Is following the "Golden Rule" making your employees less engaged?
Is following the "Golden Rule" making your employees less engaged?
The Problem With Customer Satisfaction
If you’re a trainer or training professional, you probably use customer satisfaction score to measure how happy students are with the courses you offer. Chances are that once a student has completed a course you ask them this question: “How satisfied were you with the course/instructor?” If your satisfaction scores are high, you send a message out to the organization to highlight what a great job you’re doing. The problem with asking the “satisfaction” question is that the answer doesn’t tell you how engaged or loyal your students are.
Why Measure Customer Loyalty
Customer engagement or loyalty is a much better indicator of whether those students will take any more of your classes. In fact, high satisfaction scores might well be hiding that many of your training customers are ready to jump ship and find another provider. Here a real life non-training example:
I hired a vendor to work on my house. The project took longer than I expected and the contractor really didn’t do a good job of communicating schedule changes, delays, etc. The final product was pristine. And, I was satisfied with the results. If the vendor gave me a survey to rate just that aspect of the effort, I would have given him a nine out of 10. Unfortunately, because of the elongated timeline and poor communication there was no way I would use this vendor again or refer his services to one of my friends. The impact to the vendor was unrealized revenue opportunities.
Is it possible that your training organization is like the vendor that worked on my house? You’re getting a lot of good scores on your satisfaction surveys, but your students or customer base is not loyal. They are unwilling to recommend your classes to their colleagues and they would prefer to take classes from someone else.
What the Research Says
My personal experience, it seems, was not a coincidence. Research shows that there is a direct correlation between corporate revenue and the willingness of existing customers to refer that company’s services. Forbes magazine, for example, suggests one reason Apple Inc.’s retail stores enjoy the highest productivity in retailing of any kind, is because they focus on customer loyalty, not customer satisfaction. Apple uses an approach called Net Promoter Score (NPS). Here’s how it might in a training environment.
Abandon your current questionnaire and create a one question survey. Rather than asking students who have completed courses: “How satisfied were you with this course?” Ask them: “On a scale of ‘0 – 10’ with ‘0’ meaning not at all and ’10’ being extremely likely, how likely are you to refer this course/instructor to a colleague?” Provide students with an area to submit comments if they wish.
How To Measure Customer Loyalty
With NPS anyone who gives you a score of 9 or 10 is a promoter. It considers students who give you a score of 7 or 8 passives. And, it considers students who give you a score between 0 and 6 detractors. To get your NPS you would subtract all the scores of “0-6” from the scores that rate you between 9 and 10. If for example, you received one hundred surveys from a course and twenty of those surveys rated your course between 0 and 6. Ten rated you between 9 and 10, and seventy rated you between a 7 and an 8. You would subtract the detractors (20) from the promoters (10) giving you a NPS of (-10), the translation, you have a lot of work to do.
What Customer Satisfaction Hides
Using a traditional approach to viewing these numbers gives you a different view. We would probably consider anyone who rated us above a “5” as satisfied. Thus the satisfaction score would have been 80% (the seventy that rated you between 7 and 8 plus the 10 that rated you between 9 and 10). The score of 80% would have hidden that more of your students are detractors than are promoters, and only 10 out of 100 would refer your services to a colleague.
So, if you really want to know how good a job you’re training team is doing. Consider NPS.
Twelve years ago I Co-authored an article for Training Industry Inc. titled “The Training Value Gap.” My thesis was: The incremental delivery of small nuggets of learning adds more value to an organization than the one time delivery of large training programs. I believed that consistently providinglearners with small (sometimes incomplete) knowledge nuggets would cause learners to more quickly gain new skills. The quicker acquisition of those skills would cause incremental and consistent performance improvements that would help the organization reap the benefits much earlier than if the organizations waited and delivered one large training program.
“The incremental delivery of small nuggets of learning adds more value to an organization than the one time delivery of large training programs.”
When Bobbi Edwards and I wrote that article back in 2007, we had never heard of Agile. We had our own theory regarding the design of learning solutions, but we didn’t have a method to support it. Over the years we attempted to accomplish this fresh approach to training design and development using a variety of waterfall development approaches, including ADDIE and Six Sigma. It wasn’t until we transitioned to Agile that we truly had an iterative, incremental training development technique that allowed us to develop and deploy small incremental learning content in a sustained and proactive manner.
“Agile not only provides software developers with a technique that supports incremental releases, it also accommodates for the quick and nimble change of the high-tech world in which we live.”
For those not familiar with Agile and how this approach to product development has changed our everyday lives, consider how you receive updates to your smartphone apps or your personal computer software. Chances are you frequently receive small functionality updates to these applications. Right? This is in stark contrast to the mindset of just a few years ago when software applications underwent major rewrites every eighteen to twenty-four months. Delivering incremental software fixes and functionality allows customers to receive value faster and more frequently.
Consider the impact to today’s customers if they had to wait two years to get the latest twitter app because the phone manufacturer would not release that update until the Facebook interface was complete? Agile not only provides software developers with a technique that supports incremental releases, it also accommodates for the quick and nimble change of the high-tech world in which we live. As a result, we all glean the benefits of frequent fixes and increased functionality.
Applying this analogy to training allows a new manager (who needs to developleadership skills) the opportunity to learn how to deliver performance reviews even if the component of the curriculum that teaches how to navigate the company’s culture is incomplete. The implications are: the new manager (and his or her company) can immediately enjoy the benefits of one component of the training even though the entire program is incomplete. This allows the company to realize incremental improvements that reduce the training value gap. When training organizations develop content the Agile way, companies and trainees both realize the benefit of learning solutions sooner, not later.
If you want to close the training value gap, I encourage you to use Agile.
An institution’s capacity to learn drives its ability to succeed (Gronhaug & Stone, 2012). Businesses reach the pinnacle of this capacity when they become learning organizations (LO) and realize what Senge (1990) characterized as the “Fifth Discipline”. Institution that achieve the “Fifth Discipline” experience a shift in organizational culture. Inventing new knowledge turns into a means of operating, not a specialized activity (Nonaka, 1991).
Modern literature agrees with the potential, philosophy and grand themes of the “Fifth Dimension”. The research is likewise in agreement that the doctrine includes several unsettled issues and queries that organizations need to clarify to reach it (Antonacopoulou, Moldjord, Steiro & Stokkeland, 2019; Gronhaug & Stone, 2012). Those challenges include; How will the entity recognize when it has developed into a learning organization? And, what behavior modifications are needed? These unanswered questions are perhaps the reason Gavin (2019) contended that although business leaders concur with the notions embraced by the LO, few organization have transitioned.
The New Learning Organization
Antonacopoulou et al. (2019) focused on these unsettled issues by presenting a conceptualized view of what they referred to as “The New Learning Organization” (NLO). The investigators argued for precise, actionable, simple to implement rules for practice that result in producing what they referred to as an “agile” organization. They further proclaimed the NLO is proficient at the same principles Goncalves (2011) represented as core tenants of agile. Those tenants include; group problem solving, experimenting with new techniques, learning from previous experience and best practices, and transferring knowledge throughout the organization in a quick and efficient manner.
Agile and the New Learning Organization
The change from a conventional institution into the NLO requires several interrelated organizational activities (Sharma & Bilgic, 2016). However, because of its similarities to the agile method, Yocum (2015) maintained that adopting agile can assist with, and speed up an entity’s transformation. The researcher found that numerous training teams have replaced their traditional principles and processes with agile to achieve the “Fifth Dimension” and become more flexible and efficient in creating online educational programs. Further, Yocum (2015) found that, like the NLO, agile focuses on solving problems, experimenting with new ways of getting work done, learning from experiences, and transferring knowledge throughout the organization. With agile, employees, empowered to decide, collaborate to produce solutions (Denning, 2016).
Training organizations that have adopted agile as a development method have experienced radical improvements because of group problem solving, experimentation with new approaches, and knowledge sharing (Sweeney & Cifuentes, 2012). One company reduced the time required to develop and deliver training solutions from close to a year to less than two weeks. Another increased the amount of training it could produce by 74 percent. Perhaps the most impressive story is how one group avoided layoffs during a company downsizing, because agile made its training and development process so cost-effective (Islam, 2017).
If you’re interested in learning how to use agile to help transform your training team into the NLO, fill out the form below to pick up a case study that details how one team did it.
I’m a big fan of Apple Inc.. Their products look good and work well. What’s most impressive, however, is that they’ve figured out a technique to ensure their clients always have the latest and greatest version of their software. What if training professionals could apply these approaches to ensure their clients always had access to the most important learning solutions?
THE APPLE WAY
Apple ensures their customers always have the most recent version of their software by delivering frequent iterative updates to their products. If you have an iPhone, Mac, or Apple Watch, it can feel as though you’re getting a new software update almost every week. Contrast this with the method used by most learning teams to design and deliver their training programs.
HOW TRAINING DEPARTMENTS DO IT
The process begins when the training team receives a request from one of their internal stakeholders. The learning professionals then undertake a needs analysis. The results of the needs analysis requires approval before work can continue. Once gained, the design phase begins. The output of this phase is a design document that also requires approval. After the stakeholders approve the design document, the training team begins the process of developing the learning content. This learning content also requires approval, and thus, the review and approval process repeats itself.
THE BAD NEWS…
The back-and-forth review and approval process can take months and frequently requires a lot of rework. This is bad news for learning organizations.
How This Impacts The Learning Team
Research suggests that rework is a major source of pain for training professionals. It elongates the time required to get learning content to the audience that needs it. And, it decreases the quality of the training while increasing its cost.
THE GOOD NEWS…
The good news is that training professionals can apply many of the techniques used by Apple to develop its products to the develop their learning solutions.
THE BETTER NEWS…
The better news is that this isn’t a theory. It’s been done, and the results are documented.
WHAT ARE THE RESULTS?
One training organization used these methods to reduce the time required to develop and deliver training solutions from close to a year, down to less than two weeks. These techniques also resulted in the training unit creating solutions that received world class satisfaction scores. Perhaps most impressive is that this group avoided layoffs during a company downsizing because their training and development process was so cost effective.
WANT TO LEARN HOW THEY DID IT?
Detailing everything that this team did to achieve these results is too much information to detail in a blog, but, if you want to know how training professionals can apply the same techniques that Apple uses to deliver superior software to build learning solutions, put your name and e-mail address in the form below, and I send you a copy of a case study that details how this company got Agile and applied the techniques used by Apple to develop fast, good, and cheap learning solutions.
THE STATE OF ADULT LEARNING IS IN FLUX
Changing demographics, globalization, and an increased reliance on technology have made the job of organizational development (OD) professionals difficult. To further complicate the situation, there’s no consensus on how to address the aforementioned challenges. Some experts believe the function should emphasize “organizational learning. ” In this model the role of OD is to help employees become “learning agents” and respond to changes by identifying and correcting errors. Others feel the emphasis of OD should be on creating a “learning organization.” In this model individuals perceive themselves as active participants in creating their company’s future.
TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONALS FACE SIMILAR CHALLENGES
Similar contradictions exist in the field of training and development (T+D). The literature reveals two schools of thought. The first forwards a belief that search engines like Google eliminate the need for trainers to help learners get facts and obtain knowledge. Proponents of this philosophy believe adult educators should concentrate on “higher order” thinking skills like evaluation and synthesis. Followers of the second school of thought make the case that instructors must help learners get a contextual view of the required knowledge and facts if they expect a change in performance.
HOW CAN AGILE HELP?
An Agile approach to developing learning solutions presents both OD and T+D professionals with a framework for addressing the conflicting approaches to addressing the problems presented by changing demographics, globalization, and the increased reliance on technology. Agile techniques further the adaptability of people and systems to respond to change. They also promote collaboration and foster knowledge creation and dialog.
WANT TO LEARN MORE?
On January 15 at 10 AM EST, the TrainingProAcademy will present Developing Training That’s Fast, Good, AND Cheap (An Agile Approach to Content Development). In this webcast we’ll share the techniques that one organization used to improve their employee engagement and leadership scores from the 4th quartile to the 1st quartile. We’ll also present findings from Dr. Kiersten Yocum’s research on Agile in an OD or T+D environment. Finally, we’ll present case studies from individuals like Siobhan Curran, M. Ed. who has achieved tremendous success implementing Agile as an OD and T+D strategy at two organizations.
This webcast will introduce you to some Agile of the techniques that many organizations are already using to design, develop, and deliver training that’s FAST, GOOD, AND CHEAP. In this webcast you’ll learn:
So… If you’re ready to learn how adopting an Agile approach to OD or T+D can help you address changing demographics, globalization, and an increased reliance on technology click HERE to register.
Have you ever read the Charles Dickens classic “A Tale of Two Cities?” This timeless novel begins with the famous statement “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times” and tells the story of a French doctor’s experience in two cities: Paris and London. The culture in one city was one of wisdom, belief, light, and hope. The culture in the second was one of incredulity, darkness and despair. In the first city the people believed things were headed in the right direction. In the other, the citizens felt that things were headed the other way.
The story reminds of an experience I had working with two training departments. One department was experiencing the “worst of times.” The employees were in despair. They didn’t feel empowered. The training programs they developed took months and sometimes up to a year to complete. The rework associated with developing training seemed to never end. Internal customers constantly challenged the value they were receiving for their investment in training. Satisfaction with their training programs were pedestrian at best. And, the costs associated with developing said programs were through the roof.
IT WAS THE BEST OF TIMES
The second training organization was experiencing “the best of times.” The employees felt empowered. They could develop and deliver training in as little as two weeks. Sometimes they even deployed learning solutions within hours of interviewing subject matter experts. Rework was almost non-existent. The satisfaction with the training programs were at world-class levels, and the cost to develop these programs was less than to cost of off-shoring training development.
Now here’s the plot twist….. those two training departments were actually the same training department.
WHAT MADE THE DIFFERENCE?
After experiencing “the worst of times” this training organization abandoned the old and outdated training methodologies of the past, and adopted an Agile approach to learning content development. Within 2 months the team realized a 75% increase in the number of learning solutions they could deliver to clients. Internal stakeholders sang the praises of this training organization by highlighting the quality of the programs and the “quick turnaround time.” The individuals who worked in the training organization began to feel empowered. The employee engagement and department leadership survey scores went from the 4th quartile to the 1st quartile. Perhaps most importantly, however, is that the Agile techniques the team adopted allowed the group to deliver training in days and weeks…not months.
Now, what about you and your training organization? Are you experiencing the worst of times or the best of times? How would you like to develop and deliver training in days and weeks instead of months?
If you’d like to know what we did to turn this training organization around and go from the “worst of times” to the “best of times” just put your name and email address in the form below and I’ll send you a FREE Case Study that will take you step by step through exactly what we did.
Our new website is finally up. We’ve worked hard to get a beautiful new site ready and we’re proud to show it off. Thanks for reading our blog. We have lots of great blog posts in the works. Please check back or contact us now to find out how we can help you.