Combining Social Media with Facilitation/ILT

[Kevin D. Jones]

Using Chuck's blog post and Christine's comment to springboard off of, I thought a full discussion on this would be helpful (at least it would be for me).

I agree with Christine's comments - especially after last week's Technology Day. I am coming to the same (or similar) conclusion that my ILT/facilitation methods need to change.

Thoughts gathered so far: Not sure that I know exactly the best way to apply them or even if they are correct, but I will be testing out...

- Use more involvement before, during and after using social media tools.
- Allow more 'off the cuff' yet guided information flow sessions.
- Allow participants to assist in creating the structure before, during and after.
- More learner engagement, even with the presence of increased chaos introduced by the learner, is OK.

What else did you learn or would you add to the list?

[Chuck]

I think you are right on track. Our previous models of training in which the trainer/facilitator created the structure and then provided the content in a linear fashion are clearly not as effective and efficient. This model makes the assumption that the trainer is the expert on whatever the topic at hand may be. Instead, using a model of social learning in which we invite full participation from all of the participants using all of the tools available to us recognizes the fact that while independently we may have some knowledge, the collective of the community has far more than any of us individually.

In thinking about these things, and re-reading Block's text and Kevin's post, I am not convinced after all that chaos would be a necessary ingredient in this process. I think what we may all be recognizing, feeling or even fearing right now is the environmental shift from one form of learning to another. During that period of organizational and communal change we will most certainly notice this bit of chaos as people get accustomed to the 'brave new world' of learning in a new way and taking responsibility for their own learning, and for contributing to the learning of the group. However, it has been my experience as a college-level educator using various social learning tools now for almost a decade that once people get comfortable with the tools and with the model, not only does chaos not ensue, they very easily slip in and out of teacher/learner roles as they feel they have more or less to contribute. It becomes a very effective manner in which to engage all members of the community over time.

[Kevin D. Jones]

Before being hired at Intel I was repeatedly asked, "Are you OK with ambiguity?" "Do you have any problem living in an ambiguous world?"

Chuck, your point about chaos I believe is correct. It may be chaos at the beginning as everyone figures things out (like the Storming/Forming/Norming/Performing model). But it can quickly turn into something that is less chaotic and more ambiguous to start - and we need to be OK with that. Not that in the end we walk out saying, "What on earth was that!?" Instead, in the end, the ambiguousness turns into something solid - and what we take away from it may be something different (probably will be) for everyone. This could never happen to the same degree without the upfront ambiguity.

And that is one of the great things about this whole movement - it is all personalized to us and not so canned. That way we can all take away what we need at any moment. The opposite is to walk out, all taking away the same thing but that 'thing' is not really what we needed.

Not that regular ILT/facilitation is wrong by any means - I think has its purpose. But I think we are really starting to see the differences of when to use what method, how to use them and their purposes.

[Chuck]

It is ironic that you mention the current movement from traditional, linear training to a more informal version and how that is affecting how we do business. Our organization is in the midst of 'transforming' itself and moving to using SharePoint as a key application in this process. The interesting part of this though is that while we have a directive to move toward a more open and collaborative model of learning and operating, and we have a very aggressive schedule in which to do so, even the group of us who are charged with leading the organizational change sem to be resisting it to some degree in order to stay within our comfort zones. It is almost as if we are saying "I can see how that will be more efficient and could really be beneficial to us, but...you go first and prove it and then I will follow along." We need to be willing to take that first step to be leaders in the organization to be able to sell the concept by embracing it and showing how it can best be used or it will never gain any traction and all of the arguments against using social learning tools and methods will come to fruition.

[Christine Martell]

The changes in what we do everyday are significant, and therefor not easy. And just because we understand the concept doesn't mean our behaviors will match up.

I make a concerted effort to use the tools on a daily basis. However, when I am under a short time limit, I find myself resorting to the old ways. It's faster in a pinch to go with where I have more experience and know what to do. I haven't been using social media long enough to make it the default, and there are not enough people around me using it to create a support for it.

So beyond being sold, I have to work on choosing a new way consistently, and be willing to live with short term delays to achieve the longer term benefits.

[Sue Todd]

As the complexity of the business and market landscape increase, the response will more and more require an adaptive leadership approach to find the new future. That requires solving new problems with yet unknown solutions. But leaders have not yet been prepared to do this - so they continually resort to solving new problems with outdated mental models and frameworks that worked in the past. That's why people know cognitively there's probably a new answer, a new paradigm, but they are extremely hesitant to move forward. It's as if they were staring at a frozen lake. They want to see someone walk across it first to make sure the ice is solid. Even then - many will be afraid to even follow. We have to develop new leadership skills that will help us walk out together by building a strong human link to keep us safe at all times. That means leaders have to rely much more on creating an environment where their people find the answers - and leaders work at a higher level - assembling all the answers into the new framework - the new understanding that they can take back to their teams, who then work from a new understanding to solve the next series of challenges. That's essentially - the future of learning - a continual feedback loop built into the execution of the strategy.