HR is under attack

Prelude

Like it or not, this is a time of crisis for many businesses.=

Crisis is a time when Human Resources (HR, the People function, or whatever it is called in your business) can be a key leader in helping the business move forward and out of the crisis. A crisis often calls for change – including people and how they are organized – and for people to have hope. HR – the function that is about people – should be leading the way.

Sadly, this is less the case than one would think. And the opposite is often true, with the HR function, especially training and development, being the first to take cuts.

In my last post, I offered that this is because HR rarely can show ROI or other financial relevancy. In a financial crunch, only those functions that can show – or assist – with tangible financial benefits are considered relevant at leadership table deliberations.

HR may be under attack, but there are ways out. This white paper discusses how to achieve positive ROI for one of the HR functions, learning and development, during a crisis … or anytime for that matter.

Summary

HR functions, especially training and development, are under attack. When economic storms hit a business, training and development expenses are often one of the first things to go overboard to save the ship. Other HR functions considered non-critical are next. Why? Those things are viewed by many in senior management as “nice to have” but not relevant to staying afloat. This solution white paper outlines the problem, why it exists, and what to do about it. You will be armed for future budget battles and to help lead the business forward.

 

Cuts, cuts, everywhere … and worst of all, irrelevance

HR functions, especially training and development, are under attack.

When economic storms hit a business, training and development expenses are often one of the first things to go overboard to save the ship. Other HR functions considered non-critical are next.

Why?

Those functions are viewed by many as “nice to have” and “costs” or “expenses” with no tangible return on investment. In economic storms, business must focus on tangible revenue and positive return on investment (ROI) to survive. Functions or organizational groups that do not produce tangible returns or something that the business must absolutely have to operate right now are viewed as not relevant … and therefore expendable.

Worse yet, this often leads to HR (and the training and development function if a separate group) being seen as a “nonplayer” at the leadership table … irrelevant to economically viability. “Human Resources” is also now seen by younger workers as an archaic and even demeaning function title, with the function purpose being just compliance and financial efficiency by managing people like any other company “resources.” (For the purposes of this paper, we’ll stick with the traditional “HR” short title)

This solution white paper will examine one HR aspect – training – and provide a framework to both arm you for future budget battles and to make training really work.

 

What are the issues with training?

It doesn’t work … at least if improving the business is the goal.

There are three general types of business training:

1. Training to improve capabilities or other change in the business.
2. Training to meet regulatory compliance (i.e., “check the box”).
3. Training to provide development outside of what is directly needed for the business. This is usually in the area of personal interests and development not relevant to a person’s immediate role.

Training works for #2. Get people in a classroom or on a computer, conduct the training to fulfill the requirement, and take attendance. Done.

Training can “work” for #3 if the objective is to provide it as an employee benefit and not worry about actual outcomes. “Works” here means providing … if provided, box checked. Done.

Traditional training doesn’t work for #1.

Most everyone wants effective training. Most trainees. Most trainers. The business. The problem is what is meant by “effective” training.

What businesses want from training is not “training.”

What businesses want from training is positive change … behavior change or other change that improves business results. Traditional training is largely ineffective in achieving lasting behavior change or tangible positive ROI.

Training spending was $83 billion in the United States alone in 2019, according to Training magazine, or a staggering $370 billion globally according to trainingindustry.com. Traditional training has an effectiveness – at best – of 20-25%. That means about $62-66+ billion wasted in the U.S. alone. In a single year. No wonder training gets jettisoned when the financial going gets rough!

 

Why doesn’t traditional training work?

The problem: change from traditional “training” is not automatic. 

People do not become more productive or productive in new forms of work from a few hours “training” or from a single event.  Trainees need to try out what they’ve learned and get coaching to improve for any training to work well.

Hardly anyone can start a new sport and be a “pro” after one training session. Why should we expect significant behavior change in business to be any different? Hardly anyone can leave a single business training session with sufficient proficiency to be considered “skilled.” The fastest path to mastery is to do, check results, and adjust with expert modeling and coaching, then keep repeating the cycle.

“… learning itself is best done slowly to accumulate lasting knowledge … the most effective learning looks inefficient; it looks like falling behind.”
Range – Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World by David Epstein

Change does not come from an event.

Lasting, productive change only comes from concerted, ongoing effort in applying and perfecting new ways of work.

Yet “events” are how most organizations go about change – sending people to “training” events and assuming that productive change will then happen.  Or use change frameworks that depend on training events as a key change component.

Furthermore, learning and development professionals measure training effectiveness in the following rank order, according to the 2020 LinkedIn workplace learning report:

1. Course completions
2. Learner satisfaction surveys
3. Minutes of learning per month
4. Repeat visits per month

See actual behavior change or ROI in there? I don’t either. Those metrics are, sorry to say, “vanity metrics” … metrics that are easily measurable but don’t measure what’s ultimately of value. Little wonder, then, why learning and development budgets get axed so easily and quickly. If the business is struggling to survive, “course completions” doesn’t matter … at all.

 

The problem gets worse – we’re not skilling for the future

(https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/10/top-10-work-skills-of-tomorrow-how-long-it-takes-to-learn-them/)  lists the top 10 essential skills for 2025 according to World Economic Forum.

The report states “Critical thinking and problem-solving top the list of skills that employers believe will grow in prominence in the next five years. These have been consistent since the first report in 2016.” … “But newly emerging this year are skills in self-management such as active learning, resilience, stress tolerance and flexibility.”

Here is the top 10 list:

This surfaces two things. First, critical thinking and problem-solving have been consistently important for the past five years. Traditional training structured around knowledge acquisition doesn’t contribute much to those two at all. Second, a further 6 of the 10 (all remaining but the technology-specific) are of the same general type of skills that do not lend themselves to achieving competency via traditional “event” and knowledge-sharing based training.

The good news is that research has identified skills for the future. The LinkedIn report indicated that around half of the surveyed learning and development professionals planned to launch upskilling or reskilling programs.

Also, adaptability (generally a composite of resilience, stress tolerance, flexibility, and versatility) in particular is absolutely critical amid relentless change. As I’ve written before, adaptability is likely the single best predictor of sustained success in today’s world.

The not so good news is that almost all the skills require a different type of training than normally provided in business. Whether “upskilling” or “reskilling,” it takes time and effort to change a workforce for future needed skills. However, changing a workforce, or even a single existing employee, to be proficient at new skill sets is definitely not a “go to a class” situation.

 

… and even worse – transformation is not happening fast enough

“Transformation” is a hot business topic.

“Digital transformation,” “business agility transformation,” and so on reverberate in business conversation and agendas.

The definition of “transformation” is a complete, or at least significant, fundamental change.

Fundamental change magnifies training ineffectiveness. Fundamental change requires, by definition, new work, new work processes, new leadership, and probably some cultural change. In short, transformation requires changes across all four factors of the Optimal Business Performance Model™ (for more explanation, see my blog at www.mikerussell.com or my book Wrong Until Right – How to Succeed Despite Relentless Change):

This is more than traditional training can hope to deliver. People just don’t fundamentally change overnight with new habits, even if they want to do so. Fundamental change requires many application and learning cycles to take hold and achieve intended results. Sitting in a classroom for a training “event,” divorced from actual work, won’t help much.

HR can be a strategic leader in transformation. However, research and reports suggest that HR is still lagging overall rather than seizing the opportunity, despite some bright spots.

• Research indicates an astounding 70% of transformations fail. Reasons are legion; however, some key factors lacking are commitment, of skills and capabilities, of effective change management, and of performance management support/reinforcement … all areas where HR can and should lead the way.
• This 2020 HBR article underscores the opportunity: “We believe this is HR’s moment to lead organizations in navigating the future. They have a tremendous opportunity, and responsibility, to provide workers with guidance on the skills and capabilities they will need to be successful over the next decade as new roles continue to emerge.”
• “The most dangerous way to approach the disruption caused by digital transformation is to apply the same processes and strategies that were relevant in the past,” said the research report, HR Must Deliver on Transformation. “Placing your people at the centre of the transformation effort requires new tools, new architecture, and a clear vision of the new role HR needs to play.”
• A Forbes article on human factors in digital transformation cites that culture and human factors are the barrier. “In a recent article on digital transformation trends, Forbes.com Contributor Daniel Newman noted that company culture is still the biggest barrier to digital transformation. Beyond planning the roadmap and implementing the technology, leaders need to think seriously about the human side of transformation. A change management program focused on tackling the human barriers to change needs to be run in parallel to any digital transformation program.” I would go further to say that there should be one program with the various elements – human and digital – integrated into the overall program.

 

… and even worse still –leadership development is ineffective in today’s digital and rapidly shifting workplace

Leadership is a multiplying factor in any business. Effective leadership will multiply positive results, ineffective leadership will reduce results or produce negative ones. Some statistics about leadership effectiveness:

• 50% of all managers do not want to manage people. If they choose to stay in a management role, they need to learn how to be effective despite preference.
• 90% of all managers use no more than 2 of the 5 different management approaches/styles for handling situations. Lots of room for improvement!
• Most managers (and people overall) prefer or tend to focus either on tasks/controlling OR on people/relating in situations, rather than adapting to the situation. As we pointed out earlier, adaptability is the key skill for the future.

… and most alarming of all:

• 80+% of leaders and managers are underperforming according to research by Dr. Michael O’Connor and Dr. Richard Boyatzis. They don’t consistently excel in both productivity and satisfaction – their own, co-workers’, reports’, customers’, owners’, and that of any other significant stakeholders.

Leadership training abounds across businesses and training providers. Yet, if the research above is correct, much of leadership training is wasted year after year.

The lack of effective leaders is compounded by the wide-spread lack of effective succession planning. This almost guarantees ineffective leadership in the future. And, in the case of a crisis like the pandemic, there is the prospect of suddenly losing key leaders and, without a succession plan, having no backups. Not a good situation when the ship is already taking on water.

Training leadership is similar to training other skills; application and learning cycles are needed. Given the complexity of leadership compared to other skills, more cycles are likely needed for most individuals to become effective.

 

OK … so now what?

We’ve identified the desired results of effective training (outside compliance-related and enrichment training) should be sustained behavior change and positive ROI.

The top ranked priorities of learning and development professionals for 2020, according to the LinkedIn report, are:

1. Getting managers to make learning a priority.
2. Creating a culture of learning.
3. Increasing learner engagement.
4. Teaching technology effectiveness.

The report survey was conducted prior to the pandemic taking widespread hold. Even so, the pandemic would serve to only strengthen #1 (we already discussed how training suffers in economic storms) and #3 (it’s hard to learn when your job may be on the line). Priority 4 would also become even more important for learning how to conduct business remotely.

Now we’re ready to identify what should be included in any solution. This will drive the design of candidate solutions.

First, immerse managers in any solution

The reasons managers don’t make learning a priority is that it is not in their best interests to do so.

Learning doesn’t usually show a tangible, positive ROI. Learning takes away time from activities that do produce a tangible, positive ROI or are part of the manager’s explicit responsibilities. Managers usually have to pay out of their area budget to pay for training, whether external or internal, increasing profit & loss pressure. Finally, managers are encouraged to delegate “training” to the professional learning and development group if one exists.

No wonder managers don’t make learning a priority, even if those in the Learning and Development community want them to do so (LinkedIn survey priority 1). Even if they do send people to train, it is not uncommon for managers to pull people out of it for some non-emergency reason. This also inculcates an employee mindset of training as “not real work” or not pertinent, undermining efforts to create a culture of learning (LinkedIn survey priority 2) and reducing engagement (LinkedIn survey priority 3).

Any solution should incorporate aspects to address those disconnects.

Second, lest we forget … a lesson from history

There was a big problem in World War II (besides the fact that there was a really big war going on …). To win the war, allied countries needed to do (at least) two things: 1) gather a lot of people to fight, and 2) manufacture all the stuff they needed to wage war. And fast, before the war was lost.

The problem was that the people for #1 were a lot of the people who knew how to do #2. Women and men ineligible for military service were asked to fill in. Most of them did not know how to do the work or do it well enough. How do you train so many people in so short a time for work where they have no skills?

Enter TWI in the United States. TWI is short for “Training Within Industry.” The U.S. government provided services to companies to help develop effective training and work improvement programs. These programs were designed to both provide the needed skills and generate large numbers of skilled workers quickly.

TWI had several facets, two of them being training instructors how to train effectively and training trainees how to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of their work once trained.

Instructors (usually supervisors or managers, not “professional instructors”) learned the training steps of:

• prepare,
• show and tell (how to do specific steps and also why),
• observe the trainee perform the tasks,
• provide feedback so the trainee could improve,
• repeat the cycle until sufficient proficiency has been gained in the chosen task.

Where possible, instruction was either in labs where work conditions could be replicated or on the job, so the trainee learned the actual work.

The satisfaction of tangible progress, along with understanding the “why” of the work, are factors that increase employee learning engagement (the third priority in the LinkedIn survey). If the training has no linkage to success in the trainee’s work, then training will be wasted due to low trainee commitment.

While training well was critical, don’t miss the importance of the second facet: employees improving how work was done. Creating a culture of continuous evaluation, learning, and improvement is what many companies want today (reference the second priority in the LinkedIn survey; a culture of “learning” being the enabler of continuous improvement).

Post-war, the TWI approach generally faded from U.S. view, especially as “professional trainers” came to the forefront. The focus became maximizing “trainer” utilization, especially if the trainer or program was contracted external to the company. Therefore, training became focused on single-day or multiple day events where the trainer could conduct a knowledge transfer course and be “done,” similar to how education has evolved over the past decades.

Furthermore, following the TWI model would be too expensive in terms of repeatedly bringing trainers and/or trainees to a site. Furthermore, if trainers supplied observation and coaching, that would be a near full-time expense. The trainers also wouldn’t be available to provide other “training,” further reducing trainer utilization. Training became event-driven around maximizing trainer “course utilization” and minimizing training expenses, rather than training process and results-driven.

Also, TWI was introduced in Japan post-war and led to the Kaizen concept and key factors in the “Toyota Way.” TWI also provides important contributions to lean and agile work approaches. (Here is one source for more information: https://www.lean.org/Search/Documents/105.pdf).

Use this starter list of core training parameters in designing your solution

• Managers are explicitly included in the program design.
  • The manager agrees in writing, before program start, to support the program in specific ways.
  • Trainee time necessary for the program is identified and agreed to by the manager.
  • Managers and trainees have regular, pre-scheduled update sessions as part of the agreement.
  • If there is a performance management system, a “developing people” objective is included in the manager’s performance objectives.
• The program should have some capability for producing positive ROI.
• The instruction process should incorporate some form of the TWI instruction cycle and with sufficient cycles to gain proficiency.
• TWI type cycles would preferably occur substantially in the workplace and with “real” work.
• Training would preferably incorporate at least some of the essential future skills.
• Trainees should be able to begin identifying and proposing better ways of doing work going forward. If there is a performance management system, doing so should be part of the trainee’s performance objectives.
• The program would move away from the event-driven model.
• Now that remote work has become more normal, remote training should be more normal as well. This also helps moving to learning spread over time, rather than depending on “once and done” events due to physical and financial logistics concerns.

Some fundamental implementation tips for success

Do identify key business priorities and what training could support those needs.

Do think and act like a business unit, rather than HR as a “support” function. Walk the walk and talk the talk of “we’re part of this business.”

Don’t try to redesign all training at once and then start delivery. Pick the most important program from an overall business success perspective, redesign it, and then pilot. Adjust based on learning from the pilot and deliver again, modeling learning cycles analogous to what you want the trainees to follow.

Don’t worry about new programs not being perfect. Having a mindset of “failure is not an option” will almost guarantee your failure (here’s a post on this). Let everyone involved, as well as executives, know this and keep reminding them you are moving forward to produce positive ROI programs that help the company move forward. Keep the focus on future-proofing the business with necessary skills and doing so with positive ROI.

 

An example of a change framework solution

Our Peer Mentoring change framework is one example of implementing solutions to training issues. It is the result of a two-year effort to correct the failure of traditional training; one year of intensive research and one year of designing, building, and testing in the real world to find out and deliver what really works.

Here, as an example, is how the Peer Mentoring framework fits the solution parameters:

Solution parameter	Peer Mentoring aspects
Explicit managerial involvement and support	The manager agrees before program start to support the program in specific ways. Estimated participant time necessary for the program is identified and agreed to by the manager. Managers and participants have regular, pre-scheduled update sessions as part of the agreement.
Capability for positive ROI	A fundamental learning component in the Peer Mentoring program is the workplace improvement project. Participants learn how to identify, analyze, present, and advocate for improvements with positive ROI. The composite ROI of all the projects will usually more than pay for the investment in the program. Once the projects are implemented, the ROI will continue to build as long as the work continues. This allows self-funding of additional Peer Mentoring programs over time, accelerating ROI.
Effective, TWI-type learning cycles	The essentials program duration is 6 months, which allows time for effective learning cycles and to identify a workplace improvement project. Each week a skill is introduced or elaborated in part of one day. The skill is then applied during the rest of the week. There are feedback cycles at the daily, weekly, and monthly level for reinforcement, improvement, and accountability. 360 degree feedback, where feasible, is also incorporated to aid participant learning. Furthermore, the framework is called “Peer Mentoring” because peer mentoring is literally included as a key aspect. Coaching is a key skill for the future workplace, and coaching should be also peer to peer, not just for managers. Participants learn how to interact well with others, including understanding how to adjust to others’ best learning and communication styles. Peers learn coaching and helping others learn by doing within the program. Research about the important of mentoring, particularly for Millennials and supporting workplace diversity is at https://peer-mentoring.com/research-studies-and-statistics/.
Incorporate future skills	The program includes at least some aspects of all the non-technology skills from the WEF list. It also includes how to use communication technology effectively and allows practicing this skill, since the program is virtual. All skills are applied in TWI-type learning cycles. A skill not directly cited in the WEF list, but an underlying fundamental of the list, is change management. Participants learn a change management model and get practical experience in change via their own change and through the workplace improvement project. These help participants embrace and leverage change, rather than fearing it … a key for their future success and the future success of any business. Only one component of the list involved working with people: leadership and social influence. This is included as an obvious component in Peer Mentoring leadership programs. However, since effective collaboration is a key component of successful innovative organizations today, collaboration is explicitly added to the program skills mix. An element also needed for the future, especially to encourage diversity, is respect. Respect is woven into the program, including in peer mentoring. (See the Peer Mentoring program description page for a complete list of subjects covered)
Continuous and sustainable work improvement	Participants build and execute personal development plans, learning how to manage their personal continuous improvement. The workplace improvement project component highlights skills and mindsets that are key to continuous workplace improvement. Participants also model for others, including their managers, how to improve work.

 

We encourage clients to include Peer Mentoring program objectives in both participant and manager performance management if a performance management program exists, both for accountability and for recognition of being a work objective for the performance period.

One of the valuable take-aways from participation is a better understanding of how the business works and what other areas do to make it work. The formal and informal interactions between participants from different functions improves workplace collaboration and ROI of future workplace improvements.

Finally, there is one aspect of the workplace improvement program that supports achieving immediate business results in both economic upturns and downturns. Improving business results requires change of some type. Participants accelerate needed workplace change by actually making changes as part of their learning program. The program isn’t merely about discussing change, it is about making change.

 

Call to arms

You have read about why training is the first to go in economic storms, the issues underlying this, factors for any successful solution implementation, and a solution example that you can implement now.

It’s time to decide … will you address training issues and perceptions of HR/learning and development being a non-player in business … not essential?

If so, this has given you the tools to start arming yourself for battles ahead.  So get going!

 

by Mike Russell

 

Published on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/hr-under-attack-mike-russell