Archive for the ‘Resources – Trainers’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Theory or Model?

Sunday, November 14th, 2010

During an event I was running last week I was asked what the difference is between a Model and a Theory. The short answer is that a Model ‘represents’ and a Theory ‘explains’.

A Theory usually starts with a number of assumptions, which are then tested. The assumptions generally relate to a logical chain of objective reasoning. The testing leads to conclusions and possible further testing. And a Theory is born. The theme for the testing of any effective Theory is that of validity.

A Model, in the learning and development  environment, is generally accepted to be a symbolic or graphic representation of a theory, system or intricate process. It will often show the inter-relationship between the differing aspects of the theory.  It is intended to explain and as such is often a simplification and does not contain all the detail. The theme for the testing of and effective Model is that of utility.

Incidentally, this reminds me of a quote I once read somewhere – and successfully remembered for some reason. It was explaining what a Model was and it stated, “A Model is a theoretical reflection, an approximation of reality, but like a map it helps us see the ground a little more clearly”. I do wish I could forget some of these things I have learned in the past and remember things that are of more use.

Anyway, a week before being asked the Model and Theory question – during a management development programme – I was asked what was the best Theory that I knew. I found (and find) this a very difficult question to answer. It’s a little like asking me what my favourite piece of music is – it will depend on the situation and circumstances. Having said that, whilst it will depend on the setting, I would probably have to go for Transactional Analysis (TA). I would choose TA for a number of reasons:

  • It is perhaps the most versatile Theory I know in that it is applicable to so many situations.
  • It is fundamental to so many situations as it improves communications and assists in building rapport.
  • It is relatively easy to understand.
  • I have witnessed more personal and professional development by individuals and teams through the application of this Theory than any other.

This Theory was developed by Dr Eric Berne in the 1960s and has since been popularised in books such as his own, “Games People Play” and Harris’ “I’m Okay, You’re Okay”.

Berne developed the theory that at various times individuals behave in different ways which are identifiable through different types of behaviour. These different types of behaviour he called “ego-states” and he labelled named them as “Parent”, “Adult” and “Child”. 

According to Berne (and no one has really threatened this theory in the intervening years) people are always operating in one of these three ego-states.

The ego-states are so named because they reflect behaviour typically exhibited by parents, adults and children. It should be understood from the outset, however, that the states have nothing to do with actual ages. For example, a 5 year old person can be in the Adult or Parent ego-state, and a childless person can be in the parent ego-state.

Earlier this year, having delivered a session on TA on a Leadership Programme, I found that one of the delegates had found the input so impactive, he had resigned from his job and returned to his native France to find an ex-girlfriend as it had enabled him to understand why the relationship had initially failed. I say initially failed as they are now back together again.

Whilst this level of impact is an extreme example, it is testament to the powerful understanding this theory can deliver when applied to personal or professional situations.

In my next blog, I will explain more about TA.

Paul

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Resources – Students, Resources – Trainers, Topic – Personal Development | No Comments »

Avoiding evaluation pitfalls

Sunday, October 24th, 2010

In my last post I said that I would use this one to explain how to avoid common pitfalls when undertaking evaluations. So here goes …

  1. Identify your sponsor. This is the person asking for the evaluation and has the authority to implement any recommendations. If the person you are working to is not the person who can implement your findings, you haven’t found your sponsor. What’s the point in carrying out work specified by a person who cannot do anything with it?
  2. The list of ‘10 key questions to ask’ that I published in my last post have to be discussed and agreed with your sponsor. Without clarity on these answers you will not be able to create an appropriate methodology. You may want to produce lots of statistical data, but if that’s not what he or she requires, it’s pointless creating it.  This helps you get your methodology spot on.
  3. When you are asked to evaluate something, remember that there will be a reason for it – and sometimes that reason will not be shared with you. Your sponsor may want the evaluation to prove something, they might want to use it to justify something or they may have already decided what your findings should be. So, what happens when your findings are different or you come up with the ‘wrong’ answers? What can happen is that the evaluator gets blamed for problem. You have used an inappropriate methodology or interpreted the data incorrectly or just not done what the sponsor asked. The focus is turned on the evaluator. So whenever you agree something with your sponsor get it signed – it is one of the many strands of life where having an insurance policy can be useful even though you don’t expect to need one. And this one costs nothing. And if the sponsor is reluctant to acknowledge his or her agreement to it, you perhaps need to be concerned at that early stage. Why are they reluctant? Do they actually know what they want?
  4. Once the evaluator has chosen an appropriate methodology, it can be very easy to stray off the planned route. At regular intervals check the methodology still fits with the agreement you have with the sponsor. This will help you stay on track, and to appropriately amend the methodology should it be warranted.
  5. Triangulation. Often you will find what appears to be a meaningful or important piece of data. If you are to publish it, I suggest that you triangulate it. That means you corroborate it from a different source. Using non-triangulated data can be problematic and may make your findings easier to challenge.
  6. Consider letting the sponsor and key stakeholders see copies of your report prior to publication – assuming your agreement with your sponsor allows this. This is particularly useful if you have some controversial data. You may get asked to remove it – which you can then do if you think it appropriate – however, you will already have made your point to those people who matter.

By following this guidance you should avoid the common pitfalls, keep on track, protect yourself and be able to produce a very effective evaluation report.

Good luck!

Paul

Tags: ,
Posted in Resources – L&D Management, Resources – Trainers | No Comments »

The key to productive evaluation

Monday, October 18th, 2010

When managing a project or delivering training it is important that we know what our manager, sponsor or client needs from us. Clarity is required. Without it we are unlikely to deliver a good quality product.

There is exactly the same requirement when undertaking an evaluation of a training or learning event. But for some reason evaluators often obtain the information they think is appropriate rather than what the sponsor requires.

Here are the 10 key questions to ask your sponsor in order to unlock their exact requirements and ensure you deliver what is required:

1. Do you require statistical or anecdotal data? A person requiring statistical information probably wants to be able to scientifically back up the findings ensuring it is provable and measurable. If the sponsor prefers anecdotal information they may well be looking for thoughts and impressions as to how it appears to others.

2. Do you want simple answers to simple questions or complex process issues to be addressed?

3. When obtaining data, do you want a large sample size of respondents to be used or a case study approach? With the former we would interview or question lots of people, with the latter we would follow individuals or ideas from start to finish, like a thread.

4. Is the report intended as a management tool or a practitioner’s tool? In other words, is it for the sponsor or another manager to use to improve a situation or is it for the providers to help them?

5. Am I, as the evaluator, required to make a judgement with sanctions, or am I non-judgemental in my approach?  With the former, I may be required to report on whether people are following a specific policy and name those who were not. With the latter, the sponsor does not want people to feel threatened and wants them to develop issues.

6. Are my findings to be specific or anonymous? This indicates whether the sponsor is more interested in who is doing (or not doing) what or more interested in what staff really think about the issues.

7. Is it a set agenda or a progressive agenda?  The former means the evaluator sticks to the initial remit, the latter gives permission to go with new or unexpected issues that arise.

8. Is the final report (assuming there will be one) to make recommendations or pose questions? The former gives the readers a clear idea of what is required whilst the latter involves everyone in how the goal or noteworthy practice can be achieved.

9. Is the information gathered to be closed or open? With the former, only the sponsor gets to know about the findings, whereas with the latter everyone knows tham as they become apparent

10. Is the feedback to be ‘official’ (summative) or ‘formative’? The former would usually be a full report with recommendations to act on whilst the latter would be a product enabling everyone to understand what is happening so that those involved are in the best position to decide where to go to next.

As you will have seen, all the questions contain alternatives. If your responses are all towards the first alternative within each question, you will be undertaking what can be called a ‘Bureacratic’ evaluation. If your sponsor’s preferences are more towards each of the second alternatives, your evaluation methodology will be more ‘Democratic’.

Get this right and you have sound foundations for your work. Get this wrong or omit to do it, you are almost guaranteed problems. In my next post I’ll explain why, and how, to avoid the potential pitfalls.

Paul

Posted in Resources – L&D Management, Resources – Managers, Resources – Trainers | No Comments »

How do I ask that?

Wednesday, October 13th, 2010

On the community forums where I often post comments I spend a significant proportion of the time answering or offering thoughts on learning and development evaluation. This then leads to me receiving other personal emails regarding the subject. One of the key areas that appears to be problematic for a number of people relates to questionnaire writing.

I have formed this opinion both from the questions I have been asked and from seeing some of the questionnaires that people have asked me to complete or critique. I think this is because people often think (something like) “They are only questions – I ask questions all the time”. They can therefore assume it is straightforward and so don’t put sufficient thought and time into the process. Exactly what information are you looking for? What type or style of questions are most likely to elicit the information. How should they be worded?

It is a critical area. It can have a huge impact on the quality and quantity of the primary data you generate. Many years ago I was lucky to have had the opportunity to write and deliver an 11-week course on Training Evaluation. As you might gather from the duration of the course, it was very detailed! We spent a day of the Programme looking at how to write a covering letter to a questionnaire, and another 3 days on the actual formulation and writing of the questionnaire itself.

Are you thinking of writing a questionnaire? If so, the following 10 principles will assist you to maximise the quality of data and quantity of questionnaires returned to you.

1                     Avoid general or vague questions

2                     Avoid hypothetical questions

3                     Avoid leading questions

4                     Avoid double-barrelled questions

5                     Avoid jargon

6                     Avoid potentially embarrassing questions

7                     Keep your questions short

8                     Consider your terminology

9                     Open ended or prompted questions?

10                 Apply all the principles appropriately

If you go to the Discussions area of my Company Facebook Page you will find a document with more detail on each of these principles, together with examples of each. Or you can email me if you would like a version in MS Word.

On my next post I will look at two different models of evaluation.

Paul

Tags: ,
Posted in Resources – L&D Management, Resources – Managers, Resources – Trainers | No Comments »

The power of poems

Thursday, October 7th, 2010

I recently blogged about how the use of stories can be very impactive when delivering training or important messages. As some of you will know, it is National Poetry Week here in England and so I thought I’d share a couple of poems that I have seen make a difference for people. I have used these both when working with groups and when coaching individuals.

Risks (Anonymous)

To weep, is to risk appearing sentimental.
To reach out to another, is to risk involvement.
To expose feelings, is to risk exposing our true selves.
To put your ideas, your dreams, before the crowd is to risk loss.
To love, is to risk not being loved in return.
To live, is to risk dying.
To hope, is to risk despair.
To try at all, is to risk failure.

Only the person who risks is free.

But risks must be taken,
Because the greatest hazard in life is to risk nothing.
The person who risks nothing, does nothing, has nothing, is nothing.
They may avoid suffering and sorrow, but they simply cannot learn, change, feel, grow, love, live…
Chained by their attitudes they are slaves.

Untitled (Nadine Stair)

If I had my life to live over, I’d dare to make more mistakes next time. I’d relax, I would limber up. I would be sillier than I have been this trip. I would take fewer things seriously. I would take more chances. I would climb more mountains and swim more rivers. I would eat more ice cream and less beans.

I would perhaps have more actual troubles, but I’d have fewer imaginary ones. You see, I’m one of those people who lived sensibly and sanely, hour after hour, day after day. Oh, I’ve had my moments, and if I had to do it over again, I’d have more of them. In fact, I’d try to have nothing else. Just moments, one after another, instead of living so many years ahead of each day.

I’ve been one of those persons who never goes anywhere without a thermometer, a hot water bottle, a raincoat and a parachute. If I had to do it again, I would travel lighter than I have. If I had my life to live over, I would start barefoot earlier in the spring and stay that way later in the fall. I would go to more dances. I would ride more merry-go-rounds. I would pick more daisies.

Do you have a favourite poem that could be used in such a way? If so, it would be great to read it.

Paul

Tags:
Posted in Resources – Managers, Resources – Trainers | No Comments »

Giving and receiving

Wednesday, September 29th, 2010

What’s the best story you have ever heard? Some of my favourites are ones that have been used by trainers or leaders to illustrate a point. Stories have been around a very long time, but in today’s multimedia worlds they are perhaps overlooked a little. They are, however,  able to bring a session to life or make learning more memorable.

I was reminded of their power recently when training some trainers. Having encouraged them to think about using them, several were used in different ways, and all very effectively. The most powerful were where the tellers had combined a relevant story with effective voice intonation and body language.

And whilst there may be less storytelling taking place due to modern technologies, one such technology – the internet – has made it a lot easier to source and access good stories. One such website is Stories for Trainers. Why not have a look and see if you could use some of them?

Not only has the internet enabled us to find things more easily, it has also enabled us to give more effectively.  As you may be aware if you have visited our website, one of our business aims is to help local people who may not have had the facility to access coaching or other development activities.  We believe that one of the foundations of a sustainable and effective community is for its members to support and assist each other. Recently I found a website that has enabled me to build on that a little.

Charity Days is a register of trainers who volunteer to deliver training for registered charities free of charge.  Jane (the person who runs it) receives requests from charities and then circulates the requests to the trainers, who can then volunteer if it is an area of their expertise. The charity then considers the offers and decides which is the best fit for their requirements.  If you are a trainer you may want to think about getting involved?

Paul

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Resources – Managers, Resources – Trainers | No Comments »

Figure and Ground

Sunday, September 26th, 2010

We learn new things all the time. Sometimes when we least expect it, and sometimes a while after the event. I have recently been delivering a programme to a group of trainers – and have had great fun during the process – and there was one such moment for me during the Programme.

During one of the sessions, I noticed a person put one of those yellow ‘sticky notes’ on the outside of the glass panel in the door. I assumed that it was a message for a member of the group, thought that we could get it at the next break and mentally moved on.

About 30 minutes later one of the group was going to the front of the room and in doing so was passing the door. He made a minimal detour by opening the door, removing the sticky note, quickly reading it and giving it to me – as it was a message for me. I took it, and again mentally moved on very quickly intending to contact the ‘sender’ at a more appropriate time. Time moved on, I actioned the ‘sticky note’ and the whole episode was gone. Well, so I thought.

A couple of days later a break time discussion was taking place about a model that we had been discussing – ‘Figure and Ground’. In case you are not familiar with the model, I will take a few lines to explain it. As a trainer, manager, customer service agent – whatever – when we are concentrating on something, we need it to be the ‘Figure’ and everything else to be the ‘Ground’. In other words, the ‘Figure’ part is what we are focussed on. So, for example, if you are reading an interesting paper or an enjoyable book you want to focus on that and that alone. If a wasp was to start flying around near you or a spider to start walking across the paper, it is likely that the insect can become ‘Figure’ – and the consequences of this is that the book or paper becomes the ‘Ground’. You then need to remove the insect, or move away from it, for your paper or book to return to being the ‘Figure’.  Hopefully that makes sense?

One of the delegates then made reference to the sticky note saying how that had become ‘Figure’ for them. I was so surprised – that was just so far from my world and not a consideration I had made!  And then a couple of days later the same person explained that when they have a note posted on a door during training (or notification of a message in any other way) they always remove it straight away and let the group know what was on the message – so as to remove any possibility of it being ‘Figure’. This made total sense.

I was fascinated. This had never crossed my mind. I then started to think back to the last time I had had a sticky note left on the door while I was training – or a note pushed under the door, or any other way of getting attention. And I can’t think of any occasions. Perhaps they have happened and I just haven’t remembered them as they are of little significance to me? Or perhaps I have worked with organisations where this isn’t part of the culture (in my last one we had a notice board away from the classrooms for notices for delegates to be written on or stuck on – perhaps that’s why we had the board!)? And what makes them ‘Figure’ for some people and not for others? I am still fascinated.

What are your thoughts?

What I am sure of is that the next time someone leaves a sticky note on the door of a room and I’m leading the group, I will remember this episode. And I will get it straight away!

Paul

Tags: , ,
Posted in Resources – Trainers, Topic – Personal Development | No Comments »

Story of a life

Saturday, September 18th, 2010

When I was doing my ‘A’ levels many years ago here in England, there was a guy in my English Literature group who had just transferred from a school in New York. I can’t remember his name. There was always an air of mystery as to how and why he had arrived at our school. He was regarded as being very street-wise and was a key member of the in-crowd.  I didn’t mix with him too much, but did walk with him towards our homes on a few occasions – generally after we had an English lesson at the end of the day.

I have two key recollections of him. The first was when we were walking past some horses and before I could tell him not to walk behind them, he did and got booted to the floor. He may have been street-wise, but was not animal-wise. The second was that he introduced me to the words and music of Harry Chapin. He was a big fan, a very big fan.  I am now a big fan and have been for many years, and I have him to thank for introducing me.   

Harry Chapin

Within the training context I have used Harry’s music and words on many occasions over the years. They can be really impactive for delegates in some key learning areas, and the affective nature of the experience can leave a lasting impression – as long as it is debriefed with skill and care. The two songs that I have used most regularly are “Flowers are Red” and “Why do Little Girls?” They are great for exploring diversity issues.

I used one this week that I have never used before. It’s “Mr Tanner” and it tells the story of Martin Tanner, who loves to sing. Singing wasn’t his profession – he ran a cleaning shop – but singing made his life whole. And apparently he was pretty good at it. He knew he had a few flaws, but all his friends said he could take it further. I suppose in today’s world, he would have been encouraged to audition for The X Factor or similar. Mr Tanner listened to the friends, and decided to give it a go, and so hired a hall and gave a concert. The critics lambasted him. As a result he never sang again. “Music was his life”, Harry tells us, and in the space of a couple of hours at the concert, this had been lost and his life continued incomplete.

I used it to illustrate the impact a trainer – or manager – can have when giving feedback and encouraging people to take risks.  With false encouragement and (or) poor quality feedback that is imbalanced, there can be a huge negative impact for those we should be helping to develop. That’s not to say we shouldn’t encourage people to develop, just that we should do it with care and empathy.

And I’m pleased to say it went really well with the group of trainers I was working with – very impactive, created some great discussion and left a lasting impression.

As for Harry Chapin, I got to one of his concerts. An altogether different affair.  It was back in 1981, and I just wish I had known more of his songs before I went. After the show he signed programmes and was happy to go to the bar with people – all driven by his desire to sell as much merchandise as possible to help the World Health Organisation. He did about 100 concerts a year purely for raising money for charity.

Very sadly, three months later he died in a car crash in New York – which geographically takes us back to where I started from in this post.  As Harry used to sing to end his concerts, “All my life’s a circle …”

Paul

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Resources – Managers, Resources – Trainers, Topic – Personal Development | No Comments »

What conditions enable you to learn most effectively?

Sunday, September 12th, 2010

When coaching and training your staff, do you treat them as adults or children? This may sound like a daft question, but too many managers continue to treat their staff based on the principles of child learning as opposed to adult learning. In fact, you can relate the principles below not just to how you develop your people, but also to the ethos of how you manage your team on a day to day basis.

The term Pedagogy (meaning child-leading) has been around for many centuries. The term Andragogy (man-leading) has been around for only a couple of centuries.

It was developed significantly by Malcolm Knowles in the last Century. He created a number of assumptions with regard to Andragogy, or Principles of Adult Learning.

The foundations of his work were as a result of reflecting on his childhood experiences of learning from his parents. His father was a vet who took him round on his visits from an early age.  Knowles recognised the nature of the conversations they had, how his father asked for his opinion and how his opinion was then valued. He also reflected on the tender and loving approach of his mother, and how this in turn led to him becoming a more caring individual. He developed from these foundations and eventually published a list of the conditions that he suggested should be present for adults to learn as effectively as possible. These conditions are summarised below:

1)      Where it is accepted that learning is a continuous process.

2)      Where adults are encouraged to relate what they are learning to what they already know.

3)      Where it is accepted that a learning process will involve feelings as well as thought processes.

4)      Adults generally learn best by doing.

5)      Training must always be realistic and relevant in order to encourage motivation.

6)      An informal environment is generally most effective.

7)      Learning flourishes best where the atmosphere is non-judgemental.

8)      Variety generally stimulates learning.

9)      A manager, coach or trainer can train, however, the delegates also have a responsibility to learn.

If you don’t already adopt these principles, if you did you could have a significant impact on the learning and motivation of your team. And that will lead to business improvements and better results. Wouldn’t you like some of that?

Paul

Tags: , ,
Posted in Resources – L&D Management, Resources – Managers, Resources – Trainers, Topic – Personal Development | No Comments »

Two of the best trainer models?

Sunday, September 5th, 2010

I am running a Train the Trainer Programme in a week’s time and am very excited about it. It is a while since I have done one, and for me, in working life terms, life doesn’t get much better than training trainers. Hence the excitement!

Part of my planning has been updating or preparing new handouts for certain models and topics, and this has reminded me of some of the excellent models and theories available to assist trainers in their work and own personal development.

I have just completed handouts on two of John Heron’s models – 6 Category Intervention Analysis (6CIA) and Dimensions of Facilitator Style (DFS). As I completed them, I was left wondering whether these are perhaps the best models available for a trainer to use to assess whether they are a ‘complete’ trainer?

Heron first developed the 6CIA model. It was designed to assist people involved in 1-2-1 helping relationships, such as a doctor working with a patient. As the name suggests, it categorises the helper’s Interventions into 6 Categories (Prescriptive, Informative, Confronting, Cathartic, Catalytic and Supportive). By using this model, trainers can ascertain whether they are using all the Categories, and whether they are using the most appropriate Category at the most appropriate time. I have seen it help a person understand a potential ‘blind spot’ they have by it illustrating to them how they were only using 5 of the Categories.

DFS also has 6 groupings, but here they are referred to as Dimensions (as opposed to Categories). These dimensions are Planning, Meaning, Confronting, Feeling, Structuring and Valuing. Heron developed this model to assist facilitators working with Groups (as opposed to 1-2-1s), and these Dimensions cover all aspects of how a facilitator and a group works together.

This model is sometimes also referred to as 18DFS. This is because not only does it have the six Dimensions, it also has three Modes – Hierarchical, Co-operative and Autonomous. Heron used the Modes to describe the exercise of power in the running of the group by the facilitator – moving from Hierarchical, where all the power is with the trainer, through to Autonomous where the group has the freedom to finds its own way. As each Mode can be combined with each Dimension, this gives eighteen possible combinations.

I find that one of the best ways of explaining this model is to imagine, as a trainer, you have a ‘mixer’, as a producer would use when recording music. On the producer’s mixer they have 6 controls managing the loudness or softness of each instrument making up the track, which they can change as they see fit – thus enabling them to create the perfect sound. As a trainer, change the instruments to Dimensions, and the loudness / softness control to the Modes. You then use your mixer to set the Dimensions and Modes at their appropriate level for the needs of the group, amending them as you see fit.

If you want more details of these models, you’ll find them on the ‘Discussions’ area of the Breathe Facebook Page. If you would like Microsoft Word versions (which contain additional information that I cannot reproduce on Facebook), please drop me an email and I’ll happily send them to you.

Are these the two best trainer models, or would you suggest any better ones? I’d be very interested to hear your views.

Paul

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Resources – Trainers, Topic – Personal Development | No Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »