Anyone working in learning is working with change – it is directly related to how we re/upskill, how we change behaviours, how we decide what combination of solutions will lead to performance improvement, etc etc.
We also know that training alone is rarely the solution. This has contributed in part to the preference for “learning and development”, in that people need to learn and develop over time. More fundamentally models like Performance Consulting help us clarify with stakeholders if we are talking about knowledge, information, skill, motivation or environmental challenges. Yet when we do deliver learning solutions the industry often struggles with evaluation to demonstrate impact and value. This often leads to arguments for learning needing a “seat at the table” and other such discussions that, in my opinion, too often ignore the fact IT, marketing, finance and every other teams would likely say the same.
On option for more strategic learning has always been to ensure learning team time is closely aligned to strategic initiatives. However, the traditional challenge of learning needs being thrown “over the fence” or learning teams being “order takers” for courses has suggested that, for many, the experience has been that they are too remote from decision making. I would presume most people will have experienced a mix of this in their learning careers, certainly I have at times been an “order taker” but often when the intention is a more holistic curriculum. At other times learning programmes have been central to projects, organisational development and other strategic, business critical planning. At the same time many of us will have seen different change management approaches – one of the most common, at least in reference if not application being Prosci/ADKAR.
It is with this background that I recently completed a three day programme (via Zoom) to achieve my Prosci® Change Practitioner Certification.
As expected, the course can only go so far in building competency with this methodology. However, there is an impressive set of resources available via the Prosci portal during and after the event. This includes online and offline options for completing the various assessments, plans and other components that make up the methodology. The core tenant of the model being that change management is about the “people side of change” and part of the course was discussing how CM should interact with project management (PM). Having previously completed, and facilitated, various project management training initiatives over the years, the Prosci programme did bring provide a very detailed and potentially powerful way to focus on the CM/people side. Ultimately every organisation really needs such a model – the question is if you want to go “all in” and adopt something as robust, research-based and multifaceted as Prosci’s 3 stage method.
Having completed the programme I went back to my old P30 (2013 edition!) manual and, to be fair, the “people side” is limited. Therefore, the fundamental justification for combining CM to PM (at least with these very popular methodologies) is justified.
For anyone wanting to do the certification themselves, I would certainly recommend it. 3 days was a lot, via Zoom it could have perhaps been done over 5 days but logistics (of course) always impact on instructional design. As is often the way a lot of the interesting parts came from the interaction with others (both facilitator and participants) and sharing of experience but the Prosci team clearly have a structured approach for their (franchise?) trainers that ensures some consistency.
Overall, good to have formal training in a method I have long been familiar of – the challenge now, as with all training, is to apply the learning and not revert to bad practice(s).
Whose Education Is It Anyway? 