[00:00:00]
Speaker: Let's talk learning and development on the Commercial Leader podcast. My name is Bram Lagrou. Welcome back to the show. I think it's important to sometimes step back. And just think about: what are we doing in our day-to-day jobs? So as we're putting people through our training programs and courses, the question is: is it designed, is it engineered for the right outcomes and for the right audience?
Because here's what I've found, not all audiences are created equal. We sometimes have people that really love being part of group discussions and they're always volunteering their opinions. They're the first ones to put up their hand and throw in a funny comment. And then there's other people that just ride out the wave.
They're quietly observing and taking notes, and keeping to themselves. And so there's a bit of a disconnect, you could say. But guess what? [00:01:00] This is design. It's architecture right from the get go. Who am I sending to this course and what is it that they need to learn?
And what does the experience need to look like in order for those people to extract the most benefit from the course possible? This is the sort of questions that people don't ask. See, one of those typical things that I do see happen. Is that people say, ah we gotta cater for the auditories and the kinesthetics, all those sort of different learning styles.
Okay, that makes sense. But it cannot just stop there because if you step back and you consider again the sort of personalities you have in the room, it's predictable what those people need in order to have a great experience that not only stimulates their brain, but it also engages them wholeheartedly.
And this is where I see that organizational design in [00:02:00] terms of courses and learning and development, is not always done very well. And so the things that we then do and we recommend you do as well is to ensure that you have a good read on the audience that needs to build new skills and also potentially needs to expand their mindset.
We know that in Australia, 36% of Australians have a high S component on the disc. Now, what that means for organizational design is the following. High S people like to have a warm, friendly, inviting environment. for example, that looks like in the way that the furniture is configured.
If you were to have everybody just sitting in terms of theater style, that is not the right environment for an S. S people, they like to sit cabaret style in smaller groups at a round table where it feels very inclusive, warm, and welcoming, and where they can build relationships with the [00:03:00] people right next to them.
The other thing that the S's also appreciate is the type of group activities. So rather than having big group discussions where say, 50 to a hundred people are asked to chip in or say what they think or even a group of 24 for that matter, but those are big quantities for S's. It might feel quite intimidating and therefore they won't necessarily feel very involved right from the get go.
If, however, you know that you will have 25, 50, a hundred people in the room, then it's a lot easier if you, from the get go pre-program exercises that are discussions in pairs or an exercise that is around a table with five other people or so, and, where they might stand up and do a role play, but again, it's with one key person that they're doing it only with.
And these sorts of exercises would really work well for an s. Let's just now [00:04:00] then also say that we're looking at the more analytical, highly technical people, very data driven, conscientious people, like we would expect with engineers and, accountants and to some extent lawyers.
Subject matter experts, people that are trained to get their numbers right. Facts, procedures, Data analyst, you name it, you get the gist. These people now expect a very different learning experience, and that learning experience is not ideally speaking in the room with other people.
The learning experience for a C type of audience? I would say from my experience is best done if it's a hybrid model where there is some level of learning that happens online, self-paced, and where some level of it happens with other people, but it's very structured. It's very programmed, and for example, the group activities that would be involved would be anonymous surveys that [00:05:00] are done and where the results are being projected live on screen in front of everyone. That sort of style is a very good activity. Anonymous reporting instead of, for example, holding their microphone and speaking up in front of everyone. Another thing that I also see that really works well with the C's is where you actually are kind of workshopping through things together with them. So you ask for their opinion, but you've asked them to also consider things after they've done their homework with some information that you've pre-sent to them upfront. Therefore they have time to think it through. They have time to do their own analysis, they have time to do some further research, and then they come prepared to the in-person training event.
This is really, again, organizational design that is best practice and it uses the personality styles and it [00:06:00] meet the needs and wants of the people that are coming to the training event. By the way, there's about 12 odd percent of the general population in Australia that are high C people.
So they have certain needs that need to be met in order for the training to really land well and resonate well. Let's now move over to The D's. About 18% of Australians are in the D quadrant, which means they are very big picture. They are very fast-paced. They are very direct in their communication, and they are very open-minded to say what they think in the moment. So that means if you ask a question to the general public in a room full of people, the D's will very easily step in and say what they think. They don't have to think about it. They don't have to do any homework. They like the group discussions very quickly.
However, it also means that they, along with the other ones, the I's, will be more vocal in the room. It's predictable and it's also preventable for [00:07:00] them to steal the thunder of all the other people in the room. Therefore, you gotta make sure that you have the right structures in place, the right methods in place to solicit their input and get 'em engaged, but also make sure that you do the right thing by the other people in the room.
And so I personally always like to understand: who is the audience? Who is this group of managers? Who is this next cohort of leaders? Who are the SLT?
What will really make sure that the experience, the user experience, is gonna be designed optimally for the people involved?
I's then also, they like having fun. They like going on tangents, they like cutting jokes and being the one that, everybody kind of sees. They like the spotlight on themselves. And so if you know that and you know that you'll have I's, then the question is how will you involve them and put the spotlight on them, but also not at the expense of the learning experience for the other people involved.
Courses cannot just [00:08:00] be stock standard. I personally believe that too often people just roll out courses off the shelf expecting for, people to come along on the journey, but it's not fully optimized for the people involved. And we know what we can expect based on the roles that they fulfill.
So I's very often will be in sales. They very often will be in PR or marketing type of activities. Especially anything that is very creative, that is very fast-paced and it is very flexible will draw the eyes to those roles. So we know that there's a correlation between jobs and roles and certain personality styles on the disc.
So therefore we can cater for that. We can factor it in. The other thing that I think is too often forgotten about is that when you put people through a program, knowing about it doesn't necessarily translate into doing it consistently day in, day out. For example, [00:09:00] if a leader needs to learn how to get better at holding themselves in difficult conversations with staff or external stakeholders, well... just by seeing someone do it and getting the words on a booklet and having gone through it once, that ain't really going to move the needle will it? So what we wanna do instead is to give them X number of one-to-one coaching sessions where they can actually practice it with a coach. Or if cost is prohibitive, at least have an opportunity for people to be paired up and be each other's buddy to practice, rehearse and drill those new skills on an ongoing basis. Because here's the thing, you might give people one day or two days of an intensive. It's not really there where the biggest gold will be unlocked. The biggest gold [00:10:00] will be unlocked as you Follow up after the training and put the practice rehears and drill in place over a multi-week and even multi-month program.
Only then people will put it to the test and keep going at it over time. And we all know: New habits only lock in if you've put enough effort into them consistently over time. We know, the first few times it'll be messy, people will blurt it out. They'll feel inadequate, or they think like, well, that ain't gonna work.
So you don't wanna necessarily give people an excuse early on and appease by pulling back and never touching it again. No. You wanna say, Hey, we understand this. We're on the journey with you, and we have everything in place to guide you on it, and make sure that it'll start from, learning how to walk after bum shuffling, to then going for a small run.
Jog, so to speak, before you [00:11:00] go off to the sprint, right? We do it step by step. We have it all backed up. We have it all engineered as such. Everything is in place for you to go from unconsciously incompetent to unconsciously competent. And it takes time. We know it. Like in our programs, we'll very easily do eight weeks of group coaching.
Part of the deal. And that might be group coaching, that might be individual coaching, but we have the practice rehearse and drill in place, and it's structured around topics that are very practical for the people in the role that they're in. So for example, leaders, tough conversations, how to provide feedback, things like this.
How to actually have people open up to us and say where they're at so that we can keep the finger to the pulse. All these sorts of things are skills that we don't necessarily, we're not born with them. Unless somebody has shown us how to do it, [00:12:00] how it can be done, has given us the words, has given us the tools, has showed the wide variety of things that they have at their disposal.
Kind of like tools in a toolbox. Well, only if you've been giving it can you actually use it. Otherwise, in the absence thereof, we're falling back on what we have picked up along the way, and I call that default behaviors. Now, default behaviors, some of them they work, but then there's always also how do we deal when stress is on, when there's pressure, then suddenly we very easily fall back into old behaviors and those can easily break relationships, let's face it.
I personally believe that great training has everything really nutted out. It has it thought through. It has architectured the perfect structure for the [00:13:00] audience that we have any outcomes that we seek to achieve.
And those outcomes are commercial in nature. So whether that is reducing staff turnover or it is to minimize hazards and safety incidents at work, or it is to ensure that there's more compliance so that we cannot be fined or things can go more pear shaped. All these things that are all commercial nature.
Now, of course, if you then go into business development and sales environments, you can easily measure outcomes of better conversations, more client engagement, better follow up, better follow through, better conversions. You can measure all this as well. That's also commercial of nature. But then what about people working better together? People doing things better on time, faster, cheaper, easier, with less pushback? Where they don't have to chase each other all the time, where [00:14:00] things just flow more easily. What about a senior leadership team? If there's no antagonism, sabotaging one another, or slowing things down, or where egos get triggered because people feel not respected by an equal.
All of this, it's human behavior, and therefore we wanna make sure that as we do training and coaching programs, that we cater for those things because guess what? Human behavior is predictable. So if you know what you have to deal with, you can cater for it.
Difficulties with people are also preventable and all performance in businesses, even with AI still largely depends on the people in that business and how those people communicate and how those people work together and how those people go outside representing the business and generate more business for the business.
All of these things, it's human behavior. It's [00:15:00] predictable. It's preventable. So therefore, let's cater for it. Let's create a great architectural piece so that the training actually lands well with the audience, and that it also produces the outcomes that we seek.
Now, there's always so much more that we can unpack about organizational design, learning and development courses and training and development.
But it's always going back to psychology. If anytime you're stuck, anytime you'd like to pick our brain on how we potentially can add value to you and your business and your team, please: always welcome to reach out to us. My name is Bram. I appreciate you tuning in with the Commercial Leader Podcast and I look forward to seeing you again next time.
