Impatient Learners

October 1, 2012 in Author, Delivery, Facilitation, Greg Owen-Boger, Preparation, Presentation, Training

greg 200x300If you’re a regular reader of our blog, you know that I often find inspiration in the Answers feature on LinkedIn. A while back, this question about impatient learners appeared.

Question: How do you deal with impatient participants during corporate training workshops?

As I think about this question, I’m reminded of an incident with a client several years ago where we were brought in mid-stream to try to rescue a particularly large training initiative.

Back Story
Leadership discovered that their employees lacked a basic understanding of what they actually did as an organization. To fix this, there was to be a big training push to educate everyone in the organization on the core elements of the business. To protect our client, I’ll call this initiative “Our Business 101.”

Each department was to develop a half-day session that would be delivered to the entire organization. They were to roll through the sessions roughly one a month until they had made it through the entire company. No matter your position, how long you’d been there, or what department you worked in, you would attend in person on the same day as everyone else. And, if you worked remotely, you’d dial in.

This was to be repeated annually.

Sounds like a good time, right?

Well, each department begrudgingly put its session together, assigned SMEs to speak and waited for their big day.

After a few months, we got a call from Leadership. The training wasn’t working. People were disengaged, the sessions were boring, and the initiative wasn’t doing what they had set out to do. Further, evaluations were bad. Real bad.

Leadership asked us to observe the next one and identify what they were doing wrong.

What we observed
The speakers demonstrated their expertise, but they were dull and long-winded. There was little connection between what they were saying and what was on their slides. They stood behind a podium and seldom looked up.

As I looked around the room at the learners that day, they seemed like naughty middle schoolers. The employees (who couldn’t find an excuse for not attending) did not participate. They passed notes, played games on their mobile devices, checked email. One even fell asleep. I wish I could say I was making this up.

It didn’t take long for us to understand what was happening. There were several issues that we uncovered. Here are the four biggies.

First, departments did not coordinate their efforts, which caused a lot of redundancy. Not knowing if contract negotiations fell under business development, finance, or legal, each department included it in their session. Brand integrity was discussed in the marketing session as well as legal. You get the idea.

Second, they did not stop to think about how much detail they really needed to go into. They were told to fill up half a day. So they did.

Third, Leadership was relying on SMEs to deliver training without giving them the training or resources they needed to be successful.

And fourth, there was no effort to engage the poor souls who had to dial in from remote locations. In many cases, they couldn’t see the slides or even hear the speakers because of the poor technology set-up in the training room.

The result was worse than not hitting the learning objectives. They gave training a black eye. I found this whole thing frustrating. It didn’t have to be this way. And think of the cost to the company both in money and employee engagement! I wish them luck getting these employees to participate in future training.

So now what?
At the point we were brought in there wasn’t much we could do other than work with each of the upcoming SMEs on the delivery of their presentations, which at that point had been locked down by Legal. That was OK and they did get something out of it, but we could have done more had the client brought us in earlier in the process.

Had they brought us in earlier we would have:

  • Consulted with them to coordinate among departments to avoid redundancy
  • Suggested smaller groups and worked with Leadership to split the employees into groups of similar backgrounds and interest levels
  • Suggested that remote attendees attend a webinar designed specifically for that purpose
  • Explored eLearning options (imagine how much time and energy this might have saved)

For the SMEs we would have:

  • Helped them tailor their session to the interest-level of each audience group
  • Consulted on their instructional design so that it facilitated learning more efficiently and effectively
  • Worked with them on their delivery skills to help them keep sessions relevant and interesting (I have written about this before.)
  • Helped them connect dots from previous sessions so that learners could get a better grasp of the organization as a whole rather than just the silos

So, next time you’re thinking about rolling out training, make sure you do it right. Think strategically. And if you need help, give us a call. We’ll be there to help you through the process; from instructional design consulting, to tailoring to each audience, to working on the training skills of your trainers and SMEs.

And if we can’t help, we’ll help you find someone who can.

By Greg Owen-Boger, VP and Trainer at Turpin Communication

So, The Short Answer Is Yes.

December 13, 2011 in Author, Delivery, Greg Owen-Boger

greg 200x300Maybe this is just a pet peeve of mine. But I really wish presenters would get to the point when answering questions.

In our presentation skills workshops participants often say they worry about being accurate when answering questions. In our experience they’re worrying about the wrong thing. They know more about their topic (usually) then they give themselves credit for. What they should be worrying about is not annoying their listeners by rambling on and on.

How? By providing the short answer first, then making the decision (or not) to go into more detail. Here’s an example:

Question:
“What’s the outlook for the coming fiscal year as it pertains to growing market share?”

A typical long-winded Answer:
“Market share is something we’re all focused on moving forward. As we all know we’ve been struggling with this for a long time and competitor X is not showing any signs of weakness especially since launching their much-hyped SuperWidget. As a side note, I’ve heard all they did was make it prettier without really changing the design.

Getting back to your question, as we know, we’ve got a lot of innovation in the pipeline. At last count I believe we had 3 new products and 5 brand extensions. We’ve improved our distribution capabilities through our partnership with MoveItNOW, and our new alignment between marketing and sales (thanks to members of this team) is working well.

Over the next fiscal year, we should be well positioned to grow market share. So to answer your question, the outlook is excellent.”

The speaker builds his case carefully and eventually gets to his answer, but he takes a long time doing it.

A more concise answer:
“The outlook is excellent.”

You’re probably thinking that this very short answer doesn’t provide enough detail. You may be right. But, as I said above, it should be a decision to say more, not a knee-jerk reaction.

If your listeners look like they want more detail, the answer might look something like this:
“The outlook is excellent.

(The speaker pauses to think and make the decision to expand upon the answer.)

Despite competitor X launching SuperWidget, we’ve worked hard to position ourselves for market share growth. Examples, as you know, include our new focus on innovation, our improved distribution capabilities and the alignment between marketing and sales. Because of these initiatives we are well-positioned to grow market share.”

The short answer provides framework for the longer answer.
In this example, the short answer—“The outlook is excellent”—provides context for the details presented in the rest of the answer. Think of it as the thesis sentence for the answer, it’s placement at the beginning of the response makes the longer answer easier to understand.

If you’ve attended one of our workshops or are a regular reader of this blog, you know that we think presenters need to take responsibility for maintaining their listeners’ attention. As Dale, our President, often says, “listeners are a little bit lazy and a lot distracted. Do what you can to keep them engaged.”

I agree. Keeping your answers short and easy listen to is one way to do that.

What are your thoughts?

by Greg Owen-Boger, VP and Trainer at Turpin Communication