Dieser Artikel wurde am 17. Oktober 2023 erstmals auf LinkedIn veröffentlicht.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/organizational-learning-dynamic-world-harald-schirmer/

This is a simplified comparison on known (individual) versus new (social) learning approach as a basis for discussion and to finding the differences – knowing the world is much more colorful and we are on a way already for some time.

1. Individual Learning

Individual learning with given learning objective – managed teaching

In a relatively stable world, learning has been a one way road from those who „know“ and those who „need to learn“. The most efficient way had been managing and supplying knowledge via lectures, books, videos, classrooms and other „one to many“ formats. To enhance quality and scalability, didactics, methods and formats have been developed to optimize teaching by:

• separating teacher and learner role
• selecting the relevant learners via assessments or levels, ranks, topics, intelligence…
• providing standardized content
• checking progress and results via tests, exams
• proofing achievements via grades and certificates

This „simple“ or „complicated“ world had a common understanding on „what needs to be known“, „where it can be applied“, „who is best to use it“ – it has been seen as predictive, stable and reliable.

The formal learning setup focusses on „building knowledge“ while it is expected to do everything else (practice, repeat, reflect, apply) outside of the „scheduled learning time“. 

Simplified learning has been about „provision and consumption“.

One might argue: It is a lot more practical now, group learning, digital learning, project learning, learning on the job…

Why do most of our „formal“ systems still exclusively manage and provide content?

Learning is also seen as something separate from work or life and in a productivity oriented world – as „necessary downtime“.

This type of learning (adapted to todays possibilities) is still relevant to get to a basic level of understanding a „status quo“, learning terms, formulars or solid facts.

Where this learning style fails, is when the complexity and change-dynamic of topics exceeds the available time to create material or updates and educate trainers.

Example: a typical education to become a cancer specialist takes more than a decade. The AI driven research knowledge doubles cancer knowledge every year – same is with almost all modern technologies, platforms…

In terms of effort and tasks, learning providers are responsible for everything on the content and trainer side including scheduling, updates, feasability, selection… a lot of preparation work, before anything can start. In addition „managing“ the learner throughout the learning time.

My thesis is, that we moved away form the natural way of „social“ learning from and with each other – to make it more comparable, measurable and competitive.

Before we put kids in our „systems“, the have an extreme learning curve, shamelessly learning (copying) everything and everyone, being very practical, sharing success and fails and naturally celebrating success.

2. Organisational Learning

Co-creative, agile learning, emerging in complex frame conditions – social learning

As todays world seems* by far more complex or chaotic, a different learning setup is required, as we do no longer know, what is needed, where, by whom or even at all how to approach those VUCA/BANI topics (AI, Cloud, Sustainability, IOT, digital markets and economies…).

*I would claim, the world has always been complex – we just now realize it by being connected and start respecting diversity.

Over the last decade many great people experimented and documented new ways of „Social Learning“ with aspects like:

• respecting individual learner needs
• learning on eye-level (without hierarchy)
• collaborative formats (hackathons, barcamps, forums, market places, fishbowls…)
• interactive (large scale) methods and formats
• network learning – using crowd intelligence and exponential effects
• transparency and participation via sharing and social features (likes, comments)
• technical options like algorithms, AI, virtual rooms, virtual and augmented reality (sharing a digital room)
• intrinsically based learning (no assessments, no tests, no grades…)

The following picture looks like a lot more effort, but has proven not only to be more efficient in handling dynamics, but also much more impactful in terms of „understanding and applying“. (more actively connected brains)

The effort for the organizations is now more on making people curious about relevant topics, ensuring time availability, role modeling and commitment for experimenting and learning/practicing/sharing (self afficacy)

Most of all, it changed from one time learning to constant learning journeys in form of spirals: (later stages inspire and support earlier stages)

In detail about the graphic:

„Share progress / process“ – I learn

The fundament of organizational, social learning is an Enterprise Social Network platform and a growing „Sharing Mindset“ (Transparency and Participation). It can also be called networked-learning, where all have a contribution part (liking to add relevance, commenting to ad reflexion or depth/doubts and content to add knowledge, solutions, path forward). It is less about „final final version 4“ results, but building shared knowhow and digital reputation during the overall process.

„Show Relevance“ – I am curious about

If a topic is not personally relevant to the learner, methods, formats, teachers, can not achieve much. It all starts with raising a question in the person via inspiration, creating doubts, sharing a problem or putting in a new situation. Threatening is not a good idea (even so working with fear seems to work – nowadays it is everywhere)

We need to ask: „Why should I learn that?“, „Why now?“, „What for?“ – ideally connecting it with the next step:

„Example Triggers“ & „Get Questions“ – If this, than what?

Providing or pushing knowledge without connecting it to a possible „real trigger“ (if this happens – this is what you can do), learning fails. What helps knowledge, if you see nowhere an option to apply/need it? One big root-cause is that we train people (e.g. for agile), but do not create supporting frame-conditions (changing roles, rules, processes, responsibilities)

Make sure the triggers respect the target group, time, frame-conditions, culture, age, education… in short the learners diversity. In our experience, „centrally formulated questions“ are way to high level

Ideally the questions or triggers come „locally“!

„Do Research“ – This looks relevant to me

This phase is all about finding out, how to solve the question, finding sources, evaluate former results, contact people using official* tools. This can be guided by step-by-step or how-to documentation or via a person (individual or in groups).

Much higher impact of „self-doing“ vs. „seeing others explain“.

*official tools refers to productive tools, not playgrounds or artificial spaces dedicated for learning.

„Apply / Practice“ – That helped

Now it is time to experiment and walking the path! After finding solutions, they should be applied – respecting individual frame conditions, local specialities like tools, language settings, availability of material, access rights…

The most important aspect here is generating a „succeeded“ feeling – to develop „self-afficiacy“ 

„Summarize and Share“ – What I learned, what would be great to find out now…

Time to celebrate by sharing what has been learned – and as often there are still open questions – adding them to the second learning step for others to work on.

A positive contribution (to build digital reputation and networks) is to share learning in the social support forum, or via blog, helping others in research or application phase.

Final thought

This is not limited to „Organizational“ learning – it also works in teams, politics, science, schools, sports … if it is less about competition, money and power.

All this can be experienced also here on LinkedIn (if you follow the right people 😉 and contribute to this #socialLearning or other social platforms.

handling todays complex tasks, we can not afford to waste time and energy by hiding knowledge and their application

Unfortunately todays algorithms are not that supportive anymore, as the focus more on keeping people online or -selfpromoting – hope this will change again.

What is your Perspective?

Knowing this is very „black-and-white“ simplified comparison:

1. would you generally agree?
2. Do you have similar experience?
3. What would you recommend changing, updating, adding, removing?