So, what's your budget?

How often do we experience the lull in conversation when asked by a vendor: “So, how much do you want to spend?” or “What’s your budget for this project?” The ironic part of the budget equation is that both sides in a training transaction tend to close up around this question.

For the vendor, when a potential client asks about pricing, a tap dance may be incurred: “Well, it’s hard today,” or “Hmm…That all depends,” or better yet, “Well, we will have to go through a process to figure that out.” On the other side, when asked for their budget, a potential client will usually push back and ask the vendor, “You tell me,” or “I just want the best solution,” or better yet, “We don’t know.”

The truth of the matter is that in at least some of the cases both sides can give each other basic guidelines on budget and costs. Moreover, based on years of research at Allen, the chance of a successful engagement between the client and the vendor will go down by over 20% because of mis-scoping by the vendor and the need to continually revise the proposal as the client finally lets loose some budget numbers.

A strong case can be made that as both sides define budget and expectations up front, the quality and the cost of a project will best fit the needs of both sides of the equation.

The logic is simple: Most corporate training departments work hard to set budget expectations with the sponsors of a project. No one feels good about having to go back and ask for more money or having to surprise a sponsor with numbers they don’t expect. By the same logic, while most vendors would love to maximize the size of any deal by being given a budget, they must work harder to pour into that numbers as much value to the customer as possible. A focus on an agreed upon budget framework enables both parties to communicate clearly, understand tradeoffs and look for the most optimal solution under the constraints of such a budget.

An important point that should be made pertaining to budget is that by no means does a budget discussion stop the vendor or the prospect from being able to negotiate a better deal. A savvy prospect will usually either downplay some of his budget numbers or ask for more with a given figure hoping to see where the vendor can provide the most value and save herself from having to ask for additional features or change orders. The vendor will entice the prospect with additional features above and beyond the budget in the hope of uncovering additional needs not articulated with the original budget.

The bottom line will be that both sides will work harder up front to reach the best optimal solution as apposed to waiting for the post proposal phase to fix proposals, deal with disgruntled sponsors or worse yet, dump a cheap vendor that bid unrealistically and tries to squeeze more funds out of the client down the road.

Caring About Change

I can’t let the week end without a small note about the historic inauguration. Last we ramped up for the big inauguration with a game of Presidential Trivia (my own creation) and cupcakes decorated in red, white, and blue. Then on Tuesday January 20, 2009 at 10 am Mountain Time most of the Allen employees packed themselves into the Big Conference Room to watch the inauguration of the 44th President of the United States. Now some may have been there for the delicious breakfast treats and other may have come just to be diverted from their daily tasks. However, I’d like to think that most of us were there because we care about our own futures and the future of our great nation. Regardless of party affiliation, we recognize that some things will need to change in order for the country to overcome the current challenges, and we all need to play a role in the change. While change can be overwhelming and full of anxiety, right now the prospect of change brings a bit of excitement to the air.

For those of you wondering what this post has to do with the best eLearning ever, I’d have to say not much. Except the same people that care about their future, care about making great eLearning.

Benefits of internal collaboration and collaboration between client and vendor teams

Chris Collison and Geoff Parcell, authors of Learning to Fly: Practical Knowledge Management from Leading and Learning Organizations, were members of BP’s Knowledge Management team. They wrote the said book based on their experiences at BP and elsewhere. Chapter seven focuses on learning from one’s peers.

Collison and Parcell make a useful conceptual cross section about the meaningfulness of collaboration in problem solving. Their conceptual model lends itself well to illustrating the benefits of collaboration within an organization and the benefits of collaboration between client and vendor teams. But before I step into the collaboration discussion, I will briefly counter some of the authors’ dubious fundamental assumptions about knowledge management.

The authors suggest that the best way to learn from one’s peers is to set up a meeting for such, called a “Peer Assist”. Or, at least I assume that they feel a Peer Assist is the best way for peer-to-peer learning, because they mention no other form for individuals to learn from one another. A Peer Assist meeting would be an important component to the knowledge management processes of any successful learning organization, but it would not be the only peer-to-peer learning tool available, nor would it be suitable for all types of organizational knowledge management. The authors make some spurious assumptions about social learning, such as: social learning will only occur through formal meetings, and all the knowledge that you need can be shared explicitly. They overlook whole genres of academic and professional literature on the workings of social learning, including explicit, tacit, group, individual, distributed, legitimate peripheral participation, apprenticeship, and communities of practice. Collison and Parcell erroneously assume that the mechanism within the different aspects of social learning can be treated the same, as to be collected in a formal Peer Assist meeting for the purpose of later reproduction. Having made this disclaimer, I will return to the heart of this post.

Figure 1: General case for collaboration (base on Collison and Parcell P. 102)

Collison and Parcell make the case for collaboration in problem solving by crossing a vertical domain of what "you" know in your context with a horizontal domain of what "I" know in my context. Two additional epistemological domains result from the cross section: What we both know and Creating what is possible together. The benefit of this illustration of a collaborative relationship is that it defines the space where co-evolution of ideas and practice may develop between you and your collaborators. This co-creation domain is epistemically and socially distinct from the status quo within my, your or our domains of knowledge. The co-creation domain is a resource that only exists as part of the living negotiation between the collaborators. The collaboration resource exists, not by adding a new person to the organization, but by teaming individuals already part of the organization.

Figure 2: Too broad for effective collaboration (base on Collison and Parcell P. 115)

So, what are the best combinations for effective collaboration in problem solving? Collison and Parcell suggest that if there is little knowledge/practice overlap between the collaborators, then there may be too many possibilities for effective collaboration. Without a reasonable common base to reference, more time may be require than it is worth for individuals get on the same page and solve problems together.

Figure 3: Group think collaboration (base on Collison and Parcell P. 115)

According to Collison and Parcell, the other end of spectrum from "too many possibilities" is group think, which results in too few possibilities. In other words, if the collaborators have too much common knowledge, there will not be as much potential for innovation or problem solving.

Because collaboration grows out of the epistemological space between collaborators, the combination between them may have a dramatic effect on their problem solving potential as a group. So, it is important to create groups that have enough degrees of freedom to explore ideas outside the box, but not composed of individuals so different that they cannot easily develop a common understanding.

Why is this important for Allen and other matrix service/product organizations? It may be an advantage to Allen and similar organizations to approach training design with collaboration between lead and senior designers, rather than making design responsibilities mutually exclusive. When resources are thin as a result of the economy, organizations like Allen need to strive internally to find innovation. A greater emphasis on Peer Assists and informal, collaborative design may open up new wells of innovation that our clients need. Additionally, if we see our clients as collaborators, we may be able to develop stronger relationships and more innovative products with them, rather than for them.

To Tweet or Not to Tweet

I always find it strange when two completely different circles begin talking about the same thing. This happened to me the other day. I went to a SWIM meeting (Smart Women in Marketing) where we talked about networking, specifically Facebook and twitter, and then I went to work and read "Why I Tweet" by Jeffrey Mann on the Gartner Network Blog. I have to admit, I did not tweet and I am not sure I am sold on the good tweeting can bring. But, it got me thinking...here are two unrelated circles both talking about using it as a tool for networking.

So, I want to know, how many of you tweet? Is it for personal use or business? Or, does tweeting blur that boundary? And if it is so popular, how could we utilize those aspects for training?

I decided to join and see for myself what makes tweeting better than blogging or email. Now I have only tweeted a few times, but here is what I have discovered so far:

1) It is fun and easy. Who doesn't have 140 characters to spout something?
2) You need to tweet often to be followed
3) You also need to follow others--this I am still learning how to find fellow marketers
4) You don't have to write about the coffee you purchased in the morning, though you can.

So what seems to make it popular is the fact that it is so short and sweet. And simple. Something I think we would all like to see in training. Could there be a way to have learners tweet what they know about, I don't know, let's say customer service in 140 characters or less, and then use this information to see where employees actually need training. Or maybe they know the information, but aren't sure how to use it in real time so they tweet on actual situations and others give advice...? I'm curious to hear what others think...

Starting a New Learning Year

At a dinner party I attended the other night, some of my friends started to share stories about their children who are very good at imitation. One story that stood out to me was of a little girl in a department store. She went over to a rack of clothes (her size) and began looking through the clothes around the rack. Every third or fourth item, she would pick up the price tag, look at it, and then continue. She was about 2 years old and couldn’t read, but she had seen her mother perform this ritual many times. She had learned what "shopping" was to her mother and she was adopting a similar practice.

I want to couple that experience with that of my nephew. The other day, he was playing with a computer program he got for Christmas. He was easily maneuvering the mouse and creating pictures with his new Christmas camera. My mother came into the room and was shocked at how well a 5 year old could use the mouse and create pictures montages. She commented, "It took me a long time to feel comfortable using a mouse." But, for him, it’s second nature. He’s never known a world without such technology.

It seems that learning happens all the time, particularly when we don’t realize it. We’re constantly recognizing and creating patterns. Within instructional design, we focus so much on how our audience learns that sometimes we might forget that our own learning style and methods are integrally entwined in all the instruction we design. They influence how we design instruction.

I think it is safe to say that a majority of people stick to the means and methods they learned first or best. They turn to their old stand-bys in terms of design and effectiveness. I don’t think this is a horrible approach; in fact, it is quite natural and most of us function in this way. But, since it is the time of year to create resolutions and to break out of habits, I hope that we look at our own form of learning just as much as we focus on the learning of our audiences. Here are some questions to think about:

How does your learning affect the way you design instruction for others?
What patterns of design could you re-evaluate this year?
Where are you the most comfortable? What will you do to challenge yourself?
How will you use the contemporary patterns of instruction to best reach your audiences?

So, on your list of "things to do in 2009," perhaps after your exercise plan and budget listing, be sure to include an item about evaluating your learning habits.