Bricolage

This tale did the rounds on a number of internet list serves and inspired thoughts on training, performance evaluation, selection and sundry related issues. It came to my attention through a posting from William D. Lovett, a Management and Training Consultant from Wakefield RI, who attributes it to Fred Nichols, but says that Fred believes Anonymous is the real author.

---

Once upon a time, there lived a man named Clarence who had a pet frog named Felix. Clarence lived a modestly comfortable existence on what he earned working at Wal-Mart; but he always dreamed of being rich.”Felix!” he exclaimed one day, “We’re going to be rich! I’m going to teach you how to fly!” Felix, of course, was terrified at the prospect. “I can’t fly, you idiot! I’m a frog, not a canary!” Clarence, disappointed at the initial reaction, told Felix, “That negative attitude of yours could be a real problem. I’m sending you to class.”So Felix went to a three day class and learned about problem solving, time management and effective communication…. but nothing about flying.

On the first day of “flying lessons”, Clarence could barely control his excitement (and Felix could barely control his bladder). Clarence explained that their apartment had 15 floors and each day Felix would jump out of a window starting with the first floor eventually getting to the top floor. After each jump, Felix would analyze how well he flew, isolate on the most effective flying techniques and implement the improved process for the next flight. By the time they reached the top floor, Felix would surely be able to fly.

Felix pleaded for his life, but it fell on deaf ears. “He just doesn’t understand how important this is…” thought Clarence, “but I won’t let naysayers get in my way.” So, with that, Clarence opened the window and threw Felix out (who landed with a thud).

Next day (poised for his second flying lesson) Felix again begged not to be thrown out of the window. With that, Clarence opened his pocket guide to Managing More Effectively and showed Felix the part about how one must always expect resistance when implementing new programs. And with that, he threw Felix out the window. (THUD!)

On the third day (at the third floor) Felix tried a different ploy. Stalling, he asked for a delay in the “project” until better weather would make flying conditions more favourable. But Clarence was ready for him. He produced a timeline pointed to the third milestone and asked, “You don’t want to slip the schedule do you?” From his training, Felix knew that not jumping today would mean that he would have to jump TWICE tomorrow. So he just said, “OK. Let’s go.” And out the window he went.

Now understand that Felix really was trying his best. On the fifth day he flapped his feet madly in a vain attempt to fly. On the sixth day he tied a small red cape around his neck and tried to think “Superman” thoughts. Try as he might, though, Felix couldn’t fly.

By the seventh day, Felix (accepting his fate) no longer begged for mercy. He simply looked at Clarence and said, “You know you’re killing me, don’t you?” Clarence pointed out that Felix’s performance so far had been less than exemplary, failing to meet any of the milestone goals he had set for him. With that, Felix said quietly, “Shut up and open the window”. He leaped out, taking careful aim on the large jagged rock by the corner of the building. And Felix went to that great lily pad in the sky.

Clarence was extremely upset, as his project had failed to meet a single goal that he set out to accomplish. Felix had not only failed to fly, he didn’t even learn how to steer his flight as he fell like a sack of cement. Nor did he improve his productivity when Clarence had told him to “Fall smarter, not harder.” The only thing left for Clarence to do was to analyze the process and try to determine where it had gone wrong. After much thought, Clarence smiled and said, “Next time…… I’m going to find a smarter frog”

I couldn’t speak to my accountant today. He is at a Continuous Professional Development program to find out about the finer points of this year’s federal budget. A quick Google search of CPD Australia turned up programs for nurses, midwives, lawyers, project managers, career counsellors, speech pathologists and teachers.

Engineers Australia list 7 forms that CPD may take in order to retain chartered status:

• Formal post-graduate study not undertaken for award purposes;
• Short courses, workshops, seminars and discussion groups facilitated by recognised practitioners in the field;
• Learning activities in the workplace;
• Private study;
• Service to the engineering profession;
• Presentations at seminars and symposia;
• Tertiary teaching and/or academic research; and
• Other structured activities that meet the objectives of the policy.

But how do trainers stay up to date?

There are some great training conferences. The Australian Institute of Training and Development (AITD) hosts one most years. They also hold professional development events in most capital cities on a regular basis. There is a usually a large Australian contingent at the American Society for Training and Development’s (ASTD) annual conference.   

While the opportunity to maintain currency is available, it is not required. The standard qualification for trainers in Australia is the Cert IV in Training and Assessment. It lasts forever.  

I believe that the value that good trainers add to industry, commerce, government and society is so high that there must be a requirement for continuing professional development, if only because of the value that poor trainers subtract. 

Tags: continuing professional development, CPD, training trainers

When I started an e-learning subject in an adult education masters, I hoped that the course would bring together the two aspects of what I believed e-learning is all about - content (from the Ad Ed subjects) and process (from the e-learning unit).

The effect has been quite unexpected. I have now discovered that to get the message out there is a presentation skills requirement - beyond use of the tools, and now I am coming to realise that the biggest concern is a psychological one.

Early in the course I was attracted to an on line discussion group, TR Dev at Yahoo groups. This is a closed group, but you can apply for membership through a button on the sidebar of this weblog.

The first discussion I encountered was about the mythical statistic that we recall 10% of what we hear, 20% of what we see, 30% of what we see and hear together, and an ever increasing proportion until you reach 90% for the type of communication medium that the salesman is trying to push. (more…)

Tags: credibility, numbers, statistics

A client sent me a set of assessment instruments that he proposes to use and asked for my thoughts on them.

The first question was:

List the hierarchy of risk controls.

The answer is:

• Substitution
• Isolation
• Engineering
• Administrative controls
• Personal protection equipment

The only way that you would know the answer to that question is if you had done a course or read a book and memorised them

The purpose of the hierarchy of controls is to reduce risk.

The higher the option is on the list, the better the risk control. 

None of that information comes out in the question. It is also my experience that many people can recite the list, but have little knowledge of risk management principles.

I reworded the question and created a survey on Poll Daddy to allow him to ask the questions on-line in a way that would check understanding as well as recall.

It is not the ideal tool for on-line asessment, but does show how the questions ahould be worded for an assessment.

When I read my post “It must be true, I saw it on the web” the thought occurred to me “where do you find information on how people verify the information that they gain from web sites?” A Google search was the first thought that came to mind. And I was not disappointed. Overwhelmed maybe, but I was started on the right track.

The Stanford University Web Credibility Project was among the first of the attention grabbing offerings. It had links to 79 papers on the topic. So perhaps one criterion is lots of referenced papers.

(more…)

Tags: , credibility, internet, research