "horses will act the way you expect horses to act." Here are Grice’s principles for cooperating conversationally: Quality: Say no less than the conversation requires. Say no more than the conversation requires. Quality: Don’t say what you believe to be false. Don’t say things for which you lack evidence. Manner: Don’t be obscure. Don’t be ambiguous. Be brief. Be orderly. Relevance: Be relevant. This, argues Pinker, is how we converse. Is he nuts? No.  As he says, things could be much worse ("Press 1 for English.  Press 2 for tech support.  Press 3 for existential despair…").  When you converse with someone, you both have these general expectations.  If you ask about my new project, you’re not expecting me to start with the founding of my client’s company in 1954.  And depending on the context, my update could be "pretty good," or could be a one-minute recap. Exceptions to these principles also play a part in conversation.  Politeness can act as a social lubricant or as "fictitious solidarity," as with John McCain’s constant expression, "my friends." "People are not just in the business of downloading information into each other’s heads but are social animals concerned with the impressions they make….the literal content…and the intended message…" Pinker underscores a point that’s easily lost in online conversation: not everyone shares the same understanding of the terms of conversation.  Humor can get lost; politeness can get overlooked.  That’s the point of the joke he cites: Four people are walking down the street: a Saudi Arabian, a Russian, a North Korean, and a New Yorker. A reporter rushes up to them and says, "Excuse me, can I get your opinion of the meat shortage?" The Saudi Arabian says, "Shortage?  What’s a shortage?" The Russian says, "Meat?  What’s meat?" The North Korean says, "Opinion?  What’s an opinion?" The New Yorker says, "Excuse me?  What’s excuse me?"  

The Canadian Society for Training and Development’s 2009 Symposium will be in Halifax, Nova Scotia, May 20-22.  I’ll be making a presentation on getting real work done with 2.0 tools. CSTD invited me to write an article related to my presentation.  It’s just been published in the Canadian Learning Journal’s spring 2009 edition.  (You can download a pdf of my article.) I decided the best way to write the article was to ask a group of training and learning professionals what tool worked for them.  I haven’t met any of these people; in fact, I’ve only spoken with one of them by phone.  I know them through virtual connections: blogs, Facebook, Twitter, and similar tools. Within 48 hours, I had seven replies.  So the article wrote itself, thanks largely to: Cammy Bean Jeff Cobb Tom Gram Harold Jarche Karl Kapp Richard Nantel Dean Shareski One of the points in my presentation will be how people and organizations solve workplace problems using web 2.0 tools (as opposed to, say, raving about how cool the tools are or how cute the fail whale is).  Each of these seven people had a different angle.  And a bonus for those who read the article is that they can go visit each person’s web site and find a lot more than could possible fit into 1500 words. Thanks, guys.