After I shared that I will be speaking at ATD’s TechKnowledge Conference, Helen Blunden remarked, “Fly the flag for social learning, it’s been forgotten”. It was an interesting and insightful remark given that my session on social strategy principles is just one of only two on the program.
What happened?
Here’s my thoughts. Training and training technologies still rule the day and it’s easy to understand why
1. Training enables many industries to sprout up, from tech and strategy to classroom tools and approaches, there is a continual stream of innovation labeled as learning. It’s self perpetuating as each builds on and reinforces another. And that’s my second reason for trainings hold on all things organizational learning.
2. For the last 15-20 years the training industry has consciously or unconsciously cornered the word learning. elearning, learning management, mobile learning and now microlearning; learning = training to most. By occupying the outcome the training industry created a monopoly of the mind. This can’t be understated. When you control the message you control the mindset. And this is related to my final point, the training department.
3. Call it T&D or L&D, the departmentalization of “learning” inside organizations has created an unconscious belief of need in business leaders. Although T&D struggles to get a seat at the proverbial table, this department has mirrored that of the larger organization’s hierarchy and process; managers, management, programs and procedure, tools and vernacular all serve to make it’s structure familiar and comfortable to leadership.
Now look at these same 3 points again in the social learning light.
1. The Industry.
Outside of communication platforms there are no plethora of tools and techniques. There’s no thumballs to toss, whiteboards, curriculums, games or PowerPoint plugins.
2. The Labels.
Social learning isn’t seen first as learning but rather the emphasis is on the “social” which to many still means chit-chat, Facebook friends and cats on a Roomba GIFs. Social learning lost the battle for the learning label.
3. The Structure
Social has no agents, no ownership, no pattern, no leadership or hierarchy, when these things are applied social often struggles. Social learning also can’t be measured in seat time, completion rates or scores. There’s no imagery or infographics, it’s not flashy in the least. The process of learning socially is driven solely by the “learners” themselves in the flow of their work as opposed to a module or classroom. And that’s crux of the the issue, no controls. Social learning, unlike its counterpart, formal learning, is a messy many-to-many rather than the neat one-to-many model of training.
So is a handful of sessions a leading indicator that social has plateaued? To be fair, TechKnowledge is a training technology conference conducted by a global training organization (yeah, I know it’s “talent development” now) so the focus isn’t social. Even my own organization, The eLearning Guild, has a focus on content development technologies and approaches but at least the core understanding with us is that “elearning” is more a verb and a spectrum and not a set of technologies. With that said I do think the flag is flying but on another hilltop, that of Internal Communications. I believe L&D can leverage Social but not lead it. Training, the core activity, can benefit from more open conversations and sharing but they’ll likely do so in more formal ways with coaching and mentoring programs.
