by Harold Jarche and Jay Cross

Prior to the 20th Century, training per se did not exist outside the special needs of the church and the military. Now the training department may be at the end of its life cycle. Join us for a brief look back at the pre-training world and some thoughts about what may lay ahead.

Before the advent of the industrial age, work was local and industry meant cottage industry. People had vocations, not jobs. Sometimes guilds helped apprentices learn by doing things under the eye of a master, but there weren’t any trainers involved.

About three hundred years ago, work became an organizational matter. Factories require groups of people working together. To coordinate their activities, groups needed a shared understanding of who is doing what. Orders from the top of the organization kept everyone on the same page. Managers showed workers how to do things and made sure they were doing them the right way. A little training went on, but there still weren’t any full-time trainers.

Twentieth century limited

Fast forward to the 20th century. The pace of progress is unrelenting. Clocks measure working hours instead of the sun. Railroads and communications links span the globe. Competition fuels change. Efficiency becomes paramount. Frederick Taylor used time-and-motion studies to find the one best way to do individual pieces of work, and his Principles of Scientific Management became the bible for maximizing efficiency.

Training was invented in the first half of the 20th Century. GE started its corporate schools. NCR delivered the first sales training. Factory schools appeared in Europe. Mayo discovered the Hawthorne Effect, opening the study of motivation. B.F. Skinner constructed teaching machines. The U.S. military formalized instruction to train millions of soldiers for World War II. ASTD was born.

The second half of the 20th Century was arguably the Golden Age of Training. Every corporation worth its salt opened a training department. Xerox Learning, DDI, Forum Corporation, and hundreds of other “instructional systems companies” sprung up. Thousands upon thousands of trainers attended conferences to learn about new approaches like programmed instruction, behavior modeling, roleplay, certification, interactive multimedia, sensitivity training. corporate universities, and Learning Organizations. Training was good; efficient training was better.

Most of this training activity assumed that you could prepare people for the future by training them in what had worked in the past. Yesterday’s best practices were the appropriate prescription for tomorrow’s ills. That works when the world is stable, and things remain the same over time.

Century 21

At this point in the 21st Century, the game is changing once again. Complexity, or maybe our appreciation of it, has rendered the world unpredictable, so the orientation of learning is shifting from past (efficiency, best practice) to future (creative response, innovation). Workplace learning is morphing from blocks of training followed by working to a merger of work and learning: they are becoming the same thing. Change is continuous, so learning must be continuous.

To justify its existence from here on, a training department must shift direction in three areas:

* Embracing complexity and adaptation to uncertainty
* Inverting the structural pyramid
* Adopting new models of learning

Embracing complexity

Nothing is for sure any more. Consultant and management theorist Dave Snowden has come up with a framework for management practice in complex environments.

 Snowden’s Cynefin framework has been used in the study of management practice. It can also help us make decisions for our organizations. Understanding what type of environment we are working in (Simple, Complicated, Complex or Chaotic) lets us frame our actions. When the environment is complex, the relationship between cause and effect can only be perceived in retrospect, but not in advance, the approach is to Probe – Sense – Respond and we can sense emergent practice.

From the Cynefin perspective best practices are only suitable for simple environments and good practices are inadequate in responding to constant change. Both approaches look to the past for inspiration, or as Marshall McLuhan wrote, “We look at the present through a rear-view mirror. We march backwards into the future.”

Most of our environments are complex so first we need to probe, or take action, and then sense the results of our actions (Probe-Sense-Respond). This approach has already been adopted by Web services, where beta releases are launched and tested before they are finalized. For example, Google’s ubiquitous GMail service is still in beta. The phrase, “we are living in a beta world” is increasingly being used outside the Web services domain.

In complex environments it no longer works to sit back and see what will happen. By the time we realize what’s happening, it will be too late to take action. Here are some practical examples for learning professionals:

1. PROBE: Prototype; Field test; Accept Life in Beta; Welcome small failures
2. SENSE: Listen; Enable conversations; Look for patterns; Learn together
3. RESPOND: Support the work; Connect people; Share experiences; Develop tools


Inverting the Pyramid

So what models will work for our complex environments? The hierarchical organizational pyramid is a model that has worked for centuries. It’s premised on the beliefs that management has access to the necessary strategic information and knowledge. Because knowledge is thought to be power, management best understands the outside world and can clearly tell the workers what needs to be done and how.

In a complex, networked environment the lines of communication are no longer clear and the walls between the workers and the outside world are porous. Many workers know more about the outside environment than management does. Today, the relationship between workers and management is not as clear as it once may have been. Effective organizations are starting to look more like inverted pyramids.

As The Cluetrain Manifesto succinctly stated almost a decade ago, “Hyperlinks subvert hierarchies”. Hierarchies may not die in the future but they may have to co-exist with a new form of workplace organization, the Wirearchy.

Researcher and analyst, Jon Husband, says that wirearchy is, “a dynamic two-way flow of power and authority based on information, knowledge, trust and credibility, enabled by interconnected people and technology”. The Internet has created interconnectedness on a massive scale. Power and authority must now flow two ways for any organization to be effective. This requires information, knowledge, trust and credibility. Wirearchy in action is evident in open source software development projects, with minimal command and control, yet able to compete directly with large hierarchical corporations.

A New Model for Training

Workers at the the bottom of the traditional organizational pyramid are those who interact closest with their environment (market, customers, information). To be effective today they need to be constantly probing and trying out better ways of work. Management’s job is to assist this dynamic flow of sense-making and to respond to workers’ needs, within a trusted network of information and knowledge sharing.
The main objective of the new training department is to enable knowledge to flow in the organization. The primary function of learning professionals within this new work model is connecting and communicating, based on three core processes:

* Facilitating collaborative work and learning amongst workers, especially as peers.
* Sensing patterns and helping to develop emergent work and learning practices.
* Working with management to fund and develop appropriate tools and processes for workers.

The only certainty about the future from here on out is that it won’t resemble the past. For example, instructional designers no longer have time to develop formal courses. Survival requires people who can navigate a rapidly-changing maze at high speed. They need to find their own curriculum, figure out an appropriate way to learn it, and get on with it. It’s cliché to say that people have to learn how to learn. Management needs to support self-learning, not direct it.

Workers will also have to be their own instructional designers, selecting the best methods of learning. Furthermore, given the increasingly reciprocal nature of knowledge work, they will have to know how to teach. Each one-teach-one is at the heart of invent-as-you-go learning. The training department should be encouraging and supporting these activities.


Will training departments survive to address these issues? The cards are still out. After all, we are in a global economic depression, and training is the perennial first sacrifice.

What would happen if you called for closing your training department in favor of a new function?

Imagine telling senior management that you were shuttering the classrooms in favor of peer-to-peer learning. You’re redeploying training staff as mentors, coaches, and facilitators who work on improving core business processes, strengthening relationships with customers, and cutting costs. You’re going to shift the focus to creativity, innovation, and helping people perform better, faster, cheaper.

You might want to give it a try.

 Perhaps the time has come.



Jane Hart and Jay Cross will be leading sessions at Learning Technologies in London January 28-29.

See Jane’s articles on Social media and Learning (and continuing here). Here’s Jay’s screed on Learning for the 21st Century and a snippet on Internet acculturation and new values for learning.


If you’re looking for a way to weather the economic downturn, be aware that it’s a permanent climate change, not a passing storm. Most of the time, the global economy is cyclical. It has its ups and downs but the underlying pattern remains the same. But what we are experiencing today is fundamental. Things are not going to return to where they were, for we are witnessing the birth of a new world order.

The industrial age is in its death throes, making way for the unfolding of the network age. This is akin to when the industrial revolution overwhelmed the agrarian age. That time, people moved from farms to cities. Clock watching replaced working to the rhythm of the sun. Repetitive, mindless factory labor replaced working with holistically with nature. Taking orders replaced thinking for one’s self. Slums were born. Society unraveled.

One hopes this economic revolution will be more positive that the last. Nonetheless, it’s time to get ready for massive change. Industry won’t disappear but a third of all industrial companies probably will. The ranks of the permanently unemployed will swell. New categories of work will pop up to address network optimization, making connections, reconfiguring functions, real-time enterprise design, constructive destruction, virtual mentoring, and so on. Hallowed laws, regulations, standards, and memes will evaporate. Continue Reading »

  • RSS Mobile Phone Service Providers

    • Best Mobile Phone Companies in the United States
      The phone is one of the essential elements for day to day communication, especially in the United States where much of the population is dedicated to carry out local and international business. That's why in this country, the phone takes a good position in technological advancement. The main companies that offer the best phone service are:Best cell phon […]

  • RSS Harold Jarche

    • to know is to do
      Do we really understand tacit knowledge?, asks Haridimos Tsoukas in a 2002 paper. He bases his position on the work of Michael Polanyi in that all knowledge is personal and all knowing is through action. Tacit knowledge [I use the term implicit knowledge as it is easier to understand for non-native English speakers] is not... Read more »

  • RSS Unknown Feed

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

  • RSS Learnlets

    • Situated Cognition
      In a recent article, I wrote about three types of cognition that are changing how we think about how we think (how meta!).  All are interesting, but they also have implications for understanding for supporting us in doing things.  I think it’s important to understand these cognitions, and their implications. First, I want to talk about situated cognition. Th […]

  • RSS Unknown Feed

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.