Informal Learning – Show me the money

Jay Cross has made Chapter 3 of Informal Learning: Rediscovering the Natural Pathways that Inspire Innovation and Performance available online. I went through my copy and noticed that I had  a note stuck in this chapter, when I had used it for a previous workshop:

The leading human performance authorities “have all demonstrated that most performance deficiencies in the workplace are not a result of skill and knowledge gaps. Far more frequently, they are due to environmental factors, such as lack of clear expectations; insufficient and untimely feedback; lack of access to required information; inadequate tools, resources and procedures; inappropriate and even counterproductive incentives; task interference and administrative obstacles that prevent achieving desired results” (Stolovitch & Keeps, 2002, p. 1).

I’ve discussed this before, but it’s worth repeating.

My value proposition

I had many conversations about work and business models over the past week and realised that my niche is fairly unique, in that not many people focus on learning, business and the Web, at the same time and with the same interest [hence, “Conversations at the intersection of learning, work & technology“]. You can learn much from one discipline and then apply it to another and this process is well described in The Medici Effect.

While some may consider me an edublogger, I spend as much time working on business models. I’m currently evaluating the business plan of a small IT company and looking at how it can grow its market. I’ve also become a geek over the past decade and learned more about web infrastructure than a guy with a History degree should.

To explain my business more clearly, I created a Flickr photo and added some descriptive notes to it. The notes only work in Flickr, once you click on the image. I guess I’ll have to learn some javascript so I can embed the image on my web page.

At the Intersection

Reinforce the margins

Yesterday, in Miramichi, the conversation came around to economic development and the issues facing New Brunswick, especially the northern part of the province. I was told that a couple of years ago the foresters in the province said that we had about eight years of industrial harvests left and the fishermen felt that there weren’t even that many years left for an industrial fishery. At the same time it seems that governments at all levels are working on the assumption that nothing will change, in spite of certain sustainability task forces.

Rob Paterson has noted that in the province next door, PEI, there are also significant demographic issues:

By 2015, there will be more Islanders over 50 than under. Soon there will be more over 65. Who will do all the work? Who will lead the economy? Who will pay all the taxes to keep all us old folks in retirement homes? PEI will have the least amount of young except Newfoundland. Can we afford to have 65% of them as dependent as the old dears aged 85?

My main deduction from this is that all of our children will have to be net contributers (not just economically) to our society. However, our industrial schools are marginalizing too many children. Meanwhile, Alec Bruce tells us how highly qualified and educated immigrants are barred from fully contributing to our society:

Meet the physician from the Middle East, certified in three crucial specialties. Yet, no hospital in the Atlantic Provinces will touch him because the paper he carries does not convey designations familiar to provincial licensing authorities.

Meet the teacher from Arkansas, a graduate of Harvard and MIT. She works as a nanny in one of New Brunswick’s poorly funded day care centres, where she wipes noses, prepares snacks, and recites Dr. Seuss to pre-schoolers.

Meet the engineer from Hamburg, an expert in bridge and overpass design. He’s a delivery man in Fredericton who deploys his considerable mathematical abilities to reconciling the day’s take with tomorrow’s cash float.

We are facing economic, political and environmental challenges, and we have to fully engage all members of our society, from school-age children to newly arrived immigrants. We cannot afford to marginalize anyone, because it’s from the margins [the edges] that innovation will come.

One indication of the lack of willingness to even contemplate new ways of doing things is the wide condemnation, without an offer of alternatives, of the Post-Secondary Education report. I would say that if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. My own effort to develop one way to face the post-industrial future has been the creation of a work & cultural Commons, and it seems that we are finally making some headway (more to follow on this).

So to anyone who is complaining – get off your butt and do something creative. We need everyone to get involved in creating options, because the folks on the margins [historically, the innovators] aren’t being allowed to participate (yet).

Democratic Workplaces

Mark Dowds recommended WorldBlu to me last week. The organisation supports the creation of more democratic workplaces and publishes a yearly list [I’m not sure why a one-page PDF has to take up 6 MB of space]. Three Canadian companies are on the list, 1-800-GotJunk; Axiom News; and TakingITGlobal.

One consulting company caught my eye, Point B Solutions Group of Seattle, which is described as a model organisation, though not on this year’s list. From the Seattle Times:

Point B has no physical headquarters, no rigid work hours, no formal job titles and, unusual for a consulting firm, little travel. More significant, employees are encouraged — no, required — to have a life outside of work. “My first priority isn’t the firm,” says Jenkins, who works out of a small office near the Edmonds ferry terminal. To illustrate this, Jenkins mentions that right now, at 4:30 on a Wednesday afternoon, he’s just returned from a two-day vacation in the mountains with his family.

It reminds me of wirearchy in action, but these types of organisations still appear to be in the minority [in our society] and I’m not certain that a sea change has begun.

Reflections

Last week I headed to the West coast for a conference, all full of energy. A few 16 hour days, some jet lag and a couple of evenings with a couple of glasses of wine, and I was a bit tuckered. Then a quick trip across the Confederation Bridge to PEI and back and now I’m home, having just cleared out my aggregator.

Both conferences were a chance to see people who I was loosely connected to, as well as meet some new friends.  I was ready for a little F2F reinforcement, having spent most of the year as a virtual colleague/friend/associate.  One of the advantages of being a free agent is the ‘luxury’ of reflection. I have had time to read books in depth, think long about my blog posts and follow online discussion threads to their murky depths. The past week showed me that I really don’t want to lose this perspective.

It seems that most of us are in a hurry today, and I meet few people who have had the time to read even a few good books and reflect upon them. Fewer still have taken the time to digest new ideas and discuss their learning with others. There has always been a need to balance action and reflection, but the latter seems to be losing out in many of our workplaces.

Discussions this week centered around new tools, new literacies and perhaps even a new pedagogy, but few (yes, there were some) were demanding more time for reflection. As the digital surround engulfs us, it may become critical to carve out more reflective time and space. One way to help our children is to stop homework, but what is the equivalent for the rest of us in the working world?

Innovations Outside of Learning (IIL07)

Tom Crawford opened the conference today with ” Innovations Outside of Learning: How external forces are changing our world”. It was a great way to get the ideas flowing and people thinking about the last 100 years of technology and learning. Tom listed his top 10 nine technologies of the past five years that have affected learning. I really liked his first pick, as I think that we have only touched the tip of the iceberg with performance support on the Web.

  1. Performance support
  2. Gaming and simulation
  3. Self-publishing
  4. Collaboration
  5. Web services and mash-ups
  6. High bandwidth to the hand
  7. New input devices (e.g. wii)
  8. Video and image search
  9. Embedded devices

The end of content-centric business models

Fewer people believe that “content is king” in the online learning world. However, many e-learning business models are built on some aspect of content creation. Community and context are the two critical factors in developing e-learning environments. For example:

  • Courses online; Community = your cohort; Context = a relevant (to you) credential
  • Performance support; Community = your peers; Context = current need
  • Knowledge Management (especially PKM) ; Community = those with shared interests; Context = Maslow’s higher needs of esteem and self-actualization.

These thoughts were triggered by Rob Paterson’s post that Getting paid for content is over:

All business models must be based on something that is legitimately scarce. Today, no matter how expensive it is to make, content will become freely available quickly. So much music is free that you cannot legitimately charge much for a song. So much film is free that you cannot charge much for a move. So much information is free, that you cannot charge much for it (Britannica). This is a reality – so you have to get over it and find another area that is legitimately scarce where you can find value. So where is it?

What happens to e-learning business models when content declines in value? Will it be more profitable to a have a learning content management system or a people connecting (e.g. Facebook) system? If the best lectures & videos are available online for free, why build mediocre substitutes? What will happen to custom content development?

I’m not saying that these changes will happen immediately, but there does seem to be a trend toward free and ubiquitous digital media. Isn’t it just a matter of time before it hits the e-learning field?

The knowledge economy is the trust economy

From the Creative Class blog is part of a WSJ article on telecommuting:

“When companies allow employees to work remotely or from home, they are explicitly communicating to them that ‘I trust you to be dedicated to the accomplishment of the work, even if I’m not able to observe you doing it,’ ” says Jack Wiley, executive director of the institute, which is in Minneapolis. “It boils down to respect,” he says. “I respect you and I have confidence in your commitment to the work — to do this under the conditions and at the time you feel will be most productive for you.”

Lack of trust is a major barrier to using decentralized methods and processes that enhance information sharing and collaboration, two factors for success in a knowledge economy. However, many of our industrial organisations are not exactly jumping on the telecommuting bandwagon. Articles in the main stream press are indicators that the status quo may not last.

As I’ve been working on my own for several years now, I see first hand the advantages of distance work. It’s good for the environment, cheaper, and I’m happier and more productive when I’m in control of my schedule. Meetings are less frequent and usually more focused. I’ve noted before that collaborating at a distance is sometimes more effective than being in the same room.

Trust is the glue that holds knowledge organisations together, not rules and regulations.  It’s something to consider when developing a recruitment and retention strategy.

Personal Environments

[This is very much a work in progress]

David Dalgado has put up a graphic of his personal learning environment, using categories of Main Tool, Browser, LMS, News, Search, Communication, Knowledge base, Social Networks and Web Apps. When I examined my Web tools at the time, I came up with Main Professional Site, Information Management, Productivity Tools and Social Networks. This view was a bit different from my Personal Knowledge Management system, last year. This process consisted of Pulling, Sorting, Categorizing, Reflecting & Commenting, and Finding. In all of these cases, the individual decides what to connect to, choosing the intensity of the bonds with people or information.

Whichever view you consider, there are multiple aspects of personal learning and sense-making, enough to fill several books (or one big wiki). These new tools on the Web are making it easier to cobble together something that works for each of us. Jane Hart’s Top 100 list, shows the wide variety of tools available.

Connections, enabled by these tools, are starting to matter more in our work and our learning. We can connect with work, love, entertainment and meaning online. That’s why I’m to trying to find patterns in how these personal spaces have been created.

Mark Federman’s Valence Theory of Organization provides a most interesting lens to view our connections and I look forward to his future publications.

I identify several specific forms of valence relationships that are enacted by two or more people when they come together to do almost anything; these are economic, social-psychological, identity, knowledge, and ecological. An organization is thus defined as that complex, emergent entity which occurs when two or more people, or two or more organizations, or both, share multiple valences at various strengths, with various pervasiveness, among the component elements. Using this as a definition of organization has profoundly disruptive implications for every aspect of management, governance, and engagement that we have come to know over the last hundred or so years.

If individuals have stronger learning bonds outside school than inside, what happens to education? If there are stronger economic bonds through your network than your current job, what happens to the industrial workplace?

valences.jpg

As we are able to connect to anyone at any time, as well as have access to information as we need it, the organisation of the past century is starting to look like a hollow shell.

valences2.jpg

Hard Work

Graham commented on my back to school post, “Screw literacy, it’s thinking that’s died“, and I replied that I would rather work with a thinking illiterate partner than an unthinking literate one. Literacy and numeracy are great skills and may make for a productive workforce but critical thinking (questioning all assumptions, as well as your own) is much more important for citizens in a democracy, especially a networked one.

Our economic, political and social future lies not in working hard but in choosing to do the hard work. Seth Godin describes the latter as:

It’s hard work to make difficult emotional decisions, such as quitting a job and setting out on your own. It’s hard work to invent a new system, service, or process that’s remarkable. It’s hard work to tell your boss that he’s being intellectually and emotionally lazy. It’s easier to stand by and watch the company fade into oblivion. It’s hard work to tell senior management to abandon something that it has been doing for a long time in favor of a new and apparently risky alternative. It’s hard work to make good decisions with less than all of the data.

Anyone can work hard, but it takes courage to take on the hard work of changing our communities, questioning the education system or creating a non-profit organisation with no guaranteed return on investment. Hard work is not about literacy, numeracy or even civics. Hard work is questioning underlying assumptions and seeing new patterns and then taking action on this knowledge. Critical thinking is not only hard work, but it’s difficult to teach and not easy to measure. No wonder schools avoid it.

To face the environmental, social, political and economic challenges of our tightly coupled global world, we’ll all need to do some very hard work. Are our schools helping to prepare students for this? Do our workplaces encourage hard work? Do our communities support those who choose to do the hard work, especially challenging the status quo?

What hard work are you doing?